UNIVERSITY  OF 
ILLINOIS  LIBRARY 
AT  L'R3ANA-GHAM?A:GN 
BOOIASTACXS 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  liiinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 

I 


} 


https://archive.org/details/holybibleaccordi01cook_0 


THE 


Holy  Bible 

ACCORDING  TO  THE  AUTHORIZED  VERSION  (A.D.  i6ii), 


WITH  AN  EXPLANATORY  AND  CRITICAL 

Coninwnlarg 

AND 

% ^icbislou  of  t(je  SCranslatbix, 

BY  BISHOPS  AND  OTHER  CLERGY 

OF  THE  ANGLICAN  CHURCH. 


EDITED 


By  F.  C.  cook,  M.A.,  Canon  of  Exeter. 


VoL.  I. — Part  I. 
GENESIS— EXOD  US. 


NEW  YORK: 

CHAELES  SCEIBNEK  & CO.,  654  BEOADWAY. 

1871. 


^ L • ^ 

V:  J-- . cA' 
■ ^y.l, 
2. 


PREFACE. 


IT  IS  about  seven  years  since  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  the  Right  Hon.  J.  Evelyn  Denison,  conceived 
the  idea  of  the  present  Commentary,  and  suggested  its  execution. 

It  appeared  to  him  that  in  the  midst  of  much  controversy 
about  the  Bible,  in  which  the  laity  could  not  help  feeling  a 
lively  interest,  even  where  they  took  no  more  active  part, 
there  was  a want  of  some  Commentary  upon  the  Sacred  Books, 
in  which  the  latest  information  might  be  made  accessible  to 
men  of  ordinary  culture.  It  seemed  desirable  that  every  educated 
man  should  have  access  to  some  work  which  might  enable  him 
to  und*erstand  what  the  original  Scriptures  really  say  and 
mean,  and  in  which  he  might  find  an  explanation  of  any  diffi- 
culties which  his  own  mind  might  suggest,  as  well  as  of  any 
new  objections  raised  against  a particular  book  or  passage. 
Whilst  the  Word  of  God  is  one,  and  does  not  change,  it 
must  touch,  at  new  points,  the  changing  phases  of  physical, 
philological,  and  historical  knowledge,  and  so  the  Comments 
that  suit  one  generation  are  felt  by  another  to  be  obsolete. 

The  Speaker,  after  mentioning  this  project  to  several  pre- 
lates and  theologians,  consulted  the  Archbishop  of  York  upon 
it.  Although  the  difficulties  of  such  an  undertaking  were  very 
great,  it  seemed  right  to  the  Archbishop  to  make  the  attempt 
to  meet  a want  which  all  confessed  to  exist ; and  accordingly 
he  undertook  to  form  a company  of  divines,  who,  by  a judicious 
'distribution  of  the  labour  amongst  them,  might  expound,  each 
the  portion  of  Scripture  for  which  his  studies  might  best  have 
fitted  him. 

The  difficulties  were  indeed  many.  First  came  that  of 


5ud/8v>* 


IV 


PREFACE. 


treating  a great  and  almost  boundless  subject  upon  a limited 
scale.  Let  any  one  examine  the  most  complete  Commentaries 
now  in  existence,  and  he  will  find  that  twenty  or  thirty  ordinary 
volumes  are  not  thought  too  many  for  the  exhaustive  treatment 
of  the  Scripture  text.  But  every  volume  added  makes  a work 
less  accessible  to  .those  for  whom  it  is  intended ; and  it  was 
thought  that  eight  or  ten  volumes  ought  to  suffice  for  text  and 
notes,  if  this  Commentary  was  to  be  used  by  laymen  as  well 
as  by  professed  divines.  Omission  and  compression  are  at  all 
times  difficult ; notes  should  be  in  proportion  to  the  reader’s 
needs,  whereas  they  are  more  likely  to  represent  the  writer’s 
predilections.  The  most  important  points  should  be  most  pro- 
minent ; but  the  writer  is  tempted  to  lay  most  stress  on  what 
has  cost  him  most  labour. 

Another  difficulty  lay  in  the  necessity  of  treating  subjects 
that  require  a good  deal  of  research,  historical  and  philological, 
but  which  could  not  be  expected  to  interest  those  who  have 
]iad  no  special  preparation  for  such  studies.  In  order  to  meet 
this,  it  was  resolved  that  subjects  involving  deep  learning  and 
fuller  illustration  should  be  remitted  to  separate  essays  at  the 
end  of  each  Chapter,  Book  or  division ; where  they  can  be 
found  by  those  who  desired  them. 

The  general  plan  has  been  this.  A Committee  was  formed 
to  select  the  Editor  and  the  Writers  of  the  various  sections. 
The  Rev.  F,  C.  Cook,  Canon  of  Exeter,  and  Preacher  of 
Lincoln’s  Inn,  was  chosen  Editor.  The  work  has  been  divided 
into  ILght  Sections,  of  which  the  present  volume  contains  the 
Pentateuch.  Each,  book  has  been  assigned  to  some  writer  who 
has  paid  attention  to  the  subject  of  it.  The  Editor  thought  it 
desirable  to  have  a small  Committee  of  reference,  in  cases  of 
dispute;  and  the  Archbishop  of  York  with  the  Regius  Pro- 
fessors of  Divinity  of  Oxford  and  Caml^ridge  agreed  to  act  in 
this  capacity.  But  in  practice  it  has  rarely  been  found  necessary 
to  resort  to  them. 

The  Committee  were  called  upon,  in  the  first  place,  to 
consider  the  important  question,  which  has  since  received  a 


PREFACE. 


V 


much  fuller  discussion,  whether  any  alterations  should  be  made 
in  the  authorized  English  Version.  It  was  decided  to  reprint  that 
Version,  without  alteration,  from  the  edition  of  i6ii,  with  the 
marginal  references  and  renderings ; but  to  supply  in  the  notes 
amended  translations^  of  all  passages  proved  to  be  incorrect.  It 
was  thought  that  in  this  way  might  be  reconciled  the  claims  of 
accuracy  and  truth  with  that  devout  reverence,  which  has  made 
the  present  text  of  the  English  Bible  so  dear  to  all  Christians 

that  speak  the  English  tongue.  When  the  Prayer  Book  was 

revised,  the  earlier  Psalter  of  Coverdale  and  Cranrner  was  left 
standing  there,  because  those  who  had  become  accustomed  to 
its  use  would  not  willingly  attune  their  devotions  to  another, 
even  though  a more  careful.  Version  : the  older  Psalter  still 
holds  its  place,  and  none  seem  to  desire  its  removal.  Since 
then,  knowledge  of  the  Bible  has  been  much  diffused,  and 
there  seems  little  doubt  that  the  same  affection,  which  in  the 
middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  clung  to  the  Psalter  and 
preserved  it,  has  extended  itself  by  this  time  to  the  Authorized 
Version  of  i6ii.  Be  that  as  it  may,  those  who  undertook 

the  present  work  desired  that  the  layman  should  be  able  to 
understand  better  the  Bible  which  he  uses  in  Church  and 

at  home ; and  for  this  purpose  that  Bible  itself  gives  the  best 
foundation,  altered  only  where  alteration  is  required  to  cure 
an  error,  or  to  make  the  text  better  understood. 

This  volume  is  sent  forth  in  no  spirit  of  confidence,  but 
with  a deep  sense  of  its  imperfections.  Those  who  wish  to 
condemn  will  readily  extract  matter  on  which  to  work.  But  those 
who  receive  it  willing  to  find  aid  in  it,  and  ready  to  admit 
that  it  is  no  easy  matter  to  expound,  completely,  fully  and 
popularly,  that  Book  which  has  been  the  battle-field  of  all  sects 
and  parties,  which  has  been  interpreted  by  all  the  ages,  each 
according  to  its  measure  of  light,  will  do  justice  to  the  spirit 
that  has  guided  the  writers.  Such  will  find  in  it  something 
that  may  help  them  better  to  appreciate  the  Sacred  Text. 

^ These  emendations  are  printed  throughout  in  a distinctive  type,  darker  than 
the  rest  of  the  note. 


b 


VI 


PREFACE. 


“ As  for  the  commendation,”  says  Coverdale,  “ of  God's 
holy  Scripture,  I would  fain  magnify  it  as  it  is  worthy,  but  I 
am  far  insufficient  thereto,  and  therefore  I thought  it  better 
for  me  to  hold  my  tongue  than  with  few  words  to  praise  or 
commend  it.”  Our  English  Bible  has  come  down  to  us,  won 
for  us  by  much  devoted  labour,  by  persecution,  by  exile, 
even  by  blood  of  martyrdom.  It  has  still  much  work  to  do, 
and  when  we  consider  the  peoples  to  whom  we  have  given 
our  language,  and  the  vast  tracts  over  which  English-speaking 
peoples  rule,  we  feel  how  impossible  it  is  for  us  to  measure 
the  extent  of  that  work.  We  humbly  desire  to  further  it  in 
some  small  measure,  by  removing  a stumblingblock  here,  and 
by  shedding  light  upon  some  dark  places  there.  Such  human 
efforts  are  needed,  but  the  use  of  them  passes,  whilst  the  Word 
of  God  of  which  they  treat  will  endure  to  the  end.  Yet  it  is 
permitted  to  offer  them  with  an  aspiration  after  the  same 
result  that  attends  the  Word  of  God  itself;  and  that  result  is, 
in  the  words  of  inspiration,  “that  ye  might  believe  that  Jesus 
is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God ; and  that  believing  ye  might 
have  life  through  His  name.”  (John  xx.  31.) 


More  than  seven  years  have  elapsed  since  this  Commentary  was  first 
projected.  It  will,  doubtless,  be  admitted  that  this  period  is  not  longer 
than  might  be  reasonably  demanded  for  the  preparation  of  any  consider- 
able portion  of  such  a work:  but  it  is  due  to  all  concerned  with  this 
volume  to  state  that  but  for  unforeseen  circumstances  it  would  have  been 
published  much  earlier.  We  have  to  deplore  the  premature  death  of  no 
less  than  three  contributors,  two  of  whom  had  undertaken  the  commentary 
on  Exodus  and  Numbers.  All  the  writers  in  this  volume  had,  in  con- 
sequence of  this  and  of  other  circumstances,  a much  larger  amount  of 
work  imposed  upon  them  than  they  were  prepared  for,  long  after  the 
commencement  of  the  undertaking.  For  one  book  they  had  to  write 
the  entire  commentary  ; for  another  to  re-write,  with  a special  view  to 
condensation,  notes  which  had  been  prepared  with  great  ability  and 
learning  by  ]\Ir  Thrupp.  This  statement  is  made  simply  to  account  for 
the  delay  in  the  publication.  The  other  parts  of  the  work  are  now  far 
advanced,  and  two  volumes,  including  the  historical  and  poetical  books, 
will  probably  be  printed  within  twelve  months. 


CONTENTS  OF  VOL.  I 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  BY  E.  HAROLD  BROWNE,  D.D., 
BISHOP  OF  ELY. 


Names  of  the  Book  or  Books  .... 

PAGE 

I 

Captivity  and  Return 

PAGE 

12 

Mosaic  origin  of  the  Pentateuch  . . 

ik 

New  Testament 

14 

§ I.  Moses  could  have  written  the  Pen- 

§  3.  Internal  Evidence  of  Mosaic  au- 

tateuch   

2 

thorship  

15 

§ 2.  External  Evidence  of  Mosaic  au- 

Acquaintance with  Egypt  .... 

ih. 

thorship  

4 

,,  ,,  Sinai  and  the  Wil- 

Joshua 

ib. 

derness 

16 

Judges 

5 

Canaan  in  prospect 

17 

History  of  Samuel 

6 

Language  

18 

Times  of  David  and  Solomon  . . . 

8 

Question  of  Post- Mosaic  authorship 

Divided  Kingdom 

9 

considered . 

19 

Reign  of  Josiah 

lO 

GENESIS. 

INTRODUCTION. 

BY 

THE  BISHOP  OF  ELY. 

Document  Hypothesis 

21 

Proper  nam.es  compounded  with  jAii  . 

26 

Unity  of  plan  and  purpose  through- 

Meaning and  antiquity  of  the  name 

out  

22 

Jehovah,  with  further  reference  to 

Division  of  book  into  Toledoth  . . . 

ib. 

Exodus  vi.  2,  3 

ib. 

Of  the  names  of  God,  as  used  in  Genesis 

24 

Elohistic  and  Jehovistic  passages  . . 

28 

,,  ,,  and  in  Exodus 

Alleged  inconsistency  with  modern 

'’i-  U 3 . . • . * 

science 

29 

CONTENTS. 


viii 


G E N E S I S — contimced. 


COMMENTARY  AND  CRITICAL  NOTES.  BY  THE  BISHOP  OF  ELY. 

pp.  31— 236. 


PACK 

On  the  Days  of  Creation.  Chap.  i.  5 . 36 

On  the  Creation  and  Primiti've  State  of 

Man.  Chap.  ii.  7 43 

On  the  Effect  of  the  Fall.  Chap.  iii.  19  . 47 

On  the  Historical  Character  of  the  Temp- 


tation and  the  Fall.  Chap.  iii.  22  . . 48 

Cherubim 49 


§ I.  Traditional  accounts.  § 2.  Taber- 
nacle and  Temple.  § 3.  Seen  in 
Visions  of  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  and  St 
John.  § 4.  The  Cherubim  of  Para- 
dise. ' § 5.  Etymology  of  name. 

Chap.  iii.  24. 

On  the  Early  Ci’vilization  of  Mankind. 

Chap.  iv.  2 58 

Difficulties  in  the  Chronology  of  Chap.  v.  61 
§ I.  Difference  of  texts.  § 2.  Longevity 
of  Patriarchs.  § 3.  Antiquity  of 
Human  Race,  as  deduced  from  (i) 
Geology,  (2)  History,  (3)  Language, 

(4)  Ethnology. 

The  Deluge.  Chap,  viii 74 

§ I.  Was  it  historical?  § 2.  Was  it 
universal? 


PAGE 

On  Circumcision.  Chap.  xvii.  10.  . . 121 

§ I.  Reasons  for  the  rite.  § 2.  Origin 
of  circumcision,  whether  pre-Abra- 
hamic  or  not. 

The  Dead  Sea.,  Site  of  Sodom  and  Zoar. 

Chap.  xix.  25 13 1 

§ I.  Characteristics  of  Dead  Sea.  Tes- 
timonies ancient  and  modern.  § 2. 
Geological  formation.  § 3.  Were 
Sodom,  Zoar,  &c.  on  the  north  or 
south  of  the  Dead  Sea  ? 

On  the  Chronology  of  Jacob's  life.  Chap. 

xxxi.  41  . . ' 177 

§ I.  Difficulty  of  the  question.  Com- 
mon reckoning.  § 2.  Suggestion  of 
Dr  Kennicott.  § 3.  Dates  on  this 
hypothesis.  § 4.  Greater  facility  for 
explaining  the  events  thus  obtained. 

On  Shiloh.  Chap.  xlix.  10 232 

§ I.  Different  renderings  of  the  word, 

§ 2.  Choice  of  renderings,  either  4 
5-  § 3*  Messianic,  by  consent  of 

Jewish  and  Christian  antiquity.  § 4. 
Answer  to  objections. 


CONTENTS. 


IX 


EXODUS. 

INTRODUCTION.  BY  F.  C.  COOK,  M.A.,  CANON  OF  EXETER. 


PAGE  PAGE 

§ I.  Division  of  the  Book 237  sula  of  Sinai  shown  by  the  author  244 

§ 2.  Mosaic  authorship 239  §5.  Argument  from  the  account  of  the 

§ 3.  Miracles  in  Egypt 241  Tabernacle 247 

§ 4.  Personal  knowledge  of  the  Penin-  § 6.  Chronology 248 


COMMENTARY  AND  CRITICAL  NOTES,  CHAP,  i.— xix. 
BY  CANON  COOK.  pp.  253—329. 

On  Manna.  Chap,  xvi 320 


COMMENTARY  AND  CRITICAL  NOTES,  CHAP,  xx.-xl. 

BY  SAMUEL  CLARK,  M.A.,  VICAR  OF  BREDWARDINE.  pp.  330—434. 


On  the  Ten  Commandmoits.  Chap.  xx. 

I— 17 335 

§ I.  The  Name.  § 2.  What  was  writ- 
ten on  the  stones?  § 3.  The  Division 
into  Ten.  § 4.  The  Two  Tables. 

§ 5.  The  Commandments  as  a Tes- 
timony. § 6.  Breadth  of  their 
meaning. 

On  the  Sabbath  Day.  Chap.  xx.  8 . . 339 

§ I.  The  Sabbath  according  to  the  Law; 

§ 2.  according  to  Tradition.  § 3. 

Its  connection  with  the  Creation. 

§ 4.  Its  relation  to  Sunday.  § 5.  Its 
connection  with  the  deliverance  from 
Egypt.  § 6.  Its  meaning. 

On  the  Colours  of  the  Tabernacle.  Chap. 

XXV.  4 366 

On  the  Mercy  Seat.  Chap.  xxv.  17  . . 368 

On  the  Construction  of  the  Tabernacle. 

Chap,  xxvi 374 

§ I.  The  Mishkan,  its  Tent  and  its  Co- 
vering. § 2.  Common  view  of  the 
arrangement  of  the  parts.  § 3.  Mr 
Fergusson’s  theory.  § 4.  The  place 


of  the  tabernacle  cloth.  § 5.  Sym- 
metry of  the  proposed  arrangement. 

§ 6.  The  Court. 

On  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim.  Chap. 

xxviii.  30 390 

§ I.  Their  Names.  § 2.  They  were  pre- 
viously known  and  distinct  from  the 
Breastplate.  § 3.  Their  purpose  and 
history.  § 4.  Their  origin.  § 5. 
Theories. 

On  the  Groves.  Ch.  xxxiv.  13  . . . 416  * 

On  the  Sanctuary  as  a vohole.  Chap.  xl.  432 
§ I.  The  Altar  and  the  Tabernacle. 

§ 2.  Names  of  the  Tabernacle.  § 3. 

Order  of  the  Sacred  things.  § 4.  The 
Ark  and  its  belongings.  § 5.  Allego- 
rical explanations.  § 6.  Originality 
of  the  Tabernacle. 


On  the  Route  of  the  Israelites 
FROM  Rameses  to  Sinai.  By 
Canon  Cook.  Chap.  xvi.  xvii.  xix.  435 


TWO  ESSAYS.  BY  CANON  COOK. 

I.  On  the  Bearings  of  Egyptian  History  upon  the  Pentateuch  . 443 

II.  On  Egyptian  Words  in  the  Pentateuch 476 


X 


CONTENTS. 


LEVITICUS. 


INTRODUCTION.  BY  SAMUEL  CLARK,  M.A., 
VICAR  OF  BREDWARDINE. 


PAGE 


I-  Title 493 

n.  Authorship ib. 

III.  Contents 494 

IV.  The  Ritual  of  the  Sacrifices  . . 495 


§ I.  Introductory  Remarks.  § 2.  The 
Classification  of  Offerings.  § 3.  The 
Animal  Sacrifices,  § 4,  The  Selec- 
tion of  animals  for  Sacrifice,  § 5, 
The  Presentation  and  Slaughter  of 


PAGE 

the  Victims.  § 6.  The  Treatment  of 
the  Blood.  § 7.  The  Burning  on  the 
Altar.  § 8.  The  Fat  and  its  Accom- 
paniments. § 9.  The  Priests’  por- 
tions. § 10.  The  Meat-offerings  and 
the  Drink-offerings.  §11.  The  Public 
Offerings. 

V.  Historical  Development  of  Sacri- 
fice   ' 502 


COMMENTARY  AND  CRITICAL  NOTES.  BY  SAMUEL  CLARK,  M.A. 


On  the  Symbolical  use  of  OIL  Chap,  ii.  i 516 
On  Sinning  through  Ignorance.  Chap. 

iv.  2 522 

On  the  Distinction  between  “ Unclean 
and  Clean  ” in  respect  to  Food.  Chap. 

xi.  2—30 555 

§ I.  The  distinction  made  by  the  Law 
a special  mark  of  the  chosen  people. 

§ 2.  Different  theories  of  the  details. 

§ 3,  The  primary  distinction,  that  ' 


between  Life  and  Death,  § 4.  Con- 
ditions of  animal  food,  § 5.  The 
distinction  on  its  practical  side  not 
peculiar  to  the  Law.  § 6,  The  wis- 
dom of  it  on  sanitary  grounds.  § 7. 

In  what  was  the  Mosaic  Law  of  dis- 
tinction peculiar? 

On  the  La^s  relating  to  Leprosy — Pre- 
liminary  note  on  the  character  of  the 

Disease.  Chaps,  xiii.  xiv 559 

§ I.  Importance  of  the  subject.  § 2. 
Names  of  the  Disease.  § 3.  Its  na- 
ture. §4.  The  Tuberculated  variety. 

§ 5.  The  AniESthetic  variety.  § 6. 

Each  form  recognized  by  the  ancients. 

§ 7.  Subordinate  varieties.  § 8.  Is  it 
incurable?  § 9.  Is  it  hereditary? 

§ 10.  Is  it  endemic?  §11.  What 


circumstances  foster  it?  § 12.  Is  it 
contagious  ? 

On  the  Treatment  of  Lepers.,  and  the 
grounds  of  the  Lanvs  respecting  them. 

Chap.  xiii.  45,  46 570 

§ I.  The  Leprosy  in  Egypt.  § 2.  The  , 
way  in  which  Lepers  have  been  re- 
garded. § 3.  Their  treatment  accord- 
ing to  the  Law.  § 4.  The  Leprosy 
in  Europe.  § 5.  Segregation  of  Lepers. 

§ 6.  Its  probable  effects.  § 7.  Objects 
of  the  Law  respecting  Leprosy.  § 8. 

The  Law  was  not  cruel. 

1.  On  the  t'wo  Birds  of  the  healed  Leper. 


Chap.  xiv.  4 — 7 580 

II.  On  the  Trespass-offering  of  the  Leper. 

Chap.  xiv.  12 — 18 581 

III.  On  the  Leprosy  in  the  House.  Chap, 

xiv.  33—53 

On  the  Purifications  of  the  Law  in  gene- 
ral. Chaps,  xii. — xv 584 

On  Chap.  xvi.  8 . . . . 591 

§ I.  Origin  of  the  word.  § 2.  Is  it  the 
name  of  a Personal  being?  § 3.  The 
function  of  the  Goat  sent  away.  § 4. 


His  typical  character.  § 5.  Names 
of  the  evil  one.  § 6.  Other  explana- 
tions of  the  vrord  'azdzel. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

On  the  Slaughtering  of  Animals.  Chap. 

xvii.  3 596 

On  the  Life  in  the  Blood.  Chap.  xvii.  ii  597 

I.  On  the  List  of  Prohibited  Degrees. 

Chap,  xviii.  7 — 18  ......  600 

II.  On  Marriage  <ivith  t^o  Sisters. 

Chap,  xviii.  18 601 

§ I.  Meaning  of  the  words  “a  wife  to 
her  sister.”  § 2.  Not  a prohibition  of 
polygamy.  § 3.  The  Ecclesiastical 
question. 

III.  On  the  Prohibited  Degrees  among 

the  Gentile  nations.  Chap,  xviii.  30  . 603 

I.  On  the  Pentecost.  Chap,  xxiii.  15 — 22  624 

II.  On  the  Cinjil  Tear.  Chap,  xxiii.  24  625 


III.  On  the  Meaning  of  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles.  Chap,  xxiii.  43  . . . 

I.  On  the  Sabbatical  Year.  Chap.  xxv. 

^—1 

II.  On  the  Jubilee.  Chap.  xxv.  8 — 33  . 

I.  On  the  High  Places.  Chap.  xxvi.  30 

II.  On  the  Mosaic  Origin  of  Chap.  xxvi. 
§ I.  Objections  on  the  score  of  style; 

§ 2.  and  of  subject  matter.  § 3. 
Conjectural  dates.  § 4.  The  Chap- 
ter a true  Prophecy.  §5.  Distinguish- 
ing character  of  the  Mosaic  Legisla- 
tion. 

On  the  De'voted  Thing.  Chap,  xxvii.  a 8 


NUMBERS. 


INTRODUCTION.  BY  T.  E.  ESPIN,  B.D.,  RECTOR  OF  WALLASEY 


§ I.  Title 649  § 3.  Chronology 

§2.  Contents  . ' ib.  §4.  Authorship  and  Date  of  Composition 


COMMENTARY  AND  CRITICAL  NOTES.  BY  T.  E.  ESPIN,  B.D., 
AND  J.  F.  THRUPP,  M.A.,  LATE  VICAR  OF  BARRINGTON. 


On  the  nvords  “ Tent  of  the  Testimony P 

Chap.  ix.  15 683 

On  the  nuords  “ unto  the  'wilderness  of 
Paran,  to  KadeshP  Chap.  xiii.  26  . 697 

On  the  rebellion  of  Korah^  &c.  Chap. 

xvi.  I 712 

On  the  words  '•'■ye  rebels.^''  Chap.  xx.  10  724 

On  “ Mount  Hor.'^  Chap.  xx.  22  . . ib. 

On  the  words  “ by  the  way  of  the  spies P 

Chap.  xxi.  I .731 

On  the  rendering  “ Red  sea  ” in  Chap. 

xxi.  14 ib. 

On  Ar  — Rabbath-Moab  or  AreopoUs  (?). 

Chap.  xxi.  15 ib. 

On  the  derivation  and  significance  of 
Chemosh.  Chap.  xxi.  29  . . . . 73a 


On  the  meaning  of  D"I'M.  Chap.  xxi.  30 
On  ^'•Balaam  the  son  of  Beord’’  Chaj). 

xxii.  5 

On  the  words  ^Hhe  fourth  part  of  Israel. 

Chap,  xxiii.  10 

On  the  term  ’•'•Unicorn.^''  Chap,  xxiii.  22 
On  the  words  '•''The  man  whose  eyes  were 

openP  Chap.  xxiv.  3 

On  the  words  “ Nevertheless  the  Kenite 

shall  be  vSastedf  See 

On  the  ellipse  in  Chap.  xxvi.  59  . . . 

On  the  word  ")DD.  Chap.  xxxi.  16  , . 

On  the  meaning  of  the  term  “ Kadesh- 
Barnea.  Chap,  xxxii.  8 .... 

On  the  particle  Chap,  xxxvi.  6 


xi 

PAGE 

625 

635 

636 
642 

ih. 


647 


649 

650 


733 

737 

743 

ib. 

749 

ib. 

757 

770 

774 

788 


• CONTENTS. 


xii 


DEUTERONOMY. 


INTRODUCTION.  BY  T.  E.  ESPIN,  B.D. 


§ I.  Title 

§ 2.  Contents  and  Chronology  . . . 

§3.  Style  and  Characteristics . . . . 


PAGE 

790  § 4-  Relation  to  preceding  books  and  to 

ib.  the  rest  of  Scripture  . . . ...  . 

791  §5.  Authorship  and  Date  of  Composition 


COMMENTARY  AND  CRITICAL  NOTES.  BY  T.  E.  ESPIN,  B.D. 


On  the  Hebrew  qjuord  rendered  '‘''ye  ^vere 

ready.'"  Chap.  i.  41 806 

Ethnological  notices  contained  in  Chap. 

ii.  10 — 12,  20 — 23,  and  34  ...  . 810 

On  the  Hebreqv  word  retidered  “ swell." 

Chap.  viii.  4 832 

On  the  deri^mtion  of  the  Hebrew  word 


translated  'in  A.  H.  eaiery  wh'it." 

Chap.  xiii.  16 849 

On  the  phrase  ‘ ‘ Save  when  there  shall  be 
no  poor."  Chap,  xv,  4 855 


On  the  jud'ic'ial  inst'itut'ions  of  the  ancient 
Jews.  Chap.xvii,  8 — 13,  and  14 — 17  862 

On  the  pori'ions  of  the  Offerings  assigned 
to  the  Priests.  Chap,  xviii.  3 . . • 868 

On  the  grammatical  construction  of  Chap. 

xviii.  8 ib. 

On  the  reference  of  the  passage  “ I will 
raise  them  up  a Prophet  from  among 
the'ir brethren  f Slc.  Chap,  xviii. 15 — 18  869 

On  the  grammatical  construction  of  Chap. 

XX.  9,  and  19,  20 875 


On  the  words  rendered  in  A.  F.  “ rough 

valley."  Chap.  xxi.  4 

On  the  methods  of  execution  amongst  the 
ancient  Jews.  Chap.  xxi.  23  . . . 

On  the  word  translated  “ bastard." 

Chap,  xxiii.  2 

On  the  law  of  divorce  amongst  the  Jews. 

Chap.  xxiv.  i — 4 

On  the  word  rendered  ‘‘'■drought"  in  A.  F. 

(marg.).  Chap,  xxviii.  22  . . . . 

On  the  verb  Chap,  xxviii.  40  . . 

On  the  words  translated  '''•  drunkenness" 
and thirst."  Chap.  xxix.  19  . . o 

On  the  Hebrew  word  yashlichemP 

Chap.  xxix.  28 

On  some  passages  in  the  Song  of  Moses. 
Chap,  xxxii.;  and  on  vv.  5,  26,  33, 

36,  42,  and  43 

On  the  style.,  literary  characteristics.,  ^pfc. 
of  the  Blessing  of  the  Tr'ibes.  Chap, 
xxxiii.  2,  21,  25 


PAGE 

791 

792 


878 

ib, 

884 

886 

901 

ib. 

905 

ib. 

917 

925 


THE  PENTATEUCH 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 

Pentateuch^  names  of  the  Book  or  Books  i 

Mosaic  origin  of  the  Peyitateuch  . . i 

(1)  Moses  could  have  ^written  the 

Pentateuch  ....  a 

(2)  External  Evidence  of  Mosaic 

Authorship  ....  4 

Joshua  . . . . .4 

Judges  .....  5 

History  of  Samuel  ...  6 

Times  of  David  and  Solomon  . 8 

Divided  Kingdom  ...  9 

Reign  of  Josiah  . , .10 

'^HE  title,  Pentateuch,  is  the  Greek 
name  given  by  the  LXX.  trans- 
lators to  the  five  books  of  Moses,  the 
name  by  which  they  were  known  among 
the  Jews  being  “the  Law,”  Torah.  In 
the  Scriptures  it  is  called  “ the  Book 
of  the  Law”  (2  K.  xxii.  8),  “the  Book 
of  the  Covenant”  (2  K.  xxiii.  2,  21; 
2 Chr.  xxxiv.  30),  “ the  Book  of  the 
Law  of  the  Lord”  (2  Chr.  xvii.  9,  xxxiv. 
14),  “The  Law  of  Moses,”  “The 
Book  of  Moses,”  or  “ The  Book  of 
the  Law  of  Moses.”  (See  2 Chr.  xxv.  4, 
XXXV.  12;  Ezravi.  18,  vii.  6;  Neh.  viii.  i, 
xiii.  i). 

The  division  into  five  books  is  by  many 
thought  to  be  also  due  to  the  LXX.  in- 
terpp.  The  Jews,  however,  retain  the 
division,*  calling  the  whole  chaitiishah 
chomeshe  torah,  “ The  five  quinquernions 
of  the  Law,”  though  they  only  distinguish 
the  several  books  by  names  derived  from 
a leading  word  in  the  first  verse  in  each. 
Thus  Genesis  they  cfil  JSereshith,  i.e.  “in 
the  Beginning,”  Exodus  Shettioth,  “the 
Names,”  &c. 

VOL.  I. 


PAGE 


Captivity  and  Return  . .12 

Nevj  Testament  . . .14 

(3)  Internal  Evidence  of  Mossiic  Au- 
thorship . . . . . ^ 5 

Acquaintance  with  Egypt  . 15 

— with  Sinai  tind 

Wilderness  . . . .316 

Canaan  in  prospect  . . .17 

Language  . . . .18 

Question  of  Post^Mosaic  Authorship 
considered  . . . . *19 


The  Mosaic  Origin  of  the  Pentateuch. 

That  Moses  was  the  author  and  writer 
of  the  Pentateuch  was  the  belief  of  all 
J ewish  and  Christian  antiquity,  if  at  least 
we  except  some  heretical  sects  in  the 
early  Christian  centuries,  who  desired  in 
all  ways  to  disparage  the  Old  Testament. 
The  sacred  narrative  itself  contains  asser- 
tions of  this  authorship.  Thus,  Ex.  xvii. 
14,  after  a memorable  battle,  “The  Lord 
said  unto  Moses,  Write  this  for  a memo- 
rial in  the  book  as  though  there 

were  a regular  account  kept  in  a well- 
known  book.  Again,  Ex.  xxiv.  4,  “Moses 
wrote  all  the  words  of  the  Lord.”  So  Ex. 
xxxiv.  27,  “The  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Write  thou  these  words.”  In  Num.  xxxiii. 
2,  we  read  that  “Moses  wrote  their  goings 
out  according  to  their  journeys  by  the 
commandment  of  the  Lord.”  In  Deut. 
xvii.  18,  19,  it  is  commanded  that  the 
king,  who  should  hereafter  reign,  should 
“write  him  a copy  of  this  law  in  a book 
out  of  that  which  is  before  the  priests 
the  Levites;”  and  in  Deutxxxi.  9, 10, 1 1, 

A 


2 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


at  the  very  end  of  the  Pentateuch,  we  read, 
“ Moses  wrote  this  law,  and  delivered  it 
unto  the  priests  the  sons  of  Levi,”  com- 
manding, that  “at  the  end  of  every  seven 
years”  they  should  “read  this  law  before 
all  Israel  in  their  hearing,”  Several  times 
Moses  himself  in  Deuteronomy  names 
“this  law,”  and  “the  Book  of  this  law” 
(Deut.  xxviii.  6i,  xxix.  19,  20,  29),  as 
though  he  had  written  a book  for  his 
people  to  keep.  With  this  uniformity 
of  tradition  and  these  claims,  there  is  at 
least  a presumption  in  favour  of  the  Mo- 
saic authorship.  It  will  however  be  well 
to  shew, 

1.  That  Moses  could  have  written  the 
Pentateuch. 

2.  That  the  concurrent  testimony  of 
all  subsequent  times  proves  that  he  did 
write  the  Pentateuch. 

3.  That  the  internal  evidence  points 
to  him,  and  to  him  only,  as  the  writer 
of  the  Pentateuch. 

Let  it  only  be  understood,  in  limvie, 
that  this  authorship  thus  claimed  for 
Moses  is  not  inconsistent  with  certain 
admissions. 

{a)  For  instance,  it  is  not  necessary 
to  insist,  that  every  word  of  the  Penta- 
teuch was  written  down  by  the  hand  of 
Moses  in  his  own  autograph.  He  may 
have  dictated  much,  or  all  of  it,  to  Joshua, 
or  to  some  secretary  or  scribe.  He  may 
have*  merely  superintended  its  writing, 
and  stamped  it  with  his  own  authority, 
as  perhaps  St  Peter  did  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  St  Mark.  This  may  explain 
(though  it  is  not  necessary  to  assume 
this  in  order  to  explain)  the  fact,  that 
Moses  is  always  spoken  of  in  the  third 
person’.  This  may  explain  also  some 
things  said  concerning  Moses,  which  he 
might  have  allowed  others  to  write,  but 
would  not  have  been  ’ likely  to  write 
himself.  This  may  explain  the  difficulty, 
if  difficulty  indeed  it  be,  that  the  last 
chapter  of  Deuteronomy  relates  the  death 
of  Moses;  for  what  more  likely,  than 
that  he,  who  wrote  at  Moses’  dictation 
the  acts  and  the  words  of  Moses,  should 
have  finished  the  work  by  recording  Mo- 
ses’ death? 

^ "When  Caesar  always  writes  of  himself  in 
the  third  person,  and  when  the  like  practice  has 
been  known  to  most  nations,  it  seems  hard  to 
deny  that  Moses  could  have  so  written. 


{li)  It  is  not  necessary  to  deny,  that 
the  Pentateuch,  though  the  work  of  the 
great  Prophet  and  Lawgiver  whose  name 
it  bears,  may  have  undergone  some 
recension  in  after  times,  as  by  Ezra  or 
others.  The  J ews  hold  that  all  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  were  submitted  to 
a careful  review  by  Ezra  and  the  Great 
Synagogue  (Buxtorf,  ‘Tiberias,’  Lib.  i. 
c.  10);  and  the  fathers  of  the  Church 
generally  believed  in  some  such  super- 
vision. “Omne  instrumentum  Judaicse 
literaturae  per  Esdram  constat  restaura- 
tum  ” (Tertull.  ‘De  Cultu  Femin.’  c.  3). 
“ Sive  Mosen  dicere  volueris  auctorem 
Pentateuchi,  sive  Esram  ejusdem  instau- 
ratorem  operis,  non  recuso”  (Hieron.  ‘ad 
Helvidium,’  edit.  Vail.  Tom.  ii.  p.  212). 
If  Ezra  collated  MSS.  and  carefully 
edited  the  books  of  Moses,  it  is  not  im- 
possible, and  is  not  inconsistent  with  the 
original  authorship,  that  he  should  have 
admitted  explanatory  notes,  which  some 
think  (rightly  or  wrongly)  to  betray  a 
post-Mosaic  hand. 

(c)  It  is  not  necessary  to  deny  that 
Moses  had  certain  documents  or  tradi- 
tions referring  to  the  patriarchal  ages, 
which  he  incorporated  into  his  history. 
Indeed  it  is  most  likely  that  such  tradi- 
tions should  have  come  down  through 
Shem  and  Abraham  to  Joseph  and  the 
Israelites  in  Egypt : and  there  can  be 
no  reason  why  an  inspired  historian 
should  not  have  worked  up  such  trust- 
worthy materials  into  the  history  of  the 
ancestors  of  his  people. 

I.  Moses  could  have  written  the  Penta- 
teuch. 

The  most  sceptical  of  modern  ob- 
jectors do  not  deny  the  existence  of 
Moses,  nor  that  he  was  the  leader  of 
his  own  people  out  of  Egypt  into  Ca- 
naan. We  have  then  the  fact,  that 
there  was  a man,  evidently  of  some  ge- 
nius and  energy,  who  led  a nation  out 
of  captivity,  and  settled  them  in  a state 
of  civil  government  in  another  land.  He 
came  out  of  the  most  civilized  country 
in  the  world,  and  he  most  probably  had 
acquired  much  of  its  civilization. 

The  first  question  then,  which  naturally 
occurs  is.  Was  the  art  of  writing  known 
so  early  as  Moses  ? and  especially  was  it 
known  to  the  Egyptians  and  the  Jews? 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


3 


Recent  researches  prove  the  early  ex- 
istence of  writing  power  in  Egypt.  Hie- 
roglyphics  are  as  ancient  as  the  earliest 
Egyptian  monuments,  and  the  cursive 
hieratic  character  is  to  be  found  in  mo- 
numents, parchments,  and  papyri  cen- 
turies before  the  time  of  Moses.  A few 
examples  will  clearly  prove  this.  The 
famous  group  of  figures  in  the  tomb  of 
Chnoumhotep  at  Beni  Hassan,  which  be- 
longs to  the  twelfth  dynasty,  represents 
a scribe  as  presenting  to  the  governor  a 
roll  of  papyrus  covered  with  an  inscrip- 
tion, bearing  the  date  of  the  sixth  year  of 
Osirtasen  II.  This  was  certainly  many 
centuries  before  the  Exodus,  according 
to  most  scholars  even  before  the  time  of 
Abraham  (see  Brugsch,  ‘Hist.  d’Egypte,’ 
p.  63).  At  a later  period,  in  the  reign  of 
Menephtliah  I.,  of  the  nineteenth  dynasty, 
whom  many  have  identified  with  the 
Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  we  have  a papy- 
rus in  the  cursive  hieratic  character,  (the 
Pap}^rus  Anastasi,  No.  i),  which  gives  a 
list  of  nine  authors  distinguished  for  their 
writings  in  theology,  philosophy,  history, 
and  poetry  (Brugsch,  p.  177,  note).  But 
the  most  remarkable  of  all  is  the  papyrus 
found  by  M.  Prisse,  written  in  the  hie- 
ratic character,  and  translated  by  M. 
Chabas,  which  contains  two  treatises ; 
the  first,  consisting  of  twelve  pages,  is 
the  conclusion  of  a work,  of  which  the 
earlier  part  is  destroyed.  It  treats  of 
moral  subjects,  and  is  written  in  an  ela- 
borate and  elevated  style.  The  second 
treatise  is  by  a royal  author,  son  of  the 
king  next  preceding  Assa,  in  whose  reign 
the  work  was  composed.  This  is  con- 
sidered to  be  the  most  ancient  of  exist- 
ing MSS.  It  is  attributed  to  a prince  of 
the  fifth  dynasty,  who  represents  him- 
self as  weighed  down  with  age,  and  in- 
vokes the  aid  of  Osiris  to  enable  him  to 
give  to  mankind  the  fruits  of  his  long 
experience.  (See  De  Rouge,  ‘ Recueil  de 
Rapports,  Progres  des  Etudes  Relatives 
a I’Egypte  eta  I’Orient,’  p.  55,  Paris,  1867. 
Also  Brugsch,  pp.  29 — 32.)  The  anti- 
quity of  this  document  is  incalculable. 
There  can  therefore  be  no  reason  to 
doubt,  that  Moses,  brought  up  in  the 
house  of  Pharaoh,  and  learned  in  all  the 
learning  of  the  Egyptians,  had  acquired 
the  art  of  writing. 

But  the  Semitic  nations  had  also  a 


knowledge  of  the  same  art  from  the  most 
ancient  times.  The  traditions  of  Greece 
point  to  Cadmus  {i.e.  “ the  eastern’”),  the 
brother  of  Europa,  as  having  introduced 
letters  from  Phoenicia  into  Europe.  These 
traditions  belong  to  the  mythic  ages  of 
Greece,  and,  having  been  varied  by  later 
authors,  can  only  be  taken  for  what  they 
are  worth;  but  ki  their  earliest  form 
they  point  to  Phoenicia  as  the  teacher 
of  Greece,  and  go  on  to  say  that  parch- 
ments of  goat  and  sheep  skin  were  used 
by  the  Phoenicians  for  the  purposes  of 
writing  (Herod,  v.  58).  Moreover,  these 
traditions  are  confirmed  by  the  fact  that 
the  letters  of  the  Greek  alphabet  have 
the  same  names  and  order  with  those  of 
the  alphabets  of  the  Semitic  races ; and 
the  names  have  a meaning  in  Semitic 
but  none  in  Greek,  which  proves  that 
the  Greeks  took  them  from  the  Phoe- 
nicians, not  the  Phoenicians  from  the 
Greeks.  In  an  Egyptian  monument  a 
Hittite  is  specially  named  as  a writer. 
Pentaour,  a royal  scribe  of  the  reign 
of  Rameses  the  Great  (as  some  think 
before,  but  more  probably  soon  after, 
the  Exodus),  composed  a poem,  which 
is  described  as  a kind  of  Egyptian  Iliad, 
and  which  w'as  engraved  on  the  walls  of 
the  temple  of  Karnac.  This  mentions 
by  name  Chirapsar,  among  the  Kheta 
{i.e.  the  Hittites),  as  a writer  of  books 
(Brugsch,  p.  139);  with  which  has  been 
compared  the  fact,  that  Joshua  took  a 
city  of  the  Hittites,  the  ancient  name 
of  which  was  Kirjath-sepher,  i.e.  “the 
city  of  the  book”  (Josh.  xv.  15),  and 
that  he  changed  that  name  to  Debir,  a 
word  of  similar  significance. 

It  is  observed  by  Ewald  (‘Geschichte 
des  Volkes  Israel,’  Vol.  i.  p.  77.  Eng. 
Tr.  by  Martineau,  pp.  50,  51),  that  the 
words  for  “write,”  “book,”  and  “ink” 
(nriD,  “iSD,  vn),  belong  to  all  the 
branches  and  dialects  of  Semitic  (except 
that  the  Ethiopic  and  south  Arabic  have 
pnv  for  “to  write”).  From  this  he  infers 
that  writing  in  a book  with  ink  must  have 
been  known  to  the  earliest  Semites  be 
fore  they  separated  off  into  their  various 
tribes,  nations,  and  families.  He  con- 
cludes, and  he  cannot  be  accused  of 
over  credulity,  that  “ Whatever  the  Se- 
mitic people  may  be,  to  which  half  the 
civilized  world  owes  this  invaluable  in- 


A2 


4 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


vention,  so  much  is  incontrovertible,  that 
it  appears  in  history  as  a possession  of 
the  Semitic  nations  long  before  Moses; 
and  we  need  not  scruple  to  assume  that 
Israel  knew  and  used  it  in  Egypt  before 
Moses.” 

If  then  writing  existed  in  Egypt  and 
Israel,  it  is  certain  that  Moses  could 
have  written  a history,  first,  of  the  an- 
cestors of  his  race,  if  it  were  only  from 
the  traditions  which  were  sure  to  have 
been  preserved  among  them,  and  se- 
condly, of  their  wars  and  their  wan- 
derings, in  which  he  himself  had  been 
their  leader.  These  wars  and  wander- 
ings extended  over  a period  of  forty 
years,  during  which  there  must  have 
been  frequent  and  long  intervals  of  com- 
parative leisure,  which  would  have  af- 
forded ample  time,  to  a man  of  energy 
and  diligence,  to  compose  a long  and 
elaborate  work.  We  may  add  that,  if 
ISIoses  could  have  written  such  a book, 
then  it  is  almost  certain,  that  he  would 
have  wished  to  do  so.  If  we  admit  but 
the  barest  outline  of  the  history  of  the 
Exodus,  derivable  not  from  the  Jews 
only,  but  confirmed  by  the  adverse  tra- 
ditions of  their  enemies,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  of  the  following  facts,  viz.  that 
the  Hebrews  were  an  oppressed  race 
who,  escaping  from  their  captivity  in 
Egypt,  made  a settlement  in  thq  land 
of  Canaan,  and  by  degrees  grevy  into  a 
powerful  people,  having  a code  of  laws 
and  a system  of  worship,  markedly  dis- 
tinguishing and  keeping  them  apart  from 
the  nations  round  about  them.  Now 
it  is  plain,  that  to  fit-  such  a people 
to  be  their  own  masters,  and  to  main- 
tain themselves  in  a condition  of  civil 
polity  and  social  independence,  there 
were  needed  wise  laws  and  good  train- 
ing. If  there  be  any  truth  at  all  in 
history  and  tradition,  Moses,  their  wise 
leader,  gave  them  laws  and  subjected 
them,  before  their  settlement  in  Canaan, 
to  a system  of  training.  Moreover,  he 
gave  them  a nationality.  Was  it  not 
almost  certain  that  he  would  commit  his 
laws  to  writing?  Is  it  not  highly  proba- 
ble, that  he  should  have  tried  to  call  out 
their  national  spirit  by  giving  them  a 
history  of  their  ancestry  and  of  their  own 
assertion  of  their  national  independence? 
Such  a body  of  men  would  not  very 


easily  settle  by  conquest  among  people 
more  civilized  than  themselves,  and  re- 
tain independent  laws,  customs  and  rites, 
notwithstanding  all  surrounding  influ- 
ences. Yet  that  this  was  done  by  the 
Israelites  no  scepticism  has  yet  denied. 
Nothing  short  of  all  that  we  read  in  the 
Pentateuch  can  fully  explain  this.  But, 
at  all  events,  it  is  clear,  that  in  order  to, 
effect  it,,  a wise  leader  and  legislator 
would  have  committed  his  laws,  and 
very  probably  his  history,  to  writing. 

We  conclude  then,  that  Moses  could 
have  written  a work  such  as  the  Penta- 
teuch, and  that,  if  he  could,  most  proba- 
bly he  would  have  written  such  a work. 

2.  Our  next  position  is,  that  The 
concurrent  testwwny  of  subsequent  times 
proves y that  , Moses  fid  v/rite  the  books 
710W  known  by  his  name. 

Beginning  with  the  earliest  books  of 
the  Old  Testament  we  can  trace  a con- 
stant stream  of  reference  and  quotation 
to  the  laws,  the  history,  and  the  words  of 
Moses,  which  shew  them  all  to  have  been 
well-known  and  universally  accepted. 

In , Joshua,  the  Law  of  Moses,  the 
Book  of  the  Law,  which  had  been  writ- 
ten and  was  to  be  read,  is,  continually 
spoken  of(Josh.i.7,8,  viii.31,34,  xxiii.6). 
In  the  first  chapter  the  very  words  of 
Deuteronomy  are  twice  quoted  at  length 
by  Joshua.  (See  Josh.  i.  3 — 8,  where 
Deut.  xi.  24,  25,xxxi.  6 — 12  are  recited, 
and  Josh.  i.  13: — 18,  where  Deut.  iii. 
18 — 20  is  recited).  The  , constitution, 
both  ecclesiastical  and  temporal,  of  the 
Israeli tish  people  exactly  corresponds 
with  that  ordained  by  Moses.  Thus  the 
priesthood  is  in  the  family  of  Aaron. 
Eleazar,  the  son  of  Aaron,  is  High  priest 
(Josh.  xiv.  i).  He  holds  the  same  high 
place  in  the  nation  that  his  father  did, 
being  associated  with  Joshua,  as  Aaron 
was  with  Moses  (see  xiv.  i,  xxi.  i).  He 
and  Joshua  divide  the  land  (xxi.  i),  ac- 
cording to  the  ordinance  in  Num.  xxxiv. 
17.  The  tribe  of  Levi  perform  the  sacred 
functions,  being  scattered  among  the 
tribes,  with  forty-eight  cities  assigned  to 
them  (Josh.  xiii.  i4>  33 ; xiv.  3,  4;  xviii.  7 ; 
xxi.),  as  had  been  commanded  by  the 
I.ord  by  the  hand  of  Moses  (Num.  xxxv. 

The  Tabernacle,  which  had  been  made 
by  Moses  and  pitched  in  the  wilderness, 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


5 


is  now  set  up  at  Shiloh  (Josh,  xviii.  i). 
The  sacrifices  (Josh.  viii.  31,  xxii.  23,  27, 
29)  are  exactly  those  enjoined  in  Lev. 
i.,  ii.,  iii.  The  altar  which  Joshua  builds 
is  constructed  “ as  Moses  the  servant  of 
the  Lord  commanded  the  children  of 
Israel,  as  it  is  written  in  the  book  of  the 
Law  of  Moses”  (Josh.  viii.  30,31.  Cp.  Ex. 
XX.  25).  The  ark  of  the  covenant  occu- 
pies the  same  position  as  it  did  in  the 
wilderness.  It  is  carried  on  the  shoulders 
of  the  Levites,  and  considered  as  the 
symbol  and  the  special  place  of  the  pre- 
sence of  God  (Josh,  iii,  3,  6,  8,  vii.  6). 
Circumcision  (v.  2)  and  the  passover  (v. 
10)  are  observed  as  in  the  Pentateuch. 

There  is  the  same  general  assembly  of 
the  people  in  council  with  the  same 
princes  of  the  assembly  (Josh.  ix.  18 — 21, 
XX.  6,  9,  xxii.  30.  Cp.  Ex.  xvi.  2 2, Sic.),  the 
same  elders  of  Israel  (Josh.  vii.  6;  Deut. 
xxxi.  9),  the  same  elders  of  the  city 
(Josh.  XX,  4;  Deut.  xxv.  8),  the  same  ofi 
ficers  called  shoterhn  and  shophetim  (Josh, 
viii.  33;  Deut.  xvi.  18),  the  same  heads 
of  thousands  (Josh.  xxii.  21;  Num.  i.  16), 
and  other  functionaries  of  state  or  of 
law.  The  ordinances  of  the  Mosaic  law 
are  adhered  to.  Thus  the  bodies  of  those 
who  have  been  hung  are  taken  down 
before  sunset  (Josh.  viii.  29,  x.  27),  as  it 
was  commanded  in  Deut.  xxi.  23.  No 
league  is  made  with  the  people  of  Ca- 
naan (Josh,  ix.),  according  to  Exod.  xxiii. 
32.  Cities  of  refuge  are  appointed  (Josh, 
XX.)  in  strict  accordance  with  the  rules 
laid  down  in  Num,  xxxv.  ii — 15;  Deut. 
iv.  41^ — 43;  xix.  2 — 7.  The  land  is  di- 
vided by  lot  (Josh.  xiv.  2),  as  enjoined 
in  Num.  xxxiv.  13.  The  daughters  of 
Zelophehad  have  their  inheritance  given 
them  in  the  way  prescribed  Num.  xxvii. 

I — 12,  xxxvi.  6 — 9. 

This  is  no  place  to  discuss  the  genu- 
ineness and  antiquity  of  the  Book  of 
Joshua;  we  may  simply  observe  that  its 
testimony  to  the  Pentateuch  is  such  that 
adverse  criticism  has  found  no  escape 
but  in  saying  that  the  author  of  Joshua 
must  also  have  been  the  author  of  the 
Pentateuch,  or  (perhaps  and)  that  the 
Book  of  Joshua  was  a recent  production 
of  the  time  of  the  kings  or  of  the  cap- 
tivity. 

The  Book  of  Judges  is  of  a somewhat 
fragmentary  character  describing  a dis- 


ordered condition  of  society,  and  the 
nature  of  its  history  is  such  as  to  call 
forth  but  few  references  to  the  history  or 
the  laws  of  Moses.  The  Book,  however, 
appears  in  the  first  place  to  be  a con- 
tinuation of  the  history  of  Israel  from 
the  death  of  Joshua,  and  so  thoroughly 
joins  on  to  the  Book  of  Joshua,  that  it 
can  hardly  be  explained  except  on  the 
belief  that  the  Book  of  Joshua  was  writ- 
ten before  it  (see  ch.  i.  i.  sqq.  ii.  6 — 8). 
The  laws  of  Moses,  and  God’s  command- 
ments by  him,  seem  to  be  frequently  re- 
ferred to  (see  ii.  i,  2,  3,  ii,  12,  20;  vi. 
8 — 10;  XX.  6,  2,  13.  Cp.  Deut.  xiii.  5; 
xxii.  2i).  We  find  the  same  ordinances 
of  law  and  worship  as  are  prescribed  in 
the  Pentateuch  and  observed  in  Joshua. 
Thus  Judah  has  the  pre-eminence  among 
the  tribes  and  the  chief  command  (Judg. 
i.  2 ; XX.  18.  Cp.  Gen.  xlix.  8;  Num.  ii.  3, 
X,  14).  The  office  of  Judge,  which  here 
appears  so  conspicuously,  corresponds 
with  what  Moses  had  said  in  Deut.  xvii. 
9.  The  Theocratic  character  of  the  na- 
tion is  fully  recognized  by  Gideon,  who 
refuses  to  be  king  (Judg.  viii.  22),  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  sayings  of  Moses 
(Ex.  xix.  5,  6;  Deut.  xvii.  14,  20;  xxxiii. 
5).  The  Tabernacle  is  still,  as  set  up  by 
Joshua,  at  Shiloh  (Judg.  xviii.  31).  In 
case  of  danger  we  find  the  Israelites 
going  to  ask  counsel  of  the  Lord,  pro- 
bably by  the  High  priest  with  Urim  and 
Thummim  (Judg.  xx.  23.  Cp.  Ex.  xxviii. 
30;  Num.  xxvii.  21):  and  again  after 
defeat  we  find  them  going  up  to  the 
house  of  the  Lord,  weeping  and  fasting 
and  offering  there  burnt  offerings  and  sa- 
crifices in  conformity  with  Deut.  xii.  5 ; 
there  enquiring  of  the  Lord  by  means  of 
Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar,  the  son 
of  Aaron,  the  High  priest,  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  ark  of  the  Covenant  of  God 
(Judg.  XX.  26 — 28).  The  Ephod  is  still 
the  priestly  garment,  and  so  honoured 
as  to  become  an  object  of  idolatry  (Judg. 
viii.  27 ; xvii.  5 ; xviii.  14 — 17).  The 
Levites,  dispersed  about  the  tribes  and 
cities,  appear  as  the  only  legitimate  mi- 
nisters of  religion,  so  that  their  services 
are  sought  even  for  idolatrous  worship 
(Judg.  xvii.  7 — 13  ; xix.  i,  2).  Circum- 
cision distinguishes  the  Israelite  from 
the  neighbouring  tribes  (Judg.  xiv.  3; 

XV.  1 8). 


6 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


There  are  numerous  historical  refer- 
ences in  Judges  to  the  facts  recorded 
in  the  Pentateuch  (e.g.  i.  i6,  20,  23 ; 
ii.  I,  10;  vi.  13).  Especially  Judg.  xi. 
15 — 27  is  a complete  epitome  of  Num. 
XX,  xxi.  The  language  is  frequently  bor- 
rowed in  great  degree  from  the  language 
of  the  Pentateuch  (compare  Judg.  ii. 

I — 23  with  Ex.  XX.  5 ; xxxiv.  13  ; Lev. 
xxvi.  13 — 17,  36;  Num.  xxxii.  13;  Deut. 
vii.  2,  5,  16;  ix.  18;  xii.  3;  xvii.  2;  xxxi. 
16;  and  in  the  Song  of  Deborah,  Judg.  v. 
compare  vv.  4,  5 with  Deut.  xxxiii.  2; 

V.  8 with  Deut.  xxxii.  17. 

In  the  unsettled  state  of  the  country 
during  the  reigns  of  most  of  the  judges 
it  is  only  natural  to  expect  that  there 
would  be  some  departure  from  the  strict 
observance  of  the  law  : but  the  facts 
above  referred  to  are  consistent  only 
with  the  belief  that  the  events  and  ordi- 
nances of  the  Pentateuch  had  preceded 
the  history  and  were  known  to  the  actors 
and  writers  of  the  Book  of  J udges. 

The  History  of  Samuel.  Here  again 
we  meet  from  the  first  with  the  ordi- 
nances of  the  Law  and  the  history  of 
the  Pentateuch,  referred  to,  recognized 
and  acted  on. 

We  meet  at  once  with  Eli,  the  High 
priest  of  the  race  of  Aaron,  though  of 
the  house  of  Ithamar  (i  Chr.  xxiv.  3. 
Cp.  2 S.  viii.  17;  T K.  ii.  27);  and  his 
sons’  wickedness  is  related  with  the  threat 
of  punishment,  fulfilled  in  the  reign  of 
Solomon  (i  K.  ii.  27),  which  sustains 
the  truth  of  God’s  promise  (Num.  xxv. 
10  sqq.)  that  the  High  priesthood 
should  remain  in  the  family  of  Eleazar. 
The  tabernacle  is  still  at  Shiloh,  where 
it  was  pitched  by  Joshua  (i  S.  ii.  14, 
iv.  3),  probably  somewhat  more  solidly 
fixed  than  it  had  been  in  the  wilderness, 
perhaps  according  to  the  rabbinical  tra- 
ditions having  now  become  “ a structure 
of  low  stone  walls  with  the  tent  drawn 
over  the  top”  (Stanley  ‘ S.  and  P.’  p. 
233);  so  that  it  had  apparently  a war- 
der’s house  attached  to  it,  where  Samuel 
slept'.  The  lamp  burns  in  it  according 

^ The  objection  fColenso,  Pt.  v.  p.  97)  that 
the  I'abernacle  could  not  be  the  tai)ernacle  of 
the  wilderness,  because  it  had  “a  door,”  i Sam, 
ii.  22,  is  rather  singular,  if  we  observe  that  the 
words  in  Samuel  on  which  the  objection  is  found- 
ed, “the  women  that  assembled  at  the  door  of 


to  the  ordinance  in  Exod.  xxvii.  20,  21 ; 
Lev.  xxiv.  2,  3 ; though  either  that  ordi-  . 
nance  was  not  interpreted  to  mean  that 
the  light  might  never  go  out,  or  the 
carelessness,  which  had  come  on  in  Eli’s 
old  age  and  in  the  disordered  state  of 
Israel,  had  let  that  ordinance  fall  into 
disuse.  The  ark  of  the  covenant  is  in 
the  sanctuary  and  is  esteemed  the  sacred 
symbol  of  the  presence  of  God  (i  S. 
iv.  3,  4,  18,  21,  22;  V.  3,  4,  6,  7;  vi.  19). 
The  Cherubim  are  there,  and  the  Lord 
of  hosts  is  spoken  of  as  dwelling  between 
the  Cherubim  (i  S.  iv.  4).  There  is  the 
altar,  and  the  incense,  and  the  Ephod 
worn  by  the  High  priest  (i  S.  ii.  28). 
The  various  kinds  of  Mosaic  sacrifices 
are  referred  to:  the  burnt-offering  ( 

I S.  X.  8;  xiii.  9;  xv.  22),  the  whole 
burnt-offering  (Calil,  i S.  vii.  9.  Comp. 
Deut.  xxxiii.  10),  the  peace-offerings  {She- 
lami?n,  i S.  x.  8 ; xi.  1 5 ; xiii.  9.  Cp. 
Ex.  xxiv  5),  the  bloody  sacrifice  {Ze- 
bach.,  I S.  ii.  19),  and  the  unbloody  of- 
fering {Minchah^  1 S.  ii.  19;  iii.  14; 
xxvi.  19).  The  animals  offered  in  sacri- 
fice, the  bullock  (i  S.  i.  24,  25),  the 
lamb  (i  S.  vii.  9),  the  heifer  (i  S.  xvi.  2), 
and  the  ram  (i  k xv.  22),  are  those  pre- 
scribed in  the  Levitical  code.  The  es- 
pecial customs  of  the  sacrifice  alluded 
to  in  I S.  ii.  13,  were  those  prescribed 
in  Lev.  vi.  6,  7;  Num.  xviii.  8 — 19,  25, 
32  ; Deut.  xviii.  i sqq.:  bat  the  sons  of 
Eli  knew  not  the  Lord,  and  so  would  not 
acknowledge  the  ordinance:  (“The  sons 
of  Eli... knew  not  the  Lord,  nor  the  or- 
dinance of  the  priests  in  reference  to 
the  people,”  i S.  ii.  12,  13).  The  Le- 
vites  alone  were  permitted  to  handle  the 
sacred  vessels  and  to  convey  the  ark  of 
the  Lord  (i  S.  vi.  15).  Historical  events 
are  referred  to  as  related  in  the  Penta- 
teuch ; Jacob’s  going  down  to  Egypt, 
the  oppression  of  the  people  there  and 
their  deliverance  by  the  hand  of  Moses 
and  Aaron  (i  S.  xii.  8),  the  plagues  of 
Egypt  (i  S.  iv.  8),  and  the  wonders  of 
the  Exodus  (i  S.  viii.  8),  the  kindness* 

the  tabemade  of  the  congregation,”  are  literally 
a quotation  from  Ex.  xxxviii.  8,  “ the  women  as- 
sembling, which  assembled  at  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation.”  Of  course  the 
word  for  “door”  (HnSj  is  as  applicable  to  a 
tent  door  as  to  a house  door  ; and  is  constantly 
used  of  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch. 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


7 


shewn  by  the  Kenites  to  Israel  in  the 
wilderness  (i  S.  xv.  6). 

Even  verbal  quotations  from  the  Pen- 
tateuch are  pointed  out.  The  refer- 
ence in  I S.  ii.  2 2 to  Ex.  xxxviii.  8,  has 
been  already  mentioned.  The  people 
ask  them  a king  (i  S.  viii.  5,  6),  in 
language  which  shews  that  they  had 
the  very  words  of  Moses  (Deut.  xvii. 
14)  in  their  minds.  The  words  of 
I S.  viii.  3 are  evidently  written  with 
allusion  to  Deut.  xvi.  19.  The  only  in- 
consistencies which  appear  are  readily 
explicable  by  the  peculiar,  unsettled  con- 
dition of  the  nation  in  the  days  of 
Samuel  and  the  early  days  of  David. 
Especially  when  the  ark  was  in  captivity 
and  there  was  no  longer  the  sacred  pre- 
sence of  God  at  Shiloh,  Samuel  sanc- 
tioned the  offering  of  sacrifice  in  other 
places  beside  the  Tabernacle  (i  S.  vii. 
17;  X.  8 ; xvi.  2 — 5).  But  indeed  the 
command  to  sacrifice  only  in  the  place 
to  be  chosen  by  God  was  not  binding 
until  that  place  had  been  chosen,  viz. 
Mount  Zion,  and  the  tabernacle,  to  be 
succeeded  by  the  Temple,  had  been  set 
up  there.  The  difficulty  that  Samuel 
a Levlte  (i  Chron.  vi.  22 — 28),  but  not 
a priest,  should  be  said  to  have  sacri- 
ficed (i  S.  ix.  13),  is  removed,  if  we  con- 
sider how  frequently  it  is  said  of  others, 
of  Joshua  (viii.  30,  31),  of  Saul  (i  S.  xiii. 
9,  10),  of  David  (2  S.  xxiv.  25),  of  Solo- 
mon (i  K.  iii.  4),  of  the  people  (i  K.  hi. 
2),  that  they  sacrificed,  it  being  in  all 
these  cases  apparently  understood  that  a 
priest  was  present  to  offer  the  sacrifice 
(see  Deut.  xviii.  3;  i S.  ii.  13 ; i K.  iii. 
I — 4.  Comp.  I Chron.  xvi.  39,  40). 
Samuel,  as  prophet  and  prince,  blesses 
the  sacrifice  (i  S.  ix.  13):  but  there  is 
no  evidence  that  he  slew  it.  If  he  slew 
it,  still  the  man  who  brought  the  offer- 
ing might  slay  it,  but  he  could  not  sprin- 
kle the  blood  on  the  altar. 

This  is  an  important  point  in  the  his- 
tory of  Israel.  Supposing  Moses  to  have 
been  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch  and 
the  facts  recorded  in  it  to  be  historical, 
we  have  now  found  just  what  we  might 
expect  to  find.  The  land  of  Canaan  is 
conquered  by  Joshua,  the  lieutenant  and 
successor  of  Moses,  who  endeavours  to  es- 
tablish his  people  in  their  new  settlements 
by  enforcing  upon  them  a strict  observ- 


ance of  all  the  ordinances  of  the  Mosaic 
Law.  After  his  death,  and  even  during 
his  failing  years,  we  find  the  Israelites 
demoralized  by  long  wars,  settling  im- 
perfectly down  to  their  civil  duties  and 
institutions,  acknowledging,  and  in  the 
main,  both  ecclesiastically  and  politically, 
guided  by  the  laws  of  the  Pentateuch, 
yet  without  a strong  and  settled  govern- 
ment to  enforce  their  strict  and  'constant 
observance.  Samuel,  prophet,  judge,  and 
almost  priest,  becomes  at  length  the  chief 
ruler.  He  consistently  aims  at  consoli- 
dating and  reforming  the  state  of  society. 
To  this  end,  though  he  apparently  makes 
no  change  in  the  established  worship  of 
the  country,  which  had  not  widely  de- 
parted from  that  ordained  by  Moses,  yet 
he  strives  to  bring  all  the  ordinances 
both  of  Church  and  State  back  to  con- 
formity with  the  institutions  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch. This  is  pretty  certain,  either 
that  he  followed  these  institutions  or  that 
he  invented  them.  The  only  record  wc 
have  of  him  and  of  his  acts  is  to  be 
found  in  the  first  book  called  by  his 
name.  There  certainly  he  appears  as  a 
follower  not  as  an  inventor;  and  the 
Book  of  Judges,  which  most  of  the  mo- 
dern critics  admit  to  be  ancient,  testifies 
to  the  existence  and  authority  (though 
at  times  to  the  popular  neglect)  of  these 
ordinances,  as  much  as  do  the  books  of 
Samuel.  The  reason,  why  he  is  charged 
with  the  invention,  is  that  after  him  the 
main  facts  of  the . history  and  the  prin- 
cipal laws  of  the  Pentateuch  were  un- 
doubtedly known,  and  there  is  the  ut- 
most anxiety  on  the  part  of  the  objectors 
to  prove  that  they  had  not  been  known 
before.  But,  besides  what  we  shall  en- 
deavour to  shew  presently,  viz.  that: 
Samuel  could  not  except  by  a miracle  r 
have  invented  the  institutions  of  the- 
Law,  the  history  of  Samuel  is  wholly- 
inconsistent  with  the  theory  that  he  was^ 
a forger.  “ In  his  history  there  is  too., 
much  of  the  Mosaic  element  to  do  with- 
out Moses  and  the  Pentateuch,  there  is, 
too  little  to  betray  his  intention  to  bring 
the  system  into  prominence.”  (Smith, 
‘Pentateuch,’  i.  p.  172.)  The  Penta- 
teuch and  the  Mosaic  system  silently 
underlie  the  whole  history  of  Samuel;, 
•but,  in  the  midst  of  a general  subjection 
to  it,  there  are  at  least  some,  apparent 


8 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


departures  from  it,  which  are  utterly  in- 
consistent with  the  belief  that  Samuel 
was  its  forger.  It  is  there : but  it  is 
there  without  parade  or  observation. 

The  times  of  David  and  Solomon. 

It  is  perhaps  scarcely  necessary  to 
trace  minutely  the  references  to  the 
Pentateuch,  and  the  observance  of  the 
Law  of  Moses  through  these  reigns.  The 
facts  are  the  same  as  before;  the  Levi- 
tical  priesthood,  the  tabernacle,  the  ark, 
the  sacrifices,  all  are  the  same;  but  there 
are  two  things  to  be  observed  now,  which 
bring  us  fresh  evidence  of  the  exist- 
ence of,  and  the  respect  paid  to,  the 
Pentateuch,  and  of  the  acceptance  by 
the  nation  of  the  ordinances  of  the  Taber- 
nacle. 

I.  In  David  we  have  not  only  a 
king  but  an  author.  A large  number  of 
the  Psalms  are  assignable  to  him,  either 
as  their  author  or  as  their  compiler. 
Now  it  is  true,  that  the  later  Psalms 
(such  as  the  78th,  105th,  io6th,  136th) 
are  much  fuller  of  historical  references  to 
the  Exodus  than  the  earlier  Psalms,  the 
Psalms  of  David:  but  it  will  be  found 
that  the  passing  allusions,  and  the  simi- 
larity of  expressions  and  sentences,  a- 
mounting  sometimes  to  evident  quota- 
tions, are  far  more  abundant  in  the 
Psalms  of  David.  It  is  impossible  to 
compare  the  following,  even  in  the  Eng- 
lish Version  (but  in  the  Hebrew  it  is 
much  more  apparent),  without  being  con- 
vinced that  David  had  in  his  mind  the 
words  or  the  thoughts  of  the  author  of 
the  Pentateuch. 


Ps.  Ixviii. 

I. 

Num.  X.  35. 

55  • 

4- 

Deut.  xxxiii.  26. 

j) 

7- 

Ex.  xiii.  21. 

8. 

Ex.  xix.  16. 

5? 

5) 

17- 

Deut.  xxxiii.  2. 

Ixxxvi.  8. 

Ex.  XV.  II. 

15- 

Ex.  xxxiv.  6. 

ciii.  17,  18. 

Ex.  XX.  6.  Deut.vii.  9. 

cx.  4. 

Gen.  xiv.  18. 

cxxxiii.  2. 

Ex.  xxx.  25,  30. 

Ps.  i.  3. 

„ iv.  5 (Heb.  6). 
„ „ 6 (Heb.  7). 

„ viii.  6,  7,  8. 

„ ix.  12. 

„ XV.  5. 


„ XVI.  4. 

„ ,,  5,  6. 

„ xvii.  7. 

„ xxiv.  I. 

„ xxvi.  6. 

„ XXX.  Heading. 
„ xxxix.  12. 


Gen.  xxxix.  3,  23. 
Deut.  xxxiii.  19.  . 
Num.  vi.  26. 

Gen.  i.  26,  28. 

Gen.  ix.  5. 

Ex.  xxii.  25,  Lev.  xxv. 
36.  Ex.  xxiii.  8. 
Deut.  xvi.  19. 

Ex.  xxiii.  13. 

Deut.  xxxii.  9. 

Deut.  xxxii.  10. 

Ex.  xix.5.  Deut.x. 
Ex.  XXX.  19,  20. 
Deut.  XX.  5. 

Lev.  xxv.  23. 


2.  In  Solomon  we  have  also  a royal 
author.  His  language,  however,  is  not 
so  much  penetrated  with  the  language  of 
the  Pentateuch  as  is  that  of  David.  In- 
deed the  nature  of  his  writings,  which  are 
mostly  proverbs  or  apophthegms,  does 
not  admit  of  much  reference  to  earlier 
works.  Yet,  even  so,  where  the  subject 
leads  to  it,  we  may  trace  an  evident  ac- 
quaintance with  the  language  of  Moses. 
See  for  instance  the  third  chapter  of 
Provej'bs,  where  v.  3 appears  to  allude  to 
Ex.  xxii.  9,  Deut.  vi.  i ; v.  9 to  Ex.  xxii. 
29,  Deut.  xxvi.  2;  V.  12  to  Deut.  viii.  5; 
V.  18  to  Gen.  ii.  9.  Many  other  phrases 
in  the  Proverbs  are  borrowed  directly 
from  the  Pentateuch.  Thus  in  Prov.  x.  1 8, 
‘‘  He  that  uttereth  slander,”  is  a Hebrew 
phrase  of  peculiar  significance  occurring 
only  here  and  Num.  xiii.  32;  xiv.  36,  37; 
the  expressions  in  Prov.  x.  i;  xx.  10,  23,, 
are  taken  from  the  very  words  of  Lev. 
xix.  36;  Deut.  xxv.  13.  The  words  of 
xi.  13;  XX.  19,  “the  talebearer”  (literally 
“he  that  walketh  being  a talebearer”), 
are  taken  from  Lev.  xix.  16,  “Thou  shalt 
not  go  up  and  down  as  a talebearer,” 
lit.  “ Thou  shalt  not  walk  being  a tale- 
bearer.” 

But  that  which  specially  connects 
Solomon  with  the  history  of  the  Exodus, 
is  that  he  was  the  builder  of  the  Temple. 
Now  the  Temple  is  a fixed  and  enlarged 
Tabernacle.  All  the  proportions  of  the 
Tabernacle  are  carefully  retained,  but 
the  size  is  exactly  doubled.  All  the 
instruments  and  the  sacred  vessels  are 
the  same,  except  that  they  are  magnified. 
Nothing  material  is  altered,  except  that 
the  Temple  is  a structure  of  stone,  whilst 
the  Tabernacle  was  a tent  covered  with 
skin;  and  in  the  Temple  there  is  mag- 
nificence, whereas  in  the  Tabernacle, 
'notwithstanding  the  gold  and  embroid- 
ery, there  was  comparative  simplicity. 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


9 


Mr  Fergusson,  the  able  writer  of  the  had  then  become  excessive,  Hezekiah 
article  Tonple  in  Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of  the  in  his  ardent  zeal  for  purity  of  worship 
Bible,’  has  shewn  with  great  clearness,  brake  it  in  pieces,  2 K.  xviii.  4.  We 
that  the  proportions  and  construction  of  turn  to  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  Jeroboam 
the  Tabernacle  were  those  of  a tent,  is  warned  by  Ahijah  the  Prophet  that  he 
most  admirably  suited  for  its  purpose  in  should  keep  the  statutes  and  command- 
the  wilderness,  having  every  requisite  ments  of  God  (i  K.  xi.  38),  evidently  the 
which  a Tent-temple  ought  to  have.  It  well-known  statutes  and  commandments 
is  a strong  proof  of  the  reverence  in  of  the  law.  When,  instead  of  doing  so, 
which  Solomon  held  the  original  pattern,  he  seduces  the  people  to  idolatry,  it  is 
that  he  and  his  architects  should  have  still  with  reference  to  the  history  of  the 
so  closely  imitated  the  Tent  in  their  Exodus,  “Behold  thy  gods,  O Israel, 
erection  of  a stone  Temple.  Unless  the  which  brought  thee  up  out  of  the  land  of 
Tent  and  all  its  accompaniments  had  Egypt,”  i K.  xii.  28.  The  very  place  of 
existed  and  been  described,  the  Temple  his  worship.  Bethel,  was  probably  con- 
of  Solomon  would  have  been  almost  secrated  by  the  history  of  Jacob  and  the 


impossible.  No  one  would  have  thought 
of  building  a house  with  all  the  propor- 
tions of  a tent,  except  to  perpetuate  the 
relation  of  the  house  to  the  tent,  the  Tem- 
ple’s ancestral  rights  in  the  Tabernacle. 
In  the  words  of  Ewald,  “The  Temple  of 
Solomon  itself,  notwithstanding  all  its 
splendour  and  its  expanded  proportions, 
shews  itself  to  be  only  a tent  on  a large 
scale,  though  no  longer  portable.” 

The  divided  kingdom. 

After  the  separation  of  the  ten  tribes 
from  Judah,  though  the  worship  of  the 
true  God  was  preserved  only  in  Judah, 
and  idolatry  prevailed  in  Israel,  there  is 
still  evidence  that  in  both  kingdoms  the 
Pentateuch  was  acknowledged,  both  as  a 
history  and  a law.  In  Judah,  we  find 
“the  Book  of  the  Law  of  the  Lord” 
used  as  the  great  text-book  for  teaching 
the  people  in  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat 
(2  Chron.  xvii.  9).  In  another  reign  the 
king,  Uzziah,  ventures  to  offer  incense 
contrary  to  the  Law  (Num.  xvi.  i sqq.), 
and  he  is  stricken  with  leprosy  as  a 
punishment  (2  Chron.  xxvi.  16 — 21). 
Hezekiah,  a great  reformer  in  Judah, 
institutes  all  his  reforms  on  principles 
strictly  according  with  the  law  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  is  specially  noted  as 
having  “kept  all  the  commandments, 
which  the  Lord  commanded  Moses.” 
2 K.  xviii.  6.  To  his  day  had  descended 
that  venerable  relic  of  the  wilderness 
“the  brazen  serpent  which  Moses  had 
made.”  The  honour  paid  to  it  clearly 
proves  the  acceptance  of  its  history  by  the 
Jewish  people:  but,  because  that  honour 


appearance  of  God  to  him  there.  The 
feast  appointed  i K.  xii.  32,  was  an 
imitation  of  the  feast  of  Tabernacles. 
Though  it  was  “in  a month  devised  in 
his  own  heart”  (v.  33),  and  not  at  the 
time  decreed  in  the  Law,  yet  it  was 
“like  unto  the  feast  that  is  in  Judah,” 
and  ordained  on  purpose  to  prevent  the 
people  from  going  up  “ to  the  sacrifice  in 
the  house  of  the  Lord  at  Jerusalem” 
(v.  27).  The  Levites  appear  to  have 
remained  faithful,  and  hence  Jeroboam 
is  obliged  to  make  the  lowest  of  the 
people  priests  (v.  31).  We  have  here 
the  clearest  testimony  to  the  existence 
and  authority  of  the  Law  even  in  the 
description  of  the  most  flagrant  breach 
of  it. 

For  the  history  of  the  succeeding 
reigns  it  may  suffice  to  point  attention  to 
the  following  references  in  the  books  of 
Kings  to  the  laws  of  the  Pentateuch. 

1 K.xxi.  3 to  Lev.  XXV.  23;  Num.xxxvi.8. 

„ xxi.  10  to  Num.  XXXV.  30;  Deut.  xvii. 

6,  7>xix.  15. 

„ xxii.  17  to  Num.  xxvii.  16,  17. 

2 K.  iii.  20  to  Ex.  xxix.  38  sqq. 

,,  iv.  I to  Lev.  XXV.  39  &c. 

„ vi.  18  toGen.xix.il. 

„ vii.  3 to  Lev.  xiii.  46 ; Num.  v.  3. 

But  at  one  period  in  this  history  we 
find  a body  of  illustrious  prophets  warn- 
ing the  people  both  of  Judah  and  of 
Israel  or  Samaria.  Isaiah,  Hosea,  Amos 
and  Micah,  all  prophesied  during  the 
reigns  or  part  of  the  reigns  of  Uzziah, 
Jotham,  Ahaz  and  Hezekiah,  kings  of 
Judah.  Isaiah’s  prophecy  was  confined 
to  Judah,  but  Amos  and  Micah  pro- 


10 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


phesied  in  both  kingdoms,  and  Hosea 
wholly  or  chiefly  in  the  kingdom  of 
Israel. 

In  all  these  prophets  there  are  fre- 
quent references  to  the  Law.  which  three 
of  them  distinctly  name  (Is.  v.  24;  xxx. 

9 ; Hos.  iv.  6 ; viii.  i ; Amos  ii.  4).  Isaiah 
seems  to  speak  of  it  as  “ the  Book  ” (ch. 
xxix.  12),  just  as  Moses  himself  speaks  of 
his  own  record  as  “ the  Book  ” (Ex.  xvii. 
14,  see  above).  The  familiarity  of  this 
great  prophet  and  probably  of  his  hearers 
with  the  Pentateuch  may  be  seen  by 
comparing  Is.  i.  10 — 14  with  Ex.  xxxiv. 
24;  Lev.  ii.  1, 16 ; vi.  14,  15 ; xxiii.  passim. 
Is.  ii.  7,  xxxi.  with  Deut.  xvii.  16;  Is.  iii. 
14  with  Exod.  xxii.  5,  26;  Is.  v.  26  with 
Deut.  xxviii.  49;  Is.  xxx.  16,  17  with  Lev. 
xxvi.  S;  Deut.  xxxii.  3c,  &c. 

It  is,  however,  more  important  for  our 
present  purpose  to  pass  on  to  the  other 
three  prophets,  as  they  prophesied  in 
Israel,  and  so  their  references  will  shew, 
that  the  Pentateuch,  whether  as  Law  or 
as  history,  was  assumed  as  the  basis  of 
truth  even  in  appeals  to  the  apostate  and 
idolatrous  kingdom  of  Ephraim. 

In  Hosea  we  have  such  references 
as  these,  “They  have  transgressed  the 
covenant  like  Adam”  (not  “like  men”  as 
Authorized  Version),  Hos.  vi.  7.  Jacob 
“ took  his  brother  by  the  heel  in  the 
womb,  and  by  his  strength  he  had  power 
with  God:  yea,  he  had  power  over  the 
angel  and  prevailed,  he  wept  and  made 
supplication  unto  him:  he  found  him  in 
Bethel”  See.  (Hos.  xii.  3,  4,  the  allusions 
being  to  Gen.  xxv.  26;  xxviii.  ii ; xxxii. 
24).  “She  shall  sing  there,  as  in  the  days 
of  her  youth,  and  as  in  the  day  when  she 
came  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt”  (ii.  15). 
“ When  Israel  was  a child,  then  I loved 
him,  and  called  my  son  out  of  Egypt  ” (xi. 
I,  cp.  Ex.  iv.  22,  23).  “I  have  written 
to  him  the  great  things  of  my  law” 
(viii.  12). 

Amos  says,  “I  brought  you  up  from 
the  land  of  Egypt,  and  led  you  forty 
years  through  the  wilderness,  to  possess 
the  land  of  the  Amorite,”  (ii.  10,  the  last 
words  being  in  allusion  to  Gen.  xv.  16), 
“the  whole  family  which  I brought  up 
from  the  land  of  Egy{)t  ” (iii.  i).  Pie 
speaks  of  “the  horns  of  the  altar”  (iii.  14), 
in  allusion  to  Ex.  xxvii.  2,  xxx.  10,  and 
Lev.  iv.  7.  He  speaks  of  the  Nazarites 


(ii.  II,  12),  which  doubtless  sprang  out 
of  the  ordinance  in  Num.  vi.  i — 21. 
In  chap.  iv.  4,  5 he  writes,  “ Come 
to  Bethel,  and  transgress;  at  Gilgal  mul- 
tiply transgression;  and  bring  your  sacri- 
fires  every  morning,  and  your  tithes  after 
three  years:  and  offer  a sacrifice  of 
thanksgiving  with  leaven,  and  proclaim 
and  publish  the  freewill  offerings.”  These 
allusions  shew  an  intimate  acquaintance 
with  many  of  the  Levitical  Laws.  One 
is  to  the  continual  burnt-offering,  Num. 
xxviii.  Another  to  the  tithe  to  be  laid 
up  at  the  end  of  three  years,  Deut.  xiv. 
28;  xxvi.  13.  A third  to  the  prohibition 
to  burn  leaven  with  a meat-offering  (Lev. 
ii.  ii),  and  the  exception  made  in  the 
case  of  a thank-offering,  where  direction 
is  given  to  offer  besides  the  unleavened 
cakes  also  an  offering  of  leavoied  bread 


(Lev.  vii.  12,  13).  A fourth  allusion  is 
to  the  freewill  offering  mentioned  Lev. 
xxii.  18 — 21;  Deut.  xii.  6.  Indeed  the 
accuracy  of  agreement  in  this  one  pas- 
sage goes  far  to  prove  that  the  law  of 
which  Amos  speaks  was  identical  with 
that  which  we  now  possess  h 

Micah  refers  to  Genesis.  “ They  shall 
lick  the  dust  like ///^  serpent”  (^^(135)  (vii. 
17),  in  allusion  to  Gen.  iii.  14.  He 
mentions  the  promises  to  Abraham  and 
to  Jacob  (vii.  20).  He  alludes  to  the 
history  of  the  Exodus  and  of  the  book 
of  Numbers.  “ I brought  thee  up  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  redeemed  thee 
out  of  the  house  of  servants;  and  I sent 
before  thee  Moses,  Aaron,  and  Miriam. 
O my  people,  remember  now  what  Balak 
king  of  Moab  consulted,  and  what  Balaam 
the  son  of  Beor  answered  him,”  &c.  (vi. 
4,  5)- 

Is  it  possible  that  these  prophets,  thus 
speaking,  or  the  people  among  whom 
they  spoke,  should  not  have  had  the 


Books  of  Moses  before  them  ? 


The  reig7i  of  Josiah. 

Welcome  now  to  the  time  of  Josiah. 
In  his  reign  we  have  abundant  evidence 
that  the  ordinances  observed,  when  the 
temple  had  been  purified,  were  those  of 
the  Mosaic  Law.  The  Passover  was  then 
held  unto  the  Lord  God,  as  it  was  written 

^ M'^Caul,  ‘ Examination  of  Bp.  Colenso’s 
Difficulties,’  p.  183,  third  Edition,  1863. 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


II 


in  the  book  of  the  Covenant  (2  K.  xxiii.), 
“according  to  the  word  of  the  Lord  by  the 
hand  of  Moses”  (2  Chron.  xxxv.  6).  The 
14th  day  of  the  first  month  is  the  day 
appointed  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  i).  The  sacri- 
fices are  Mosaic  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  7 — 10). 
The  priests  assisted  by  the  Levites  kill 
the  Passover  and  sprinkle  the  blood 
(Ib.  V.  ii).  The  priests  are  the  sons  of 
Aaron  (v.  14).  The  custom  of  the  Pass- 
over  is  traced  from  the  time  of  Samuel 
to  that  of  Josiah  (v.  18),  &c.,  &c. 

But  in  this  reign  we  meet  with  that 
remarkable  event,  the  finding  of  the  Book 
of  the  Law  in  the  Temple  by  Hilkiah 
the  High  priest.  It  is  unnecessary  to 
determine  here  what  may  be  meant  by 
“ the  book  of  the  Law”  (2  K.  xxii.  8),  or  “ a 
book  of  the  Law  of  the  Lord  by  Moses” 
(2  Chr.  xxxiv.  14).  Whether  it  were  the 
whole  Pentateuch,  or  Deuteronomy  only, 
or  portions  of  the  whole,  has  been  often 
questioned.  It  seems howeverpretty  clear, 
that  Deuteronomy  was  at  least  a portion 
of  the  book  thus  found.  The  curses 
referred  to  in  2 Chr.  xxxiv.  24,  are 
either  those  in  Lev.  xxvi.  or  those  in 
Deut.  xxvii.  xxviii.  The  effect  which 
they  produce  upon  the  king,  and  his 
evident  conviction  that  they  concern 
himself  especially,  “for  me,  and  for  the 
people,  and  for  all  Judah,”  (2  K.  xxii. 
13),  seem  to  point  to  the  curses  in  Deu- 
teronomy; as  there  only  the  king  is 
threatened  (Deut.  xxviii.  36),  there  too 
the  judgments  denounced  seem  more  spe- 
cially national,  and  such  as  would  most 
signally  apply  to  the  condition  of  Judah 
in  the  days  of  Josiah. 

But  it  is  a natural  question.  Whence 
came  it  that  the  book  thus  found  should 
so  have  awakened  the  conscience  and 
aroused  the  anxieties  of  the  king,  if  the 
Pentateuch  had  all  along  been  the.  ac- 
knowledged statute  book  of  his  people, 
and  the  text  book  of  their  faith? 

Let  us  then  notice  first,  that  the  Law 
was  to  be  kept  carefully  in  the  Taber- 
nacle or  Temple.  Moses  commanded 
that  the  book  of  the  law,  which  he  had 
^ written,  should  be  put  in  the  side  of  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  and  there  preserved 
\ (Deut.  xxxi.  26).  It  is  extremely  pro- 
bable (the  language  seems  to  imply  it) 
that  the  very  autograph  of  Moses  was 
thus  stored  up,  first  in  the  Tabernacle 


and  afterwards  in  the  Temple.  We,  who 
have  manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament 
in  the  fullest  preservation  14  or  15  cen- 
turies old,  and  Egyptian  papyri,  some 
unquestionably  much  older  than  Moses 
still  legible,  others  written  in  the  14th 
century  b.  c.  in  perfect  preservation,  need 
not  wonder  if  this  treasured  MS.  of  the 
Pentateuch  had  lasted  from  Moses  to 
Josiah,  a period  of  only  700  years,  and 
that  in  the  dry  climate  of  Palestine.  Let 
us  next  observe  the  long  prevalence  of 
idolatry  and  ungodliness  in  the  reigns 
preceding  that  of  Josiah.  There  is  a 
ray  of  light  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
but  the  darkness  settles  down  again  more 
thickly  than  ever  in  the  reign  of  his  son 
Manasseh.  That  reign,  extending  over 
more  than  half  a century  (2  K.  xxi.  i), 
witnessed  the  greatest  spread  of  idolatr)q 
and  of  all  the  vices  which  accompanied 
idolatry  in  Palestine,  the  most  cruel  per- 
secution of  the  faithful,  and  the  most 
outrageous  profanation  of  the  sanctuary 
ever  known  in  Israel.  Manasseh  built 
the  high  places  and  reared  up  altars  for 
Baal ; he  built  idolatrous  altars  in  the 
courts  of  the  temple,  made  his  sons  to 
pass  through  fire,  dealt  with  wizards,  and 
even  set  up  a graven  image,  probably  of 
the  foulest  possible  character,  “in  the 
house  of  which  the  Lord  said  to  David 
and  to  Solomon  his  son,  In  this  house 

and  in  Jerusalem will  I-  put  my 

name  for  ever”  (vv.  3 — 7,  2 Chr.  xxxiii.  7). 
Thus  he  seduced  the  people  “to  do  more 
evil  than  did  the  nations  whom  the  Lord 
destroyed  before  the  children  of  Israel” 
(v.  9).  “Moreover  Manasseh  shed  inno- 
cent blood  very  much,  till  he  had  filled 
Jerusalem  from  one  end  to  another”  (v.  16, 
also  Joseph.  ‘Ant.’  x.  3.  i)^  There  was  no 
doubt  a short  season  of  repentance  at 
the  end  of  his  reign  (2  Chron.  xxxiii.  12 
sqq.)  in  which  the  idol  was  taken  from 
the  Temple  and  the  altar  of  the  Lord 
repaired;  but  his  son  Amon  succeeded, 
and  again  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the 
Lord,  and  served  the  idols  which  his 
father  served,  and  worshipped  them 
(2  K.  xxi.  19,  sq).  To  these  two  evil 
reigns  and  to  a long  inheritance  of  cor- 
ruption, Josiah  succeeded  at  eight  years  of 
age.  He  early  shewed  his  piety,  even 
from  the  age  of  sixteen  turning  to  the 
Lord,  and  at  the  age  of  twenty  com- 


12 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


mencing  the  purification  of  worship  (2 
Chr.  xxxiv.  3).  At  the  age  of  26  (the 
1 8th  of  his  reign)  the  book  of  the  Law 
was  found  by  Hilkiah  in  the  Temple  (2  K. 
xxii.  3).  The  ark  which  had  been  re- 
moved from  the  Temple  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  3) 
during  the  sacrilegious  reign  of  Manasseh, 
had  been  brought  back  again : and  wher- 
ever the  book  of  the  Law  may  have  been 
concealed,  very  likely  built  into  a wall 
by  the  priests  to  keep  it  from  the  hand 
of  the  spoiler,  it  was  now  brought  to 
light  again  by  the  High  priest  Hilkiah. 

Let  us  remember  then,  ist,  that  very 
probably  this  was  the  autograph  of  Moses; 
2ndly,  that  since  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
a period  of  seventy-five  years,  it  is  very 
unlikely  that  any  king  should  have  made 
a copy  of  the  law,  as  commanded  in 
Deuteronomy  (xvii.  18);  moreover  it  is 
very  likely  that  Hezekiah’s  copy  should 
have  been  destroyed  or  laid  aside’  and 
forgotten;  3rdly,  that’by  a cruel  persecu- 
tion idolatrous  worship  had  long  been 
upheld,  and  the  worshippers  of  the  Lord 
prohibited  from  exercising  or  teaching 
their  faith ; the  prophets  having  been 
silenced,  Isaiah  according  to  Jewish  tra- 
dition having  been  sawn  asunder  early  in 
Manasseh’s  reign;  4thly,  that  Josiah  was 
still  young  and  only  feeling  his  way  to 
truth  and  to  the  restoration  of  religion. 
We  shall  then  not  think  it  strange  that 
he  should  have  been  ignorant  of  much 
of  the  purport  of  the  Pentateuch,  nor 
that  when  the  book,  perhaps  written  by 
the  very  hand  of  Moses  under  the  direc- 
tion of  God,  was  brought  out  and  read 
to  him,  he  should  have  been  deeply  im- 
pressed by  its  burning  words,  seeming  to 
come  straight  into  his  soul  as  if  they  had 
been  sent  down  to  him  from  the  cloud 
and  the  tempest  and  the  mountain  which 
burned  with  fire.  Writing  in  those  early 
days  was  very  scarce ; reading  was  proba- 
bly confined  to  very  few.  In  the  middle 
ages  of  Europe,  if  it  were  possible  to 
conceive  such  a'  state  of  corruption  as 
that  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh  over- 
spreading any  Christian  nation,  it  would 
not  have  been  impossible  for  a young 
king  to  be  ignorant  of  the  contents  of 
the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament. 
Yet  there  can  be  no  period  of  Christian 
history  in  which  copies  of  the  Scriptures 
were  not  far  more  abundant  in  every 


Christian  country  in  Europe,  and  the 
power  of  reading  them  far  more  gene- 
ral, than  can  have  been  the  case  in  Pa- 
lestine at  any  time  before  the  captivity. 

There  is  nothing  then  to  astonish  us 
in  the  effect  produced  on  Josiah  by  the 
reading  of  the  threats  of  judgment  from 
the  Temple  copy  of  the  Law.  That  it  was 
the  Temple  copy  of  the  Law,  all  the  most 
competent  witnesses  were  satisfied.  The 
High  priest,  the  Scribes,  Huldah  the 
Prophetess  (see  2 K.  xxii.  8,  12,  14),  the 
eiders  of  the  people  (ch.  xxiii.  i),  the 
priests  and  Levites  (xxiii.  4),  those  to 
whom  some  knowledge  at  least  of  the 
past  had  come  down,  some  acquaintance 
with  the  Scriptures  must  have  remained, 
all  apparently  acknowledged  that  the 
book  found  was  the  book  of  the  Law  by 
the  hand  of  Moses.  Had  it  been  possi- 
ble that  a forger  should  then  for  the  first 
time  have  produced  it,  it  cannot  be  that 
so  many  independent  witnesses  should 
have  been  imposed  upon  to  receive  it. 
The  story  of  its  finding  is  told  simply 
and  without  parade.  It  is  what  might 
very  easily  have  happened,  for  it  is  like 
enough  that  the  book  would  have  been 
hidden,  and  Josiah’s  repairing  of  the 
Temple  would  bring  it  to  light.  The 
effect  produced  on  Josiah’s  pious  mind  is 
exactly  what  might  have  been  looked 
for.  But,  that,  under  all  the  circum- 
stances of  long  continued  corruption  and 
apostasy,  any  one  should  have  been  able 
to  impose  such  a work  and  such  a law, 
as  the  Pentateuch,  on  king,  priests,  elders 
and  people,  even  if  any  one  at  that  time 
could  possibly  have  written  it,  exceeds 
all  power  of  credence. 

The  Captivity  and  the  Return. 

The  Prophets  of  the  Captivity  ac- 
knowledge the  Law,  and  refer  to  the 
Pentateuch  as  much  as  any  of  those 
that  preceded  them.  Jeremiah  began  to 
prophesy  in  the  13th  year  of  the  reign 
of  Josiah.  The  portion  of  his  book  from 
ch.  ii.  I to  ch.  viii.  17,  is  generally  ac- 
knowledged to  have  been  written  before 
the  finding  of  the  Book  of  the  Law  by 
Hilkiah;  but  in  those  chapters  there  are 
statements  concerning  the  Law  and  quo- 
tations from  the  books  of  Moses,  which 
shew  that  Jeremiah  was  then  well  ac- 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


^3 


quainted  with  the  Pentateuch.  “ They 
that  handle  the  Law  know  me  not”  (Jer. 
ii.  8).  “How  say  ye,  We  are  wise,  and 
the  Law  of  the  Lord  is  with  us?”  (viii.  8). 
Here  we  have  the  common  mode  of  re- 
ferring to  the  Law,  as  a well-known  au- 
thority. Chap.  ii.  6 has  allusions  to  Deut. 
viii.  15;  Numb.  xiv.  7,  8;  Lev.  xviii.  25 — 
28;  Numb.  XXXV.  33,  34.  Again,  ch.  ii. 
28  is  a quotation  from  Deut.  xxxii.  37, 
38.  Chap.  iv.  4 is  a virtual  quotation 
from  Deut.  x.  16,  xxx.  6;  and  the  figure 
used  occurs  nowhere  else  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. Ch.  V.  15,  17  contains  unmis- 
takeable  quotations  from  Deut.  xxviii. 
31,  49.  It  is  of  less  importance  to  mul- 
tiply examples  of  this  kind,  because  it  is 
now  admitted  that  the  writings  of  Jere- 
miah are  throughout  impregnated  with 
the  language  of  Deuteronomy,  insomuch 
that  the  modern  critics  have  argued  from 
this  that  Jeremiah  must  himself  have 
been  the  Deuteronomist. 

Ezekiel  prophesied  during  the  cap- 
tivity. Dr  M‘Caul  has  observed  that  in 
the  one  short  passage  (Ezek.  xxii.  7 — 12), 
there  are  at  least  twenty-nine  references 
to,  or  rather  quotations  from.  Exodus, 
Leviticus,  and  Deuteronomy,  perceptible 
in  the  English  version,  and  which  the 
marginal  references  in  an  ordinary  Bible 
sufficiently  point  out,  but  which  by  con- 
sulting the  original  will  be  found  to  con- 
tain the  very  words  of  the  Hebrew.  In 
V.  26  again,  where  the  Law  is  distinctly 
named,  there  are  at  least  four  more  re- 
ferences to  Lev.  X.  10,  xi.  45,  XX.  25, 
Ex.  xxxi.  13.  Chapters  xviii.  and  xx.  con- 
"^ain  references  and  quotations  innumer- 
able; ch.  XX.  being  a recapitulation  of 
all  that  happened  in  the  wilderness k 

On  the  return  from  captivity  we  learn, 
that  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (accord- 
ing to  the  ordinance  in  Deut.  xxxi.  10 
— 13),  Ezra  brought  the  book  of  the  Law 
of  Moses,  which  the  Lord  had  command- 
ed Israel,  that  he  read  it  from  morning  till 
midday  “before  the  men  and  the  women, 
and  those  that  could  understand;  and 
the  ears  of  all  the  people  were  attentive 
unto  the  book  of  the  Law”(Neh.  viii.  3). 
That  they  accepted  it  against  their  own 
interests  and  affections  is  evident  from 
their  being  induced  to  put  away  their  hea- 

^ M‘Caul’s  ‘Examination  of  Bp.  Colenso’s 
Difficulties,’  pp.  163  sqq. 


then  wives  (see  Ezra,  ch.  x).  Some  of  them 
it  is  plain,  understood  the  book  as  it  was 
read  to  them;  but  to  some  of  them,  we 
are  told,  Jeshua,  with  the  Levites  and 
others,  “read  in  the  book  of  the  Law 
distinctly  (or  rather  ‘giving  an  explana- 
tion’), and  caused  them  to  understand 
the  reading”  (Neh.  viii.  7,8).  The  older 
men  and  women,  no  doubt,  retained  their 
knowledge  of  the  ancient  Hebrew,  but 
the  younger  men,  who  were  grandchil- 
dren or  great-grandchildren  of  those  who 
were  first  carried  captive,  had  almost  lost 
the  language  of  their  forefathers,  and  had 
broughtfrom  the  land  of  the  Chaldees  that 
Aramaic  tongue,  Chaldee  or  Syriac,  which 
soon  became  the  vernacular  language  of 
Judea.  Hebrew  was  not  quite  lost,  or 
Haggai  and  Malachi  would  not  have  writ- 
ten their  prophecies  in  Hebrew;  but  the 
change  was  rapidly  taking  place.  It  is 
the  constant  Jewish  tradition  that  Ezra 
(besides  writing  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Esther, 
andT  and  2 Chronicles)  collected  and 
reduced  to  order  all  the  earlier  books  of 
the  Old  Testament.  It  is  said,  moreover, 
that  “the  reading  distinctly  the  Law  and 
causing  the  people  to  understand,”  re- 
ferred to  above,  was  the  introduction  by 
Ezra  of  the  custom,  which  prevailed 
afterwards,  of  having  Chaldee  translations 
or  paraphrases  read  with  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures,  for  the  use  of  the  Chaldee 
speaking  Jews.  It  is  also  said,  that  it 
was  Ezra  who  transcribed  the  Scriptures 
from  the  ancient  Hebrew  character  (now 
known  as  Samaritan)  into  the  modern 
Hebrew  or  Chaldee  character.  Whether 
or  not  Ezra  did  all  this,  it  certainly  was 
done  no  very  long  time  after  the  captivity; 
and  Ezra,  who  was  “a  ready  scribe  in  the 
Law  of  Moses,”  who  bore  a high  commis- 
sion to  restore  the  Temple  and  the  wor- 
ship of  God,  was  the  most  likely  person  to 
h^ve  been  intrusted  with  this  great  work. 

However  this  may  be,  we  are  brought 
now  to  a new  kind  of  testimony.  The 
Pentateuch,  as  preserved  by  the  Jews, 
has  come  down  to  us  in  the  modern 
Hebrew  or  Chaldee  character.  It  was 
known  to  the  ancient  Jews  and  to  the 
Christian  fathers,  that  there  was.  also  a 
copy  of  the  Pentateuch  preserved  by  the 
Samaritans  in  a different  character.  For 
a thousand  years  that  Samaritan  Penta- 
teuch was  lost  to  the  Christian  Church, 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


and  it  was  almost  doubted  whether  it 
had  ever  existed;  but  in  the  year  i6j6, 
Pietro  della  Valle  obtained  a complete 
MS.  of  it  from  the  Samaritans  in  Da- 
mascus. Several  other  copies  have  since 
been  discovered,  one  of  which  is  be- 
lieved to  be  of  the  most  remote  anti- 
quity. In  almost  all  particulars  (dates 
being  the  principal  exception)  this  Sama- 
ritan Pentateuch  agrees  with  the  Jewish 
Pentateuch.  There  can  have  been  no 
collusion  between  Jews  and  Samaritans, 
for  they  were  at  mortal  feud  : and  there 
are  but  two  periods  in  which  we  can 
suppose  the  Samaritans  to  have  become 
possessed  of  this  copy  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. Manasseh,  brother  of  the  High 
priest  Jaddua,  being  expelled  from  his 
priesthood  for  marrying  the  daughter  of 
Sanballat  the  Horonite  (Neh.  xiii.  28), 
became  the  first  High  priest  of  the  Sama- 
ritans and  of  the  temple  erected  on 
Mount  Gerizim.  He  was  joined  by  many 
priests  and  Levites,  who,  like  himself, 
refused  to  put  away  their  heathen  wi\»es‘. 
It  is  the  l3elief  of  rriany,  that  the  so- 
called  Samaritan  Pentateuch  was  carried 
by  these  priests  from  Jerusalem  to  Sa- 
maria. Now  they  would  certainly  not 
have  taken  it  with  them,  testifying  as 
it  did  against  their  heathen  marriages 
and  their  schismatical  worship,  had  they 
not  fully  believed  in  its  genuineness  and 
Divine  authority  : nor  would  the  Samari- 
tans have  accepted,  it  but  for  a like 
conviction  on  their  parts.  At  all  events, 
at  no  later  period  could  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  have  been  imposed  on  the 
dissentients  Samaritans.  This  document 
therefore  preserved  in  Samaria  by  the 
Samaritans  is  an  independent  witness, 
from  at  least  the  time  of  Ezra,  to  the 
integrity  of  the  five  books  of  Moses. 
Its  witness  may  go  back  to  a much 
earlier  date ; for  many  think,  and  that 
with  much  ground  of  reason,  that  the 
Pentateuch  wa.s  carried  to  the  Cuthites 
who  had  peopled  Samaria  by  that  Is- 
raelitish  priest,  who  was  sent  by  Esar- 
haddon,  that  he  might  teach  them  the 
worship  of  the  Lord.  (See  2 K.  xvii.  28; 
Ezra  iv.  2.)  d’liis  if  it  be  correct  would 
carry  back  the  independent  testimony  of 
the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  not  only  to 
the  time  of  Ezra  but  to  the  reign  of 
^ Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  xi.  8,  §§  2,  4. 


Manasseh,  the  grandfather  of  Josiah, 
about  B.c.  680. 

We  pass  on  to  the  translation  into 
Greek  of  b;c.  280,  the  famous  translation 
of  the  LXX,  which  has  a remarkable  re- 
semblance to  the  text  of  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch,  and  which  proves  the  accept- 
ance of  the  Pentateuch  by  the  Jews  in 
Egypt.  Another  link  in  the  chain  is  the 
First  Book  of  Maccabees,  where  we  read 
of  the  fury  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who 
strove  to  destroy  the  books  of  the  Law, 
and  of  the  zeal  of  the  priests  and  peo- 
ple, who  chose  rather  to  die  than  to 
submit  to  his  cruel  edicts  (i  Macc.  i.  56 
sqq.)  The  books  of  the  Apocrypha  per- 
petually refer  to  and  quote  the  Penta- 
teuch. Ecclesiasticus  especially  (perhaps 
the  most  ancient  and  most  important)  is 
full  of  such  references.  (See  for  instance 
ch.  xvi.  8,  10;  xvii.  i — 4.) 

That  Chaldee  paraphrases  were  made 
very  soon  after  the  return  from  captivity 
we  are  well  assured.  The  earliest  which 
is  extant  is  that  of  Onkelos ; the  date  of 
which  is  uncertain,  by  some  placed  in 
the  century  before  our  Saviour,  but  most 
probably  to  be  referred  to  a date  nearly 
coincident  with  the  earthly  life  of  Christ. 
The  Targum  of  Onkelos  is  a paraphrase 
of  the  Pentateuch  as  we  have  it  now. 
These  Targums  had  been  in  use  long 
before  they  were  written  down.  When 
writing  was  comparatively  scarce,  the 
memory  was  so  exercised,  that  a Targum 
on  the  Pentateuch  would  easily  be  hand- 
ed down  memoriter,  so  that  probably  the 
Targum  of  Onkelos  really  represents  that 
which  is  much  more  ancient  than  itself.  " 

Lastly,  we  come  to  the  Ne7i'  Testa- 
ment itself.  As  our  purpose  is  to  trace 
evidence,  rather  than  to  adduce  autho- 
rity, It  may  be  sufficient  here  to  say 
that,  wherever  the  Pentateuch  is  refer- 
red to  by  the  Apostles  or  by  the  Lord 
Himself,  its  Mosaic  origin,  as  well  as 
its  Divine  authority,  is  dearly  expressed 
or  implied.  (See  for  instance,  Matt.  xix. 
8;  Mark  x.  5;  xii.  26;  Luke  xx,  37; 
Joh.  i.  17  ; v.  46,  47  ; viii.  5 ; Acts  iii. 
22  ; vii.  37  sqq.  &c.  &c.). 

The  chain  then  is  unbroken  from  the 
books  of  Joshua  and  Judges  to  the  New 
Testament,  and  the  words  of  Jesus 
Christ.  Wc  may  fairly  ask,  whether  any 
book,  ancient  or  modern,  has  such  a 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


15 


stream  of  concurrent  and  credible  testi- 
mony in  support  of  its  claims  to  genuine- 
ness and  authenticity. 

3.  The  third  point  to  be  proved  is, 

That  the  mternal  evidence  points  to 
Moses  and  to  him  only  as  the  writer  of 
the  Pefitateuch. 

(i)  The  author  of  the  Pentateuch  and 
the  giver  of  the  Levitical  Law  had 
an  intimate  acquaintance  with  Egyp% 
its  literature,  its  laws  and  its  religion. 
This  is  a wide  subject,  and  one  which 
branches  out  into  numerous  details. 
It  can  only  be  briefly  touched  on 
here.  Spencer  (‘  de  Legibus  Hebraso- 
rum’)  shewed  at  great  length  that  no 
one  could  have  invented  the  Laws  of 
Moses  who  was  not  well  skilled  in 
Egyptian  learning.  Bryant  On  the 
Plagues  of  Egypt’)  has  shewn  how  the 
plagues  were  but  an  extension  and  accu- 
mulation of  the  natural  evils  of  the 
country  intensified  by  the  Divine  Judg- 
ment. Hengstenberg  (‘  Egypt  and  the 
Books  of  Moses’)  has  shewn  how  tho- 
roughly an  acquaintance  with  Egypt  per- 
meates the  whole  Pentateuch.  This  will 
appear  in  the  following  pages,  when  we 
come  to  the  history  of  Joseph,  to  the 
Exodus,  and  to  the  laws  of  Moses.  It 
wouiJ  be  impossible  to  enter  into  all  the 
details  here.  Let  us  take  a very  few. 

The  making  of  bricks  among  the 
Egyptians  by  captives  is  pourtrayed  on 
the  monuments,  especially  of  the  i8th 
dynasty  (most  probably  the  dynasty  of 
the  Exodus)  in  such  close  conformity 
with  the  language  of  the  Book  of  Exodus 
i.  14;  V.  7,  8,  18,  that  the  one  might 
seem  to  be  a description  of  the  other 
(see  Brugsch,  ‘ Hist.  d’Egypte,’  p.  106). 
“ Ruins  of  great  brick  buildings  are  found 
throughout  Egypt”  (Rosellini).  “The 
use  of  crude  bricks  baked  in  the  sun 
was  universal  in  Egypt”  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
p.  96,  Hengst.  p.  2).  Bricks  were  made 
in  Egypt  under  the  direction  of  the  king, 
as  may  appear  by  the  impressions  found 
on  some  of  them.  And  in  the  composi- 
tion of  the  Egyptian  bricks  there  is  gene- 
rally found  a certain  quantity  of  chop- 
ped straw  (Hengst.  p.  79). 

The  ark  of  papyrus  smeared  with  bitu- 
men in  which  Moses  was  exposed.  Ex.  ii. 
3,  is  suited  to  Egypt  and  Egypt  only. 
There  only  was  papyrus  employed  in  the 


manufacture  of  many  articles,  such  as 
mats,  baskets,  sandals  (Herod,  ii.  37), 
sails  for  ships  (Herod,  ii.  96),  and  even 
boats;  for  according  to  Plutarch  (‘ De 
Is.  et  Osiri’)  Isis  was  borne  upon  a boat 
of  papyrus.  Bitumen  too  was  of  great 
use  in  Egypt.  It  was  one  of  the  chief 
ingredients  in  embalming;  and  mummy- 
shaped figures  are  found  covered  with  a 
coating  of  bitumen  (Hengstenb.  p.  85). 

The  plagues  of  Egypt  may  be  seen 
either  in  Bryant  (passwi)  or  Hengsten- 
berg  (p.  103 — 125),  to  be  the  natural 
troubles  of  the  country  magnified,  their 
miraculous  character  resulting  from  their 
appearance  and  accumulation  at  the  word 
of  Moses  and  their  removal  at ' his 
prayer. 

The  Mosaic  laws  and  institutions  of 
worship  are  penetrated  throughout  by  a 
knowledge  of  Egyptian,  customs. 

The  connection  between  the  cherubic 
figures  overshadowing  the  mercy  seat  and 
the  Egyptian  sculptures  is  traced  in  the 
note  at  end  of  Gen.  iii.  infra. 

The  distinction  of  clean  and  un- 
clean meats  is  eminently  Levitical,  but 
it  is  eminently  Egyptian  also  (Heng- 
stenb. p.  180  sqq.).  The  Egyptian  priest- 
hood was  by  inheritance  (Herod,  ii. 
37);  so  was  the  Levitical.  The  Egyp- 
tian priests  shaved  their  whole  bodies 
(Herod,  ib.);  so  the  Levites  were  to 
“shave  all  their  flesh”  (Num.  viii.  7). 
The  Egyptian  priests  had  to  bathe  con- 
tinually (Herod,  ib.);  so  the  priests  and 
Levites  had  to  purify  themselves  by 
bathing  (Ex.  xl.  12 — 15,  Num.  viii.  7). 
The  priests  of  Egypt  wore  none  but 
linen  garments  (Herod,  ib.),  so  was  it 
with  the  Israelitish  priests  (Ex.  xxviii.  39 
— 42;  xxxix.  27,  28;  Lev.  vi.  10):  and 
there  is  no  known  example  of  any  other 
priesthood  of  antiquity  clothed  only  in 
linen  (Hengst.  p.  145 — 149).  The  anoint- 
ing of  Aaron  (Lev.  viii.  7 — 12,  30)  when 
clothed  in  his  priestly  robes  has  an  ex- 
act parallel  in  the  Egyptian  sculptures, 
where  the  king  is  anointed,  clothed  in 
royal  robes  and  with  cap  and  crown  on 
his  head  (Wilkinson,  i.  p.  275;  Smith  on 
the  ‘Pentateuch,’  p.  295). 

The  ceremony  of  the  scapegoat,  where 
the  priest  confesses  the  sins  of  the  people 
on  the  head  of  the  goat,  which  is  then 
sent  away  into  the  wilderness,  finds  a 


i6 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


parallel  in  what  Herodotus  tells  us,  viz. 
that  the  Egyptians  heaped  curses  on  the 
head  of  the  victim  and  then  carried  it 
and  sold  it  to  Greek  traders,  or,  if  there 
were  no  Greeks  among  them,  threw  it 
into  the  river  (Herod,  ii.  39). 

The  Urim  and  Thummim  (Ex.  xxviii. 
30)  on  the  breastplate  of  the  High  priest 
correspond  with  what  we  learn  from 
Hllian  (‘Var.  Hist.’  lib.  xiv.  c.  34)  and 
Diodorus  (lib.  xxxi.  c.  75),  as  also  from 
the  monuments,  that  the  chief  priest 
among  the  Egyptians,  when  acting  the 
part  of  judge,  wore  round  his  neck  an 
image  of  sapphire,  which  was  called 
Truth  (Hengstenb.  p.  149 — 153). 

The  writing  of  the  commandments  of 
God  on  the  door-posts  and  gates  (Deut. 
xi.  20)  is  in  strict  accordance  with  the 
drawings  of  Egyptian  architecture,  where 
the  door-posts  of  temples  and  tombs  are 
covered  with  hieroglyphics  (Smith,  ‘ Pen- 
tateuch,’ I.  p.  257). 

The  erecting  pillars  and  coating  them 
with  plaster  to  prepare  for  inscriptions 
(Deut.  xxvii.  2,  3)  is  in  strict  conformity 
with  Egyptian  custom  (Hengst.  p.  90). 

The  infliction  of  the  bastinado  as  pre- 
scribed in  Deut.  xxv.  2,  is  graphically 
illustrated  in  the  sculptures  at  Beni  Has- 
san  (Smith,  p.  258).  The  ox  treading  out 
the  corn  unmuzzled  (Deut.  xxv.  4)  was 
the  custom  in  Egypt,  as  the  monuments 
also  prove  (Smith,  ib.,  Hengst.  p.  223). 
The  offerings  for  the  dead  forbidden  in 
Deut.  xxvi.  14,  are  evidently  such  as  were 
prevalent  in  Egypt,  where  small  tables 
were  placed  in  the  tombs,  bearing  offer- 
ings of  ducks,  cakes  and  the  like  (Smith, 
ib.). 

These  are  a few  of  the  parallels,  which 
prove  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the 
customs  of  Egypt  in  him  who  wrote  the 
Pentateuch  and  delivered  the  Mosaic 
Law. 

(2)  The  history  and  the  Law  of  the 
Israelites  both  bear  marks  and  tokens 
of  their  passage  through  the  wilderness, 
and  long  residence  in  it. 

This  is  specially  to  be  observed  con- 
cerning the  Tabernacle.  “ It  is  proved,” 
says  Ewald,  “ to  have  been  derived  from 
the  early  times  of  the  wanderings.  It 
was  only  the  most  sacred  of  the  many 
tents  of  a migratory  people,  resembling 
the  general’s  tent  in  the  midst  of  a camp; 


and  according  to  the  minute  descriptions 
of  it,  all  the  objects  belonging  to  it  were 
adapted  for  carrying,  like  those  of  an 
ordinary  tenth” 

The  memory  of  their  long  dwell- 
ing in  tents  was  preserved  among  the 
Israelites  throughout  their  generations. 
Not  only  was  the  feast. of  Tabernacles 
observed  from  the  time  of  Moses  to  that 
of  Christ,  but  their  language  and  monu- 
ments continually  bore  witness  to  the 
same.  “The  very  words  ‘camps’  and 
‘tents’  remained  long  after  they  had 
ceased  to  be  literally  applicable.  The 
‘tents  of  the  Lord’  were  in  the  pre- 
cincts of  the  temple.  The  cry  of  sedi- 
tion, evidently  handed  down  from  ancient 
times  was,  ‘To  your  tents,  O Israel!’ 
‘Without  the  camp’  (Heb.  xiii.  13)  was 
the  expression  applied  to  the  very  latest 
events  of  Jerusalem.  ‘ Thou  that  dwell- 
est  between  the  Cherubim,  shine  forth ! 
Before  Ephraim,  Benjamin  and  Manas- 
seh,  stir  up  Thy  strength,  and  come, 
and  help  us’  (Ps.  Ixxx.  i)  ...  We  see 
in  this  the  reflected  image  of  the  an- 
cient march,  when  the  ark  of  God  went 
forth,  the  pillar  of  fire  shining  high 
above  it,  surrounded  by  the  warrior  tribes 
of  Ephraim,  Benjamin,  and  Manasseh^” 
The  elders  or  chiefs  of  the  tribes  corre- 
spond with  the  Sheykhs  of  the  desert, 
the  office  never  disappears  in  the  history 
of  the  people,  till  out  of  the  Sheykhs  of 
the  desert  grew  the  elders  of  the  syna- 
gogues^. The  materials  which  are  re- 
corded as  used  in  the  construction  of 
the  Tabernacle  and  its  vessels  were  such 
as  could  be  best  obtained  in  the  desert. 
The  ark  was  not  made  “of  oak,  the 
usual  wood  of  Palestine,  nor  of  cedar, 
the  usual  wood  employed  in  Palestine 
for  sacred  purposes,  but  of  shittim  or 
acacia,  a tree  of  rare  growth  in  Syria, 
but  the  most  frequent,  not  even  except- 
ing the  palm,  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai\” 
The  coverings  of  the  Tabernacle  were 
goat’s  hair  and  ram-skin  dyed  red  after 
the  Arabian  fashion,  seal-skin  (Tachash, 
see  Gesen.  s.  v.)  from  the  adjoining 
gulfs  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  fine  linen  from 
the  Egyptian  spoils*.  Even  the  distinc- 

^ Ewald,  Translated  by  Martineau,  p.  441. 

2 Stanley,  ‘Jewish  Church,’  i.  p.  163. 

3 Ibid.  p.  i6j.  ^ Ibid.  p.  163. 

I Ibid.  p.  163, 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


17 


tion  of  the  different  kinds  of  food  per- 
mitted or  forbidden  in  the  Law  “ may  be 
traced  with  the  greatest  probability  to 
the  peculiarities  of  the  condition  of  Is- 
rael at  the  time  of  the  giving  of  that 
Law.  The  animals  of  which  they  might 
freely  eat  were  those  that  belonged  espe- 
cially to  their  pastoral  state — the  ox,  the 
sheep,  the  goat,  to  which  were  added 
the  various  classes  of  the  chamois  and  ga- 
zelle. As  we  read  the  detailed  permis- 
sion to  eat  every  class  of  what  may  be 
called  the  game  of  the  wilderness,  ‘ the 
wild  goat  and  the  roe  and  the  red  deer 
and  the  ibex  and  the  antelope  and  the 
chamois/  a new  aspect  is  suddenly  pre- 
sented to  us  of  a large  part  of  the  life  of 
the  Israelites  in  the  desert.  It  reveals 
them  to  us  as  a nation  of  hunters,  it 
shews  them  to  us  clambering  over  the 
smooth  rocks,  scaling  the  rugged  pinna- 
cles of  Sinai,  as  the  Arab  chamois  hunters 
of  the  present  day,  with  bows  and  arrows 
instead  of  guns.  Such  pursuits  they  could 
only  in  a limited  degree  have  followed 
in  their  own  country.  The  permission, 
the  perplexity  implied  in  the  permission, 
could  only  have  arisen  in  a place  where 
the  animals  in  question  abounded  The 
inevitable  conclusion  is,  that  the  Law 
had  its  origin  in,  and  the  Legislator  was 
intimately  acquainted  with,  the  wilder- 
ness of  Sinai. 

(3)  Thirdly,  the  language  and  the 
legislation  of  the  Pentateuch  has  Canaan 
only  in  prospect.  It  is  patent  through- 
out that  the  wording,  both  of  the  laws 
and  of  the  language  of  the  lawgiver,  looks 
forward  to  a future  in  Canaan.  See 
Ex,  xii.  25 — 27;  xiii,  i.  5;  xxiii.  20 — 33; 
xxxiv.  II ; Lev.  xiv.  34;  xviii.  3,  24;  xix. 
23;  XX.  22;  xxiii.  10;  XXV.  2 ; Num.  xv, 
2,  18;  xxxiv.  2;  XXXV.  2 — 34;  Deut.  iv. 
i;  vi.  10;  vii.  i;  ix.  i;  xii.  10,  &c. 

It  has  been  objected,  that  the  writer  of 
the  Pentateuch  knew  too  much  of  the 
geography  of  Palestine  for  one  who  had 
never  been  there,  and  that  this  is  an 
argument  against  its  Mosaic  origin.  This 
surely  cannot  be  a valid  objection,  when 
we  remember,  first,  that  Moses  with  his 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  Genesis  and 
of  the  wanderings  of  the  old  Patriarchs, 

* Ibid.  pp.  168,  169.  See  the  same  subject 
further  discussed,  Smith’s  ‘ Pentateuch,’  pp.  285 
Eqq. 


must  have  become  familiarized  wdth  the 
geography  of  the  land  of  these  wander- 
ings ; secondly,  that  Palestine  was  well 
known  to  the  Egyptians,  who  repeatedly 
traversed  it  from  the  reign  of  Thothmes  I.; 
thirdly,  that  Moses  had  lived  for  forty 
years  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  feed- 
ing the  flocks  of  Jethro,  and  with  his 
active  mind  and  his  deep  interest  in  the 
country  of  his  forefathers,  he  was  sure  to 
have  enquired  about,  most  probably  even 
to  have  visited,  the  neighbouring  plains 
of  Palestine ; fourthly,  that  he  had  taken 
pains  to  ascertain  all  the  character  of 
the  country,  of  its  people^  its  cities  and 
its  fortresses  by  means  of  spies,  and  that 
probably  for  many  years,  as  every  wise 
general  would  do,  when  preparing  to 
invade  a hostile  and  powerful  people. 
But  the  very  prophecies,  which  speak  so 
clearly  of  the  future  possession  of  Ca- 
naan, and  which  sceptical  criticism  will 
therefore  have  to  be  predictions  after  the 
event,  are  just  such  as  would  not  have 
been  written  when  the  event  had  become 
known.  Take  for  instance  Deut.  xii.  10, 
“When  ye  go  over  Jordan,  and  dwell  in 
the  land  which  the  Lord  your  God  giveth 
you  to  inherit,  and  when  He  giveth  you 
rest  from  all  your  enemies  round  about, 
so  that  ye  dwell  in  safety,”  &c.  This 
prophecy  is  indeed  referred  to  in  Josh, 
xxiii.  I,  and  is  spoken  of  there  as  though 
it  had  been  fulfilled  in  the  conquests  of 
Joshua.  Yet,  when  we  consider  how 
partially  those  conquests  really  gave  re^t 
to  Israel,  how  the  sins  of  the  people  con- 
ditioned and,  as  it  were,  impaired  their  ful- 
filment, how  long  it  was  before  the  words 
were  proved  to  be  true  indeed,  it  will  be 
hardly  possible  to  find  any  time  when  a 
forger  could  have  written  them.  For  in- 
stance, could  Samuel  have  written  them, 
with  the  history  of  the  Book  of  Judges,  a 
record  eminently  of  unrest  and  insecurity, 
before  his  eyes,  himself  judging  Israel, 
with  the  ark  of  the  covenant  in  the 
hands  of  the  Philistines,  and  to  be  suc- 
ceeded in  his  Judgeship  by  the  warlike 
and  turbulent  reign  of  Saul?  Indeed 
the  reign  of  Solomon  is  the  one  only 
reign  in  the  whole  history  of  Israel,  in 
which  we  witness  anything  like  an  united 
people  with  a wide  dominion  and  with 
peace  from  the  neighbouring  tribes.  That 
reign  w'as  500  years  after  the  Exodus. 

B 


VOL.  I. 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


i8 


Would  any  skilful  forger  have  put  words 
into  the  mouth  of  Moses  apparently  pro- 
mising, immediately  on  the  conquest  of 
Canaan,  rest  and  peace  and  security, 
when  it  took  500  years  of  restless  and 
often  unsuccessful  war  to  attain  security, 
and  even  so,  when  the  very  next  reign 
saw  the  nation  rent  by  an  incurable 
schism  ? 

We  conclude,  that,  as  the  Pentateuch 
bears  all  the  traces  on  its  brow  of  Egypt 
and  of  the  Desert,  so  also  it  must  have 
had  its  origin  before  the  occupation  of 
Canaan. 

(4)  The  language  of  the  Pentateuch 
is  such  as  to  suit  the  age  and  character 
of  Moses.  The  language  is  undoubted- 
ly archaic.  There  are  several  words  and 
forms  to  be  found  in  the  Pentateuch, 
and  to  be  found  nowhere  else‘. 

It  is  argued  indeed,  that  these  are  not 
so  much  archaisms  as  peculiarities;  but 
it  is  very  singular  that  they  should  per- 
vade the  Pentateuch,  which  has,  till  of 
late,  been  universally  esteemed  the  most 
ancient  portion  of  the  Bible,  and  that 
they  should  be  unknown  in  the  other 
books,  even  in  those*  connected  with  the 
writers  who  have  been  fixed  on  as  pro- 

1 The  most  familiar  and  undoubted  are  the 
following : 

(o)  The  Pronoun  of  the  third  person  singular, 
except  as  pointed  by  the  Masoretic  Jews,  has  no 
variety  of  gender.  Everywhere  else  we  have 
{hoo)  for  “he,”  and  N'H  {hee)  {ox  “she.” 
In  the  Pentateuch  we  have  NIH  doing  equal 
d«ty  for  both. 

(/i)  In  like  manner  “1^3  [na7tgar),  “a  youth,” 
is  common  to  both  genders  in  the  Pentateuch, 
meaning  indifferently  “boy”  or  “girl,”  In  all 
other  books  {nangar)  is  “a  boy,”  but 

[jiangarah)  is  “a  girl.” 

(7)  Then  we  have  “these,”  constantly 
for  the  later  form.  We  have  the  infinitive 

of  verbs  in  H ending  in  i instead  of  Dl,  as 
VK'JI,  Gen.  xxxi.  aS;  E.x.  xviii.  18; 

Gen.  xlviii.  ii.  .So  the  third  person  plural  pra’t, 
constantly  ends  in  1-1  instead  of  the  later  form 
in  I. 

(5)  We  have  words  peculiar  to  the  Penta- 
teuch, as  “an  ear  of  com;” 

“a  sack,”  “a  piece,”  and  to  “divide 

into  pieces;”  “a  young  bird;”  *73.T,  “a 

jiresent,”  and  T3T,  “to  present;”  “a 

.sickle;”  N.3P,  “a  basket;”  D-ip.'n,  “a  sub- 
stanee,  an  existing  thing;”  3*^3  (for  b'33),  “a 
lamb;”  n}pp,  “a  veil;”  (for  I'l;),  “a' city;” 
“ a blood  relation.” 


bable  forgers  of  the  Pentateuch,  such  as 
Samuel  or  Jeremiah. 

It  is  argued  again,  that  the  language 
of  the  Pentateuch,  although  in  some  few 
fragments  (such  as  Gen.  iv.  23,  24,  xiv. 
Gen.  xlix.  &c,)  apparently  archaic,  is  for 
the  most  part  too  like  to  later  Hebrew 
for  us  to  believe  that  it  came  from  Moses. 
To  this  it  may  be  replied  that  this  is 
really  what  we  might  expect.  A language 
is  fixed  by  its  great,  and  especially  by  its 
popular,  authors.  It  is  commonly  said, 
that  English  has  been  fixed  byShakspeare 
and  the  translators  of  the  Bible.  * Moses, 
putting  aside  all  question  of  inspiration, 
was  a man  of  extraordinary  powers  and 
opportunity.  If  he  was  not  divinely 
guided  and  inspired,  as  all  Christians 
believe,  he  must  have  been  even  a greater 
genius  than  he  has  been  generally  reck- 
oned. He  had  had  the  highest  culti- 
vation possible  in  one  of  Egypt’s  most 
enlightened  times;  and,  after  his  early 
training  in  science  and  literature,  he  had 
lived  the  contemplative  life  of  a shepherd 
in  Midian.  We  find  him  then,  with  a 
full  consciousness  of  his  heavenly  mis- 
sion, coming  forth  as  legislator,  historian, 
poet,  as  well  as  prince  and  prophet. 
Such  a man  could  not  but  mould  the 
tongue  of  his  people.  To  them  he  was 
Homer,  Solon,  and  Thucydides,  all  in 
one.  Every  one  that  knew  anything  of 
letters  must  have  known  the  books  of 
the  Pentateuch.  All  Hebrew  literature, 
as  far  as  we  know,  was  in  ancient  times 
of  a sacred  character,  at  all  events  no 
other  has  come  down  to  us;  and  it  is 
certain  that  writers  on  sacred  subjects 
would  have  been  deeply  imbued  with  the 
language  and  the  thoughts  of  the  books 
of  Moses.  Eastern  languages,  like  east- 
ern manners,  are  slow  of  change ; and 
there  is  certainly  nothing  strange  in  our 
finding  that  in  the  thousand  years  from 
Moses  to  Malachi,  the  same  tongue  was 
spoken  and  the  same  words  intelligible ; 
especially  in  books  treating  on  the  same 
subjects,  and  where  the  earlier  books 
must  have  been  the  constant  study  of 
all  the  writers  down  to  the  very  last.  It 
is  said?  on  the  authority  of  Freytag,  that 
the  inhabitants  of  Mecca  still  speak  the 
pure  language  of  the  Koran,  written  1200 
years  ago.  Egyptian  papyri,  with  an 
interv'al  of  1000  years  between  them, 


THE  PENTATEUCH. 


^9 


are  said  by  Egyptologists  to  exhibit  no 
change  of  language  or  of  grammar  *.  We 
must  not  reason  about  such  nations  as 
i-he  Israelites,  with  their  comparative  iso- 
lation and  fixedness,  from  the  Exodus  to 
the  captivity,  on  the  same  principles  as 
we  should  think  of  the  peoples  of  mo- 
dern Europe,  where  so  many  elements 
of  change  have  conspired  to  alter  and 
to  mould  their  language  and  their  lite- 
rature. The  language  of  the  Pentateuch 
then  is  just  what  the  language  of  Moses 
would  probably  have  been,  simple,  for- 
cible, with  archaic  forms  and  expres- 
sions, but,  having  formed  and  stamped 
all  future  language,  still  readily  intelligi- 
ble to  the  last. 

Question  of  Post-Mosaic  Aut/iorship. 

Having  now  seen  that  so  many  notes, 
both  external  and  internal,  combine  to 
point  out  Moses  as  the  author  of  the 
Pentateuch,  let  us  enquire  whether  all 
or  any  of  them  belong  to  any  later  prince 
or  prophet. 

Joshua  may  perhaps  have  been  em- 
ployed by  Moses  to  assist  him  in  his 
writings,  as  he  was  employed  to  assist 
him  in  his  wars;  and,  of  course,  Joshua 
had  some  of  the  experience  of  Moses 
and  all  the  teaching  which  Moses  could 
give  him.  Yet  nothing  points  to  Joshua 
as  the  writer  of  the  Pentateuch.  He  was 
eminently  a man  of  war  in  his  early  and 
middle  life,  and  in  his  old  age  he  had 
enough  and  more  than  enough  to  do  in 
holding  his  people  in  their  obedience  to 
the  laws. 

Samuel  was  a prophet  and  a reformer, 
but  he  is  nowhere  presented  to  us  as 
a legislator;  especially  it  is  impossible 
that  Samuel,  except  by  a miracle,  could 

See  Brugsch,  ‘Revue  Arch^ologique,’  1867, 
September,  p.  179:  “In  comparing  the  demotic 
papyrus  (which  Brugsch  translates)  with  the 
romance  of  the  two  brothers,  even  a superficial 
examination  shows  not  only  that  the  language 
and  the  formulae  in  the  two  papyri,  separated 
from  each  other  by  an  interval  of  some  thousand 
years,  are  of  the  same  kind ; but  also,  a point  of 
most  special  interest,  even  the  grammar  has  not 
undergone  the  least  change.”  It  may  be  added 
that  between  the  papyrus  of  the  two  brothers, 
written  under  the  3rd  king  of  the  19th  dynasty, 
and  the  earliest  inscriptions  and  papyri  at  least 
1000  years  earlier,  there  is  nearly  the  same  iden- 
tity of  language. 


have  written  books  which  are  so  thick  set 
with  indications  of  a knowledge  of  Egypt, 
and  a knowledge  of  Sinai.  The  laws  of 
Moses  bear  the  mark  of  Egypt  from  end 
to  end;  but  Samuel  could  never  have 
come  into  contact  with  Egypt  at  all: 
and  indeed,  as  far  as  history  shews  us, 
the  Israelites  from  Joshua  to  Samuel 
were  utterly  isolated  from  contact  with 
any,  except  the  Canaanites  and  Philis- 
tines, who  were  mixed  up  with  them, 
spread  all  around  them,  and  with  whom 
they  were  at  constant  war. 

David  is  as  little  likely  as  Samuel  to 
have  had  time  for  composing  tlie  Penta- 
teuch or  drawing  up  its  sanctions.  He 
was  a man  of  war,  and  though  the  dar- 
ling and  the  hero  of  his  people,  yet  by 
no  means  exercising  that  kind  of  control 
and  influence,  which  is  needful  for  one 
who  would  impose  a new  code  of  civil 
and  religious  laws. 

Solomon  is  the  first  who  appears  to 
have  had  much  intercourse  with  Egypt 
after  the  time  of  the  Exodus,  and  his 
extensive  and  comparatively  peaceful 
reign  may  appear  more  suited  to  the 
introduction  of  a new  code  of  legislation 
than  the  reigns  of  any  of  his  predeces- 
sors or  successors.  We  have  seen,  how- 
ever, how  Solomon  in  his  building  of  the 
Temple  followed  the  pattern  of  the  Ta- 
bernacle. The  reverse  process,  though 
it  has  been  suggested,  is  simply  impos- 
sible h His  whole  organization  indeed 
proceeds  on  the  basis  of  the  Pentateuch. 
But  his  own  history  is  the  clearest  proof, 
that  he  was  not  the  author  of  the  laws 
contained  in  it,  or  the  history  related  in 
it.  In  his  earlier  days  we  find  him  a 
pious  and  a wise  king.  He  follows  out 
the  intentions  of  his  father,  and  builds  a 
temple  to  succeed  the  old  tabernacle  of 
the  wilderness.  But,  as  he  advances  in 
years,  he  is  spoiled  by  the  wealth  and 
luxury,  which  his  power  has  brought 
around  him.  He  multiplies  wives  and 
lapses  into  idolatry,  a sad  instance  of 
one  hardened  by  the  deceitfulness  of  sin, 

^ Is  it  conceivable  that  Solomon,  about  to 
build  a Temple  to  be  the  glory  of  his  nation  and 
for  the  special  honour  of  his  God,  would  have 
constructed  it  in  fashion  like  a tent  of  the  desert, 
in  order  that  it  might  fit  into  the  story  of  the 
desert  wanderings  and  the  sacred  tabernacle, 
carried  through  the  desert? 


82 


20 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


and  so  falling  from  the  living  God.  Can 
we  conceive  the  author,  or  even  the  chief 
compiler  and  enlarger,  of  the  laws  and 
ordinances  of  the  Mosaic  code  and  wor- 
ship, so  carefully  and  so  wisely  framed  to 
guard  against  the  seductions  of  idol  wor- 
ship, being  himself  the  first  to  fall  away 
under  those  seductions  ? 

But  after  the  time  of  Solomon,  the 
possibility  of  the  Pentateuch  having 
been  written,  and  thus  the  laws  of  Mo- 
ses enforced,  becomes  less  and  less.  The 
schism  of  the  ten  tribes  constituted 
a second  kingdom,  and  the  testimony, 
not  of  one  only,  but  of  two  nations, 
would  have  been  raised  against  such  an 
attempt.  It  is  impossible  to  believe,  that 
in  any  subsequent  reign  such  a book  as 
the  Pentateuch,  and  such  a code  as  that 
of  the  Levitical  law,  with  all  its  strict- 
ness and  the  heavy  burden  of  its  ob- 
servances, should  have  been  imposed 
upon  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  either  whilst 
the  ten  tribes  were  still  living  in  their 
own  land,  or  after  they  had  been  carried 
captive  to  Assyria,  and  a remnant  only 
remained  in  Samaria.  That  the  like 
should  have  been  attempted  after  the 
return  from  captivity  is  even  more  im- 
possible, and  perhaps  is  not  asserted  by 
any  one.  The  Hebrew  language  was  then 
dying  out,  Chaldee  rapidly  taking  its 
place;  and  the  classic  simplicity  of  the 
Pentateuch  could  not  have  had  its  origin 
in  the  last  days  of  the  degeneracy  of  lan- 
guage and  literature. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  any 
man  or  succession  of  men,  attempting  to 
write  or  even  extensively  to  rearrange 
and  enlarge  such  a book  as  the  Penta- 
teuch, must  have  set  to  work  in  the  most 
diligent  and  systematic  manner  to  do  so. 


It  has  been  shewn,  that  from  end  t 
end  the  Pentateuch  and  the  laws  of  the 
Pentateuch  have  deeply  imbedded  in 
their  words  and  thoughts  ancient  Egypt 
and  ancient  Sinai.  A forger  or  redactor 
could  only  have  exhibited  such  a phe- 
nomenon by  devoting  himself  with  the 
utmost  care  and  attention  to  the  study 
of  Egyptian  customs  and  antiquities,  and 
to  an  acquaintance  with  the  Sinaitic  pen- 
insula; and  that  too  on  the  spot,  in  the 
midst  of  those  very  countries.  Nothing 
less  could  have  enabled  him  to  produce 
such  a work.  He  must  have  studied 
this  with  the  most  deliberate  purpose, 
and  must  have  brought  his  study  to  bear 
with  the  most  consummate  skill.  Where 
in  the  times  of  Samuel,  Solomon,  Heze- 
kiah,  Josiah,  or  Ezra,  can  we  look  for 
such  a man  ? And  beyond  this,  if  modern 
critical  theories  be  true,  we  must  look 
not  for  one  wise  head  and  skilful  hand, 
that  should  have  produced  such  a re- 
sult : but  the  fabric  must  have  grown 
up  bit  by  bit;  an  Elohist  first,  then  a 
first,  second,  third,  fourth,  or  even  more 
Jehovists,  who  dovetailed  their  respective 
stories  and  their  laws  of  many  colours 
one  into  another,  making  a thing  of 
shreds  and  patches,  which  nevertheless, 
when  compacted  together,  has  command- 
ed the  wonder  of  all  ages,  and  every  por- 
tion of  which  has  the  same  archaic  cha- 
racter, the  same  familiarity  with  the 
Egypt  of  early  dynasties,  the  same  air  of 
the  desert,  the  same  apparent  impress  of 
the  great  master’s  hand.  Such  a result, 
under  the  conditions  of  Jewish  history,  is 
inconceivable  as  the  work  of  any  man; 
but  it  is  such  as  the  wildest  fancy  cannot 
attribute  to  an  indefinite  and  widely 
separated  succession  of  many  men. 


GENESIS 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 

Document  Hypothesis  . . . .21  Meaning  and  antiquity  of  the  name 

Unity  of  plan  and  purpose  throughout  . 22  JEHOFAH,  nvith  further  reference 

Dmision  of  book  into  Toledoth  . .22  to  Exod.  ‘ti/.  2,  3 . . . ,26 

Of  the  names  of  God^  as  used  in  Genesis  24  Elohistic  and  Jeho’vistic  passages  . 28 

— — — Exod.  'vi.  2,  3 25  Alleged  inconsistency  civith  modern 

Proper  names  compounded  ^ith  J AH . 26  science.  . . . . .29 


IF  it  be  once  admitted  that  the  Pen- 
tateuch, as  a whole,  is  due  to  Moses, 
there  can  be  no  difficulty  in  admitting 
that  Genesis,  the  most  ancient  part  of 
the  Pentateuch,  is  due  to  him.  If  he 
wrote  the  history  of  the  Exodus,  he, 
either  as  author  or  compiler,  must  have 
written  the  introductory  history  of  the 
times  of  the  patriarchs.  The  unity  of 
design  is  very  manifest  throughout.  Moses 
was  employed  to  mould  and  form  a 
simple  and  previously  enslaved  people 
into  an  organized  nation.  He  had  to 
give  them  a code  of  laws,  civil  and  ec- 
clesiastical, for  the  guidance  of  their  na- 
tional life.  The  infant  people  was  to  be  a 
theocracy,  the  germ  and  embryo  of  a 
theocracy  greater  than  itself,  guarded 
and  isolated  for  fifteen  centuries,  till  by 
a new  revolution  it  should  expand  intQ 
the  Church  of  Christ.  It  was  obvious 
therefore,  that  he,  who  had  to  write  the 
earliest  chapters  of  its  history,  should 
begin  by  tracing  down  its  descent  from 
those  who  had  from  the  first  been  the 
depositaries  and  witnesses  of  the  truth. 

If,  however,  adverse  criticism  has  been 
busy  in  trying  to  dislocate  all  portions  of 
the  Pentateuch,  to  disprove  its  unity, 
and  so  to  shake  the  evidence  for  its 
Mosaic  origin ; it  has  been  signally  busy 
in  so  dealing  with  Genesis.  If  Moses 


wrote  the  later  books,  he  certainly  wrote 
Genesis;  and  on  the  other  hand,  if  he 
did  not  write  Genesis,  he  wrote  nothing. 
Hence  to  shake  the  foundation  of  Gen- 
esis is  to  destroy  the  fabric  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. The  progress  of  the  criticism  has 
been  sufficiently  gradual.  It  was  sug- 
gested long  since  by  Vitringa,  that  Moses 
may  have  had  before  him  “documents 
of  various  kinds  coming  down  from  the 
times  of  the  patriarchs  and  preserved 
among  the  Israelites,  which  he  collected, 
reduced  to  order,  worked  up,  and  where 
needful,  filled  in,”  schedas  et  scrinia  pa- 
truni,  apiid  Israclitas  conservata,  Moseni 
codegisse,  digessisse,  ornasse,  et  ubi  dejicie- 
bant,  complesse  (‘  Obs.  Sac.’  i.  c.  4).  A 
conjecture  of  this  kind  was  neither  un- 
natural nor  irreverent.  It  is  very  pro- 
bable that,  either  in  writing  or  by  oral 
delivery,  the  Israelites  possessed  tradi- 
tions handed  down  from  their  forefathers. 
It  is  consistent  with  the  wisdom  of  Moses, 
and  not  inconsistent  with  his  Divine  in- 
spiration, that  he  should  have  preserved 
and  incorporated  with  his  own  work  all 
such  traditions,  written  or  oral,  as  had 
upon  them  the  stamp  of  truth. 

The  next  step  in  the  theory  was,  that 
taken  by  Astruc  in  1753,  who  taught, 
that  the  names  of  God  (Elohim  and 
J ehovah),  occurring  in  the  book  of  Gen- 


22 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


esis  may  distinguish  respectively  the  do- 
cuments or  memoirs  from  which  Moses 
compiled  his  history.  He  believed  that 
there  were  no  fewer  than  twelve  docu- 
ments, the  two  chief  being  the  Elohistic 
and  the  J ehovistic. 

Later  writers  again  have  varied  this 
theory  with  every  possible  variation ; 
some  believing  that  there  was  one  Elo- 
hist,  and  one  Jehovist  document;  others 
that  there  were  more  than  one  Elohist, 
and  many  J ehovists ; and  exercising  a 
subtle  ingenuity,  most  convincing  at  least 
to  themselves,  they  have  traced  minutely 
the  transitions  from  one  document  to 
another,  sometimes  even  in  the  midst  of 
a sentence,  guided  by  some  catchword 
or  form  of  expression,  which  they  have, 
as  others  think  most  arbitrarily,  assigned 
to  the  first  or  second  Elohist,  to  the  first, 
second,  third,  or  fourth  Jehovist,  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  authors  in  which 
they  respectively  believe  \ Another  step 
has  been  to  suggest,  that  the  different 
documents,  often,  as  it  is  alleged,  giving 
different  versions  of  the  same  story,  have 
been  carelessly  and  clumsily  put  toge- 
ther. And  a further  still  has  been  to 
deny,  that  Moses  could  be  either  the 
Elohist,  the  Jehovist,  or  the  compiler 
and  redactor,  it  being  evident  that  the 
whole  was  a later  work,  due  perhaps  to 
Samuel,  perhap*^  to  Hilkiah  or  Jeremiah, 
perhaps  still  later  to  Ezra  or  some  sur- 
vivor from  the  captivity,  or  possibly  to 
a collection  of  the  labours,  the  piously 
fraudulent  labours,  of  them  all. 

The  salient  points  in  their  arguments 
are  these.  There  appear  to  be  two  ver- 
sions of  the  history  of  the  creation,  the 
first  from  Gen  i.  i to  Gen.  ii.  3,  in  which 
only  the  name  Elohim  occurs,  the  other 
from  Gen.  ii.  onwards,  in  which  the 
name  of  Jehovah  occurs  in  combination 
with  Elohim.  Again,  there  appear  two 
accounts  of  the  Flood,  which  though  in- 
terlaced in  the  book  of  Genesis,  may  be 
disentangled.  I'hese  also  are  charac- 
terized respectively  by  the  same  variety 
in  the  names  of  God.  Similar  phenomena 
are  said  to  prevail  throughout  the  book, 

^ An  abstract  of  the  different  theories  from 
Astruc  to  the  present  day  may  be  seen  in  Haver- 
nick  (‘Int.  to  I*cnt.’  ]■).  45,  Translation,  Clark, 
Edinburgh),  and  ‘Aids  to  ]-'aith,’  M ‘Caul’s 
Essay  on  ‘Mosaic  Record  of  Creation,’  p,  191. 


and  even  throughout  the  Pentateuch,  but 
these  are  the  two  most  observable.  Then 
comes  the  well-known  passage  in  Ex. 
vi.  3,  where  the  Most  High  says  to  Moses 
that  He  was  known  to  the  fathers  by  the 
name  of  El-Shaddai,  but  by  the  name  Je- 
hovah He  was  not  known  to  them ; 
whence  the  introduction  of  the  name 
Jehovah  in  the  history  of  Adam,  Noah, 
Abraham,  &c.,  is  argued  to  be  a proof  of 
later  authorship. 

It  may  be  well  then  to  shew  : 

First,  that  the  Book  of  Genesis  is  not 
an  ill-digested  collection  of  fragmentary 
documents,  but  a carefully  arranged  nar- 
rative with  entire  unity  of  purpose  and 
plan. 

Secondly,  that  the  use  of  the  names  of 
God  is  neither  arbitrary  nor  accidental, 
but  consistent  throughout  with  the  Mo- 
saic authorship,  and  the  general  scope  of 
the  history. 

I.  C/m(y  of plan  and  purpose  through- 
out. 

First  then,  as  to  the  organic  structure 
of  the  book,  though  it  may  be  somewhat 
obscured  by  the  modern  division  into 
chapters  and  verses,  as  it  was  of  old  by 
the  Jewish  division  of  the  Pentateuch 
into  perashim  or  sections ; careful  exami- 
nation will  shew,  that  the  arrangement  is 
methodical  and  orderly  from  first  to  last. 

The  book  begins  with  a general  intro- 
duction, from  ch.  i.  i to  ch.  ii.  3,  wherein 
the  creation  of  the  universe  is  related  in 
language  of  simple  grandeur,  very  possi- 
bly in  words  handed  down  from  the  re- 
motest antiquity,  than  which  none  could 
be  more  fitted  here  for  the  use  of  the 
sacred  historian. 

After  this  the  book  consists  of  a series 
of  7'oledoth.,  or  genealogical  histories,  the 
first  of  which  is  called  “ the  Toledoth  of 
the  heavens  and  the  earth,”  ch.  ii.  4;  the 
others  being  the  respective  histories  of 
the  different  families  of  man,  especially 
of  the  ancestors  of  the  people  of  Israel, 
from  Adam  to  the  death  of  Joseph*.  The 

^ The  word  Toledoth  has  by  some  been  ren- 
dered “origins,”  as  “generations”  cannot  pro- 
])erly  be  used  of  the  creation  of  heaven  and 
earth ; but  it  is  not  necessary  to  drop  the  figura- 
tive language  in  a translation.  By  an  easy  meta- 
])hor,  the  word,  which  described  well  the  family 
history  of  a race  of  men,  was  applied  to  the 
history  of  the  ma.terial  creation.  The  word? 
moreover,  as  used  in  Genesis,  does  not  mean  a 


THE  BOOK  OF  GENESIS. 


great  divisions  of  the  book  will  be  found 
to  be: 

1.  The  Introduction,  from  ch.  i.  i to 
ch.  ii.  3. 

2.  The  generations  of  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,”  beginning  with  ch.  ii.  4, 
and  extending  on  through  the  history  of 
the  fall  to  the  birth  of  Seth,  ch.  iv. 

3.  “ The  book  of  the  generations  of 
Adam,”  from  ch.  v.  to  vi.  8. 

4.  “ The  generations  of  Noah,”  giving 
tlie  history  of  Noah’s  family  till  his  death, 
from  vi.  9 to  end  of  ix. 

5.  “/I'he  generations  of  the  sons  of 
Noah,”  giving  an  account  of  the  over- 
spreading of  the  earth,  from  x.  i to  xi.  9. 

6.  “The  generations  of  Shem,”  the 
line  of  the  promised  seed,  down  to  Abram, 
Nahor,  and  Haran,  the  sons  of  Terah, 
xi.  10  to  26. 

7.  “The  generations  of  Terah,”  the 
father  of  Abraham.,  from  whom  also  in 
the  female  line  the  family  was  traced 
through  Sarah  and  Rebekah,  from  xi.  27 

to  XXV.  Ilk 

8.  “ The  generations  of  Ishmael,”  from 

XXV.  12  to  XXV.  18. 

9.  “The  generations  of  Isaac,”  con- 
taining the  history  of  him  and  his  family 
fr^m  the  death  of  his  father  to  his  own 
death,  xxv.  19  to  end  of  xxxv. 

1 0.  “ The  generations  of  Esau,”  xxxvi. 

I — 8. 

11.  “The  generations  of  Esau  in 
Mount  Seir,”  xxxvi.  9 to  xxxvii.  i.  • 

12.  “ The  generations  of  Jacob,”  giv- 
ing the  history  of  Jacob  and  his  sons  to 
his  own  death  and  the  death  of  Joseph, 
xxxvii.  2 to  the  end  of  ch.  1. 

history  of  the  mode  in  which  persons  or  things 
came  into  existence,  but  rather  the  history  of 
those  who  descended  from  them.  Thus  “the 
Toledoth  of  Adam”  gives  the  history  of  Adam 
and  his  posterity.  In  like  manner  “ the  Tole- 
doth of  the  heavens  and  the  earth”  is  the  history 
of  the  material  universe  and  its  productions. 
See  Keil  on  the  ‘Pentateuch,’  Vol.  i.  pp.  70 
sqcj.  (Clark,  Edinburgh). 

^ It  seems  strange  that  the  “generations  of 
Abraham”  should  not  be  given  distinctly  from 
those  of  his  father,  and  Quarry  thinks  that  the 
title  may  have  existed,  and  have  fallen  out  of 
the  MS.  just  before  the  last  clause  of  xii.  4. 
The  reasoir,  however,  which  he  himself  assigns, 
seems  sufficient  to  account  for  the  omission,  viz. 
that  the  history  contained  in  this  .section  is  that 
of  Abraham,  Lot,  Sarah,  and  of  'Isaac  and 
Rebekah  (all  descendants  of  Terah),  down  to 
the  death  of  Abraham, 


23 

Some  of  these  sections  relate  only  to 
collateral  branches  and  are  brief.  The 
larger  sections  will  be  found  to  have  sub- 
divisions within  them,  which  are  carefully 
marked  and  arranged.  As  a rule,  in  each 
of  these  successive  Toledoth^  the  narra- 
tive is  carried  down  to  the  close  of  the 
period  embracQd,  and  at  the.  beginning 
of  each  succeeding  portion  a brief  repe- 
tition of  so  much  as  is  needed  of  the 
previous  account  is  given,  and  with  it, 
very  often,  a note  of  time.  Thus  the 
Introduction  is  ushered  in  with  the  words 
“ In  the  Beginning.”  Then  the  second 
section,  referring  to  what  has  just  been 
recorded,  announces  “ The  generations 
of  the  heavens  and  of  the  earth  when  they 
were  created,  in  the  day  that  the  Lord 
God  made  the  earth  and  the  heavens,” 
ch.  ii.  4.  Then  again  ch.  v.  i,  having 
the  same  note  of  time  (“  In  the  day,” 
&c.)  refers  back  to  the  account  of  cre- 
ation, “ In  the  likeness  of  God  made 
He  him,  male  and  female  created  He 
them,”  &c.  The  next  section,  .vi.  9, 
“ The  Toledoth  of  Noah,”  recapitulates 
the  character  of  Noah,  the  degeneracy 
of  man,  and  God’s  purpose  to  destroy 
all  flesh.  In  xi.  10,  the  age  of  Shem 
and  the  birth  of  his  son  two  years 
after  the  flood,  are  named.  The  like 
plan  is  observable  in  the  “Toledoth 
of  Terah,”  xi.  27;  “th#  Toledoth  of 
Ishmael,”  xxv.  12;  “ of  Isaac,”  xxv.  19, 
“ who  was  forty  years  old  when  he  took 
Rebekah  to  wife;”  “of  Esau,”  xxxvi.  i, 
where  his  marriages  are  recorded  again : 
and  lastly,  in  the  case  of  Jacob  (xxxvii.  2), 
we  find,  in  the  verse  immediately  pre- 
ceding (viz.  xxxvii.  i),  a note  telling  us 
the  position  of  Jacob  at  the  time,  and 
again  in  vv.  2 and  3 the  age  of  Joseph 
(“Joseph  was  seventeen  years  old”), 
taking  us  back  to  a point  of  time  twelve 
years  before  the  death  of  Isaac,  which  had 
been  before  recorded,  that  so  we  might 
see  the  new  starting-point  of  the  history. 

Space  will  not  allow  the  tracing  of 
similar  recapitulations  and  notes  of  time 
in  the  smaller  sub-sections  of  the  history. 
It  must  suffice  to  observe  that  they  are 
very  characteristic  of  the  whole  book, 
and  are  had  recourse  to  wherever  per- 
spicuity of  narrative  seems  to  require  *. 

^ They  are  traced  at  length  by  Quarry  (‘  Ge- 
nesis,’ pp.  326  to  340). 


24 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


This  brief  review  of  the  divisions  of 
Genesis  shews  that  it  was  not  a loosely 
compacted  structure,  carelessly  or  clum- 
sily thrown  together  by  some  one,  who 
found  a variety  of  heterogeneous  mate- 
rials and  determined  to  mass  them  all  in 
one  : but  that  it  was  drawn  up  carefully, 
•elaborately,  and  with  distinct  unity  of 
purpose;  whether  from  pre-existing  do- 
cuments or  i\ot  it  matters  comparatively 
little  to  enquire. 

2.  Of  the  ?ia  fries  of  God  as  used  in  the 
Book  of  Genesis. 

The  names  by  which  the  Supreme  Being 
is  called  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  espe- 
cially in  Genesis,  are  chiefly  two,  Elohim 
and  Jehovah,  the  one  generally  rendered 
in  the  versions  God,  the  other  Lord.  We 
meet  also  with  El  (which  is  but  a shorter 
form  of  Elohim),  with  Elion,  Most  High, 
(in  the  Pentateuch  occurring  only  in  Gen. 
xiv.  1 8 in  connection  with  El;  El-Elion, 
God  most  High,  though  in  the  Psalms  it  is 
found  with  Elohim  and  Jehovah,  and  also 
stands  alone),  and  Shaddai,  Almighty  (in 
the  Pentateuch  generally  with  El,  El- 
Shaddai;  elsewhere  standing  alone). 

The  name  Elohim  is  derived  either 
from  the  Arabic  root  Alaha,  “to  fear, 
reverence,  worship,”  or,  much  more  pro- 
bably, from  ialah)  = “to  be 

strong,  to  be  mighty'.”  It  is  the  simple, 
generic  name®of  God,  “ The  Mighty.” 
It  does  not  occur  in  the  singular  in  the 
earlier  books  of  Scripture,  except  in  the 
abbreviated  form  of  El.  The  plural  is 
probably  a })lural  of  excellence  and  ma- 
jesty. As  in  Prov.  ix.  i,  “wisdom,”  occurs 
in  the  i)lural  Chochmoth,  to  signify  wis- 
dom in  the  abstract,  including  in  itself 
all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  know- 
ledge; so  Elohim  in  the  plural  is  applied 
to  (lod,  as  comprehending  in  Himself 
the  fulness  of  all  power  and  all  the  attri- 
butes which  the  heathen  ascribe  to  their 
several  divinities  (see  Smith’s  ‘Diet,  of 
Bible,’  Art.  Jehovah).  Still  the  word  is  a 
title  rather  than  a name.  It  is  applied 
to  false  gods,  as  well  as  to  the  true,  d'he 
henthen  nations  round  about  the  Israel- 
ites would  have  recognized  the  existence 
and  the  divinity  of  El  and  of  the  Elohim. 

* It  is  more  pro’.'able  that  the  verb  to  signify 
“ fear  and  worship  ’’  is  derived  from  the  name 
of  tile  Deity,  than  that  the  name  of  the  I^eity 
was  derived  from  the  verb  signifying  “ to  fear.” 


Jehovah,  on  the  contrary,  is  as  clear- 
ly a proper  name  as  Jupiter  or  Vishnu. 
Elohim  and  fehovah  are  therefore  as 
distinguishable  as  Deus  and  fupiter ; the 
difference  being  only  in  this,  that,  where- 
as the  worshippers  of  Jupiter  admitted 
“ gods  many  and  lords  many,”  a multi- 
tude of  Dii,  the  w^orshippers  of  Jehovah, 
on  the  other  hand,  believe  in  no  Elohim 
except  Jehovah.  We  may  see  at  once, 
then,  that  there  may  be  good  reasons  for 
expecting  the  title  Elohim  to  be  chiefly 
employed  in  some  passages,  whilst  the 
proper  name  Jehovah  would  be  chiefly 
employed  in  others.  For  instavice,  in 
the  general  account  of  creation  it  is  very 
natural  that  Elohim,  the  Mighty  One, 
the  God  of  creation  and  providence, 
should  be  the  word  in  use.  So,  where 
foreigners,  people  of  heathen  nations,  as 
Hagar,  Eliezer  of  Damascus,  the  Egyp- 
tians, &:c.  are  introduced,  it  is  most  na- 
tural that  the  word  Elohim  should  be 
more  frequent  than  Jehovah,  unless 
where  some  distinct  acknowledgment 
of  Jehovah  is  intended.  On  the  con- 
trary, when  the  history  of  the  chosen 
people  or  their  ancestors  is  specially  con- 
cerned, and  the  stream  of  the  Theocracy 
traced  down  from  its  fountain  head, 
then  the  special  name  of  Him,  who  was 
not  ashamed  to  be  called  their  God, 
would  probably  be  of  more  frequent  use. 
This,  if  kept  clearly  in  view,  will  explain 
many  of  the  so-called  Elohistic  and  Je- 
hovistic  phenomena  in  Genesis.  Ano- 
ther thing  to  be  noted  is  this.  The 
Semitic  tongues,  especially  the  more 
ancient  and  simpler  forms  of  them,  deal 
much  in  repetition,  and  where  our  mo- 
dern Aryan  languages  would  put  a pro- 
noun, they  very  frequently  repeat  the 
noun.  From  this  general  habit  of  repeti- 
tion, and  especially  the  habit  of  repeat- 
ing the  noun  rather  than  using  the  pro- 
noun, when  in  any  one  chapter  or  section 
we  And  either  the  word  Elohim  or  the 
name  Jehovah,  we  are  very  likely  to  find 
the  same  frequently  recurring.  In  con- 
sequence of  this,  the  several  passages 
will  to  an  European  eye  look  as  if  they 
were  strongly  marked  either  by  the  title 
Elohim,  or  by  the  name  Jehovah.  For 
instance,  it  is  alleged  that  in  the  first 
account  of  creation,  ch.  i,  ii.  i — 3, 
Elohim  occurs  thirty-five  times,  and 


THE  BOOK  OF  GENESIS. 


25 


that  there  is  here  no  other  name  of 
God : but  it  has  been  replied,  that,  if  it 
occurred  once,  it  was  only  natural,  owing 
to  the  uniformity  of  the  whole  passage, 
that  it  should  have  occurred  again  at 
each  account  of  a separate  creation,  and 
also  that  in  modern  language  a pronoun 
would  have  been  substituted  in  many 
cases  for  the  repeated  title  or  name. 
Hence  the  thirty-five  are  in  effect  re- 
ducible to  one.  The  passage  is  scarcely 
more  really  marked  as  Elohistic  by  the 
name  Elohim  occurring  thirty-five  times, 
than  if  it  had  occurred  but  once;  for  its 
having  occurred  once  would  inevitably 
lead  to  its  continued  and  frequent  recur- 
rence 

The  most  important  passage  in  rela- 
tion to  this  question  is,  of  course,  Exod.  vi. 

^ Quarry,  ‘on  Genesis,’  pp.  341,  400,  401. 
The  following  table  of  the  alternation  of  the 
names  in  the  first  1 1 chapters  is  given  by  the 
learned  author,  and  will  shew  how  different  the 
virtual  occurrence  of  the  respective  names  is 
from  the  apparent,  superficial  occurrence  on 
which  so  much  has  been  built : 


E. 

J- 

i.  ii.  I — 3,  Elohim  35 

times 

= I 

ill.  1 — 5.  Elohim  3 

= 1 

iv.  I.  Jehovah  i 

= I 

2 — 16.  Jehovah  8 

= I 

25.  Elohim  I 

= I 

26.  Jehovah  i 

= I 

V.  I.  Elohim  2 

= I 

22 — 24.  Elohim  3 

= I 

29.  Jehovah  i 

= r 

vi.  2 — 4.  Elohim  2 

= I 

3.  Jehovah  1 

= I 

5 — 8.  Jehovah  4 

= I 

9 — 22.  Elohim  5 

= I 

vii.  I — 5.  Jehovah  2 

= I 

9.  Elohim  I 

= I 

16.  Elohim  1 

= I 

Jehovah  i 

= 1 

viii.  I.  Elohim  2 

= I 

15.  Elohim  I 

= I 

20 — 21.  Jehovah  3 

= i 

ix.  I — 6.  Elohim  2 

= I 

8 — 17.  Elohim  4 

= I 

26.  Jehovah  i 

= I 

Elohim  1 

r=  I 

27.  Elohim  I 

=:  I 

X.  9.  Jehovah  2 

= I 

xi.  5 — 9.  Jehovah  5 

15 

= I 

12 

“Hence  for  the  purposes  of  the  present  en- 
quiry, and  as  evidence  of  any  predilection  of 
either  name,  the  case  is  just  as  if  in  these  eleven 
chapters,  in  the  order  of  succession  and  at  the 
distances  here  indicated,  the  name  Elohim  had 
recurred  singly  15  times,  and  the  name  Jehovah 
12  times.” 


2,  3,  where  according  to  the  Authorized 
Version,“  God  spake  untoMoscs,and  said 
unto  him,  I am  Jehovah  ; and  I appeared 
unto  Abraham,  unto  Isaac,  and  unto  Jacob, 
by  the  name  of  God  Almighty,  but  by 
my  name  Jehovah  was  I not  known  to 
them.”  The  inference  derived  from  this 
passage  has  been  this.  The  person,  who 
recorded  these  words  of  God  to  Moses, 
would  never  have  written  a history  of 
still  earlier  times,  in  which  tl:ie  name 
Jehovah  should  be  introduced  not  only 
in  the  narrative,  but  in  the  mouths  of 
the  various  speakers,  from  Eve  down- 
wards. Hence,  no  doubt,  in  his  earlier 
history  the  writer  of  this  passage  would 
surely  have  been  an  Elohist.  The  parts 
of  Genesis  then,  which  are  characterized 
by  the  use  of  the  title  Elohim,  may  pro- 
bably be  attributed  to  him : but  all  the 
parts  in  which  Jehovah  predominates 
were  evidently  added  afterwards,  and 
must  be  due  to  some  one  who  was  not 
alive  to  the  incongruity  of  introducing 
Jehovistic  language  into  a history  of 
events  and  speeches  prior  to  the  revela- 
tion of  the  name  Jehovah.  It  follows, 
of  course,  that  the  very  first  who  could 
possibly  have  written  the  original  Elo- 
histic  narrative  was  Moses,  the  Jehovis- 
tic portions  being  necessarily  much  later 
than  Moses.  It  is  further  argued,  hov.-- 
ever,  that  names  compounded  with  the 
sacred  name  of  Jah  or  Jehovah  do  not 
occur  till  the  time  of  Samuel,  hence 
it  is  added  that  the  name  could  not 
have  been  known,  nor  the  sixth  chapter 
of  Exodus  written,  till  the  time  of  Sa- 
muel : and  further,  it  is  now  alleged  that 
the  name  Jehovah  is  unknown  even  to 
the  writer  of  the  earlier  Psalms,  and  that 
therefore  probably  David  learned  it  late 
in  life  from  its  inventor  Samuel. 

The  romance  of  modern  criticism  is  as 
remarkable  as  its  perverse  ingenuity  ; for 
when  once  a theory  has  been  suggested, 
its  author  and  his  followers  proceed 
forthwith  to  construct  an  elaborate  his- 
tory upon  it,  as  much  as  if,  instead  of 
excogitating  a theory,  they  had  discover- 
ed a library  of  authentic  records.  The 
wider  the  theory  is  from  all  that  has 
hitherto  been  believed  from  concurrent 
testimony  and  careful  enquiry,  the  more 
it  finds  acceptance  and  is  hailed  as  a 
discovery.  If  we  look  a little  closely 


26 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


into  the  foundations  of  the  theory,  it  will 
appear  as  baseless  as  other  dreams. 

First,  as  regards  the  names  compound- 
ed with  Jah,  we  have  at  all  events  Joche- 
bed,  Joshua,  Jonah,  Jotham,  Micah  and 
Jonathan  and  mount  Moriah,  besides 
three  named  in  Chronicles,  Azariah  (i 
Chr.  ii.  8),  Abiah  (i  Chr.  ii.  24),  Ahijah 
(i  Chr.  ii.  25),  all  of  which  at  least  ap- 
pear to  have  been  so  compounded,  and 
which  it  is  a gratuitous  slander  to  say 
were  the  inventions  of  later  days.  More- 
over, it  by  no  means  follows,  that  one 
age  should  have  had  the  fashion  of  a 
special  form  for  the  composition  of 
names,  because  we  find  that  fashion 
prevailing  some  centuries  later.  Names 
compounded  with  any  name  of  God  are 
rare  in  the  early  ages,  but  became  com- 
mon in  the  later.  Secondly,  as  regards 
the  Psalms,  there  is  no  foundation  what- 
ever for  saying  that  the  earlier  Psalms 
are  Elohistic  and  the  later  only  Jeho- 
vistic.  Many  of  the  manifestly  and  con- 
fessedly later  Psalms  (as  the  78th,  82nd, 
1 14th,  &c.)  are  eminently  Elohistic,  whilst 
many  of  the  earliest  (as  the  24th,  27  th, 
34th,  &:c.)  are  as  eminently  Jehovistic‘. 

But  again,  the  form  and  derivation  of 
the  name  J ehovah  points  to  a pre-Mosaic 
origin.  Some  of  the  German  writers  in- 
deed have  tried  to  trace  the  name  to  an 
attempt  at  expressing  in  Hebrew  letters 
the  name  of  the  Phoenician  god,  lao. 
Time  will  not  allow  of  a lengthened  con- 
sideration of  this  theory  here.  Suffice  it 
to  say  that  its  chief  support  is  an  oracu- 
lar response  of  the  Clarian  Apollo  quoted 
by  Macrobius  (‘Sat.’  i.  c.  18)  about  400 
A.  D. ; which  has  been  clearly  proved  by 
Jablonsky  to  have  originated  in  a Juda- 
izing  gnostic^ 

It  is  now  generally  admitted  by  com- 
petent Semitic  scholars,  that  the  word 
signifies  “the  existent”  or  something 
nearly  akin  to  this.  The  true  pronuncia- 
tion, of  course,  is  lost ; but  there  can  be 
no  reasonable  doubt,  that,  as  the  name 
of  God  declared  to  Moses  in  Ex.  iii.  14, 
viz.  n'nx,  I AM,  is  the  first  person  pre- 
sent of  the  substantive  verb,  so  the  name 

^ The  Editor  lias  shewn  this  more  at  length 
in  his  tract,  called  ‘The  Pentateuch  and  the 
Elohistic  Psalms’  (Longman). 

“ See  the  whole  ([uestion  discussed  in  Smith’s 
‘Diet,  of  Pible,’  i.  p.  953,  and  Quarry,  ‘Genesis,’ 
p.  300  sqq. 


Jehovah  is  part  of  the  same,  but  pro- 
bably the  third  person  present,  or,  as 
others  think,  the  same  tense  of  a causative 
(Pliphil)  form*.  But  if  so,  there  can  be 
no  question,  as  even  Ewald  fully  admits, 
that  the  name  must  have  been  pre- 
Mosaic.  In  Hebrew  the  verb  is  always 
hayah,  though  in  Syriac  and  Chaldee  it 
is  always  havah,  A name  therefore  de- 
rived from  havah  and  existing  in  ancient 
Hebrew,  must  have  come  down  from  a 
time  prior  to  the  separation  of  the  He- 
brews from  their  kindred  Aramjeans,  i.e. 
not  later  than  the  time  of  Abraham.  In 
fact  the  name  niiT  (IHVH)  could  not 
have  been  found  among  the  Hebrews,  at 
any  period  of  history  from  the  descent 
into  Egypt  to  the  captivity  of  Babylon  : 
and  as  it  undoubtedly  exists  in  Hebrew 
writings  prior  to  the  captivity,  so  it  must 
have  originated  before  the  time  of  Joseph. 

W e must  conclude,  then,  that  the  name 
Jehovah  was  not  unknown  to  the  patri- 
archs, nor  do  the  words  of  Exodus  neces- 
sarily mean  that  it  was.  These  words 
literally  are,  “ I am  Jehovah  : and  I ap- 
peared (or  was  manifested)  to  Abraham 
and  to  Isaac  and  to  Jacol3  by  El-Shad- 
dai,  but  My  name  Jehovah  was  I not 
known  to  them:”  that  is  to  say,  “I 
manifested  myself  to  the  patriarchs  in 
the  character  of  El-Shaddai,  the  Omni- 
potent God,  able  to  fulfil  that  which  I 
had  promised ; but  as  to  my  name  (/.  e. 
my  character  and  attributes  of)  Jehovah 
I was  not  made  manifest  to  them^”«  (So 
liXX.  Vulg.  ovK  iSrjXwaa,  non  indicavi), 
T'he  words  strictly  and  naturally  imply 
this.  The  ancient  versions  seem  to  con- 
firm this  interpretation.  It  is  no  new 
one  framed  to  meet  modern  objections, 
but  was  propounded  by  Aben  Ezra 
and  Rashi  among  the  Jews,  and  by 
many  of  the  most  illustrious  Christian 
commentators  of  past  times. 

The  theory  then  of  the  late  invention 
of  this  sacred  name  has  really  no  founda- 
tion. That  its  use  was  very  much  more 

^ Thus  it  corresponds  in  form  M’ith  such  names 
as  Isaac,  Jacob,  Joseph,  which  are  all  the  third 
persons  singular  present  of  verbs. 

* “In  El-Shad  lai”  is  interpreted  to  mean 
“as  El-Shaddai,”  “in  the  character  of  El- 
Shaddai,”  (Gesen.  Lex.  s.  v.  2 div.  C.).  “The 
name  of  Jehovah,”  as  meaning  the  character  of 
Jehovah,  is  very  common.  Cf.  Ps.  v.  il,  viii.  i, 
ix.  10,  Is.  xxvi.  8,  x.xx.  37. 


THE  BOOK  OF  GENESIS. 


27 


prevalent  after  the  revelation  to  Moses 
in  Exodus  than  it  had  been  before,  there 
can  be  no  reasonable  doubt.  God  made 
His  special  covenant  with  Abram,  be- 
ginning with  the  emphatic  words,  “ I 
am  El-Shaddai,”  Gen.  xvii.  i.  So  again 
on  a like  occasion  He  spake  to  Jacob, 
Gen.  XXXV.  ii.  Hence  both  Isaac  and 
Jacob  seemed  to  lay  especial  stress  upon 
that  name  in  times  of  trouble  and  anxiety 
(see  Gen.  xxviii.  3,  xliii.  14),  as  recalling 
to  them  the  faithfulness  and  the  power 
of  their  covenant  God.  But  to  Moses 
the  words  are  frequently  spoken,  “ I am 
Jehovah,”  and  the  covenant,  which  had 
been  assured  to  the  patriarchs  by  God  as 
El-Shaddai,  the  Mighty  God,  is  now 
assured  to  the  people  of  Israel,  by  the 
same  God,  as  Jehovah,  the  self-existent, 
the  cause  of  all  being,  governing  the 
past,  the  present,  and  the  future.  Let 
us  then  suppose,  that  Moses  had  access 
to,  or  knowledge  of,  oral  or  written 
traditions  concerning  the  Creation,  which 
must  from  the  nature  of  the  case  have 
been  originally  matter  of  revelation,  the 
Flood,  the  history  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and 
Jacob;  it  is  most  likely  that  he  would 
liave  made  these  the  ground-work  of  his 
history.  If  the  name,  Jehovah,  was  known 
to  the  patriarchs,  but  had,  as  seems  most 
likely  from  the  first  chapters  of  Exodus, 
been  latterly  but  little  used,  perhaps 
wholly  disused,  among  the  Israelites  in 
Eg>q)t;  then  it  is  pretty  certain  that 
these  traditions  or  documents  would 
have  had  lil,  Elohim,  or  Elion,  for  the 
name  of  God,  perhaps  even  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  .the  name  Jehovah.  In  working 
up  these  materials  into  a continuous  his- 
tory, some  of  the  documents  would  be 
preserved  entire,  others  might  be  so  ar- 
ranged and  so  worded  as  to  fit  them  to 
be  connecting  links  one  with  the  other, 
while  we  should  probably  find  many  por- 
tions of  the  history  in  the  hand  of  the  au- 
thor or  compiler  himself.  If  Moses  was 
that  author,  though  he  would  often  use 
the  name  Elohim,  we  might  naturally 
expect  to  find  that  he  had  a fondness 
for  that  sacred  name  by  which  the  Most 
High  had  declared  Himself  as  the  spe- 
cial Protector  of  His  people  ; and  hence 
we  might  look  for  that  name  in  passages 
where  another  v/riter  perhaps  v/ould  not 
have  introduced  it.  If,  as  we  infer  from 


Josh.  xxiv.  14,  the  Israelites  in  Egypt 
had  learned  to  serve  strange  gods,  there 
would  be  the  more  reason  why  Moses 
should  set  before  them  the  one  true 
God,  as  their  own  God,  and  exhibit  Him 
under  His  name,  Jehovah,  thereby  the 
more  clearly  to  mark  Him  off  from  the 
false  Elohim  of  Egypt,  and  the  false  Elo- 
him of  Canaan. 

Now  the  facts  of  Genesis  remarkably 
coincide  with  all  this  probability.  Some 
portions  of  the  narrative  do  indeed  pre- 
sent what  is  called  an  Elohistic  aspect; 
and  especially  those  portions,  which,  of 
their  very  nature,  are  most  likely  to 
have  existed  in  the  traditions  current 
from  old  time  among  the  Israelites,  viz. 
the  general  account  of  the  Creation,  the 
Flood,  the  covenant  of  circumcision  made 
with  Abraham,  and  the  genealogical 
tables.  These  then  Moses  appears  to 
have  adopted,  much  as  he  found  them, 
perhaps  perpetuating,  word  for  word,  in 
his  writings  what  before  had  been  float- 
ing in  unwritten  record.  Yet  these  por- 
tions of  the  narrative  are  not  loosely 
thrown  in,  but  rather  carefully  and  or- 
ganically incorporated  and  imbedded  in 
the  whole. 

For  instance,  in  the  history  of  creation, 
we  have  first,  in  Gen.  i.  ii.  i — 3,  that 
which  was  very  probably  the  ancient  pri- 
meval record  of  the  formation  of  the 
world.  It  may  even  have  been  commu- 
nicated to  the  first  man  in  his  innocence. 
At  all  events,  it  very  probably  was  the 
great  Semitic  tradition,  handed  down 
from  Noah  to  Shem,  from  Shem  to  Abra- 
ham, and  from  Abraham  through  Isaac, 
Jacob  and  Joseph,  to  the  Israelites  who 
dwelt  in  Egypt.  Without  interfering  with 
the  integrity  of  this,  the  sacred  author 
proceeds  in  the  same  chapter  to  add  a 
supplementary  history,  briefly  recapitu- 
lating the  history  of  creation,  with  some 
little  addition  (in  vv.  4 — 7),  and  then 
proceeding  to  the  history  of  Paradise, 
the  Fall,  the  expulsion,  and  the  first  bit- 
ter fruits  of  disobedience.  In  the  first 
part  of  this  second  or  supplementary 
history  we  meet  with  a signal  phenome- 
non, viz.  that,  from  ch.  ii.  4 to  the  end 
of  chapter  iii.  the  two  names  (or  rather 
the  generic  and  the  personal  names)  of 
God,  Jehovah  and  Elohim,  are  used 
continually  together.  There  is  no  other 


28 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


instance  in  Scripture  of  this  continued 
and  repeated  use  of  the  united  names. 
It  is  evident,  that  the  author,  who  adopt- 
ed the  first  ancient  record  and  stamped 
it  with  authority,  and  who  desired  to 
bring  his  people  to  a worship  of  the  great 
self-existent  Jehovah,  used  this  method 
of  transition  from  the  ancient  Elohistic 
document  to  his  own  more  immediate 
narrative,  in  order  that  he  might  more 
forcibly  impress  upon  his  readers,  that 
the  Elohim  who  created  all  things  was 
also  the  Jehovah,  who  had  revealed 
Himself  to  Moses,  and  who  was  now 
to  be  spoken  of  as  the  Protector  and 
King  of  the  great  Theocratic  race,  whose 
history  was  to  be  traced  down  even 
from  the  very  creation  of  Adam.  The 
consistency  and  close  connection  of  the 
two  parts  is  admitted  by  some,  who  are 
far  from  admitting  the  Divine  original 
or  high  inspiration  of  the  Pentateuch. 

The  second  account,”  says  Kalisch  {in 
loci)  “is  no  abrupt  fragment;  it  is  not 
unconnected  with  the  first;  it  is  not  su- 
perfluous repetition;  it  has  been  com- 
posed with  clear  consciousness  after,  and 
with  reference  to,  the  first.  The  author 
of  the  Pentateuch  added  to  an  ancient 
document  on  creation  the  history  of 
man’s  disobedience  and  its  consequence. 
...The  first  account  was  composed  in- 
dependently of  the  second ; but  the 
second  is  a distinct  and  deliberate  con- 
tinuation of  the  first. ...It  does  not  mere- 
ly recapitulate,  but  it  introduces  new 
facts  and  a new  train  of  thought.”  The 
consistency  of  the  two  narratives,  and 
a consideration  of  the  alleged  incon- 
sistencies, will  be  seen  in  the  commen- 
tary (on  ch.  ii.  especially).  One  singular 
point  of  resemblance  it  may  be  well  to 
point  out  here.  In  ch.  i.  26,  in  the  so 
called  bilohistic  document,  we  have  the 
remarkable  words,  “ Let  us  make  man,” 
the  plural  pronoun  used  by  the  Almighty 
Himself,  and  the  appearance  of  deli- 
beration. In  ch.  iii.  22  (in  the  so  called 
Jehovistic  portion)  we  have  again,  “Be- 
hold the  man  is  become  as  one  of  us:” 
again  the  very  observable  plural,  and 
again  perhaps  even  more  markedly 
anthropomorphic  language,  as  though 
the  Most  High  were  taking  counsel, 
before  executing  His  judgments.  This 
identity  of  thought  and  speech  is  very 


observable.  The  like  occurs  again  in 
ch.  xi.  6;  where  neither  Elohim,  nor  Je- 
HOVAH-Elohim,  but  Jehovah  alone  is 
the  name  of  God  made  use  of*.  There 
is  not  space  to  go  through  the  book  of 
Genesis  and  shew  how  similar  principles 
prevail  throughout.  If  the  basis  of  the 
history  of  the  Flood  were  an  ancient  Elo- 
histic document,  Moses  appears  to  have 
interwoven  it  with  a further  narrative  of 
his  own.  The  one  portion  may  be  mark- 
ed by  the  prevalence  of  one  name,  the 
other  by  that  of  another  name  of  God; 
but  the  consistency  of  the  one  with  the 
other  is  complete  throughout  (see  notes 
on  the  history,  infra).  The  same  will 
appear  in  other  portions  of  Genesis, 
though  the  creation  and  the  flood  most 
clearly  exhibit  both  the  phenomena  re- 
lied on  by  the  theorists  and  the  facts 
leading  to  a refutation  of  their  theory. 

It  must  not,  however,  be  thought  that 
the  variety  in  the  employment  of  the 
sacred  names  could  have  resulted  only 
from  the  variety  of  the  materials  used 
by  Moses  and  the  additional  matter 
introduced  by  himself.  Careful  obser- 
vation will  shew,  that,  whilst  often  it 
was  a matter  of  indifference  whether 
the  one  or  the  other  name  was  intro- 
duced, yet  there  was  no  mere  careless- 
ness in  the  introduction.  On  the  con- 
trary, in  most  passages  it  is  impossible 
to  doubt  that  the  choice  of  the  name 
adopted  is  the  happiest  possible. 

Thus  in  the  first  history  of  creation  , 
we  have  Elohim,  the  mighty  one,  God 
of  Creation  and  Providence,  then  in 
order  to  mark  the  transition  of  subject 
and  yet  the  unity  of  the  Being  spoken 
of,  we  have  for  two  chapters  Jehovah 
Elohim;  but  when  we  come  to  the  ivth 
chapter  and  to  Eve’s  exclamation,  when 
she  hoped  that  her  firstborn  should  be 
the  ancestor  of  the  promised  seed,  the 
words  ascribed  to  her  connect  her  hope 
with  Jehovah,  Him  whom  the  Israelites 
learned  to  look  on  as  their  covenant 
God,  who  was  to  make  good  all  the 
promises  to  the  fathers.  Again,  in  ch. 

V.  the  genealogy  from  Adam  to  Noah 
has  no  Divine  name  except  Elohim,  till 
we  come,  in  v.  29,  to  the  birth  of  Noah, 
and  his  father’s  pious  anticipation  that 
he  should  be  a comfort  to  his  race,  in 
^ See  Quarry,  p.  348. 


THE  BOOK  OF  GENESIS. 


29 


reference  to  the  earth,  which  had  been 
cursed.  The  use  of  the  nanie  Jehovah 
in  this  verse  points  us  at  once  to  the 
fact  that  Noah  became  the  second  head 
of  the  Theocratic  race,  the  new  deposi- 
tary of  the  promises  of  God.  If  we 
pass  on  to  ch.  xiv.  we  are  introduced 
to  Melchizedek,  priest  and  king  of  a 
Canaanitish  people.  He  is  a worship- 
per of  El-Elion^  God  most  High,  this 
being  evidently  the  name  by  which  the 
Almighty  was  known  to  him  and  to  his 
countrymen.  Once,  however,  the  name 
Jehovah  occurs  in  the  chapter,  but  it 
is  in  the  mouth  of  Abraham,  and  Abra- 
ham evidently  uses  it  that  he  may  shew 
that  he  acknowledges  the  El-Elion  wor- 
shipped by  Melchizedek  to  be  one  and 
the  same  with  the  Jehovah,  who  was  the 
God  of  Hebrews.  ‘T  have  lift  up  my 
hand  to  JEHOVAH,  El-Elion,  possessor 
of  heaven  and  earth,”  xiv.  22.  A similar 
propriety  of  usage  prevails  throughout 
Genesis,  and  will  frequently  be  referred 
to  in  the  notes. 

Again,  verbal  peculiarities  are  said  to 
distinguish  the  so  called  Jehovistic  from 
the  so  called  Elohistic  portions  of  the 
'Pentateuch,  so  that,  besides  the  variety 
in  the  use  of  the  names  of  God,  it  is 
possible  for  a keen  eye  to  disentangle 
the  different  documents  the  one  from  the 
other  by  noting  the  phraseology  peculiar 
to  each.  It  will  be  plain  that,  if  even 
this  were  proved  and  patent,  it  would 
still  not  interfere  with  the  Mosaic  origin 
of*  Genesis,  so  long  as  we  admit  that 
Moses  may  have  used  the  so  called 
Elohistic  MSS.  or  traditions.  The 
Elohistic  phraseology  would  then  be 
characteristic  of  the  more  ancient  docu- 
ments, the  Jehovistic  would  belong  to 
Moses  himself.  It  is,  however,  very 
clear,  that  the  peculiarities  are  greatly 
magnified,  if  they  exist  at  all.  Some- 
times indeed  the  theorists  discover  that 
a passage  must  belong  to  the  Elohist 
for  instance,  because  it  contains  Elohistic 
expressions ; but  then,  though  the  name 
Jehovah  occurs  in  it,  that  name  must 
be  a later  insertion  because  it  does  not 
correspond  with  the  general  wording  of 
the  chapter.  Thus  the  name  Jehovah 
in  ch.  xvii.  i is  argued  to  be  evidently 
out  of  place,  because  Elohim  occurs 
ever)'where  else  (ten  times)  in  the  chap- 


ter. Surely  this  is  constructing  a theory 
in  despite,  not  in  consequence,  of  the 
facts  on  which  it  ought  to  stand 

Again  anthropomorphisms  are  said 
to  characterise  the  Jehovist  passages. 
This  is  by  no  means  unlikely,  consider- 
ing that  Jehovah  is  the  personal  name 
of  God,  and  that  by  which  He  was 
pleased  to  reveal  Himself  familiarly  to 
His  people;  yet  they  are  far  from  ex- 
clusively belonging  to  the  Jehovistic 
portions.  Lastly,  all  the  indications  of 
a more  advanced  civilization,  such  as 
the  use  of  gold,  jewels,  earrings,  musical 
instruments,  camels,  servants,  &c.  are 
assigned  to  the  Jehovist,  and  are  thought 
to  mark  a period  later  than  that  of 
Moses.  But  surely  the  Israelites,  who 
had  dwelt  for  centuries  in  the  fairest 
province  in  Egypt,  and  Moses  who  had 
been  bred  up  in  the  court  of  a powerful 
and  luxurious  Pharaoh,  must  have 
been  familiar  with  a civilization  consider- 
ably in  advance  of  anything  that  we 
read  of  in  Genesis.  Indeed  the  graphic 
account  which  Genesis  gives  of  the 
simple  habits  of  Abraham  and  the  other 
patriarchs  is  one  proof  of  its  antiquity 
and  its  truth.  It  is  very  doubtful 
whether  an  author  even  in  the  time  of 
Samuel,  more  than  doubtful  whether  one 
in  the  reign  of  Solomon,  of  Josiah,  or 
one  of  those  who  returned  with  Ezra 
from  captivity,  could  have  written  the 
history  of  the  forefathers  of  his  race 
with  all  the  truthfulness,  all  the  sim- 
plicity, and  all  the  accuracy  of  detail 
to  be  found  in  the  Book  which  is  called 
the  First  Book  of  Moses.  Moses  could 
have  written  it,  for  he  had  every  conceiv- 
able qualification  for  writing  it.  The 
writer  of  after  times,  who  could  have  pro- 
duced that  book,  must  have  been  himself 
a wonder,  unsurpassed  by  any  of  those 
wonders  which  he  is  supposed  to  have 
devised  and  recorded. 

The  supposed  inconsistency  of  the 
statements  in  Genesis  with  the  recent 

^ The  distinction  between  the  Elohistic  and 
Jehovistic  words  and  phrases  is  carefully  and 
elaborately  investigated  by  Mr  Quarry  (‘Genesis,’ 
pp.  578  sqq.).  The  conclusion  at  which  he 
arrives  is  the  very  reverse  of  the  conclusion 
arrived  at  by  the  believers  in  the  fragment 
theory. 


30  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  GENESIS. 


discoveries  of  science  will  be  found 
treated  of  in  the  notes  to  the  earlier 
chapters.  It  may  be  well  here  only  to 
say,  that  in  the  present  state  of  our 
knowledge,  both  critical  and  scientific, 
a patient  suspension  of  judgment  on 
many  points  seems  our  wisest  attitude. 
It  is  plain  that  a miraculous  revelation 
of  scientific  truths  was  never  designed 
by  God  for  man.  The  account  of 
creation  is  given  in  popular  language; 
yet  it  is  believed  that  it  will  be  found 
not  inconsistent  with,  though  not  an- 
ticipatory of,  modern  discovery.  And 
after  all,  modern  discovery  is  yet  in  a 
most  imperfect  condition,  the  testimony 
of  the  rocks  and  of  the  stars  but  im- 
perfectly read,  whilst  there  is  room  for 
no  small  diversity  of  sentiment  on  the 
meaning  of  many  of  the  expressions 
in  Genesis.  At  present  the  greatest  in- 
consistency alleged  as  between  Genesis 
and  science  is  to  be  found  in  the  ques- 
tion of  the  antiquity  of  man.  Whilst 
there  is  at  least  good  reason  for  with- 
holding confident  assent  from  the  con- 
clusions of  some  eminent  geologists  as 
to  the  evidence  of  the  drift ; it  is  quite 
possible  to  believe  that  Genesis  gives 
us  no  certain  data  for  pronouncing  on 
the  time  of  man’s  existence  on  the  earth. 
The  only  arguments  are  to  be  drawn 
from  the  genealogies.  As  those  given  by 
the  Evangelists  are  confessedly  incom- 
plete, there  cannot  be  sufficient  reason 
for  maintaining  that  those  in  Genesis 
must  have  been  complete.  It  is  true 
that  we  have  only  conjecture  to  lead 
us  here:  but  if  the  genealogies,  before 
and  after  the  Flood,  present  us  only 
with  the  names  of  leading  and  “repre- 
sentative” jnen;  we  can  then  allow  no 
small  latitude  to  those  who  would  extend 
the  duration  of  man  upon  the  earth  to 
more  than  the  commonly  received  six 
thousand  years.  The  appearance  of 
completeness  in  the  genealogies  is  ar 


undoubted  difficulty ; yet  perhaps  not 
insuperable,  when  we  consider  all  that 
may  have  happened  (no  where  more 
probably  than  here)  in  the  transmis- 
sion of  the  text  from  Moses  to  Ezra 
and  from  Ezra  to  the  destruction  of  Je- 
rusalem. 

Let  us  suppose  that  it  had  pleased 
God  to  reveal  to  Moses  the  fact  that 
the  earth  revolves  round  the  sun,  a 
fact  familiar  now  to  children,  but  un- 
known to  astronomers  for  more  than 
three  thousand  years  after  the  Exodus. 
The  effect  of  such  a revelation  would 
probably  have  been  to  place  the  believer 
and  the  astronomer  in  a state  of  an- 
tagonism. The  ancient  believer  would 
have  believed  the  truth ; yet  the  ob- 
server of  the  heavens  would  have  tri- 
umphantly convicted  him  of  ignorance 
and  error.  We  can  see  plainly  that  the 
wise  course  for  both  would  have  been 
to  suspend  their  judgments,  believing 
the  Bible  and  yet  following  out  the 
teaching  of  nature.  A Galileo  would 
then  have  been,  not  feared  as  a here- 
tic, but  hailed  as  a harmonist.  There 
appears  now  to  some  an  inconsis- 
tency between  the  words  of  Moses  and 
the  records  of  creation.  Both  may  be 
misinterpreted.  Further  research  into 
science,  language,  literature  and  exegesis, 
may  shew  that  there  is  substantial  agree- 
ment, where  there  now  appears  partial 
inconsistency.  It  would  evidently  have 
served  no  good  purpose,  had  a revela- 
tion been  vouchsafed  of  the  Copernican 
system,  or  of  modern  geological  science. 
Yet  there  maybe  in  Scripture  truth  popu- 
larly expressed  concerning  the  origin  of 
all  things,  truth  not  apparent  to  us,  be- 
cause we  have  not  yet  acquired  the 
knowledge  to  see  and  appreciate  it.  Cer- 
tainly as  yet  nothing  has  been  proved 
which  can  disprove  the  records  of 
Genesis,  if  both  the  proof  and  the  re- 
cords be  interpreted  largely  and  fairly. 


THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  MOSES, 


CALLED 

GENESIS. 


« Psal.  1 
6. 

& 136.  5. 
Acts  14.1 
it  17.  24. 
Hcbr.  II. 


CHAPTER  I. 

! The  creation  of  heaven  and  earth,  3 of  the 
light,  6 of  the  firma77ient,  9 of  the  earth  sepa- 
rated f7'oi7i  the  wate7's,  1 1 a7td  77iade fruitfid, 
14  of  the  sn7i,  moo7t,  ami  sta7's,  ■20  offish  a7id 
fowl,  24  of  beasts  a7id  cattle,  26  of  /na7t  hi 
the  i7nage  of  God.  29  Also  the  appoi7ttt7ie7it 
of  food. 

IN  "the  beginning  God  created 
the  heaven  and  the  earth. 


2 And  the  earth  was  without  form, 
and  void ; and  darkness  was  upon  the 

face  of  the  deep.  And  the  Spirit  of  God  ^ 

moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters. 

3 And  God  said,  *Let  there  be  ^2Cor.4.6 

light : and  there  was  light.  t 7.^. 

4 And  God  saw  the  light,  that  it 

was  good  : and  God  divided  ^ the  be  twee  • 
light  from  the  darkness. 


Chap.  I.  1.  In  the  beginnmg\  Not  “first 
in  order,”  but  “in  the  beginning  of  all  things.” 
The  same  expression  is  used  in  Joh.  i.  i,  of 
the  existence  of  the  “Word  of  God,”  “In 
• the  beginning  was  the  Word.”  The  one 
passage  illustrates  the  other,  though  it  is  partly 
by  the  contrast  of  thoughts.  The  Word 
when  the  world  was  created.  ' 

God  created^  In  the  first  two  chapters 
of  Genesis  we  meet  with  four  different  verbs 
to  express  the  creative  work  of  God,  viz. 
I,  to  create;  a,  to  make;  3,  to  form;  4,  to 
build.  The  first  is  used  of  the  creation  of 
the  universe  (v.  i);  of  the  creation  of  the 
great  sea-monsters,  whose  vastness  appears 
to  have  excited  special  wonder  (v.  21);  and 
of  the  creation  of  man,  the  head  of  animated 
nature,  in  the  image  of  God  (v.  27).  Every- 
where else  we  read  of  God’s  making,  as  from 
an  already  created  substance,  the  firmament, 
the  sun,  the  stars,  the  brute  creation  (vv.  7, 
16,  25,  &c.);  or  of  His  forming  the  beasts 
of  the  field  out  of  the  ground  (ch.  ii.  19);  or 
lastly,  of  His  building  up  (ii.  22,  margin) 
into  a woman  the  rib  which  He  had  taken 
from  man.  In  Isai.  xliii.  7,  three  of  these 
verbs  occur  together.  “I  have  created  him 
for  my  glory,  I have  formed  him,  yea,  I have 
made  him.”  Perhaps  no  other  ancient  lan- 
guage, however  refined  or  philosophical,  could 
have  so  clearly  distinguished  the  different  acts 
of  the  Maker  of  all  things,  and  that  because  all 
heathen  philosophy  esteemed  matter  to  have 
been  eternal  and  uncreated.  It  cannot  justly 
be  objected  that  the  verb  create,  in  its  first  sig- 
' nification,  may  have  been  sensuous,  meaning 
probably  to  he^  stone  or  to  fell  timber. 
Almost  all  abstract  or  spiritual  thoughts  are 
expressed  by  words  which  were  originally 
concrete  or  sensuous;  and  in  nearly  all  the 


passages  of  Scripture  in  which  the  verb  in 
question  occurs,  the  idea  of  a true  creation 
is  that  which  is  most  naturally  implied.  Even 
where  the  translators  have  rendered  it  other- 
wise, the  sense  is  still  clearly  the  same,  e.g.  in 
Numb.  xvi.  30,  “If  tne  Lord  make  a nevj 
thing  (lit.  create  a creation),  and  the  earth 
open  her  mouth;”  or  again,  Ps.  Ixxxix.  47, 
“ Wherefore  hast  Thou  made  (Heb.  created) 
all  things  for  nought?”  The  word  is  evi- 
dently the  common  word  for  a true  and  ori- 
ginal creation,  and  there  is  no  other  word  in 
Hebrew  which  can  express  that  thought. 

the  hea'ven  and  the  earth']  The  universe 
popularly  described  according  to  its  appear- 
ance as  earth  and  sky.  In  similar  language, 
as  Grotius  notes,  the  new  creation,  to  be 
hereafter  looked  for,  is  described  2 Pet. 
iii.  13,  as  “new  heavens  and  a new  earth.” 
The  Hebrew  word  for  hea-ven  is  always 
plural,  whether  as  expressive  of  greatness,  or 
perhaps  of  multitude,  like  the  old  English 
plural,  nvelkin. 

2.  And  the  earth  nvas  ^without  form,  and 
Desolate  and  void.  These  two  words, 
express  devastation  and  desolation.  They 
are  used  of  the  desert.  Job  xii.  24 ; xxvi. 
7;  of  the  devastated  city,  Isa.  xxiv.  10;  of 
“the  line  of  wasting,  and  the  plummet  of 
destruction,”  Isa.  xxxiv.  ii.  In  Jer.  iv.  23 
they  describe  the  utter  wasting  of  a con- 
demned and  desolated  land.  W hether  in  the 
present  verse  they  indicate  entire  absence  of 
life  and  order,  or  merely  that  the  world  was 
not  then,  as  now,  teeming  with  life;  whether 
they  express  primeval  emptiness,  or  rather 
desolation  and  disorder  succeeding  to  a former 
state  of  life  and  harmony,  cannot  immediately 
be  determined.  The  purpose  of  the  sacred 
writer  is  to  give  a history  of  man,  his  fall, 


GENESIS.  I. 


32 


[v.  5. 


5 And  God  called  the  light  Day, 
and  the  darkness  he  called  Night. 


^And  the  evening  and  the  morning 
were  the  first  day. 


t Heb. 

A nd  the 
evenbig 


his  promised  recovery,  then  specially  of  the 
chosen  seed,  and  of  the  rise  of  the  Theocracy. 
He  therefore  contents  himself  with  declaring 
in  one  verse  generally  the  creation  of  all 
things,  and  then  in  the  next  verse  passes  to 
the  earth,  man’s  place  of  abode,  and  to  its  pre- 
paration for  the  habitation  of  man.  Count- 
less ages  may  have  elapsed  between  what  is 
recorded  in  v.  i,  and  what  is  stated  in  v.  %. 
Some  indeed  have  insisted  on  the  close  con- 
nection of  V.  z with  V.  I,  because  they  are 
united  by  the  word  And:  but  this  particle, 
though  necessarily  implying  transition,  does 
by  no  means  necessarily  imply  close  connec- 
tion. The  Book  of  Leviticus  begins  with 
“And  the  Lord  called  unto  Moses.”  The 
Book  of  Exodus  begins  with  the  same  word 
And^  though  centuries  intervene  between  its 
history  and  that  of  the  Book  of  Genesis ; and 
so  our  translators  have  very  reasonably  ren- 
dered the  Hebrew  particle  in  that  passage  not 
And^  but  Nonjo.  The  meaning  of  the  verse 
before  us  evidently  is,  “In  the  beginning  God 
created  the  universe but,  at  the  time  now 
to  be  spoken  of,  the  earth,  which  is  our  chief 
concern,  was  shapeless  and  waste.  The  verb 
“was”  as  used  in  this  verse  implies,  not 
succession,  but  condition  at  the  time  in 
question. 

darkness  (was  upon  the  face  of  the  deep\ 
No  light  penetrated  to  the  desolate  and  dis- 
ordered ruin.  The  deep  may  mean  cither 
the  confused  mass  itself,  or,  as  more  fre- 
quently, the  abyss  of  waters  and  the  clouds 
and  mists  with  which  the  earth  was  sur- 
rounded. 

the  Spirit  of  God  moved  upon  the  face  of 
the  (waters'\  The  Targum  of  Onkelos  and 
many  Jewish  commentators  render  “a  mighty 
wind  was  moving,”  &c.,  which  is  favoured, 
though  not  proved,  by  the  absence  of  tlie  ar- 
ticle. The  common  rendering  is  the  more 
natural,  especially  if  the  word  “moved”  sig- 
nifies, as  some  think,  not  merely  fluttering  or 
hovering^  as  of  a bird  over  its  nest,  but  also 
brooding^  as  of  a bird  sitting  on  its  eggs.  (See 
Bent,  xxxii.  ii,  where  it  is  used  of  the  eagle 
fluttering  over  her  young.)  The  Spirit  of 
God  appears  to  be  represented  as  the  great 
quickening  principle,  hovering  or  brooding 
over  the  earth  and  the  ocean,  and  breathing 
forth  upon  them  light  and  life. 

3.  God  said]  In  the  cognate  languages 
the  word  here  rendered  said  has  the  force  of 
commanded. 

Let  there  be  light:  and  there  was  light] 
'Was  light  created  liefore  the  creation  of  the 
sun  and  other  luiviinous  bodies?  That  this 
is  possible  has  been  shewn  by  Dr  M'^Caul, 


‘Aids  to  Faith,’  p.  zio,  &c. ; but  very  pro- 
bably the  creation  of  the  sun  is  related  in  v.  i, 
where  under  the  word  heaven  (or  heavens) 
may  be  comprehended  the  whole  visible  uni- 
verse of  sun,  moon,  and  stars.  Now,  the 
history  is  going  on  to  the  adaptation  of  the 
earth  for  man’s  abode.  In  v.  z a thick  dark- 
ness had  enveloped  it.  In  this  3rd  verse  the 
darkness  is  dispelled  by  the  word  of  God, 
the  light  is  separated  from  the  darkness,  and 
the  regular  succession  of  day  and  night  is  esta- 
blished. Still  probably  there  remains  a cloud- 
ed atmosphere,  or  other  obstacle  to  the  full 
vision  of  sun  and  sky.  It  is  not  till  the  fourth 
day  that  these  impediments  are  removed  and 
the  sun  appears  to  the  earth  as  the  great 
luminary  of  the  day,  the  moon  and  the  stars 
as' reigning  in  the  night.  Light  may,  perhaps, 
have  been  created  before  the  sun.  Yet  the 
statement,  that  on  the  first  day,  not  only  was 
there  light,  but  the  succession  of  day  and 
night,  seems  to  prove  that  the  creation  of  the 
sun  was  “in  the  beginning,”  though  its  visible 
manifestation  in  the  firmament  was  not  till  the 
fourth  day. 

4.  God  savj  the  light.,  that  it  (was  good] 
The  earlier  the  records,  the  more  we  find 
in  them  of  anthropopathic  language,  as  the 
better  fitted  to  simple  understandings.  The 
design  of  words  like  these  is  to  express  em- 
phatically, that  all  the  works,  as  they  came 
direct  from  the  hand  of  God,  were  good,  and 
that  the  evil  did  not  result  from  any  defect  in 
the  workmanship,  but  from  the  will  of  the 
creature  not  according  with  the  will  of  the 
Creator. 

divided  the  light  from  the  darkness]  In 
the  chaotic  condition  described  in  v.  2,  all 
things  were  confused  and  commixed;  but, 
when  God  called  the  light  out  of  darkness. 
He  set  bounds  to  both  of  them,  and  caused  a 
succession  of  day  and  night,  calling  the  light 
day  and  the  darkness  night. 

5.  And  the  evening  and  the  morning  (were 
the  first  day]  Literally,  “And  it  was  (or 
became)  evening,  and  it  was  (or  became) 
morning,  day  one.” 

Some  think  the  evening  is  put  before  the 
morning,  because  the  Jews  reckoned  their 
days  from  evening  to  evening.  Others  think, 
that,  as  the  darkness  was  first  and  the  light 
called  out  of  darkness,  so  the  evening  (in 
Heb.  ereb.,  the  time  when  all  things  are  mixed 
and  confounded)  is  placed  before  the  morning; 
and  thus  the  whole  period  of  chaotic  darkne.ss 
may  have  been  the  first  night,  and  the  first 
day  that  period  of  light  which  immediately 
succeeded  the  darkness. 

See  Note  A at  end  of  the  Chapter. 


V.  6—14.] 


GENESIS.  1. 


33 


e Psal.  136. 
5- 

Jer.  10.  12. 

51.  15- 

t Heb.  e.v- 
pansion. 


rfjet.  51. 


^ Psal.  33. 

h 136.  5. 
Job  38.  8. 


6 ^ And  God  said,  ‘'Let  .there  be 
a ^firmament  in  the  midst  of  the 
waters,  and  let  it  divide  the  waters 
from  the  waters. 

7 And  God  made  the  firmament, 
and  divided  the  waters  which  were 
under  the  firmament  from  the  waters 
which  were  above  the  firmament  : 
and  it  was  so. 

8 And  God  called  the  ‘^firma- 
ment Heaven.  And  the  evening  and 
the  morning  were  the  second  day. 

9 H And  God  said,  ‘'Let  the 
waters  under  the  heaven  be  gathered 
together  unto  one  place,  and  let  the 
dry  land  appear : and  it  was  so. 

10  And  God  called  the  dry  land 


Earth;  and  the  gathering  together  of 
the  waters  called  he  Seas  : and  God 
saw  that  it  was  good. 

1 1 And  God  said.  Let  the  earth 
bring  forth  ^ grass,  the  herb  yielding  f Heb. 
seed,  and  the  fruit  tree  yielding  fruit 
after  his  kind,  whose  seed  is  in  itself, 
upon  the  earth:  and  it  v/as  so. 

12  And  the  earth  brought  forth 
grass,  and  herb  yielding  seed  after  his 
kind,  and  the  tree  yielding  fruit, 
whose  seed  was  in  itself,  after  his 
kind:  and  God  saw  that  it  was  good. 

13  And  the  evening  and  the  morn- 
ing were  the  third  day. 

14  ^ And  God  said.  Let  there  19  ' \ 
be  .^lights  in  the  firmament  of  the 


6.  Let  there  be  a Jirmament]  The  earth  is 
spoken  of  as  covered  with  waters,  partly,  that 
is,  the  waters  of  the  sea,  partly  the  heavy 
clouds  and  vapours,  which  hung  round  it  in 
its  state  of  desolation  and  darkness.  The 
dispersion  of  some  of  these  vapours  lets  in  the 
light.  Then,  in  the  present  verse,  the  clouds 
and  mists  are  described  as  raised  up  above 
the  firmament,  the  firmament  itself  dividing 
between  the  waters  of  the  ocean  and  the 
clouds  of  heaven.  It  is  plain  from  this  that 
the  word  rendered  firmament  embraces  the 
atmosphere  imnnediately  surrounding  the  sur- 
fiice  of  the  earth,  which  bears  up  the  clouds 
floating  in  it,  in  or  on  the  face  of  which  also 
the  birds  are  described  as  flying  (see  v.  20). 
In  V.  14  the  word  is  extended  further 
to  embrace  the  whole  region  of  the  sky  in 
which  sun  and  moon  and  stars  appear.  In 
this  respect,  as  Le  Clerc  notices,  it  cor- 
responds with  the  classical  word  ccelum^ 
'xvhich  meant  at  times  the  air  just  round  us,  at 
other  times  the  place  of  the  stars  and  planets; 
and  so  likewise  of  our  own  English  word 
heaven^  we  may  say  the  birds  of  heaven,  the 
clouds  of  heaven,  or  the  stars  of  heaven.  The 
original  sense  of  the  word  has  been  much  de- 
bated, but  is  of  little  consequence;  for  the 
sacred  writer  would  use  the  common  language 
of  his  people,  and  not  go  out  of  his  way  to 
devise  one  which  would  be  philosophically 
accurate.  The  verb,  from  which  the  sub- 
stantive is  derived,  signifies  (i)  to  beat  or 
stamp  upon,  Ezek.  vi.  ii,  xxv.  6;  (2)  to 
spread  abroad  by  stamping,  2 S.  xxii.  4.; ; 
(3)  to  beat  out  metal  into  thin  plates,  or  gold 
into  gold  leaf,  Ex.  xxxix.  3,  Num.  xvi.  38, 
Isai.  xl.  19;  (4)  to  spread  forth,  extend, 
stretch  out,  Job  xxxvii.  18,  Ps.  cxxxvi.  6, 
Is.  xlii.  5,  xliv.  24.  The  most  probable  mean- 
ing of  the  substantive  therefore  is  the  expanse 
VOL.  I. 


or  the  expansion.  The  LXX.  rendered  it y^r- 
mament  (see  here  Quarry  ‘ on  Genesis,’  p.  79)  ; 
and  hence  it  has  been  argued  that  Moses 
taught  the  sky  to  be  a hard,  metallic  vault, 
in  which  the  sun  and  stars  were  fixed ; but 
the  most  learned  modern  commentators,  in- 
cluding Gesenius,  Kalisch,  &c.,  believe  the 
true  etymology  of  the  word  to  shew  that 
expanse.,  not  firmament^  is  the  right  translation. 
The  teaching  however  of  the  present  passage 
does  not  depend  on  the  etymology  of  the  word. 
If  a writer  in  the  present  day  uses  the  English 
word  hea^ven.  it  does  not  follow,  that  he  sup- 
poses the  sky  to  be  a vault  hea’ved  up  from 
the  earth.  Neither  would  it  follow  that  the 
inspired  writer  had  taught,  that  the  portion  of 
atmosphere,  intervening  between  the  sea  and 
the  clouds,  was  a solid  mass,  even  if  the  word 
used  for  it  had  etymologically  signified  solidity, 

11.  Let  the  earth  bring  forth  grass~\  We 
have  here  the  first  calling  forth  of  life  upon 
the  earth,  vegetable  life  first,  soon  to  be  suc- 
ceeded by  animal  life.  The  earth  v/as  made ' 
fruitful,  and  three  kinds  of  vegetation  wero 
assigned  to  it ; the  tender  grass,  the  com- 
mon covering  of  the  soil,  fit  chiefly  for  the  • 
use  of  the  lower  animals ; herb  bearing  seed, 
which  should  be  adapted  to  the  service  of ' 
man ; and  trees,  with  their  conspicuous  fruits; 
all  three  so  ordained,  that  their  seed  should 
be  in  themselves,  that  they  should  contain,, 
not  a principle  of  life  only,  but  a power  also.- 
of  fecundity,  whereby  the  race  should  be  per- 
petuated from  generation  to  generation. 

14.  Let  there  be  light s~\  Lit.  luminaries, 
light-bearers.,  spoken  of  lamps  and  candle- 
sticks, Ex.  xxv.  6,  Num.  iv.  9,  16.  The 
narrative  only  tells  what  sun,  moon,  and  stars 
are  in  relation  to  the  earth.  When  the  clouds 
and  mists  are  dispelled  from  its  surface,  the 

C 


34 


GENESIS.  I, 


[v.  15—24. 


\^wenikl  divide  Ehe  day  from  the 

day  and  iiight  ; and  let  them  be  for  signs, 
^'i/ieZight.  ^^*1  Er  seasons,  and  for  days,  and 
years : 

15  And  let  them  be  for  lights  in 
the  firmament  of  the  heaven  to  give 
light  upon  the  earth  ; and  it  was  so. 

16  And  God  made  tv/o  great 
’ the  greater  light  Eo  rule  the 

tiu-day,  day,  and  the  lesser  light  to  rule  the 
niirht : he  made  the  stars  also. 

O 

17  And  God  set  them  in  the 
firmament  of  the  heaven  to  give  light 
upon  the  earth, 

^Jer. 31.35.  18  And  to  ^ rule  over  the  day 

and  over  the  night,  and  to  divide  the 
light  from  the  darkness ; and  God 
saw  that  it  was  good. 

19  And  the  evening  and  the  morn- 
Fsdr  were  the  fourth  day. 

6. 47!  20  And  God  said,  '''Let  the  waters 


bring  forth  abundantly  the  “moving"®'’’ 

= ‘1  1 1 +t-r  1 r Hcreepi7ig. 

creature  that  hath  ' life,  and  row!  t Heb. 
that  may  fly  above  the  earth  in  the ' 
^open  firmament  of  heaven.  t Heb. 

21  And  God  created  great  whales, 
and  every  living  creature  that  moveth, 
which  the  waters  brought  forth  abun- 
dantly, after  their  kind,  and  every 
v/inged  fowl  after  his  kind  : and  God 
saw  that  it  was  good. 

22  And  God  blessed  them,  saying, 

'Be  fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  fUl'chap.  s. ' 
the  waters  in  the  seas,  and  let  fowl  Si  g.  i. 
multiply  in  the  earth. 

23  And  the  evening  and  the  morn- 
ing were  the  fifth  day. 

24  ^ And  God  said.  Let  the  earth 
bring  forth  the  living  creature  after 
his  kind,  cattle,  and  creeping  thing, 
and  beast  of  the  earth  after  his  kind  ; 
and  it  was  so. 


seas  confined  within  their  boundaries,  and 
the  first  vegetation  springs  up ; then  the 
sky  is  cleared  up,  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars 
appear  and  assume  their  natural  functions, 
marking  days  and  nights,  seasons  and  years; 
and  God  makes  or  appoints  them,  the  sun  to 
rule  the  day,  and  the  moon  to  rule  the  night. 

16.  be  made  the  stars  also']  The  purpose 
of  the  sacred  narrative  being  to  describe  the 
adaptation  of  the  earth  to  the  use  of  man,  no 
account  is  taken  of  the  nature  of  the  stars, 
as  suns  or  planets,  but  merely  as  signs  in  the 
heavens.  The  words  in  the  text  may  be  a 
kind  of  parenthesis,  not  assigning  the  special 
time  of  the  creation  of  the  stars.  Moreover, 
the  word  used  is  “made,”  not  “created,”  see 
on  V.  I.  When  t^ie  Sun  and  Moon  became 
great  lights  to  rule  the  day  and  to  rule  the 
night,  then  also  the  stars  shone  forth;  the 
heavens  were  lit  up  by  the  sun  in  the  day- 
time, by  the  m.oon  and  stars  in  the  night- 
season,  all  of  them  declaring  the  glory  of  God 
and  shewing  I lis  handy-work. 

20.  the  iuo^ntig  creature]  The  versions  ren- 
der reptiles.  'I'he  word  is  of  wide  significance, 
most  frequently  used  of  reptiles  and  fishes;  the 
verb  from  which  it  comes,  and  which  is  here 
tran.slatcd  “ bring  forth  abundantly,”  means 
to  sauar/u,  to  creep,  to  propagate  itself  rapidly. 
WT*  may  probably  therefore  understand  here 
the  insect  creation,  the  fishes  of  the  sea,  and 
the  reptiles  and  saurians  of  sea  and  land. 

that  hath  life]  Literally  perhaps,  “ Lot 
the  waters  swarm  with  swarms  of  the  breath 
of  life.”  l.et  the  waters  teem  with  innu- 
merable crc.iiures,  in  wliich  is  the  breath  of 


life.  The  word  nephesh.  which  we  have 
rendered  breath,  corresponds  nearly  with  the 
classical  p.p'r/jc,  the  vital  principle.  It  is  used 
of  the  breath,  of  the  living  principle,  of  the 
soul  or  seat  of  feelings  and  aftections,  and  of 
living  beings  themselves. 

and  fowl,  &c.]  and  let  fowl  fly. 

21.  great  whales]  Great  sea  mon- 
sters. The  word  is  used  of  serpents.  Ex.  vii.  9, 
Dent,  xxxii.33,  Ps.  xci.  13,  Jer.  li.  34,  and  of 
the  crocodile,  Ezek.  xxix.  3,  xxxii.  2.  It  is 
not  likely  that  the  Israelites  should  have  had 
much  knowledge  of  the  larger  species  of  whales 
which  do  not  frequent  the  shores  of  the  Medi- 
terranean. Their  early  acquaintance  with 
Egypt  had  impressed  them  with  a horror  (d' 
the  crocodile,  and  in  the  desert  they  had 
become  familiar  with  large  serpents.  In 
Is.  xxvii.  1,  and  perhaps  in  Job  vii.  12,  this 
name  apparently  belongs  to  sea  monsters;  but 
we  may  remember  that  the  Hebrews  applied 
the  term  sea  to  great  rivers  also,  like  the  Nile 
and  the  Euphrates.  (See  Is.  xix.  5,  Jer.  li.  36, 
E/.ek.  xxxii.  2,  Nahum  iii.  8.)  It  seems,  on  the 
whole,  most  probable,  that  the  creatures  here 
said  to  have  been  created  were  serpents,  croco- 
diles, and  other  huge  saurians,  though  possibly 
any  large  monsters  of  sea  or  river  may  be  in- 
cluded. The  use  of  the  word  created  in  this 
place  has  already  been  remarked  on  v.  i. 
Another  reason  for  its  use  may  be,  that,  as  the 
Egyptians  paid  idolatrous  worship  to  croco- 
diles, the  sacred  historian  would  teach  that 
they  also  were  creatures  of  God. 

24.  The  fifth  day  was  chiefly  occupied 
in  peopling  the  waters  with  fishes  and  reptile.s, 


V.  25.  26.] 


GENESIS.  I. 


25  And  God  made  the  beast  of  the 
earth  after  his  kind,  and  cattle  after 
their  kind,  and  every  thing  that  creep- 
eth  upon  the  earth  after  his  kind : and 
God  saw  that  it  was  good. 


26  ^ And  God  said,  -^Let  us  make  ^chap.  5. 
man  in  our  image,  alter  our  likeness;  &9.  c. 
and  let  them  have  dominion  over  the 
fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of 
the  air,  and  over  the  cattle,  and  over  Coi.  3. 10. 


and  the  air  with  birds.  The  work  of  the 
si.Kth  day  gives  inhabitants  to  the  land, 
‘‘cattle”  (i.e.  the  well-known  animals,  which 
afterwards  became  dome.sticated,  though  the 
name  was  not  exclusively  attached  to  them), 
‘‘  and  creeping  things,”  such  as  serpents,  lizards, 
crawling  insects  and  the  like,  “and  beast  of 
the  earth,”  i.  e.  either  the  wilder  and  fiercer 
beasts,  as  distinguished  from  cattle,  or  perhaps 
more  generally  animals  of  all  kinds. 

26.  And  God  said^  Let  us  make  mand]  It 
has  been  observed  by  commentators,  both 
Jewish  and  Christian  [e.  g.  Abarbanel,  in  loc. 
Chrysost.  in  loc.)^  that  the  deliberation  of  the 
Creator  is  introduced,  not  to  express  doubt, 
but  to  enhance  the  dignity  of  the  last  work, 
the  creation  of  man.  So  even  Von  Bohlen, 
“A  gradual  ascent  is  observed  up  to  man,  the 
chief  \\'ork  of  creation,  and  in  order  to  exalt 
his  dignity,  the  act  of  his  creation  is  accom- 
panied by  the  deliberations  of  the  Creator.” 
The  creative  fiat  concerning  all  other  creatures 
runs,  “ Let  the  waters  bring  forth  abundantly,” 
“Let  the  earth  bring  forth,”  &c.  Man  is  that 
great  “piece  of  work,”  concerning  which  God 
is  described  as  taking  forethought  and  counsel, 
as  making  him  in  His  otvn  image,  and  (ch.  ii. 
7)  as  breathing  into  him  the  breath  of  life. 
Three  times  in  v.  27  the  verb  created  is  used 
concerning  the  production  of  man ; for,  though 
his  bodily  organization  may,  like  that  of  the 
beasts,  have  been  produced  from  already 
created  elements  (“the  dust  of  the  ground,” 
ch.  ii.  7);  yet  the  complex  being,  man,  “of  a 
reasonable  soul  and  human  flesh  subsisting,” 
was  now  for  the  first  -time  called  into  being, 
and  so  was,  unlike  the  beasts,  wholly  a new 
creation. 

Let  us  7nake']  The  Jews  vary  much  in  their 
explanation  of  these  word^.  Philo  speaks  of 
“the  Father  of  all  things  addressing  his  own 
powers”  (‘ De  Profugis,’  p.  359).  The  Tal- 
mud says,  “The  Holy  One,  Blessed  be  He, 
does  nothing  without  consulting  the  family 
which  is  above”  {Sanhed.  c.  iv.).  Moses 
Gerundinus  says,  that  God  addressed  the 
earth,  for,  as  the  earth  was  to  give  man 
the  body,  whilst  God  was  to  infuse  the  spirit, 
so  “in  our  likeness”  was  to  be  referred  both 
to  God  and  to  the  earth.  Abenezra  writes, 
“When,  according  to  God's  commandment, 
the  earth  and  the  sea  had  brought  forth 
plants  and  living  beings,  then  God  said  to 
the  angels,  ‘ Let  us  make  man,  we  will  be 
occupied  in  his  creation,  not  the  seas  and  the 
earth.'”  So  he  considers  man  to  have  been 


made  after  the  likeness  of  the  angels.  To  a 
similar  effect  Maimonides,  ‘More  Nevochim,’ 
p.  ii.  ch.  6.  See  Munster  in  loc..  Cleric,  in  loc., 
Heidegger,  p.  32. 

Some  interpreters,  both  Jewish  and  Chris- 
tian, have  understood  a plural  of  dignity,  after 
the  manner  of  kings.  This  is  the  opinion  of 
Gesenius  and  most  of  the  Germans.  But  the 
royal  style  of  speech  was  probably  a custom 
of  much  later  date  than  the  time  of  Moses. 
Thus  we  read  Gen.  xli.  41-44,  “I  have 
set  thee  over  the  land  of  Egypt  ....  I am 
Pharaoh.”  Indeed  this  royal  style  is  unknown 
in  Scripture.  Some  of  the  modern  rationalists 
believe  (or  affect  to  believe)  that  the  plural 
name  of  God,  Elohim,  was  a mere  relic  of 
ancient  polytheism,  and  that  though  Moses 
habitually  attaches  a singular  verb  to  the  plural 
nominative,  yet  here  “the  plural  unconsciously 
escaped  from  the  narrator’s  pen”  (Von  Bohl.). 
The  ancient  Christians  with  one  mind  see  in 
these  words  of  God  that  plurality  in  the  Divine 
unity,  which  was  more  fully  revealed,  when 
God  sent  His  only  begotten  Son  into  the 
world,  and  when  the  only  begotten  Son,  who 
was  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  declared 
Him  to  mankind.  So  e.  g.  Barnabas  (ch.  iv.), 
Justin  M.,  Irenaeus,  Theophil.,  Epiphan. 
(‘Hasres.’  xxxiii.  4-2),  Theodoret  (‘Quaest.  in 
Gen.’). 

in  our  image,  after  our  likeness^  Many 
Christian  writers  think  that  nothing  is  meant 
except  that  man  was  created  holy  and  inno- 
cent, and  that  this  image  of  God  was  lost 
when  Adam  fell.  That  holiness,  indeed, 
formed  part  of  the  likeness  may  be  inferred 
from  Col.  iii.  10,  “the  new  man,  which  is 
renewed  after  the  image  of  Him  that  crf^ated 
him;”  but  that  the  image  of  God  was  not 
wholly  obliterated  by  the  fall  seems  clear 
from  Gen.  ix.  6,  Jas.  iii.  9.  And,  if  so,  then 
that  image  did  not  simply  consist  in  perfect 
holiness.  Some,  both  Jewish  and  Christian, 
have  supposed  that  it  referred  to  that  do- 
minion, which  is  here  assigned  to  man.  As 
God  rules  over  all,  so  man  was  constituted 
the  governor  of  the  anim.al  world.  St  Basil 
M.  in  ‘Hexaemeron’  (qu.  by  Clericus)  con- 
siders that  the  likeness  consisted  in  freedom 
of  will.  This  probably  is  a most  important 
point  in  the  resemblance.  The  brute  creatures 
are  gifted  with  life  and  will  and  self-con- 
sciousness, and  even  with  some  powers  of 
reason ; but  they  have  no  self-determining  will, 
no  choice  between  good  and  evil,  no  power 
of  self-education,  no  proper  moral  character, 

C 2 


\ 


GENESIS.  1. 


[v.  27—31. 


36 

all  the  earth,  and  over  every  creeping 
thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth. 

27  So  God  created  man  in  his  own 
image,  in  the  image  of  God  created  he 
i Matt.  19.  him;  '"m^ale  and  female  created  he  them. 
Wisd.  2.  28  And  God  blessed  them,  and  God 

»?chap.  9.  said  unto  them,  "'Be  fruitful,  and  mul- 
replenish  the  earth,  and  sub- 
due it:  and  have  dominion  over  the 
fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of 
the  air,  and  over  every  living  thing 
tHeb  that  ^moveth  upon  the  earth. 

29  H And  God  said.  Behold,  I have 
given  you  every  herb  ^bearing  seed. 


which  is  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth, 
and  every  tree,  in  the  which  is  the  fruit 
of  a tree  yielding  seed;  "to  you  it  ” chap.  9. 
shall  be  for  meat. 

30  And  to  every  beast  of  the  earth, 
and  to  every  fowl  of  the  air,  and  to 
everything  that  creepeth  upon  the 
earth,  wherein  thereis  Uife,  I have  ziven  ^ 

1 1 r ° 1 • " living 

every  green  herb  for  meat : and  it  soui. 
was  so. 

3 1 And  God  saw  every  thing  that  " EccIus. 
he  had  made,  and,  behold,  it  was  very  ^ 
good.  And  the  evening  and  the  morn- 
ing were  the  sixth  day. 


and  so  no  true  personality.  God  is  the  essen- 
tially personal  Being,  and  in  giving  to  man  an 
immortal  soul,  He  gave  him  also  a true 
personality,  self-coiisciousness,  powder  of  free 
choice,  and  so  distinct  moral  responsibility. 


NOTE  A on  Chap.  i.  v.  5. 

The  vexed  question  of  the  duration  of  the 
days  of  creation  cannot  readily  be  solved  from 
consideration  of  the  wording  of  this  verse. 
The  English  Version  would  seem  to  confine  it 
to  natural  days,  but  the  original  will  allow 
much  greater  latitude.  Time  passed  in  regular 
succession  of  day  and  night.  It  was  an  inge- 
nious conjecture  of  Kurtz,  adopted  by  Hugh 
Miller,  that  the  knowledge  of  pre-Adamite 
history,  like  the  knowledge  of  future  ages, 
may  have  been  communicated  to  Moses, 
or  perhaps  to  the  first  man,  in  prophetic 
vision,  that  so  perhaps  vast  geological  periods 
were  exhibited  to  the  eye  of  the  inspired 
writer,  each  appearing  to  pass  before  him  as 
so  many  successive  days.  It  has  been  said 
moreover  that  the  phenomena  under  the  earth’s 
surface  correspond  with  the  succession  as  de- 
scribed in  this  chapter,  a period  of  compara- 
tive gloom,  with  more  vapour  and  more  car- 
bonic acid  in  the  atmosphere,  then  of  greater 
light,  of  vegetation,  of  marine  animals  and  huge 
reptiles,  of  birds,  of  beasts,  and  lastly  of  man. 
(See  Kurtz,  Vol.  i.  p.  xxvii.  sq.,  Hugh  Miller, 
‘ Test,  of  Rocks,’  passim,  &c.)  In  the  present 
condition  of  geological  science,  and  with  the 
great  obscurity  of  the  record  of  creation  in 
this  chapter,  it  may  be  wise  not  to  attempt 
an  accurate  comparison  of  the  one  with  the 
other.  Some  few  jwints,  however,  seem 
clearly  to  come  out.  In  Genesis,  first  of  all, 
creation  is  spoken  of  as  “in  the  beginning,”  a 
period  of  indefinite,  possibly  of  most  remote 
distance  in  the  past;  secondly,  the  progress  of 
the  preparation  of  the  earth's  surface  is  de- 
scribed as  gradually  advancing  from  the  rocks 
to  the  vegetable  world,  and  the  less  perfectly 
organised  animal  creation,  then  gradually 


All  this  was  accompanied  at  first  with  perfect 
purity  and  innocence ; and  thus  man  was  like 
his  Maker,  intelligent,  immortal,  personal,  with 
powers  of  forethought  and  free  choice,  and 
at  the  same  time  pure,  holy  and  undefiled. 


On  the  Days  of  Creation. 

mounting  up  through  birds  and  mammals, 
till  it  culminates  in  man.  This  is  the  course 
of  creation  as  popularly  described  in  Genesis, 
and  the  rocks  give  their  testimony,  at  least  in 
the  general,  to  the  same  order  and  progress. 
The  chief  difference,  if  any,  of  the  two  wit- 
nesses would  s'eem  to  be,  that  the  Rocks  speak 
of  (i)  marine  plants,  (2)  marine  animals,  (3) 
land  plants,  (4)  land  animals  in  their  succes- 
sive developements ; whereas  Moses  speaks  of 
(i)  plants,  (2)  marine  animals,  (3)  land  ani- 
mals; a difference  not  amounting  to  diver- 
gence. As  physiology  must  have  been  nearly 
and  geology  wholly  unknown  to  the 'Semi- 
tic nations  of  antiquity,  such  a general  cor- 
respondence of  sacred  history  with  modern 
science  is  surely  more  striking  and  import- 
ant than  any  apparent  difference  in  details. 
Efforts  have  been  made  to  compare  the  In- 
dian cosmogony  with  the  Biblical,  which 
utterly  fail.  The  cosmogony  of  the  Hindoos 
is  thoroughly  adapted  to  their  Pantheistic 
Theology,  the  Hebrew  corresponding  with 
the  pure  personal  Monotheism  of  the  Old 
Testament.  The  only  important  resemblance 
of  any  ancient  cosmogony  with  the  Scriptural 
account  is  to  be  found  in  the  Persian  or  Zo- 
roastrian ; which  is  most  naturally  accounted 
for,  first  by  the  fact,  which  will  be  noticed 
hereafter,  that  the  Persians,  of  all  people,  ex- 
cept the  Hebrews,  were  the  most  likely  to 
have  retained  the  memory  of  primitive  tradi- 
tions, and  secondly,  that  Zoroaster  was  pro- 
bably brought  into  contact  with  the  Hebrews, 
and  perhaps  with  the  prophet  Daniel  in  the 
court  of  Darius,  and  may  have  learned  muen 
from  such  association. 


V.  1—4.] 


GENESIS.  11. 


37 


CHAPTER  II. 

I The  first  sabbath.  4 The  manner  of  the  crea- 
tion. 8 The  planting  of  the  garden  of  Eden, 
10  and  the  river  thereof.  17  The  tree  of 
knowledge  only  forbidden.  19,  20  The  na7n- 
iug  of  the  creaiiii'es.  2 r The  making  of  wo- 
man, and  mstitution  of  ma^'riage. 

Thus  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
v/ere  finished,  and  all  the  host 
of  them. 


2 "And  on  the  seventh  day  God  « Exod. 
ended  his  work  which  he  had  made;  ^ 
and  he  rested  on  the  seventh  day  from  ^ 
all  his  work  which  he  had  made.  Heb.  4.  4. 

3 And  God  blessed  the  seventh  day, 

and  sanctified  it:  because  that  in  it 
he  had  rested  from  all  his  work  which 
God  ^created  and  made.  Hieb. 

4 ^ These  are  the  generations  o^Ziake^^° 


Chap.  II.  3.  And  God  blessed  the  seoeenth 
day'\  The  natural  interpretation  of  these  words 
is  that  the  blessing  of  the  Sabbath  was  imme- 
diately consequent  on  the  first  creation  of  man, 
for  whom  the  Sabbath  was  made  (Mar.  ii.  27). 
It  has  been  argued  from  the  silence  concerning 
its  observance  by  the  patriarchs,  that  no  Sab- 
batic ordinance  was  really  given  until  the 
promulgation  of  the  Law,  and  that  this  pas- 
sage in  Genesis  is  not  historical  but  anticipatory. 
There  are  several  objections,  which  seem  fatal 
to  this  theory.  It  is  first  to  be  observed,  that 
this  verse  forms  an  integral  part  of  that  history 
of  the  creation,  which,  if  there  be  any  truth 
in  the  distinction,  is  the  oldest  portion  of  the 
Pentateuch,  the  work  of  the  Elohist,  very 
possibly  handed  down  from  the  earliest  ages 
of  the  world,  and  taken  by  Moses  as  the  very 
groundwork  of  his  inspired  narrative.  Second- 
ly, the  history  of  the  patriarchs  extending 
over  at  least  2500  years  is  all  contained  in  the 
book  of  Genesis,  and  many  things  must  have 
been  omitted,  much  more  memorable  than 
the  fact  of  their  resting  on  the  Sabbath,  which 
in  their  simple  pastoral  life  would  seldom  have 
called  for  special  notice.  Thirdly,  there  are 
indications  even  in  Genesis  of  a division  of 
days  into  weeks  or  hebdomades.  Thus  Noah 
is  said  twice  to  have  waited  seven  days,  when 
sending  the  dove  out  of  the  ark,  Gen.  viii. 
10,  12.  And  the  division  of  time  into  weeks 
is  clearly  recognized  in  the  history  of  Jacob, 
Gen.  xxix.  27,  28.  The  same  hebdomadal 
division  was  known  to  other  nations,  who  are 
not  likely  to  have  borrowed  it  from  the 
I sraelites  after  the  time  of  the  Exodus.  M ore- 
over,  it  appears  that,  before  the  giving  of 
the  commandments  from  Mount  Sinai,  the 
Israelites  were  acquainted  with  the  law  of  the 
Sabbath.  In  Ex.  xvi.  5 a double  portion  of 
manna  is  promised  on  the  sixth  day,  that 
none  need  be  gathered  on  the  Sabbath.  This 
has  all  the  appearance  of  belonging  to  an 
acknowledged,  though  perhaps  neglected,  or- 
dinance of  Divine  Service,  not  as  if  then  for 
the  first  time  the  Sabbath  were  ordained  and 
consecrated.  The  simple  meaning  of  the  text 
is  theretore  by  far  the  most  probable,  viz. 
that  God,  having  divided  His  own  great  work 
into  six  portions,  assigned  a special  sacredness 
to  the  seventh  on  which  that  work  became 


complete;  and  that,  having  called  man  into 
being.  He  ordained  him  for  labour,  but  yet 
in  love  and  mercy  appointed  that  one-seventh 
of  his  time  should  be  given  to  rest  and  to  the 
religious  service  of  his  Maker.  This  truth  is 
repeated  in  the  ivth  Commandment,  Ex.  xx. 
1 1 ; though  there  was  a second  and  special 
reason  why  the  Jews  should  observe  the 
Sabbath  day,  Deut.  v.  15 : and  very  probably 
the  special  cjay  of  the  seven,  which  became 
the  Jewish  Sabbath,  was  the  very  day  on  which 
the  Lord  brought  them  from  the  land  of 
bondage,  and  gave  them  rest  from  the  slavery 
of  Egypt.  If  this  reasoning  be  true,  all  man- 
kind are  interested  in  the  sanctification  of  the 
Sabbath,  though  Jews  only  are  required  to 
keep  that  Sabbath  on  the  Saturday;  and  not 
only  has  it  been  felt  by  Divines  that  the 
religious  rest  of  the  seventh  day  is  needful  for 
the  preservation  of  the  worship  of  God,  but 
it  has  been  acknowleged  even  by  statesmen 
and  physiologists  that  the  ordinance  is  invalu- 
able for  the  physical  and  moral  benefit  of 
mankind.  The  truly  merciful  character  of 
the  ordinance  is  fully  developed  in  the  Law, 
where  it  is  extended  not  only  to  the  man- 
servant and  maidservant,  but  to  the  ox  and 
the  ass  and  the  cattle,  that  they  also  should 
rest  with  their  masters,  Ex.  xx.  10,  Deut.  v.  14. 

^hich  God  created  and  made\  Lit.  “which 
God  created  to  make.”  So  the  Targum 
of  Onkelos  and  the  Syriac  version  render  it. 
The  Vulgate  has  “which  God  created  that 
He  might  make  it.”  Ofi  the  difference 
between  the  verbs  create  and  make  see  on 
ch.  i.  I.  The  natural  meaning  of  the  words 
here  is,  that  God  first  created  the  material 
universe,  “the  heavens  and  the  earth,”  and 
then  made,  moulded  and  fashioned  the  new 
created  matter  into  its  various  forms  and 
organisms.  This  is  the  explanation  of  the 
R.  Nachmanides,  “all  His  work  which  He 
had  created  out  of  nothing,  in  order  that  He 
might  make  out  of  it  all  the  works  which 
are  recorded  in  the  six  days.”  (Quoted  by 
Fagius,  ‘Grit.  Sacri.’) 

4.  These  are  the  generations,  &c.]  The 
Jews  tell  us,  that,  when  these  vv'ords  occur 
without  the  copulative  and,  they  separate  the 
words  following  from  those  preceding,  but 


38 


GENESIS.  II. 


the  heavens  and  of  the  earth  when 
they  were  created,  in  the  dav  that  the 
Lord  God  made  the  earth  and  the 
heayens, 


[V.  S- 

5 And  every  plant  of  the  held  be- 
fore it  was  in  the  earth,  and  every 
herb  of  the  field  before  it  grew:  for 
the  Lord  God  had  not  caused  it  to 


that  when  they  have  the  and^  then  they  unite 
with  the  preceding.  It  is  apparent,  that  the 
narrative  proceeds  in  direct  order  fioni  Gen. 
i.  I to  this  verse,  ii.  4,  and  that  from  tliis 
verse  there  is  a return  to  the  first  formation 
of  plants  and  vegetables  and  to  the  creation 
of  man,  a kind  of  recapitulation,  yet  with 
some  appearance  of  diversity.  This  has  been 
noticed  long  ago.  In  the  17th  century  (1655) 
Is.  Peyreyrius  wrote  a book  to  prove,  that 
the  account  of  the  creation  of  man  in  ch.  i. 
related  to  a pre-Adamite  race,  from  which 
sprang  a great  majority  of  the  Gentiles, 
whereas  the  account  in  ch.  ii.  was  of  the 
creation  of  Adam,  the  direct  ancestor  of  the 
Israelites  and  of  the  nations  in  some  degree 
related  to  them.  The  book  was  condemned 
and  suppressed.  Some  modern  writers  have 
more  or  less  embraced  its  views,  but  it  seems 
that  the  whole  Bible,  both  Old  and  New 
I'estament,  refers  to  Adam  as  the  head  of  the 
whole  human  race,  so  that,  if  pre- Adamite 
man  existed  at  all,  the  race  must  probably  have 
been  extinguished  before  Adam  was  created. 
Moreover,  ch.  ii.  4 sqq.  is  evidently  a conti- 
nuation of  ch.  i.,  although  there  is  a return 
or  recapitulation  in  vv.  4,  5,  6,  7,  in  order  to 
prepare  the  way  for  an  account  of  Paradise 
and  the  fall.  See  note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

The  word  “generations,”  toledoth^  which 
occurs  for  the  first  time  in  this  verse,  meets 
us  again  continually  at  the  head  of  every  prin- 
cipal section  of  the  Book  of  Genesis.  Thus 
ch.  V.  I,  we  have  “ the  book  (or  account)  of 
the  generations  of  Adam,”  in  which  the  de- 
scendants of  Adam  are  traced  to  Noah.  From 
ch.  vi.  9 we  have  the  generations  of  Noah, 
where  the  history  of  Noah  and  his  sons  is 
given.  In  ch.  x.i  we  come  upon  the  generations 
of  the  sons  of  Noah,  where  the  genealogical 
table  and  the  history  of  the  descendants  of 
Shem,  Ham,  and  Japhet  are  recorded.  Ch. 
xi.  (10  — 26)  gives  us  the  generations  (or 
genealogical  table)  of  Shem.  Ch.  xi.  27  be- 
gins the  generations  of  Terah,  the  father  of 
Abram.  Ch.  xxv.  12  gives  us  the  generations 
of  Ishmael.  Ch.  xxv.  19  the  generations  of 
Isaac.  Ch.  xxxvi.  i,  the  generations  of  Esau; 
xxxvii.  2,  the  generations  of  Jacob,  which  are 
continued  to  the  end  of  the  bouk. 

The  word  itself  naturally  signifies  the  gene- 
ration or  posterity  of  any  one.  It  is  used  in 
general  to  usher  in  a history  of  the  race  or 
descendant  of  the  heads  of  the  great  patri- 
archal families.  The  application  of  the  word 
here  is  very  appropriate.  The  primary  crea- 
tion of  all  things  liail  just  been  recorded  ; tlie 


sacred  writer  is  about  to  describe  more  in  de- 
tail the  results  of  creation.  The  world  had 
been  made ; next  comes  a history  of  its  na- 
tural productions,  its  plants  and  trees,  and 
chief  inhabitants.  And  as  the  history  of  a 
man’s  family  is  called  the  “book  of  his  gene- 
rations,” so  the  history  of  the  world's  produc- 
tions is  called  “ the  generations  of  the  heavens 
and  the  earth.” 

‘when  they  were  created]  By  these  words 
the  inspired  writer  reveals  the  truth  set 
forth  in  the  former  chapter,  that  heaven 
and  earth  were  creatures  of  God,  “ the  gene- 
rations” referring  to  what  is  to  come  after, 
not  to  what  preceded,  as  though  the  universe 
had  sprung  from  generation  or  natural  produc- 
tion. 

the  Lord  God]  It  has  long  ago  been 
observed  that  the  sacred  name  JEHOVAH 
occurs  for  the  first  time  here  in  verse  4.  The 
Jews  give  as  a reason,  that  the  works  being 
now  perfected,  the  perfect  name  of  God,  “the 
Lord  God,”  is  for  the  first  time  adopted.  It 
seems  most  probable,  that  the  sacred  writer, 
having  in  the  first  chapter  recorded  the  crea- 
tion as  the  act  of  God,  giving  to  Him  then 
His  generic  name  as  the  Supreme  Being,  now 
passes  to  the  more  personal  history  of  man  and 
his  immediate  relation  to  his  Maker,  and  there- 
fore introduces  the  more  personal  name  of 
God,  the  name  by  which  He  became  afterwards 
known  to  the  patriarchs,  as  their  God.  The 
union  of  the  two  names  JEHOVAH  Elohim 
throughout  chapters  ii.  iii.  is  singularly  ap- 
propriate, as  indicating  that  the  Elohim  of  the 
first  chapter  is  the  same  as  the  JEHOVAH 
who  appears  afterwards  in  the  fourth  chap- 
ter, and  from  time  to  time  throughout  the 
history.  On  the  names  of  God  and  the  docu- 
ments in  Genesis,  see  Introduction  to  Genesis. 

5.  And  e'very  plant  of  tlx  feld]  So  the 
LXX.  and  the  Vulg.  But  the  Targums,  the 
Syr.,  Rashi,  and  the  most  distinguished  mo- 
dern Hebraists,  such  as  Rosenmulier,  Gese- 
nius,  &c.,  translate,  “Now  no  plant  of 
the  field  was  yet  in  the  earth,  and 
no  herb  of  the  field  had  yet  sprout- 
ed forth;  for  the  LORD  God  had  not 
caused  it  to  rain  upon  the  earth, 
and  there  was  not  a man  to  till  the 
ground.*' 

It  was  objected  long  ago,  and  the  objection 
is  repeated  with  all  its  force  by  the  German 
critics  of  the  day,  that  this  is  opposed  to 
ch.  i.  II,  where  we  read,  “ God  said,  Let  the 
eartii  bring  forth  grass,”  See.  Hence  it  is 


V.  6 — 8.] 


GENESIS.  II. 


39 


rain  upon  the  earth,  and  there  was  not 
a man  to  till  the  ground. 
nOr,  6 But  II there  went  up  a mist  from 

V/iiJi  the  earth,  and  watered  the  whole  face 
/rom%c  ground. 

7 And  the  Lord  God  formed  man 


the  ‘^dust  of  the  ground,  and  breath-  t iieb. 
ed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life ; 
and  “"man  became  a living  soul.  15. 

8 ^ And  the  Lord  God  planted  a^^iCor. 
garden  eastward  in  Eden ; and  there 
he  put  the  man  whom  he  had  formed. 


inferred  tliat  the  first  and  second  chapters 
constituted  two  independent  and  contradic- 
tory traditions,  clumsily  put  together  by  the 
compiler  of  Genesis.  The  difficulty  had  been 
anticipated  by  R Nachman,  who  observes, 
that  this  passage  does  not  refer  to  the  pro- 
duce of  the  earth  created  on  the  third  day, 
but  to  those  herbs  and  plants,  which  are  raised 
by  the  cultivation  of  man.  L.  de  Dieu  also 
(‘  Critica  Sacr.’  in  loc.)  notices,  that  the  words 
rendered  plants  field  and  gre-zv^  never  occur  in 
the  first  chapter,  they  are  terms  expressive 
of  the  produce  of  labour  and  cultivation  ; so 
that  the  historian  evidently  means,  that  no 
cultivated  land  and  no  vegetables  fit  for  the 
use  of  man  were  yet  in  existence  on  the  earth. 

the  Lord  God  had  not  caused  it  to  rain 
upon  the  earthy  and  there  zvas  not  a man  to  till 
the  ground.  (6).  But  there  zuent  up  a mist^ 
&c.]  It  is  objected  here  also,  that  the  first 
chapter  speaks  of  the  earth  as  enveloped  in 
waters  and  vapours,  and  that  there  could 
therefore  have  been  no  lack  of  rain  and  mois- 
ture. The  inconsistency  is  again  more  appa- 
rent than  real.  In  the  first  place,  the  mist,  or 
vapour,  or  cloud,  here  mentioned  as  watering 
the  ground,  may  perhaps  tally  well  with  that 
watery  condition  of  the  atmosphere,  of  which 
we  read  in  ch.  i.  But  next,  the  purpose  of 
ch.  ii.  is  to  give  an  account,  not  of  the  crea- 
tion or  adaptation  of  the  whole  earth,  but  of 
the  preparation  of  a special  chosen  spot  for 
the  early  abode  of  man.  That  spot  may  have 
been  in  a region  where  little  or  no  rain  fell, 
and  which  derived  all  its  moisture  from  va- 
pours or  dews.  It  may  not  have  been  wholly 
Avithout  vegetation,  but  it  was  not  a culti- 
vated field ; no  herbs,  or  shrubs,  or  fruit- 
trees  fitted  for  man’s  use  grew  there;  no  rain 
was  wont  to  fall  there  (as  some  render  it, 
“not  even  a mist  went  up  to  water  the 
ground,”  or  more  probably),  “ yet  there  went 
u[)  a mist  and  watered  the  whole  face  of  the 
ground.”  When  the  Creator  made  Adam, 
that  he  might  not  wander  about  a helpless 
savage,  but  that  he  might  have  a habitation 
suited  to  civilized  life,  a garden  or  cultivated 
field  was  planted  for  him,  provided  with  such 
vegetable  produce  as  was  best  adapted  to  his 
comforts  and  wants. 


is  said  to  have  created  man  in  His  own  image, 
because  the  production  of  a rational,  personal, 
responsible  being  clothed  with  a m.aterial 
body  was  a new  creation.  Spiritual  beings 
existed  before;  animal  natures  had  been  called 
forth  from  earth  and  sea ; man  had  an  animal 
nature  like  the  beasts,  but  his  spiritual  nature 
was  in  the  likeness  of  his  Maker.  So  in  this 
chapter  again  the  Creator  is  described  as 
forming  man  from  the  earth,  and  then  breath- 
ing into  him  a living  principle.  It  is  probably 
not  intended  that  the  language  should  be  phi- 
losophically accurate,  but  it  clearly  expresses 
that  man's  bodily  substance  was  composed 
of  earthly  elements,  whilst  the  life  breathed 
by  God  into  his  nostrils  plainly  distinguishes 
that  life  from  the  life  of  all  inferior  animals. 
All  animals  have  the  body,  all  the  living  soul, 
ch.  i.  20,  21,  but  the  breath  of  life,  breathed 
into  the  nostrils  by  God  Himself,  is  said  of 
man  alone.  Cp.  “the  body,  soul  and  spirit” 
of  ancient  philosophy  and  of  the  Apostle 
Paul. 

See  note  A at  the  end  of  this  chapter. 

8.  a garden']  The  versions  render  a 
Paradise^  which  is  a Persian  word,  signifying 
rather  a park  than  a garden,  pleasure  grounds 
laid  out  with  shrubs  and  trees. 

in  Eden]  The  word  Eden  signifies  de- 
light, and  the  Vulgate  renders  a garden  of 
delight.,  a pleasure  garden ; but  the  word  is  a 
proper  name,  and  points  to  a region,  the  extent 
of  which  is  unknown.  Two  countries  are 
mentioned  in  Scripture  with  the  same  name, 
viz.,  one  in  Mesopotamia  near  the  Tigris, 
2 K.  xix.  12,  Is.  xxxvii.  12,  Ez.  xxvii.  2j; 
the  other  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Damascus, 
Amos  i.  5 ; but  neither  of  these  can  be  iden- 
tified with  the  region  in  which  Pai'adise  was 
placed.  Much  has  been  written  on ‘the  site 
of  Paradise,  but  with  no  very  definite  result. 
The  difficulty  consists  in  discovering  the  four 
rivers  mentioned  in  vv.  ii,  12,  13,  14.  It  is 
generally  agreed  that  one,  Phrath  (v.  14)  is  the 
Euphrates,  and  that  another,  Hiddekel,  is  the 
Tigris,  and  so  it  is  rendered  by  all  the  ancient 
VSS.  The  name  of  the  Tigris  in  Chaldee  is 
Diglath,  in  Syriac  Diklath,  in  Arabic  Dijlat, 
all  closely  corresponding  with  Hiddekel,  and 
from  one  of  them  the  word  Tigris  itself  is 
probably  a corruption.  The  following  are 
the  principal  opinions  as  to  the  names  of  the 
other  rivers,  and  consequently  as  to  the  site 
of  Paradise. 


7.  ylnd  the  Lord  God  formed  man  of  the 
dust  of  the  ground.,  8:0.]  Here  again,  as  in  i.  26, 
27,  the  formation  of  man  is  ascribed  to  the 
direct  workmanship  of  God.  In  ch.  i.  God 


40 


GENESIS.  11. 


[v.  9. 


9 And  out  of  the  ground  made  the  food:  the  tree  of  life  also  in  the  midst 
Lord  God  to  grow  every  tree  that  of  the  garden,  and  the  tree  of  know- 
is  pleasant  to  the  sight,  and  good  for  ledge  of  good  and  evil. 


1.  Josephus  identified  the  Gihon  with  the 
Nile. 

2.  Calvin,  Huet,  Rochart,  and  others  be- 
lieved the  river  of  Paradise  to  have  been  the 
united  streams  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates 
called  the  Shat-el-Arab,  which  flows  by  Bas- 
sora.  Its  four  heads,  on  their  shewing,  would 
have  been,  on  the  north,  the  two  separate 
streams  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  on  the 
south,  Gihon,  the  eastern,  and  Pison,  the 
western  channels,  into  which  the  united  stream 
again  branches  out  below  Bassora,  before  it 
falls  into  the  sea.  Havilah  would  then  be  the 
north-eastern  part  of  Arabia,  and  Cush  the 
region  of  Kissia,  Susiana  or  Chuzestan.  A 
general  exposition  of  this  view  may  be  found 
in  Wells,  ‘ Geog.  of  the  O.  T.,’  ch.  i. 

3.  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Rosenmuller,  and  Karl 
Von  Raumer,  who  appear  to  be  followed  by 
Kurt/,,  identify  Eden  with  the  Armenian 
highlands,  making  Pison  to  be  the  Phasis  or 
A raxes,  and  Gihon  to  be  the  Oxus,  Havilah 
is  with  them  the  country  of  the  Chwalissi, 
which  is  said  even  now  to  be  called  by  the 
Russians  Chwaliskoje  More. 

4.  Heidegger  believed  that  Eden  was  a 
portion  of  the  Holy  Land. 

5.  Others  again  find  the  site  in  India  or 
Circassia. 

Of  these  ofwnions  No.  i is  utterly  untena- 
ble. Tlie  identification  of  Gihon  with  the 
Nile  probably  originated  with  the  Alexandrian 
Jews,  who  for  the  honour  of  their  country 
would  have  had  the  Nile  to  be  one  of  the 
rivers  of  Paradise.  This  was  confirmed  by 
the  mistranslation  of  Cush  into  Ethiopia.  It 
is  impossible,  however,  setting  aside  all  ques- 
tions of  inspiration,  that  one  so  familiar  with 
Egyjrt  as  tlie  writer  of  Genesis  should  have 
conceived  of  the  Nile  as  connected  with  the 
I'igris  and  Euphrates.  See  Kurt/,  ‘ Hist,  of 
Old  Covenant’  (Clark’s  Library),  Vol.  i.  p.  73. 

No.  2 has  the  advantage  of  pointing  to  a 
single  river,  which  might  in  primitive  times 
have  been  described  as  branching  out  into 
four  divisions  or  heads.  Moreover,  Arabia,  in 
which  certainly  was  a region  called  Havilah,  is 
near  to  the  western  channel,  whilst  Chu/estan, 
which  may  have  corresponded  with  the  land 
of  Cush,  borders  on  the  eastern  channel. 

'I'he  chief  dilhculty  in  No.  3 is  that  at  pre- 
sent there  is  no  junction  between  the  heads 
of  the  four  rivers,  'I'igris,  Euphrates,  Oxus, 
and  A raxes,  though  all  may  take  their  rise  in 
the  same  mountain  system,  and  may  possibly 
in  more  ancient  times  have  been  more  nearly 
related.  'I'he  (luestion  is  one  which  has  been 
mvich  discussed,  and  is  not  likely  soon  to  be 
set  at  rest : but  the  weight  of  argument  and 


of  authority  seems  in  favour  of  No.  2,  or 
something  nearly  corresponding  with  it ; and 
it  is  the  solution  (more  or  less)  adopted  by  the 
best  modern  interpreters. 

9.  made  the  Lord  God  to  We 

must  understand  this  of  the  trees  of  Paradise 
only. 

the  tree  of  life  also  in  the  midst  of  the 
garden']  Jewish  and  many  Christian  com- 
mentators consider  that  there  was  a virtue  in 
this  tree,  which  was  calculated  to  preser\'e 
from  diseases  and  to  perpetuate  animal  life. 
Kennicott  (‘Two  Dissertat.’  Diss.  i.)  argued 
that  the  word  “tree”  is  a noun  of  number, 
whether  in  the  Hebrew  or  the  Greek  (comp. 
Rev.  xxii.  2),  and  that  all  the  trees  of  Para- 
dise, except  the  tree  of  knowledge,  “the  true 
test  of  good  and  evil,”  were  trees  of  life,  in 
the  eating  of  which,  if  man  had  not  sinned, 
his  life  would  have  been  perpetuated  continu- 
ally. The  fathers  inclined  to  the  belief  that 
the  life  to  be  supported  by  this  tree  was  a 
spiritual  life.  So  St  Augustine  (‘  De  Gen.  ad 
lit.’  VIII.  4)  says,  “ In  other  trees  there  was 
nourishment  for  Adam ; but  in  this  a s:icra- 
ment,”  i.e.  The  tree  was  a sacrament  or  mys- 
tic image  of,  and  perhaps  also  supporting,  life 
eternal.  Its  reference,  not  to  temporal,  but 
to  eternal  life,  seems  to  be  implied  in  Gen.  iii. 
22.  In  Prov.  iii.  18,  Wisdom  is  compared  to 
the  tree  of  life:  and  in  Prov.  xiii.  12,  we  read, 
“ When  the  desire  cometh,  it  is  a tree  of 
life,”  which  connects  it  with  the  hope  of  the 
future.  And  so  perhaps  we  may  say  pretty 
confidently,  that  whatever  was  the  physical 
effect  of  the  fruit  of  this  tree,  there  was  a les- 
son contained  in  it,  that  life  is  to  be  sought 
by  man,  not  from  within,  from  himself,  in 
his  own  powers  or  faculties,  but  from  that 
which  is  without  him,  even  from  Him  who 
only  hath  life  in  Himself.  God  only  hath 
life  in  Himself;  and  the  Son  of  God,  who  by 
eternal  generation  from  the  Father  hath  it 
given  to  Him  to  have  life  in  Himself,  was 
tyjfified  to  Adam  under  this  figure  as  “the 
Author  of  eternal  salvation.”  Joh.  i.  4,  xiv. 
6,  Rev.  ii.  7,  xxii.  2 (see  Fagius  in  loc.  and 
Heidegger,  ‘ Hist.  Patriarch.’  Exerc.  iv.). 

the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil] 
Onkelos  paraphrases,  “of  the  fruit  of  which 
they  who  eat  learn  to  distinguish  between 
good  and  evil.”  The  tree  appears  to  have 
been  the  test,  whether  man  would  be  good 
or  bad;  by  it  the  trial  was  made  whether 
in  keeping  God’s  commandments  he  would 
attain  to  good,  i.e.  to  eternal  life,  or  by 
breaking  them  he  should  have  evil,  i.e.  eter- 


V.  lO — 17.] 


GENESIS.  II 


41 


10  And  a river  went  out  of  Eden  to 
water  the  garden ; and  from  thence 
it  was  parted,  and  became  into  four 
heads. 

rfEccUts.  1 1 The  name  of  the  first  is  “^Pison : 

24-  29.  compasseth  the  whole 

land  of  Havilah,  where  there  is  gold; 

12  And  the  gold  of  that  land  is 
good;  there  is  bdellium  and  the  onyx 
stone. 

13  And  the  name  of  the  second 
river  is  Gihon  : the  same  is  it  that 

Cil/i  compasseth  the  whole  land  of  Tthiopia. 


14  And  the  name  of  the  third  ri/er 
is  Hiddekel : that  is  it  which  goeth 

•I  toward  the  east  of  Assyria.  And  the  n Or, 
fourth  river  is  Euphrates. 

15  And  the  Lord  God  took  lithe  11  or, 
man,  and  put  him  into  the  garden 
Eden  to  dress  it  and  to  keep  it. 

16  And  the  Lord  God  command- 
ed the  man,  saying.  Of  every  tree 
of  the  garden  ^ thou  mayest  freely 

eat ; ^/lou  skait 

17  But  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil,  thou  shalt  not  eat  of 


nal  death.  The  lesson  seems  to  be,  that  man 
should  not  seek  to  learn  what  is  good  and 
evil  from  himself  but  from  God  only;  that 
he  should  not  set  up  an  independent:  search 
for  more  knowledge  than  is  fitting,  throwing 
off  the  yoke  of  ob-edience  and  constituting 
himself  the  judge  of  good  and  ill.  Some  have 
thought  that  the  tree  had  not  this  name  from 
the  first,  but  that  it  was  given  it  after  the 
temptation  and  the  fall,  either  because  the 
tempter  had  pretended  that  it  would  give 
wisdom,  or  because  Adam  and  Eve,  after 
they  had  eaten  of  it,  knew  by  bitter  experi- 
ence the  difference  between  good  and  evil. 

12.  bdellium']  a transparent  gum  obtained 
from  a tree  (Borassus  Jiabelliformis)  which 
grows  in  Arabia,  India,  and  Media  (Plin.  ‘H. 
N.’  XII.  9.  § 19).  This  is  the  translation  of 
Aqu.,  Symm.,  Theod.,  Vulg. : Josephus  and 
many  moderns,  as  Celsius  (‘Hierob.’  i.  324), 
Cleric,  in  loc.  adoptit.  The  LX  X.  renders  “the 
carbuncle;*’  the  Arabic,  “sardius;”  Kimchi, 
Grotius,  Bochart,  Gesenius,  and  others,  with 
great  probability  take  it  to  mean  “ pearls,” 
of  which  great  abundance  was  found  in  India 
and  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  this  falls  in  well 
with  Bochart’s  belief,  that  Havilah  bordered 
on  the  Persian  Gulf.  It  appears  far  more 
probable  that  it  should  mean  either  pearls  or 
some  precious  stone  than  a gum  like  bdellium, 
which  is  of  no  great  value. 

the  onyx]  Most  of  the  versions  give  “onyx” 
or  “ sardonyx;”  Onkelos  has  “ beryl.” 

13.  Ethiopia]  Cush,  This  is  a word  of 
wide  extent.  It  generally  belongs  either  to 
Arabia  or  to  Ethiopia.  From  Gen.  x.  7 sqq. 
it  will  appear  how  widely  the  sons  of  Cush 
spread  forth : their  first  settlement  appears  to 
have  been  in  Arabia.  Nimrod  founded  the 
kingdom  of  Babylon.  Afterwards  they  set- 
tled largely  in  Ethiopia.  In  the  more  an- 
cient books  of  Scripture,  the  Asiatic  Cush  is 
more  frecpiently,  perhaps  exclusively,  intend- 
ed. Later  the  name  applies  more  commonly 


to  African  Cush,  i.e.  Ethiopia. 

14.  toward  the  east  of  Assyria]  The 
name  Asshur  included  Babylonia,  and  even 
Persia:  see  E/ravi.  22,  where  Darius  is  called 
King  of  Assyria:  but  in  the  time  of  Moses 
probably  Assyria  proper  would  be  under- 
stood, a region  of  low  land  on  the  left  bank 
of  the  Tigris,  perhaps  only  including  the 
country  afteiwards  called  Adiabene.  It  is 
hardly  correct  to  say,  that  the  Tigris  runs 
“to  the  East  of  Assyria.”  Perhaps  the  ren- 
derings in  some  of  the  versions  “towards”  or 
“before  Assyria”  may  be  correct. 

17.  thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it]  It  has  been 
questioned  why  such  a test  as  this  should 
have  been  given ; whether  it  be  consistent  with 
God’s  goodness  to  create  a sin  by  making  an 
arbitrary  enactment;  and  how  “the  act  of 
eating  a little  fruit  from  a tree  could  be 
visited  with  so  severe  a penalty.”  But  we 
may  notice  that  if  there  was  to  be  any  trial 
of  man’s  obedience  in  Paradise,  some  special 
test  was  almost  necessary.  His  condition  of 
simple  innocence  and  happiness,  with  no  dis- 
order in  the  constitution  of  his  body  or  in 
the  affections  of  his  soul,  offered  no  natural 
temptations  to  sin.  Adam  and  Eve  had  none 
but  each  other  and  their  Creator  near  them; 
and  they  could  have  had  no  natural  inclina- 
tion to  sin  against  God  or  against  their  neigh- 
bour. If  we  take  the  ten  Commandments 
as  the  type  of  the  moral  law,  we  shall  find 
none  that  in  their  state  of  healthy  innocence 
they  could  naturally  desire  to  break  (see  Jo- 
seph Mede,  Bk.  i.  Disc.  40).  Their  position 
was  one  of  freedom  indeed,  but  of  depend- 
ence. Their  only  danger  was  that  they 
should  prefer  independence  upon  God,  and 
so  seek  for  themselves  freedom  in  the  direc- 
tion of  evil  as  well  as  in  the  direction  of 
good;  and  the  renouncing  dependence  upon 
God  is  the  very  essence  of  evil  in  the  crea- 
ture. Now  the  command  concerning  the 
fruit  ()f  the  tree,  simple  and  childish  as  it  may 
appear,  was  one  exactly  suited  to  their  sim- 


42 


GENESIS.  II. 


[V.  18—23. 


f Heb. 
dyiiii^  tJiou 
sluiit  die. 


e Ecclus. 


> ncD. 

as  before 
him. 


nOr, 
the  man. 


tHeb. 

called. 


it:  for  in  the  day  that  thou  eatest 
thereof  ^ thou  shalt  surely  die. 

18  H And  the  Lord  God  said,  It 
is  not  good  that  the  man  should  be 
alone ; I will  make  ‘'him  an  help  ^ meet 
for  him. 

19  And  out  of  the  ground  the  Lord 
God  formed  every  beast  of  the  field, 
and  every  fowl  of  the  air;  and  brought 
them  unto  I'Adam  to  see  what  he  would 
call  them  : and  whatsoever  Adam  call- 
ed every  living  creature,  that  was  the 
name  thereof. 

20  And  Adam  ^gave  names  to  all 
cattle,  and  to  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and 


to  every  beast  of  the  field;  but  for 
Adam  there  was  not  found  an  help 
meet  for  him. 

21  And  the  Lord  God  caused  a 
deep  sleep  to  fall  upon  Adam,  and  he 
slept:  and  he  took  one  of  his  ribs, 
and  closed  up  the  flesh  instead  thereof; 

22  And  the  rib,  which  the  Lord 
God  had  taken  from  man,  ^ made  he  t Heb. 
a woman,  and  brought  her  unto  the 
man. 


23  And  Adam  said.  This  is  now 
bone  of  my  bones,  and  flesh  of  my 
flesh:  she  shall  be  called  Woman, 
because  she  was  ^taken  out  of  man. 


f 1 Cor.  II, 

8. 


pie  and  childlike  state.  Moreover  it  is  not 
inconsistent  with  God's  general  dealings  with 
mankind,  that  he  should  at  times  see  fit  to 
test  faith  and  obedience  by  special  and  un- 
usual trials.  Compare  Gen.  xxii.  i,  Matt, 
xix.  21. 

thou  shalt  surely  die']  St  Jerome  (‘  Qu. 
in  Gen.’)  proposes  to  adopt  the  translation  of 
Symmachus,  “Thou  shalt  become  mortal  or 
liable  to  death.”  It  is  needless  so  to  trans- 
late, but  the  meaning  of  the  threat  probably 
was  that  the  effect  of  eating  of  the  fruit  of 
that  tree  should  be  to  poison  the  whole  man, 
soul  and  body,  with  a deadly  poison,  making 
the  body  mortal,  and  the  soul  “dead  in  tres- 
passes and  sins.”  With  the  day  of  trans- 
gression a life  commences,  which  is  a living 
death.  St  Paul  uses  the  expression,  “ Death 
worketh  in  us.”  There  was,  however,  doubt- 
less some  remission  of  the  sentence,  so  that 
they  did  not  die  instantly,  as  was  the  case 
with  the  Ninevites  (Jonah  hi.  10);  and  then 
a remedy  was  provided  which  might  ultimate- 
ly turn  the  curse  into  a blessing.  Still  the 
sentence  was  never  wholly  reversed,  but  the 
penalty  took  effect  at  once. 

19.  the  Lord  God  formed]  The  account 
of  the  formation  of  the  brute  animals  here 
does  not,  as  some  have  supposed,  necessarily 
imply  that  they  were  created  after  Adam; 
but  it  is  introductory  to  the  bringing  them 
one  by  one  to  Adam  that  he  may  name  them, 
and  it  is  intended  to  lead  up  to  the  statement 
that  they  were  none  of  them  suited  to  be 
Adam's  chief  companions.  They  were  form- 
ed by  God  of  earthly  materials;  but  the 
breath  of  Divine  life  had  not  been  breathed 
into  them. 

brought  them  unto  Adam  to  see  nvkat  he 
(would  call  them]  d'he  power  of  speech  was 
one  of  those  gifts  which  from  the  first  distin- 
guished man  from  all  other  animals;  but,  as 
tending  to  that  civilized  condition  in  which 


it  was  God’s  will  to  place  Adam,  in  order  to 
mature  his  mental  powers,  and  to  teach  him 
the  use  of  language,  the  animals  are  brought 
to  him  that  he  might  name  them.  Nouns  are 
the  first  and  simplest  elements  of  language; 
and  animals,  by  their  appearance,  movements 
and  cries,  more  than  any  other  objects  sug- 
gest names  for  themselves. 

20.  there  (ivas  not  fou7^d  an  help  meet  for 
him]  There  is  some  obscurity  in  the  origi- 
nal of  the  words  “an  help  meet  for  him;” 
they  probably  mean  “a  helper  suited  to,”  or 
rather  “ matching  him.” 

22.  the  rib... made  He  a (woman]  lit.  The 
side  He  built  up  into  a woman.  The 
word  which  primarily  means  “rib”  more  fre- 
quently signifies  “ side:”  whence  many  of  the 
rabbins  adopted  the  Platonic  myth  (see  Euseb. 
‘Prtep.  Evang.’  xii.  12),  that  man  and  woman 
were  originally  united  in  one  body,  till  the  Cre- 
ator separated  them.  The  formation  of  woman 
from  the  side  of  man  is  without  question 
most  mysterious:  but  it  teaches  very  forcibly 
and  beautifully  the  duty  of  one  sex  towards 
the  other,  and  the  close  relationship  between 
them,  so  that  neither  should  despise  or  treat 
with  unkindness  the  other.  That  respect  for 
the  weaker  sex,  which  we  esteem  a mark  of 
the  highest  refinement,  is  taught  by  the  very 
act  of  creation  as  recorded  in  the  earliest  ex- 
isting record.  The  New  Testament  tells  us 
that  marriage  is  a type  of  the  union  of  Christ 
and  His  Church;  and  the  fathers  held  that 
the  formation  of  Eve  from  the  side  of  Adam 
typified  the  formation  of  the  Church  from 
the  side  of  the  Saviour.  The  water  and 
blood  which  flowed  from  that  side  were  held 
the  one  to  signify  baptism,  the  other  to  belong 
to  the  other  great  Sacrament,  both  water  and 
blood  cleansing  from  sin  and  making  the 
Church  acceptable  to  God. 

23.  Woman.,  because  she  (was  taken  out  of 


V.  24,  25.J  • 


GENESIS.  II. 


■43 


ir  Matt.  19.  24  -^Therefore  shall  a man  leave 

Markio.7.  his  father  and  his  mother,  and  shall 

i^Cor.  6.  ]^Jg  J g}^^]] 

5-  31-  one  flesh. 


25  And  they  were  both  naked,  the 
man  and  his  wife,  and  were  not  a- 
shamed. 


Hebrew  “Ishsha  because  she  was  taken 
out  of  Ish.”  Hence  many  have  argued  that 
Hebrew  must  have  been  the  primitive  lan- 
guage. The  same,  of  course,  is  inferred  from 
other  names,  as  Eve,  Cain,  Abel,  &c.,  all 
having  appropriate  significance  in  Hebrew. 
The  argument  is  inconclusive,  because  it  is 
quite  possible  to  translate  names  from  one  lan- 
guage into  another,  and  to  retain  the  meaning 
which  those  names  had  in  their  original  tongue. 


24.  Therefore^  &c.]  These  may  have  been 
the  words  of  Adam,  or  of  the  inspired  his- 
torian. Matt.  xix.  5 seems  to  refer  them  to  the 
latter,  which  also  is  the  more  natural  inter- 
pretation. Then  too  they  have  more  ob- 
viously that  Divine  authority  which  our  Lord 
so  emphatically  ascribes  to  them.  Such  inci- 
dental remarks  are  not  uncommon  in  Scrip- 
ture; see  for  instance  ch.  xxxii.  32. 


NOTE  A on  Chap.  ii.  v.  7.  On  the  immediate  Creation  and  primitive 

State  of  Man. 


On  the  question  of  man’s  direct  creation  in 
distinction  to  the  hypothesis  of  development, 
and  on  his  original  position  as  a civilized 
being,  not  as  a wild  barbarian,  we  may  re- 
mark, ist.  It  is  admitted  even  by  the  theorists 
themselves,  that  in  the  present  state  of  the 
evidence  the  records  beneath  the  earth’s  surface 
give  no  support  to  the  hypothesis  that  every 
species  grew  out  of  some  species  less  per- 
fect before  it.  There  is  not  an  unbroken  chain 
of  continuity.  At  times,  new  and  strange  forms 
suddenly  appear  upon  the  stage  of  life,  with  no 
previous  intimation  of  their  coming,  andly, 
In  those  creatures,  in  which  instinct  seems 
most  fully  developed,  it  is  impossible  that  it 
should  have  grown  by  cultivation  and  suc- 
cessive inheritance.  In  no  animal  is  it  more 
observable  than  in  the  bee : but  the  working 
bee  only  has  the  remarkable  instinct  of  build- 
ing and  honey-making  so  peculiar  to  its  race; 
it  does  not  inherit  that  instinct  from  its  pa- 
rents, for  neither  the  drone  nor  the  queen-bee 
builds  or  works ; it  does  not  hand  it  down  to 
its  posterity,  for  itself  is  sterile  and  child- 
less. Mr  Darwin  has  not  succeeded  in  re- 
plying to  this  argument.  3rdly,  Civilization, 
as  far  as  all  experience  goes,  has  always  been 
learned  from  without.  No  extremely  barba- 
rous nation  has  ever  yet  been  found  capable  of 
initiating  civilization.  Retrogression  is  rapid, 
but  progress  unknown,  till  the  first  steps  have 
been  taught.  (See  Abp.  Whately,  ‘Origin 
of  Civilization,’  the  argument  of  which  has 
not  been  refuted  by  Sir  John  Lubbock,  ‘Pre- 
historic Man.’  Both  have  been  ably  reviewed 
by  the  Duke  of  Argyll,  ‘Primeval  Man’). 
Moreover,  almost  all  barbarous  races,  if  not 
wholly  without  tradition,  believe  themselves 
to  have  been  once  in  a more  civilized  state, 
to  have  come  from  a more  favoured  land,  to 
have  descended  from  ancestors  more  enlight- 
ened and  powerful  than  themselves.  4thly, 


Though  it  has  been  asserted  without  any 
proof  that  man,  when  greatly  degenerate, 
reverts  to  the  type  of  the  monkey,  just  as  do- 
mesticated animals  revert  to  the  wild  type ; 
yet  the  analogy  is  imperfect  and  untrue.  Man 
undoubtedly,  apart  from  ennobling  influences, 
degenerates,  and,  losing  more  and  more  of  the 
image  of  his  Maker,  becomes  more  closely  as- 
similated to  the  brute  creation,  the  earthly 
nature  overpowering  the  spiritual.  But  that 
this  is  not  natural  to  him  is  shewn  by  the 
fact,  that,  under  such  conditions  of  degene- 
racy, the  race  gradually  becomes  enfeebled, 
and  at  length  dies  out ; whereas  the  domesti- 
cated animal,  which  reverts  to  the  type  of 
the  wild  animal,  instead  of  fading  away,  be- 
comes only  the  more  powerful  and  the  more 
prolific.  The  wild  state  is  natural  to  the 
brutes,  but  the  civilized  is  natural  to  man. 

Even  if  the  other  parts  of  the  Darwinian 
hypothesis  were  demonstrable,  there  is  not  a 
vestige  of  evidence  that  there  ever  existed  any 
beast  intermediate  between  apes  and  men. 
Apes  too  are  by  no  means  the  nearest  to  us 
in  intelligence  or  moral  sense  or  in  their  food 
and  other  habits.  It  also  deserves  to  be 
borne  in  mind,  that  even  if  it  could  be  made 
probable  that  man  is  only  an  improved  ape, 
no  physiological  reason  can  touch  the  ques- 
tion, whether  God  did  not  when  the  im- 
provement reached  its  right  point,  breathe  into 
him  “a  living  soul,”  a spirit  “which  goeth 
upward,”  when  bodily  life  ceases.  This  at 
least  would  have  constituted  Adam  a nevs- 
creature,  and  the  fountain  head  of  a new  race. 

On  the  derivation  of  mankind  from  a 
single  pair,  see  Prichard’s  ‘ Physical  Hist,  of 
Mankind,’  Bunsen,  ‘Philosophy  of  Universal 
History,’  Smyth,  ‘Unity  of  the  Human 
Race,’  Quatrefages,  ‘ L’unite  de  I’esptxe 
Humaine,’  &c. 


44 


GENESIS.  III. 


[v.  1—7. 


CHAPTER  III. 

I The  serpent  deceiveth  Eve.  6 Mads  shame- 
ful fall.  9 God  arraigneth  them.  14  The 
serpent  is  cursed.  15  The  promised  seed.  16 
The  punishment  of  mankind.'  2 i Their  first 
clothing.  22  Their  castmg  out  of  paradise. 

NOW  the  serpent  was  more  sub- 
til than  any  beast  of  the  field 
which  the  Lord  God  had  made.  And 
iHeb.  he  said  unto  the  woman,  ^Yea,  hath 
cause, God  Said,  Ye  shall  not  eat  of  every 
tree  of  the  garden  ? 

2  And  the  woman  said  unto  the 
serpent.  We  may  eat  of  the  fruit  of 
the  trees  of  the  garden  : 

3  But  of  the  fruit  of  the  tree  which 
is  in  the  midst  of  the  garden,  God  hath 
said.  Ye  shall  not  eat  of  it,  neither 
shall  ye  touch  it,  lest  ye  die. 


4 ''And  the  serpent  said  unto  the"='^°''  ” 

woman,  Y e shall  not  surely  die  : 1 Tim.  2. 

5 For  God  doth  know  that  in  the 
day  ye  eat  thereof,  then  your  eyes 
shall  be  opened,  and  ye  shall  lf>e  as 
gods,  knowing  good  and  evil. 

6 And  when  the  woman  saw  that 
the  tree  was  good  for  food,  and  that 

it  was  ^ pleasant  to  the  eves,  and  a ^ Heb. 

, , . , . .a  desire. 

tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise. 


she  took  of  the  fruit 


one  wise 
thereof,  ^and 
did  eat,  and  gave  also  unto  her  hus-  FTim.  2. 
band  with  her;  and  he  did  eat. 

7 And  the  eyes  of  them  both 
were  opened,  and  they  knew  that 
they  were  naked ; and  they  sewed  fig 
leaves  together,  and  made  themselves  11  Or. 

DanrnnQ  things  to 

aprons.  gird  about 


Chap.  III.  1.  Nonv  the  serpent]  “Almost 
throughout  the  East  the  serpent  was  used  as 
an  emblem  of  the  evil  principle,”  Kalisch,  ad 
h.  1.:  but  Kalisch  himself,  Tuch  and  others 
deny  that  the  evil  spirit  is  to  be  understood 
in  this  narrative  of  Genesis.  Yet  not  only 
did  the  East  in  general  look  on  the  serpent  as 
an  emblem  of  the  spirit  of  evil,  but  the  earliest 
traces  of  Jewish  or  Christian  interpretations 
all  point  to  this.  The  evil  one  is  constantly 
called  by  the  Jews  “the  old  serpent,”  Han- 
fiachash  bakkadnioni  (so  also  in  Rev.  xii.  9, 
“that  old  serpent  the  devil”).  In  Wisd.  ii. 
24,  we  read,  “ By  the  envy  of  the  devil  death 
entered  into  the  world.”  Our  Lord  flimself 
says,  “the  Devil  was  the  murderer  of  man 
from  the  beginning”  (Joh.  viii.  44).  Von 
Bohlen  observes  that  “ the  pervading  Jewish 
view  is  the  most  obvious,  according  to  which 
the  serpent  is  considered  as  Satan;  and  the 
greatest  confirmation  of  such  an  interpreta- 
tion is  the  very  general  agreement  of  the  Asi- 
atic myths”  (ad  h.  1.).  Some  have  thought 
that  no  serpent  appeared,  but  only  that  evil 
one,  who  is  called  the  serpent;  but  then  he 
could  not  have  been  said  to  be  “more  subtle 
than  all  the  beasts  of  the  field.”  The  reason 
why  Satan  took  the  form  of  a beast  remark- 
able for  its  subtlety  may  have  been,  that  so 
Eve  might  be  the  less  upon  her  guard.  New 
as  she  was  to  all  creation,  she  may  not  have 
been  surprised  at  speech  in  an  animal  which 
apparently  possessed  almost  human  sagacity. 
Fit  vessel,  fittest  imp  of  fraud... 

...For  in  the  wily  snake 
Whatever  sleights  none  would  suspicious  mark, 
As  from  his  wit  and  nature  subtlety 
Proceeding,  which  in  other  beasts  observed 
Doubt  might  beget  of  diabolic  power, 

Active  within  beyontl  the  sense  of  brute. 

• ‘Paradise  Lost,’  ix.  91. 


5.  God  doth  hno^u]  The  tempter  repre- 
sents God  as  envious  of  His  creatures’  happi- 
ness, the  ordinary  suggestion  of  false  religion 
and  unbelief.  Then  he  suggests  to  Eve  the 
desire  of  self-dependence,  that  which  is  in  fact 
the  origin  of  all  sin,  the  giving  up  of  depend- 
ence on  God,  and  the  seeking  for  power, 
wisdom,  happiness  in  self. 

as  gods]  Or  more  probably,  “as  God.” 
The  plural  word  Elohim  stands  at  times  for 
false  gods,  at  times  for  angels,  but  most  com- 
monly for  the  one  true  God. 

knowing  good  and  enjil]  Having  a clear 
understanding  of  all  great  moral  questions; 
not  like  children,  but  like  those  of  full  age, 
who  “by  reason  of  use  have  their  senses  ex- 
ercised to  discern  both  good  and  evil”  (Heb. 
V.  14).  This  was  the  serpent’s  promise, 
though  he  knew  that  the  result  would  be 
really  a knowledge  of  evil  through  the  per- 
version of  their  own  will  and  their  own  ill 
choice. 

6.  to  make  one  wise]  Gesenius  and  others, 
after  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate,  render  to  look 
upon. 

7.  the  eyes  of  them  both  were  opened.,  &c.] 
“ Their  eyes  were  truly  opened  as  the  serpent 
had  promised  them,  but  only  to  see  that  in 
the  moment  when  they  departed  from  God 
they  became  slaves  of  the  flesh,  that  the  free- 
will and  independence  of  God,  and  knowing 
the  good  and  the  evil,  delivers  them  up  to  the 
power  of  evil.  Man,  who  had  his  glorious 
destiny  before  him  of  becoming  by  means  of 
the  knowledge  and  love  of  God,  and  by  obe- 
dience, the  free  lord  of  the  world,  ceases,  by 
disobedience,  to  be  master  of  himself.”  (O. 
Von  Gerlach,  ‘Comment.’  ad  h.  1.). 

fig  lea'ves]  Celsius,  Tuch,  and  Gese- 
nius, have  doubted  whether  this  was  the  Ficus 


V.  8—15.] 


GENESIS. 


III. 


45 


8 And  they  heard  the  voice  of  the 
Lord  God  walking  in  the  garden  in 

■’  the  ^cool  of  the  day:  and  Adam  and 
his  wife  hid  themselves  from  the  pre- 
sence of  the  Lord  God  amongst  the 
trees  of  the  garden. 

9 And  the  Lord  God  called  unto 
Adam,  and  said  unto  him,  Where  arl 
thou  ? 

10  And  he  said,  I heard  thy  voice 
in  the  garden,  and  I was  afraid,  be- 
cause I zaas  naked ; and  I hid  myself. 

1 1 And  he  said.  Who  told  thee  that 
thou  ziwsf  naked  ? Hast  thou  eaten 

*•  of  the  tree,  whereof  I commanded 
thee  that  thou  shouldest  not  eat  ? 


Carica  of  Linnaeus,  supposing  it  to  have  been 
the  Musa  Paradistaca;  but  the  word  is  that 
used  throughout  Scripture  for  tlie  well  known 
hg  tree  (see  Roediger  in  Ges.  ‘Lex.’p.  1490). 

8.  the  ‘voice  of  the  Lord  God~\  The 
whole  of  this  history  of  the  creation  and  the 
fall  is  full  of  these  anthropomorphic  represen- 
tations. The  Creator  is  spoken  of  as-if  con- 
sulting about  the  formation  of  man  (i.  26),  as 
reflecting  on  the  result  of  His  creation,  and 
declaring  it  all  very  good  (i.  31),  as  resting 
from  His  work  (ii.  2),  as  planting  a garden 
for  Adam  (ii.  8),  bringing  the  animals  to  him 
to  name  them  (ii.  19),  then  building  up  the 
rib  of  Adam  into  a woman,  and  bringing  her 
to  Adam  to  be  his  bride  (ii.  22).  Here  again 
Adam  hears  His  voice  as  of  one  walking  in 
the  garden  in  the  cool  of  the  day.  All  this 
corresponds  well  with  the  simple  and  child- 
like character  of  the  early  portions  of  Gene- 
sis, The  Great  Father,  through  His  inspired 
word,  is  as  it  were  teaching  His  children,  in 
the  infancy  of  their  race,  by  means  of  simple 
language,  and  in  simple  lessons.  Onkelos  has 
here  ‘-The  Voice  of  the  Word  of  the  Lord.” 
It  is  by  this  name,  “ the  Word  of  the  Lord,” 
that  the  Targums  generally  paraphrase  the 
name  of  the  Most  High,  more  especially  in 
those  passages  where  is  recorded  anything  like 
a visible  or  sensible  representation  of  His  Ma- 
jesty. The  Christian  fathers  almost  univer- 
sally believed  that  every  appearance  of  God 
to  the  patriarchs  and  prophets  was  a manifes- 
tation of  the  eternal  Son,  judging  especially 
from  Joh.  i.  18. 

cool  of  the  day']  Lit.  “wind  of  the 
day,”  which  is  generally  understood  of  the 
cool  breezes  of  evening.  Paradise  had  been 
to  man  the  place  of  God's  presence,  which 
brought  heretofore  happiness,  and  security. 
Now  that  sin  had  come  upon  him,  the  sense 
of  that  presence  was  accompanied  with  shame 
and  fear. 


12  And  the  man  said.  The  woman 
whom  thou  gavest  to  be  with  me,  she 
gave  me  of  the  tree,  and  I did  eat. 

13  And  the  Lord  God  said  unto  the 
woman.  What  is  this  that  thou  hast 
done .?  And  the  woman  said.  The 
serpent  beguiled  me,  and  I did  eat. 

14  And  the  Lord  God  said  unto 
the  serpent,  Because  thou  hast  done 
this,  thou  art  cursed  above  all  cattle, 
and  above  every  beast  of  the  field  ; 
upon  thy  belly  shalt  thou  go,  and  dust 
shaft  thou  eat  all  the  days  of  thy  life : 

15  And  I will  put  enmity  between 
thee  and  the  woman,  and  between 
thy  seed  and  her  seed;  and  it  shall 


14.  cursed  abo've  all  cattle]  AVe  can 
hardly  doubt  that  these  words  were  in  part 
directed  against  the  animal,  which  was  made 
the  instrument  of  man’s  ruin,  as  in  the  law 
the  ox  which  gored  a man  was  to  be  put  to 
death  like  a malefactor.  Thus  the  serpent 
was  ever  to  bear  about  the  remembrance  of 
that  evil,  which  he  had  been  made  the  means 
of  producing,  was  to  be  the  enemy  of  man, 
causing  him  suffering,  but  in  the  end  suffer- 
ing from  him  utter  destruction;  yet,  as  the 
serpent  was  but  the  outward  form  of  the 
spirit  of  evil,  so  the  language  of  the  Al- 
mighty, which  outwardly  refers  to  the  ser- 
pent, in  its  spiritual  significance  is  a curse 
upon  the  evil  one.  And  as  the  curse  is  for 
the  sake  of  man  ; so  in  it  is  contained  a pro- 
mise that  the  human  race  shall  finally  triumph 
over  that  which  first  caused  its  fall.  The 
most  natural  interpretation  of  the  curse  might 
indicate,  that  the  serpent  underwent  some 
change  of  form.  It  would,  however,  be  quite 
consistent  with  the  narrative,  even  in  its  most 
literal  acceptance,  to  understand  that  it  merely 
implied  continued  and  perpetual  degradation 
coupled  with  a truceless  war  against  man- 
kind. 

15.  seel]  Allix,  as  quoted  by  Bishop  Pa- 
trick, observes  that  in  this  promise  God  did  a 
kindness  to  Adam,  who  otherwise  by  the 
temptation  might  have  been  estranged  fi'om 
his  wife ; but  here  the  promise  of  redemption 
is  through  the  seed  of  the  'woman.  “ Mar- 
riage, which  had  been  the  vehicle  of  the  fall, 
is  now  also  to  become  that  of  salvation  ; the 
seed  of  the  woman  is  to  bruise  the  head  of 
the  Serpent.”  (Kurtz,  i.  78.)  The  promise 
is,  no  doubt,  general,  that,  though,  the  seed 
of  the  serpent  (mystically  Satan  and  all  his 
servants)  shall  continually  wage  war  against 
the  descendants  of  Eve,  yet  ultimately  by 
God’s  appointment  mankind  (the  whole  seed 
of  the  woman)  shall  triumph  over  their  spi- 


46 


[v.  1 6 — 19. 


A. 


GENESIS.  III. 


bruise  thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise 
his  heel. 

16  Unto  the  woman  he  said,  I will 
greatly  multiply  thy  sorrow  and  thy 
conception  ; in  sorrow  thou  shalt  bring 
forth  children;  and  thy  desire  shall  be 
"Or,  II to  thy  husband,  and  he  shall  “"rule 
ihy  hus.  over  thee. 

^rcor  14  ^7  Adam  he  said,  Be- 

34.  cause  thou  hast  hearkened  unto  the 


voice  of  thy  wife,  and  hast  eaten  of  the 
tree,  of  which  I commanded  thee,  say- 
ing, Thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it:  cursed 
is  the  ground  for  thy  sake ; in  sorrow 
shalt  thou  eat  of'w.  all  the  days  of  thy  life ; 

18  Thorns  also  and  thistles  shall 

it  Tring  forth  to  thee  ; and  thou  shalt  t Heb 
eat  the  herb  of  the  held  ; 

19  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt 
thou  eat  bread,  till  thou  return  unto 


ritual  enemy.  If  there  were  no  more  than 
this  in  the  language  used,  even  so  there  would 
be,  an  obscure  indeed,  but  still  a significant 
promise  of  some  future  deliverance.  But  the 
last  words  of  the  verse  seem  not  merely 
general  but  personal.  In  the  first  clause  it 
is  said,  that  there  should  be  “ enmity  between 
thy  seed  and  her  seed;''"'  but  in  the  second 
clause  it  is  said,  “It  (or  he)  shall  bruise  thy 
head.”  It  was  the  head  of  the  particular 
serpent  (not  of  the  seed  of  the  serpent  only), 
which  the  seed  of  the  woman  was  to  bruise. 
And  though  we  must  not  lay  stress  on  the 
masculine  pronoun  because  the  word 

for  seed  is  masculine  in  Hebrew,  yet  there  is 
the  appearance  here  of  a personal  contest, 
and  a personal  victory.  This  inference  is 
strengthened  by  the  promise  being  made  to 
the  seed  of  the  ^oman.  There  has  been  but 
one  descendant  of  Eve,  who  had  no  earthly 
father ; and  He  was  “ manifested  that  He 
might  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil.” 
I'hough  the  Jewish  writers  do  not  directly 
interpret  the  promise  of  the  Messiah ; yet 
the  Targums  of  Jerusalem  and  of  the  Pseudo- 
Jonathan  both  say  that  this  victory  over  the 
serpent  shall  be  “ in  the  days  of  the  Messiah.” 

It  is  well  known  that  Roman  Catholic 
divines  have  attributed  the  victory  to  the 
\’irgin  Mary,  misled  by  the  rendering  of 
some  MSS.  of  the  Latin,  Ipsa^  she.  The 
original  Hebrew  is  perfectly  unequivocal ; 
for,  though  the  pronoun  might  be  so  pointed 
as  to  signify  cither  he  or  she^  yet  the  verb 
is  (accoi'ding  to  the  Hebrew  idiom)  mascu- 
line. Moreover  the  LXX.  has  seed  in  the 
neuter,  but  the  pronoun  referring  to  it,  “/6^,” 
in  the  masculine,  which  would  naturally  refer 
it  to  some  individual  son  of  the  woman. 
The  Syriac  Version  also  has  a masculine  pro- 
noun. 

shall  bruise']  The  LXX.  followed  by  the 
Vulgate  and  Onkelos  has  “shall  watch,” 
probably  meaning  to  watch  and  track  as  a 
hunter  does  his  prey;  but  the  word  in  Chal- 
dee signifies  “to  bruise  or  crush.”  In  this, 
or  nearly  this  sense  it  is  used  in  the  only 
other  passages  in  which  it  occurs  in  Scrip- 
ture, viz.  Job  ix.  17,  Ps.  cxxxix.  ii,  and  so 


it  is  rendered  by  most  ancient  Versions  and 
Comm,  as  Syr.  Sam.  Saad.  St  Paul  refers  to 
it  in  the  words  “The  God  of  peace  shall 
bruise  Satan  under  your  feet  shortly.”  Rom. 
xvi.  20. 

16.  Unto  the  qvoman  He  saitf]  It  is  no- 
ticed by  Tertullian,  that  though  God  punished 
Adam  and  Eve,  He  did  not  curse  them,  as 
He  did  the  Serpent,  they  being  candidates  for 
restoration  (‘adv.  Marcion.’  ii.  25). 

I ^'ill  greatly  multiply  thy  sorronv  and  thy 
conception]  Some  suppose  this  to  be  a hendia- 
duoin  for  “the  sorrow  of  thy  conception.” 
The  ^4^ords  rather  mean  that  woman’s  sorrow 
and  her  conception  should  both  be  multi- 
plied. The  mother  has  not  only  the  pains 
of  childbirth,  but  from  all  the  cares  of  mater- 
nity greater  sorrow  connected  with  her  com- 
mon offspring  than  the  father  has.  The 
threat  of  multiplying  conception  indicates, 
not  that  Eve  had  already  borne  children,  but 
that  childbirth  would  not  have  been  un- 
known had  the  first  pair  remained  in  Paradise. 

Thy  desire  shall  be]  Desire  here  expresses 
that  reverential  longing  with  which  the  weak- 
er looks  up  to  the  stronger.  The  Vulgate 
therefore  renders,  “ Thou  shalt  be  under  the 
power  of  thy  husband.”  This  is  also  the  in- 
terpretation of  Abenezra  and  of  many  moderns. 
The  comparison  with  ch.  iv.  7 shews  that  there 
is  somewhat  of  dependence  and  subjection  im- 
plied in  the  phrases. 

17.  Hnd  wito  Adam  He  said]  Here  for 
the  first  time  Adam  occurs  without  an  article, 
as  a proper  name. 

cursed  is  the  ground  for  thy  sake]  The 
whole  earth  partakes  of  the  punishment,  which 
the  sin  of  man,  its  head  and  destined  ruler, 
has  called  down.  The  creature  itself  is  sub- 
jected to  vanity,  Rom.  viii.  20.  Death  reigns. 
Instead  of  the  blessed  soil  of  Paradise,  Adam 
and  his  offspring  have  to  till  the  ground  now 
condemned  to  bear  thorns  and  thistles,  and 
this  is  not  to  end,  until  the  man  returns  to 
the  earth  from  which  he  was  taken.  Yet 
even  here  there  is  some  mark  of  mercy : for, 
whereas  the  serpent  is  cursed  directly,  and 
that  with  a reference  to  the  earth  he  was 


V.  20 24-] 


GENESIS.  III. 


47 


t Heb. 
Chavah. 


the  ground ; for  out  of  it  wast  thou 
taken  : for  dust  thou  art^  and  unto 
dust  shalt  thou  return. 

20  And  Adam  called  his  wife’s 
name  ^Eve;  because  she  was  the 
mother  of  all  living. 

21  Unto  Adam  also  and  to  his  v/ife 
did  the  Lord  God  make  coats  of 
skins,  and  clothed  them. 

22  ^ And  the  Lord  God  said,  Be- 
hold, the  man  is  become  as  one  of 
us,  to  know  good  and  evil:  and  nov/. 


lest  he'  put  forth  his  hand,  and  take 
also  of  the  tree  of  life,  and  eat,  and 
live  for  ever: 

23  Therefore  the  Lord  God  sent 
him  forth  from  the  garden  of  Eden, 
to  till  the  ground  from  whence  he  was 
taken. 

24  So  he  drove  out  the  man ; and 
he  placed  at  the  east  of  the  garden 
of  Eden  Cherubims,  and  a flaming 
sword  which  turned  every  way,  to 
keep  the  way  of  the  tree  of  life. 


to  travel  over ; here  on  the  contrary  the 
earth,  rather  than  the  man,  is  cursed,  though 
for  the  man’s  sake  and  with  reference  to  him. 
(Tuch.) 

19.  See  note  A at  end  of  Chapter. 

20.  E-ve]  Chat'^mh,  Life.  Not  only  be- 
cause she  gave  birth  to  all  living,  but  perhaps 
with  a further  prophetic  meaning,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  promise  just  given,  because  the 
race  of  man,  now  subject  to  death,  should 
be  made  alive  by  the  Offspring  of  the  woman. 

22.  tJoe  man  is  become  as  one  of  US'] 
Man  was  not  a mere  animal,  following  the 
impulse  of  sense,  without  distinction  of  right 
and  wrong.  He  had  also  a spiritual  per- 
sonality, with  moral  will  and  freedom  of 
forechoice.  His  lower  nature,  though  in  sub- 
jection to  the  higher,  as  that  was  in  subjec- 
tion to  God,  yet  acted  as  a veil,  screening 
from  him  what  might  have  been  visible  to 
pure  spiritual  intelligence:  hence,  though  he 
knew  good  from  knowing  God  and  living  in 
dependence  on  Him,  yet  he  knew  not  evil, 
ha’vdng  had  no  experience  of  it  hitherto.  His 
fall  therefore,  although  sinful,  was  not  like 
the  sin  of  angels,  who  had  no  animal  nature 
to  obscure  vision  or  to  tempt  by  sense. 
Their  fall  must  have  been  more  deliberate, 
more  wilful,  less  pardonable.  But,  when 
man  by  fatal  mischoice  learned  that  there 
was  evil  in  the  universe  as  well  as  goad,  then 
he  had  acquired  a condition  like  to  that  of 
spiritual  beings,  who  had  no  veil  to  their 
understanding,  and  could  see  both  on  the 
right  hand  and  on  the  left.  The  meaning 
then  of  this  mysterious  saying  of  the  Most 
High  may  be,  that  now  by  sin  man  had 
attained  a knowledge  like  the  knowledge  of 
pure  spiritual  existences,  a knowledge  which 
God  has  of  necessity,  a knowledge  which  the 
angels  have,  who  might  have  fallen  but  who 


stood  uprigfft,  a knowledge,  which  evil  angels 
have  from  their  own  deliberate  choosing  of 
evil  instead  of  good.  The  difficulty  of  this 
interpretation  is,  that  it  supposes  God  to 
speak  of  Himself  as  One  among  other  spi- 
ritual beings,  whereas  He  cannot  be  likened 
to  any  one,  but  is  infinitely  above  and  beyond 
all  created  natures.  Some  therefore  would 
understand  here  and  elsewhere,  the  plural  as 
a mere  plural  of  majesty.  Still  there  is  a 
manifest  plurality  of  person.  It  is  not  merely 
“like  Us,”  but  “like  one  of  Us.”  Hence  it 
was  the  universal  belief  of  the  early  Christians, 
that  here  as  in  Gen.  i.  20,  God  was  speak- 
ing to,  and  of,  His  coeternal  Son  and  Spirit. 

See  note  B at  end  of  Chapter. 

lest  he  put  forth  his  hand]  Vatablus,  who 
looks  on  the  tree  of  life  as  no  more  than 
a mystical  emblem,  understands  that  it  was 
as  though  God  had  said,  “ Lest  he  should 
have  a vain  expectation  excited  in  him  by 
laying  hold  of  this  symbol  of  My  promise; 
that  shall  be  taken  from  him  which  might 
give  him  such  a hope  of  immortality,”  ad 
h.  1.  But  Augustine,  who  spoke  of  the  tree 
of  life  as  a sacrament,  probably  meant  by  a* 
sacrament  something  more  than  a mere  em- 
blem; and  many  of  the  fathers  looked  on 
this  judgment  of  God,  whereby  man  was 
excluded  from  the  reach  of  that,  which  m.ight 
have  made  him  immortal,  as  rather  a mercy 
than  a judgment.  If  his  life  had  now  been 
perpetuated,  it  would  have  been  an  immor- 
tality of  sin.  So  Gregory  Nazianzen  says 
the  exclusion  from  the  tree  of  life  was  “ that 
evil  might  not  be  immortal,  and  that  the 
punishment  might  be  an  act  of  benevolence.” 
(Greg.  Naz.  ‘ Orat.’  xxxvii.  n.  i.  See  Pa- 
trick). 

24.  Cherubims]  See  note  C at  end  of 
Chapter. 


NOTE  A on  Chap.  hi.  v.  19.  On  the  Effect  of  the  Fall. 

Nothing  can  really  be  plainer  than  that  the  suiting  fi-om  the  presence  of  God  and  a life 
narrative  describes  a most  deplorable  change  in  dependence  on  His  support,  to  a state  of 
in  the  condition  of  the  first  parents  of  man-  sin  and  shame  following  on  disobedience  to 
kind,  a change  from  a state  of  holiness  re-  His  will  and  a desire  to  become  independent 


48 


GENESIS.  III. 


of  Him.  It  is  the  distinctest  possible  ac- 
count of  a sin  and  of  its  punishment.  More- 
over in  all  subsequent  teaching  of  Scripture 
the  whole  human  race  is  represented  as  shar- 
ing in  the  exile  of  Adam  from  his  Maker, 
and  hence  in  his  sinfulness ; for  holiness  and 
happiness  are  inseparable  from  the  presence 
and  the  Spirit  of  God.  It  may  be  impossible 
fully  to  explain  all  the  justice  or  the  mercy  of 
this  dispensation.  Yet  we  may  reflect  that 
man  was  created  a reasonable,  free-willing, 
responsible  being.  All  this  implies  power  to 
will  as  God  wills,  and  power  to  will  as  God 
does  not  will.  It  implies  too  something  like 
a condition  of  trial,  a state  of  probation.  If 
each  man  had  been  put  on  his  trial  separately, 
as  Adam  was;  judging 'from  experience  as 
well  as  from  the  history  of  Adam,  we  may 
see  the  probability  that  a large  number  of 
Adam’s  descendants  would  have  sinned  as  he 
sinned.  The  confusion  so  introduced  into 
the  world  would  have  been  at  least  as  great 
as  that  which  the  single  fall  and  the  expulsion 
once  for  all  of  our  first  parents  from  Paradise 


have  actually  brought  in.  And  the  remedy 
would  have  been  apparently  less  simple  and 
more  complicated.  As  the  Scripture  history 
represents  it  to  us,  and  as  the  New  Testament 
interprets  that  history,  the  Judge  of  all  the 
earth  punished  the  sin  of  Adam  by  depriving 
him  of  His  presence  and  His  Spirit  (that 
“ original  righteousness  ” of  the  fathers  and 
the  schoolmen,  see  Bp.  Bull,  Vol.  ii.  Dis.  v. 
and  Aquinas,  ‘Summa,’  ii.  i.  qu.  82.  art.  4), 
and  thus  subjecting  him  to  death.  But 
though  He  thus  “ concluded  all  under  sin,’’ 
it  was  indeed  “that  He  might  have  mercy  on 
all,”  Rom.  xi.  32.  The  whole  race  of  man 
condemned  in  Adam,  receives  in  Adam  also 
the  promise  of  recovery  for  all.  And  in  the 
Second  Adam,  that  special  Seed  of  the  <vjoman^ 
the  recovery  of  the  whole  race  is  effected, 
insomuch  that  as  in  Adam  all  died,  even  so 
in  Christ  all  shall  be  made  alive.  And  thus  in 
truth  the  mystery  of  sin  can  only  be  cleared 
up  by  the  mystery  of  redemption  ; whilst  both 
exhibit  the  justice  of  God  brought  out  into  its 
fullest  relief  only  under  the  light  of  His  love. 


NOTE  B on  Chap.  hi.  v.  22.  On  the  Historical  Character  of  the  Temp- 
tation AND  THE  Fall. 


The  traditions  of  all,  especially  Eastern 
nations,  have  more  or  less  of  resemblance 
to  the  record  of  the  first  three  chapters 
of  Genesis.  This  is,  according  to  some,  to 
be  explained  by  mere  similarity  in  all  early 
mythology.  According  to  others  it  results 
from  the  Hebrew  histories  borrowing  the 
myths  of  neighbouring  countries  and  pro- 
pounding them  as  historical  truths.  There 
can  be  no  reasonable  doubt,  that  the  writer 
of  Genesis  puts  forth  his  history  as  history. 
Hence  some  of  the  early  rationalists  admitted 
an  historical  foundation,  though  they  thought 
it  coloured  by  subsequent  fancy.  Eichhorn 
for  instance  (‘Urgeschichte,’  Th.  2.  B.  2)  sup- 
posed that  Adam  dreamed  of  the  formation 
of  Eve  out  of  his  side.  Eve  (as  Abarbanel 
had  also  imagined)  saw  the  serpent  eating 
poisonous  fruit,  then  ate  of  it  herself  and 
gave  it  to  her  husband ; and  thus  awakened 
in  them  both  sensual  thoughts  and  the  first 
feelings  of  shame.  A thunderstorm  seemed  to 
them  the  voice  of  God ; they  lied  in  terror 
from  Paradise,  and  in  the  unkindliness  of  a 
sterile  land,  the  toils  of  agriculture  and  the 
pangs  of  childbirth  found  a punishment  for 
their  fault.  But  such  forced  explanations 
.soon  gave  way  to  mythical  interpretation. 
Paradise  is  but  the  golden  age  of  the  He- 
brews; the  tree  of  life  is  the  Ambrosia  or 
Amrita  of  Greece  or  India;  the  tempter 
finds  a parallel  in  the  contests  of  Krishna 
with  the  serpent,  or  in  the  Persian  myth  of 
Ahriman  deceiving  the  first  luiman  beings 
under  a serpent's  form.  I'he  Indian  cosmo- 
gony and  the  history  of  Krishna  certainly 
bear  some  reseiublance  to  the  Jewish  history, 


though  widely  distinguished  from  it  by  the 
gross  Pantheism  of  the  Hindoo  Theology  : 
but  that  the  Hebrews  can  owe  nothing  to  these 
is  evident  from  the  fact  that  they  are  not  con- 
tained in  the  Vedas  and  the  most  ancient 
Sanscrit  literature,  fi*om  which  alone  it  is 
possible  that  even  the  later  Jewish  writers 
could  have  borrowed.  Indeed  the  history  of 
Krishna  first  appears  in  the  ‘Bhagavat  Gita,’ 
a work  assigned  to  the  3rd  century  af- 
ter Christ,  and  which  is  supposed  to  have 
drawn  largely  from  Christian  or  Pseudo- 
Christian  sources.  The  nearest  resemblance,, 
however,  is  traceable  between  the  Biblical 
record  and  the  teaching  of  the  Zendavesta.  As 
there  is  a likeness  in  the  history  of  Creation 
and  in  the  description  of  Paradise,  so  there  is 
a special  similarity  in  the  account  of  the  fall. 
According  to  the  doctrine  of  Zoroaster,  the 
first  human  beings,  created  by  Ormuzd,  the 
good  principle,  lived  in  a state  of  innocence 
in  a happy  garden  with  a tree  which  gave 
them  life  and  immortality ; but  Ahriman,  the 
evil  principle,  assuming  the  form  of  a serpent, 
offered  them  the  fruit  of  a tree,  which  he  had 
himself  created  ; they  ate  and  became  subject 
to  evil  and  to  a continual  contest  between 
light  and  darkness,  between  the  good  motions 
of  Ormu/.d,  and  the  evil  suggestions  of 
Ahriman.  As  the  Hindoo  traditions  are 
disfigured  by  Pantheism,  so  are  the  Persian 
by  dualism ; and  both  are  markedly  con- 
trasted with  the  pure  monotheism  of  the 
Bible  History.  But  Hartmann,  Von  Bohlen, 
and  other  mythical  interpreters,  have  imagin- 
ed that  the  Mosaic  account  was  really  bor- 
rowed from  the  Zoroastrian  ; a theory  which 


GENESIS.  III. 


49 


could  only  be  established  by  proving  that  the 
early  chapters  of  Genesis  were  not  written 
till  after  the  Babylonish  captivity ; for  it  was 
then  that  the  Jews  first  came  into  close  con- 
tact with  the  Persians,  and  might  have  bor- 
rowed some  of  their  superstitions. 

Against  so  late  a date  the  language  of  the 
first  chapter  of  Genesis  is  conclusive.  Therd 
are  indeed  a few  Aramaisms  in  Genesis;  but 
it  has  been  ruled  most  justly,  that  “Arama- 
isms in  a book  of  the  Bible  are  proof  either  of 
a very  early  or  of  a very  late  origin.”  The 
Patriarchs,  who  came  from.  Ur  of  the 
Chaldees,  may  have  naturally  spoken  a He- 
brew not  unmixed  with  Chaldaisms,  and 
some  names,  as  that  of  Eve  (Chava)  and 
that  of  the  LORD  (JEHOVAH),  both  of 
which  have  a Chaldee  or  Aramaic  form,  could 
not  possibly  have  been  invented  later  than 
the  age  of  Moses,  unless  they  were  invented 
after  the  Babylonian  Captivity,  when  the 
Jews  again  came  into  contact  with  the  Chal- 
deans in  Babylonia.  That  the  Aramaisms  of 
Genesis  really  mark  antiquity,  not  novelty, 
should  almost  be  self  apparent  to  one  familiar 
with  the  original.  The  Hebrew  of  the  first 
three  chapters  of  the  Bible  is  most  emphati- 
cally archaic.  It  cannot  therefore  be  a modern 
Chaldaized  Hebrew,  but  is  a Hebrew  so 
ancient  as  still  to  retain  strong  traces  of  its 
original  union  with  its  sister  dialect  Chaldee. 
Its  peculiar  conciseness  is  the  exact  opposite  of 
the  diffuse  and  verbose  style  of  the  Chaldee 
in  Daniel  or  Ezra.  The  3rd  verse  of  Genesis 
owes  much  of  its  proverbial  grandeur  to  this 
very  conciseness.  So  many  thoughts  are 
perhaps  nowhere  else  in  the  world  uttered  in 
so  few  syllables.  The  very  reverse  of  this  is 
true  of  the  language  when  it  had  become 
infected  by  the  Chaldee  of  the  Captivity. 
But,  if  the  legends  of  the  Zendavesta  were 
not  borrowed  by  the  Jews  in  their  captivity, 
then  the  real  contact  point  between  them 
and  the  Jewish  history  must  be  found  in 
pre-Mosaic  times,  in  the  days  of  the  early 


patriarchs ; and  then  the  fact,  that  the  tradi- 
tions of  Persia  were  of  all  others  the  nearest 
to  the  Jewish  traditions  may  easily  be  ex- 
plained. Let  us  suppose  the  account  in 
Genesis  to  be  the  great  Semitic  tradition, 
perhaps  delivered  direct  from  Shem^  to  Abra- 
ham, from  Abraham  to  Jacob,  from  Jacob 
to  Joseph,  and  incorporated  under  Divine 
guidance  by  Moses  in  his  history.  Is  it 
unlikely  that  Japhet  may  have  given  the  very 
same  account  of  his  own  posterity  ? and 
where  would  it  have  been  so  well  preserved, 
as  in  Iran,  that  spot,  or  at  least  near  to  that 
spot,  where  the  Aryan  races  seem  longest  to 
have  dwelt  together,  and  where  the  tradition 
was  most  likely  to  have  been  undisturbed 
by  constant  migrations  ? The  Persians  prided 
themselves  on  their  pure  and  ancient  de- 
scent ; and  modern  ethnologists  have  given 
to  those  tribes  which  peopled  India  and 
Europe  the  name  of  Aryan,  after  the  inhabit- 
ants of  Iran  and  the  noblest  race  among 
them,  the  Arii.  If  the  Hebrews  retained  the 
Semitic  tradition  pure  and  uncorrupted, 
through  their  adherence  to  the  worship  of 
the  true  God,  whilst  the  Persians  had  the 
Japhetic  tradition,  though  corrupted  by  dual- 
ism, the  resemblance  between  their  respective 
accounts  would  be  in  every  way  natural, 
and  the  real  historical  basis  of  them  both 
would  be  the  simplest  solution  of  the  diffi- 
culty. 

It  may  only  be  necessary  to  add  that  this 
reasoning  will  not  be  affected,  even  if  we 
should  concur  with  those  who  argue,  that 
the  history  of  the  fall  is  a true  history  though 
veiled  under  allegorical  imagery,  i.  e.  that 
Adam  and  Eve  were  created  innocent  and 
holy,  that  they  were  subjected  to  a trial  and 
fell  under  it,  thereby  bringing  in  sin  and 
death  upon  mankind,  but  that  the  description 
given  of  this  in  Genesis  is  not  literal  but 
emblematical  and  mystical  (see  for  instance 
Quarry  ‘on  Gen.’  p.  112,  and  Warburton 
quoted  by  him). 


NOTE  C on  Chap.  hi.  v.  24.  Cherubim. 

(i)  Traditional  accounts  of  the  Cherubim.  (2)  Cherubim  figured  in  Tabernacle  and  Temple. 
(3)  Cherubim  seen  in  visions  of  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  St  John.  (4)  Cherubim  of  Paradise. 


(5)  Etymology  of  name. 

In  this  passage  the  Cherubim  appear  to  be 
living  beings,  angels  of  God,  fulfilling  the^will 
of  God.  Elsewhere  (except  in  brief  allu- 
sions as  Ps.  xviii.  10  ; 2 Sam.  xxii.  ii)  we  find 
them  as  sculptured  or  wrought  figures  in  the 
Tabernacle  and  the  Temple ; or  as  images  in 
the  visions  of  prophets,  which  visions  have  al- 
ways more  or  less  of  the  other  imagery  of  the 
Temple  presented  in  them  (Ez.  i.  x;  Rev.  iv. 
and  perhaps  Is.  vi.). 

Tradition  gives  no  satisfactory  account  of 
the  appearance  of  these  cherubic  figures.  Jo- 
sephus, (‘Ant.’  III.  6.  § 5)  says  that  they  were 
“winged  animals  in  form  li'Ke  nothing  seen 

VoL.  ]. 


by  man.”  It  is  possible  that  Josephus’  Pha- 
risaic prejudice  in  interpreting  the  second  com- 
mandment may  have  led  him  to  this  profession 
of  utter  ignorance  concerning  the  forms  of  the 
Cherubim,  for  he  charges  Solomon  witha  breach 
of  the  law  on  account  of  the  oxen  under  the 
brazen  sea  (‘  Ant.’  viii.  7.  § 3),  and  in  the  face 
of  Exod.  xxvi.  31  (compared  with  Ezek.  x.  20), 
he  denies  that  the  veil  of  the  tabernacle  had  any 
living  creatures  on  it  (‘Ant.’  iii.  3.  § 6).  Still 
the  Apostle  (Heb.  ix.  5),  who  speaks  of  “the 
Cherubim  of  glory  shadowing  the  mercy  seat,” 
adds,  “of  which  we  cannot  now  speak  par- 
♦^icularly,”  as  though,  after  the  captivity  and 

D 


50 


GENESIS.  III. 


the  destruction  of  the  first  Temple,  not  only- 
had  the  sacred  figures  never  been  restored,  but 
even  the  memory  of  their  shapes  had  been 
lost. 

1.  The  Tabernacle  and  the  Temple'\  When 
Moses  is  commanded  to  make  the  ark,  we 
learn  that  he  was  to  make  the  Capporeth, 
the  mercy  seat  or  covering  of  the  ark,  of 
pure  gold,  and  Cherubim  looking  towards 
the  mercy  seat,  stretching  forth  their  wings 
on  high  to  cover  the  mercy  seat.  The  Che- 
rubim were  to  be  of  a piece  with  the  mercy 
seat,  or  at  least  of  the  same  material  (Ex. 
XXV.  17 — 20).  There  is  no  appearance  of 
more  than  one  face  to  each  Cherub,  nor  of 
more  than  two  wings.  The  Cherubim  on 
the  mercy  seat  in  the  Tabernacle  appear  to 
have  been  exactly  imitated  by  Solomon  in 
the  Temple,  unless  they  were  the  very  Cheru- 
bim of  the  Tabernacle  removed  to  the  Temple. 
Their  height  is  said  to  have  been  ten  cubits, 
and  their  wings  touched  the  walls  on  either  side 
(i  K.  vi.  27).  Besides  the  twoCherubimon  the 
mercy  seat,  figures  of  Cherubim  were  wrought 
on  the  curtains  of  the  Tabernacle  (Ex.  xxvi. 
I,  31,  xxxvi.  8,  35),  and  were  afterwards 
engraven  on  the  walls  and  doors  of  the  Tem- 
ple, along  with  palms  and  flowers,  (i  K.  vi. 
29,  32,  35) : also  on  the  bases  of  the  ten  lavers, 
on  the  borders  that  were  between  the  ledges 
were  “lions,  oxen  and  Cherubims.”  (i  K.  vii. 
29).  Then  again  were  four  wheels  a cubic 
and  a half  high,  and  again  we  find  “Cheru- 
bims, lions  and  palm  trees.”  (».  36.) 

The  special  offices  of  the  Cherubic  figures 
in  the  Tabernacle  appear  to  have  been,  first, 
the  watching  and  guarding  of  the  ark  and 
the  sacred  law  deposited  within  the  ark,  to- 
wards which  they  are  represented  as  look- 
ing and  over  which  they  spread  their  out- 
stretched wings,  and  secondly,  to  attend  and 
bear  up  that  mystic  presence  of  God,  which 
appeared  in  the  Cloud  of  glory  over  the 
mercy  seat.  That  Cloud  of  glory  had  led 
Israel  through  the  Red  Sea  and  the  wilder- 
ness, the  guide  and  guardian  of  God’s  people, 
the  symbol  of  His  presence,  especially  in  the 
giving  of  the  law,  having  a twofold  aspect,  at 
times  as  darkness,  at  times  as  a pillar  of 
light ; now  a glory  settling  on  the  Taber- 
nacle or  resting  above  the  ark,  at  another 
time  accompanied  with  fire  and  lightnings,  so 
that  the  people  durst  not  look  on  it.  (Ex. 
xiii.  21,  22,  xiv.  19,  24,  xvi.  to,  xix.  r6,  18, 
20,  XX.  18,  xxiv,  16,  17,  xxxiii.  9,  xxxiv.  5, 
xxxvii.  6 — 9,  xl.  34 — ^38;  Num.  ix.  17 — 23, 
xii.  5 — TO,  xvi,  19 — 42).  When  the  Taber- 
nacle is  set  up,  the  Law  is  deposited  in  the 
Ark,  the  cloud  is  promised  to  rest  upon  the 
covering  of  the  Ark,  and,  as  the  Cherubim 
guard  the  Law  and  the  Testimony  of  God, 
so  they  may  be  supposed  reverently  to  sur- 
round the  throne  of  His  glory. 

If  we  went  no  farther,  we  should  natu- 
rally conclude,  that  the  Cherubim  were  wing- 
ed liirman  figures,  sculptured  in  the  Taber- 


nacle and  the  Temple,  representing  either 
the  personal  angels  of  God,  or  at  least  those 
ministers  and  agents  of  His  in  creation  which 
do  His  pleasure  and  wait  upon  His  will. 
We  should  infer,  that  their  offices  were  (i) 
to  guard  what  is  sacred  and  unapproachable, 
the  gate  of  Paradise  (Gen.  iii.  24),  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  in  which  were 
deposited  the  two  tables  of  the  Law  (com- 
pare Ezek.  xxviii.  14 — 16,  where  the  Prince 
of  Tyre  is  compared  to  a Cherub,  who  in 
Eden  covers  with  his  wings  the  precious 
stones):  (2)  to  surround  the  mystic  throne 
of  God  and  to  attend  His  presence  (hence 
the  Most  High  is  constantly  spoken  of  as 
dwelling  between  the  Cherubim,  i.  e.  by  His 
Shechinah  on  the  mercy  seat,  i S.  iv.  4 ; 
2 S.  vi.  2 ; 2 K.  xix.  15  ; Ps.  Ixxx.  2,  xeix. 
i;  Is.  xxxvii.  16):  (3)  perhaps  to  bear  up 
the  throne  of  God  upon  their  wings,  and 
to  carry  Him  when  He  appeared  in  His 
glory.  (Comp.  2 S.  xxii.  ii;  Ps.  xviii.  10, 
“ He  rode  upon  a Cherub,  and  did  fly : yea. 
He  did  fly  upon  the  wings  of  the  wind.”) 

2.  The  visions  of  Isaiah^  Ezekiel  and  St 
John']  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  Seraphim 
in  the  vision  of  Isaiah  ch.  vi.  (the  only  place 
in  which  they  are  named  in  Sci'ipture)  be  the 
same  as  the  Cherubim  or  not.  The  scene 
is  the  same  as  in  the  Cherubic  visions  of 
Ezekiel  and  St  John,  viz.  in  the  Temple  (vv. 
I.  6).  The  Seraphim  occupy  a place  like 
that  of  the  Cherubim,  viz.  just  by  the 
Throne  of  God ; and  their  taking  the  live 
coal  from  the  altar  seems  to  connect  them  with 
the  burning  coals  of  Ezekiel’s  Cherubim  (Ez. 
i.  13).  As  far  as  we  can  judge  these  Sera- 
phim resemble  the  Cherubim  of  the  Taber- 
nacle and  the  Temple  in  having  human  forms 
and  single  faces,  but  they  have  six  wings 
each : “ With  twain  he  covered  his  face, 
and  with  twain  he  covered  his  feet,  and  with 
twain  he  did  fly.” 

We  come  now  to  the  visions  of  Ezekiel 
and  St  John.  These  visions  also  have  their 
seat  in  the  Temple  as  the  image  of  Heaven. 
(See  Ezek.  x.  2,  3,  5,  18,  where  we  meet 
with  the  altar  fire  and  the  courts  of  the  Tem- 
ple : and  Rev.  passim^  where  all  the  imagery 
is  drawn  from  the  Temple,  c.g.  the  candle- 
stick ch.  i,  12,  the  High  Priest  ch.  i.  13,  the 
altar  ch.  vi.  9,  &;c.)  In  both  visions  the 
throne  corresponds  with  the  place  on  which 
the  Cloud  of  glory  rested  between  the  Che- 
rubim, The  Cherubim  then  are  desci-ibed 
as  living  creatures  (Ezek,  i.  5 ; Rev.  iv.  6), 
in  the  form  of  a man  (Ezek.  i.  5)  v/ith  four 
(Ezek.  i.  8,  ii.  23,  x.  7,  8 — 21),  or  with  six 
wings  (Rev.  iv.  8),  having  eyes  all  over 
(Ezek.  i.  18,  X.  12;  Rev.  iv.  8).  In  Ezekiel 
they  have  each  four  faces,  viz.  of  a man,  of  a 
lion,  of  an  ox,  of  an  eagle  (Ezek.  i.  10,  x. 
16).  In  St  John  they  have  but  one  face 
each,  these  faces  being  respectively  of  a man, 
of  a lion,  of  a calf  and  of  an  eagle  (Rev.  iv. 
7).  Their  feet  appear  to  Ezekiel  as  straight 


GENESIS.  III. 


51 


feet,  like  the  feet  of  oxen  (Ezek.  i.  7).  In 
Ezek.  X.  14,  we  have  the  very  singular  phe- 
nomenon that  the  face  of  a Cherub  seems 
identified  or  synonymous  with  the  face  of  a 
calf  or  an  ox.  (Comp.  Ezek.  i.  10;  Rev,  iv. 
7.)  It  is  thought  by  many,  that  in  these 
latter  visions  we  have  a fuller  description  of 
the  Cherubim  of  the  Tabernacle  and  the 
Temple  than  we  could  gather  from  the 
earlier  accounts  in  Holy  Scripture.  It  is 
supposed  that  they  too,  like  the  Cherubim 
in  the  visions,  must  have  been  composite 
creatures,  if  of  human  form,  yet  with  heads 
of  other  animals,  either  as  described  by  Eze- 
kiel or  by  St  John.  Moreover,  as  such  com- 
posite figures  must  plainly  have  been  emblem- 
atical, it  has  been  thought  that  the  Cheru- 
bim by  their  faces  of  a man,  a lion,  a bull 
and  an  eagle,  perhaps  expressed  the  strength 
and  wisdom  of  the  Divine  Majesty,  or  per- 
haps the  strength  and  the  swiftness,  with 
which  His  ministers  do  His  will.  Again,  as 
they  surround  the  throne  and  guard  the  Law 
of  the  Most  High,  so  perhaps  we  may  un- 
derstand, that  the  natural  and  the  spiritual 
creation  being  knit  up  together  in  one  great 
scheme,  these  symbolic  creatures  indicate  that 
all  things,  all  creation,  wait  upon  God,  all 
do  His  will,  all  work  together  for  good  to 
the  godly  and  for  judgment  on  the  un- 
godly. They  guard  His  law,  and  execute 
its  judgments,  and  keep  off  the  sinner  from 
the  blessing  of  its  rewards. 

The  existence  of  composite  winged  em- 
blematical figures  amongst  nations  more  or 
less  connected  with  the  Hebrews  is  now  well 
known.  The  Sphinx  and  the  Griffin  have 
long  been  familiar  to  us ; but  it  has  been  re- 
marked as  singular  that  Mr  Layard  should 
have  discovered  in  Nineveh  gigantic  winged 
bulls  with  human  heads,  winged  lions,  and 
human  figures  with  hawk  or  eagle  heads,  cor- 
responding so  nearly  with  the  winged  Cheru- 
bim of  the  visions  of  Ezekiel  and  St  John. 
These  gigantic  figures  too  are  generally  placed 
as  guards  or  sentinels  at  the  entrances  of  tem- 
ples and  palaces,  like  the  guarding  Cherubim 
of  Holy  Writ.  Moreover,  they  are  evidently 
not  objects  of  idolatrous  worship,  but  appear 
rather  as  worshippers  than  as  divinities.  It 
is  argued,  that  it  is  not  improbable  that  Mo- 
ses should  have  adopted  similar  emblems,  op- 
posing the  true  worship  to  the  false,  and 
placing  in  the  temple  of  the  true  God  em- 
blems of  protection,  watchfulness,  power,  and 
glory,  similar  to  those  used  in  the  temples  of  the 
gods  of  the  nations.  (See  Lammert,  ‘Die  Che- 
rubim’ in  ‘ Jahrbticher  fiir  Deutsche  Theol.’ 
Zwblfter  Band,  Viertes  Heft,  Gotha,  1867). 
It  is,  however,  to  be  observed,  that  nothing 
connects  Moses  with  Assyria  or  the  Assyrian 
sculptures;  and  indeed  those  found  by  Mr 
Layard  in  the  Temple  of  Kojundjik,  which 
are  most  to  the  point,  are  not  considered  by 
him  to  be  of  great  antiquity.  Far  more  likely 


is  it  that  some  Egyptian  type  should  have 
been  followed:  and  we  find  in  the  Egyptian 
Sculptures,  and  in  the  i8th  dynasty,  which 
was  probably  the  dynasty  of  the  Exodus,  ex- 
amples of  a shrine  or  ark  wonderfully  calcu- 
lated to  remind  us  of  the  ark  of  the  Covenant 
made  by  Moses.  It  Is  carried  by  persons  of 
the  sacerdotal  race,  by  staves,  as  the  Levites 
carried  the  ark.  In  the  centre  is  the  symbol 
of  the  Deity,  and  two  winged  human  figures 
spread  out  their  wings  around  and  over  it. 
(Lepsius,  ‘Denkm.’  iii.  Bl.  14.)  These  two 
figures,  however,  represent  the  goddess  Ma. 
under  the  tv/o-fold  notion  of  “justice”  and 
“truth.”  This  is  clear  from  the  ostrich  fea- 
thers on  the  heads  of  the  figures.  This  god- 
dess is  often  called  “the  double  Ma,”  and  it 
is  very  doubtful,  whether,  notwithstanding 
this  apparent  similarity,  there  is  any  relation 
between  these  figures  and  the  Cherubim  of  the 
Tabernacle. 

What  then  is  to  be  said  of  the  vision  of 
Ezekiel  and  of  St  John  who  nearly  repeats 
the  imagery  in  Ezekiel?  We  may  observe, 
that  Ezekiel  was  a priest  (Ezek.  i.  3).  He 
was  therefore  probably  familiar  with  the 
sculptures  in  the  Temple,  especially  the  Che- 
rubim carved  on  the  bases  of  the  ten  lavers, 
along  with  bulls  and  lions,  and  with  four 
wheels  curiously  connected  with  them.  His 
vision,  the  scene  of  which  was  the  Temple, 
naturally  was  mixed  up  with  objects  in  the 
Temple.  The  connection  of  his  Cherubic 
figures  with  wheels  is  explained  by  i Kings 
vii.  29,  30,  33.  ‘Even  the  lion  and  bull-heads 
of  these  figures  may  have  come  from  the 
mingling  of  the  Cherubim  with  the  bulls  and 
lions  in  the  Temple.  But,  besides  this,  he  saw 
these  visions  by  the  river  Chebar  in  the  land 
of  the  Chaldeans;  and  there  he  and  his  people 
would,  no  doubt,  have  become  familiarized 
with  the  gigantic  winged  guardians  of  the 
temples  and  the  palaces  in  Babylonia  and  As- 
syria, the  bulls  and  lions  and  eagle-headed 
men,  and  human-headed  bulls.  It  is  highly 
probable  that  the  difference  between  the  Che- 
rubim in  Ezekiel’s  vision  (repeated  with  cer- 
tain variations  in  St  John’s),  and  the  Cheru- 
bim in  the  Tabernacle  and  the  Temple  re- 
sulted in  part  from  this.  In  God’s  dealings 
with  man.  He  constantly  uses  for  lessons 
things  just  before  men's  eyes.  And  so  He 
may  have  done  in  this  case  with  Ezekiel.  It 
is  almost  certain  that  Ezekiel's  visions  did  not 
represent  accurately  that  to  which  he  had 
been  used  in  the  I'emple.  Hence  he  appears 
not  at  first  to  have  recognized  them  as  being 
Cherubim ; but  at  the  end  of  his  second  vision 
he  tells  us,  that  now  he  knew  they  were  Che- 
rubim (Ezek.  X.  20).  To  Moses,  on  the  other 
hand,  but  still  on  the  sam.e  principle,  God  had 
dictated  the  carving  of  figures  like  those 
which  he  had  seen  in  Egypt,  figures  emblem- 
atical of  guardianship,  and  of  the  reverence 
of  those  who  wait  constantly  upon  God,  but 

D 2. 


GENESIS.  IV. 


[v- 


which  had  never  been  objects  of  idolatrous 
worship.  Thus  He  sanctioned,  or  at  least 
tolerated,  that  v/hich  seems  so  dear  to  re- 
ligious humanity,  the  use  of  symbolism  wheie 
dangers  from  its  abuse  were  not  great.  We 
conclude,  therefore,  notwithstanding  much 
authority  to  the  contrary,  that  in  all  proba- 
bility the  Cherubim  of  glory  shadowing  the 
mercy  seat  were  winged  human  hgures,  with 
human  faces  too. 

The  Cherubim  of  Paradise^ 
that  Moses  describes  the  placing  of  the  Che- 
rubim at  the  gates  of  Eden  in  words  suggest- 
ed by  that  which  he  had  to  carve  in  the 
Tabernacle.  - He  placed... Cherubim  is  in 
the  Hebrew  “ He  made  to  dwell,  a 

term  specially  lielonging  to  the  dwelling  of 
the  glory  of  God  in  the  Shechinah,  the  cloud 
of  glory.  And  the  Paradise  Cherubim  were 
to  keep,  lit.  “to  guard,’’  the  way 

to  the  tree  of  life,  as  the  Cherubim  m the 
Tabernacle  guarded  the  Ark 
Those,  who  believe  the  Cherubim  in  the  i a- 
bernacle  to  have  been  like  those  seen  by  Eze- 
kiel, naturally  believe  also  that  they  were  but 
emblems  of  those  powers  of  nature  and  crea- 
tion by  which  the  Creator  so  constantly 
works  His  will.  The  Cherubim  and  the 
naming  sword  at  the  East  Gate  of  Raradise 
to  them  mean  only  that  the  way  back  to 
Eden  and  to  the  tree  of  life  wms  closed  by 
such  natural  hindrances  as  the  Author  of  na- 
ture saw  fit  to  interpose.  It  is  not  impossib  e 
that  even  if  the  Cherubim  of  the  Tabernacle 
were  not  composite  creatures,  but  simply 
winged  human  figures,  much  the  same  may 
have  been  meant.  There  are  doubtless  hosts 
of  spiritual  beings  that  surround  the  throne  ot 
God  and  do  His  will ; but  all  things  serve  Him. 
He  maketh  the  winds  flis  angels,  and  a flame 
of  fire  His  ministers.  The  stern,  mechanical. 


turning  every  wav  of  the  sword  of  flame  per- 
haps points  to  this;  and  the  sacred  writer 
may  possibly  have  signified  under  the  symbols 
of  angelic  beings  the  great  ministering  powers 

of  nature.  , u • 

This  at  least  is  taught  us  by  the  Cheimbim 
guarding  the  w^ay  to  the  Tree  of  life.  Para- 
dise had  been  lost  by  sin ; but  it  was  not  gone 
for  ever.  The  tree  of  life,  and  the  garden 
where  it  grew,  were  still  in  full  glory  under 
the  keeping  of  God  and  of  His  holy  angels. 
The  forfeited  life  is  not  irrecoverable  : but  it 
can  only  be  recovered  through  fighting  and 
conquest,  suffering  and  death.  There  w'-ere 
between  it  and  man  the  ministers  of  righteous 
vengeance  and  the  flaming  sword.  ^ ^ 

The  Etymology  of  the  word  Cherub  is  very 
obscure.  Some  derive  it  from  2'^'^  (Cherab) 

“ to  plough,”  it  being  inferred  from  Ezek.  i. 
lo  compared  wdth  x.  14,  that  the  true  (..herub 
form  \vas  that  of  an  ox.  Others  compare 
nnp  (Kerob)  “near,”  i.e.  admitted  to  the 
special  presence  of  God.  The  Talmudisp  as- 
sert that  the  name  signifies  “a  child,'  and 
that  the  faces  of  the  Cherubim  were  the  faces 
of  children.  Eichhorn  and  others  compare 
the  Greek  ypui//-,  ypilivo?,  rrom  the  PeisitUi 
irreifen  “to  hold,”  and  consider  the  name  to 
be  nearly  equal  in  significance,  ^sweW  as  in 
dcriv3.tion,  with  the  fabulous  Griffin  or  Gi)-* 
phon  of  the  East.  Gesenius  suggests  the 
root  n-lD  (Charab)  = D“in  (Charam)  “to  shut 
out,”  “to  consecrate”  (hence  haram,  a sa- 
cred shrine).  According  to  this  derivation 
the  Cherubim  w^ould  be  the  guardians  and 
defenders  of  that  which  is  consecrated,  of  the 
Shrine  or  the  Paradise.  Canon  Cook  (see 
Appendix  to  this  volume)  has  traced  the  word 
to  an  Egyptian  root,  which  probably  means 
“carve,”  or  at  any  rate  “shape.”  In  Matt, 
xviii.  a,  xepfi3  is  the  Coptic  for  /xopc/)?). 


Cain,  and  said,  I have  gotten  a man 
from  the  Lord. 

2 And  she  again  bare  his  brother  ^ 
^Abel.  And  Abel  v/as  ^a  keeper  of  Held. 
sheep,  but  Cain  was  a tiller  of  the 

ground.  ■ c ■ ■ 

2 And  Hn  process  of  time  it  came  of  days. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

I The  birth,  trade,  and  religion  of  Cain  and 
Abel.  8 The  vnirder  of  Abel.  ii  The  ciirse 
of  Cain.  1 7 Enoch  the  first  city.  19  Lamech 
and  his  two  wives.  25  The  birth  of  Seth,  cO 
and  Enos. 

And  Adam  knew  Eve  his  wife; 
and  she  conceived,  and  bare 


Chap.  IV.  1.  The  last  Chapter  was  a 
history  of  the  first  birth  of  sin ; this  gives  us 
an  account  of  its  developcment,  as  also  of  the 
first  out-spreading  of  the  liiiman  race.  Cain 
and  Abel  are  respectively  types  of  the  two 
opposing  principles  discernible  throughout  the 
sacred  history;  Cain  of  the  unchecked  domi- 
nion of  evil,  Abel  (;f  the  victory  of  faith. 

I haw  gotten  a man  from  the  Lokd]  LXX. 
“by  means  of  the  Lord;”  t)nk.  “from 
the  Lord;”  Syriac  “for  the  Lord;”  Pseudo- 


Jonathan  “ a man,  the  angel  of  the  Lord. 
Followung  the  latter  paraphrpt,  Luther, 
Munster,  Fagius,  Schmidt,  Pfeifler,  Baum- 
gart.  and  others,  have  rendered  “ 1 have  got- 
ten a man,  even  JEHOVAH,”  as  though 
Eve  understood  that  the  seed,  who  was  to 
bruise  the  serpent,  shoukl  be  incarnate  Deity, 
and  supposed  that  Cain  was  that  seed,  ^^'e 
can,  however,  scarcely  see  ground  enough  to 
believe  that  Eve's  knowledge  wms  so  advanced, 
or  her  faith  in  the  xMessiah  so  lively  as  to 


GENESIS.  IV. 


53 


V.  4.] 


to  pass,  that  Cain  brought  of  the  fruit 
of  the  ground  an  offering  unto  the 
Lord. 

4 And  Abel,  he  also  brought  of  the 


f 

firstlings  of  his  ^dock  and  of  the  \ 

thereof.  And  the  L®rd  had 
spect  unto  Abel  and  to  his  offer-  4. 
ing: 


have  called  forth  such  an  exclamation.  It  is 
more  probable  that  the  particle  rendered  in 
our  Version  frorn  is  a preposition  (it  is  in  the 
next  chapter  (v.  24)  rendered  q.uith\  and  that 
it  signifies,  as  the  LXX.  has  it,  by  means  of 
or,  as  Gesenius,  by  the  help  of.  There  is, 
however,  little  doubt  that  her  words  had 
some  pregnant  meaning,  and  that  she  looked 
on  Cain  as  at  all  events  one  of  that  race 
which  was  destined  to  triumph  over  the  seed 
of  the  Serpent. 

“The  use  of  the  name  (JEHOVAH)  is 
significant,  though  we  cannot  think  that  Eve 
already  knew  this  name  of  God,  which  was 
first  revealed  to  man  at  a later  period  of  his 
history,  and  which  is  of  Hebrew  origin, 
whereas  that  language  probably  did  not  exist 
until  the  time  of  the  dispersion  at  Babel. 
Yet,  doubtless,  the  historian  expresses  the 
true  meaning  of  Eve’s  speech  which  she  spoke, 
inspired  by  that  help  which  had  been  gra- 
ciously given  her  of  God”  (Keil,  ‘Bibl.  Com- 
ment.’). 

2.  Abel.']  She  called  her  first-born  Cain 
{possession).,  but  this  second  Hebei  {breath., 
•vapour.,  •vanity,  nothingness),  because  all  hu- 
man possession  is  but  vanity.  Yet  it  is  not 
said,  that  Abel  was  so  named  by  Eve  herself, 
as  Cain  had  been.  Hence  it  is  possible,  that 
the  name  Abel  was  that  by  which  he  became 
known,  after  his  life  had  passed  away  like  a 
breath  or  a vapour. 

Abel  nvas  a keeper  of  sheeps  but  Cain  'njoas 
a tiller  of  the  ground]  The  word  ren- 
dered sheep  includes  sheep  and  goats.  It  is 
observed  that  the  wildest  nations  live  by 
hunting,  those,  who  have  thrown  off  the  first 
barbarism,  are  nomadic,  feeding  sheep  and 
cattle,  those  more  civilized  are  agriculturists 
(see  Rosen.).  Hence  the  rationalist  view  co- 
incides with  the  heathen,  that  a state  of  na- 
ture was  pure  barbarism,  and  that  man  gra- 
dually emerged  from  it  into  nomadic,  then 
into  agricultural,  and  finally  into  civilized 
life.  In  contradistinction  to  this,  the  account 
of  Genesis  represents  man  as  placed  by  his 
Maker  in  a state  of  very  simple  civilization. 
Adam  in  Paradise  was  “ to  dress  and  to  keep” 
the  garden  (Gen.  ii.  15).  His  sons  must 
have  learned  from  him  the  knowledge  which 
he  had  thus  acquired.  It  is  not  likely  to 
have  been  extensive  knowledge,  probably  the 
very  simplest  possible,  but  still  sufficient  to 
rescue  them  from  a state  of  pure  barbarism, 
and  from  the  necessity  of  living  by  the  chase. 

See  note  A at  the  end  of  this  Chapter. 

3.  in  process  of  time]  Tit.  “at  the  end  of 
days.”  Abenezra  understands  “at  the  end  of 


the  year.”  So  Fag i us,  Bochart,  'Clericus, 
Dathe,  Rosenmiiller,  and  many  others.  Cle- 
ricus quotes  from  Aristot.  ‘ Ethics,’ V III.  2. 
“ It  appears  that  ancient  sacrifices  were  offer- 
ed after  the  gathering  of  the  fruits  of  the 
earth,  they  being  a kind  of  first  fruits.  More- 
over, at  that  time,  men  were  most  at  leisure.” 

an  offering]  The  word  here  used  always 
signifies  an  unbloody  oblation.  It  is  frequently 
translated  “a  meat  offering.”  Its  nature  is 
defined.  Lev.  xi.  i seq. 

4.  of  the  firstlings  of  his  fiock  and  of  the 
fat  thereof]  There  has  been  in  all  times  a 
difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  Divine  or  hu- 
man origin  of  saciafice.  Sacrifices  were  so 
thoroughly  sanctioned  by  the  Divine  law  in 
after  times,  so  generally  accepted  by  God, 
and  made  so  conspicuously  types  of  the  Lamb 
of  God,  that  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how 
they  should  have  arisen  but  from  a Divine 
command.  Yet,  there  is  a deep  silence  as  to 
any  such  command,  whilst  the  institution  of 
the  Sabbath  and  of  other  positive  ordinances 
is  distinctly  recorded.  Hence,  many  have 
thought  that  sacrifice  was  dictated  by  an  in- 
stinct of  natural  religion,  and  then,  by  a con- 
descension to  man’s  infirmity,  sanctioned  for 
a temporary  purpose,  and  constituted  an 
image  of  redemption.  It  is  impossible  to  say 
what  the  view  of  the  Apostolic  fathers  was; 
but  from  the  time  of  Justin  Martyr  (‘  ApoL’ 

II.  5;  ‘Dial.’  pp.  237,  292),  the  fathers  gen- 
erally adopted  the  belief  that  sacrifice  was  a 
human,  not  a Divine  ordinance.  A remarlc- 
able  exception  to  this  appears  in  a passage  of 
the  most  learned  of  the  4th  century  divines 
(Euseb.  ‘Dem.  Evang.’  i.  10),  in  which  he 
distinctly  ascribes  the  origin  of  sacrifice  to  a 
Divine  inspiration,  though  even  this  does  not 
necessarily  imply  a Divine  command.  It 
may  be  fairly  said,  that  no  certain  conclu- 
sion on  this  question  can  possibly  be  arrived 
at,  in  the  silence  of  Scripture.  The  principal 
arguments  on  the  side  of  the  Divine  origin 
may  be  seen  in  Bp.  Jer.  Taylor,  ‘Duct.  Dub.' 
Bk.  II.  R.  XIII.  §§  27,  30;  W'itsii  ‘ Tgypt.’ 

III.  14;  Kennicott,  ‘Two  Dissertations,’ ii. 
p.  184  sq. ; Magee  ‘ On  Atonement,’  Disc.  11. 
and  notes;  Faber,  ‘Three  Dispensations,’  Vol.  i. 
The  arguments  on  the  opposite  side  may  be 
found  in  Spencer,  ‘Dc  Legibus  Heb.’  Lib.  ill. 
Diss.  ii.;  Warburton,  ‘ Div.  Legat.’  Bks.  vi. 
IX. ; Davison’s  ‘Remains,’  art.  on  origin  of  Sa- 
crifice. The  work  of  Outram,  ‘De  Sacrificiis,’ 
should  by  all  means  be  consulted,  which  takes 
an  impartial  survey  of  the  v/hole  question. 

had  respect  unto]  Comp.  Num.  xvi.  15; 


54 


GENESIS.  IV. 


[v.  5—8. 


p 

5 But  unto  Cain  and  to  his  offering 
he  had  not  respect.  And  Cain  was 
very  wroth,  and  his  countenance 
fell. 

6 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Cain, 
Why  art  thou  wroth  ? and  why  is  thy 
countenance  fallen? 


7 If  thou  doest  well,  shalt  thou  not  " Or, 

•I  be  accepted  ? and  if  thou  doest  not 
well,  sin  lieth  at  the  door.  And  ''  unto 
thee  shall  be  his  desire,  and  thou  shalt  sribject 

, , . icnto  thee. 

rule  over  him.  -^wisd.  lo. 

8 And  Cain  talked  with  Abel  his 
brother : and  it  came  to  pass,  ‘^when  ^ 

12.  Jude  II. 


Amos  V.  How  did  the  Almighty  express 
His  approval  of  Abel’s  offering?  According 
to  the  ancient  Greek  translation  of  Theod.,  it 
was  by  sending  down  fire  to  consume  the  sa- 
crifice, as  in  Lev.  ix.  24;  Jud.  vi.  ai;  i K. 
xviii.  38;  I Chr.  xxi.  26;  2 Chr.  vii.  i.  This 
explanation  has  been  adopted  by  St  Jerome, 
Rashi,  Abenezra,  Kimchi,  Luther,  Grotius, 
Delitzsch,  and  many  others.  Nothing  but 
conjecture  can  guide  us  in  this  matter.  We 
must  be  content  to  suppose,  that  some  sign, 
intelligible  to  both  the  brothers,  was  given 
from  above.  The  reason,  as  well  as  the 
mode,  of  the  acceptance  of  Abel’s  gift  has 
been  greatly  debated.  Ver.  7,  and  Heb.  xi.  4, 
seem  to  prove  that  the  difference  of  spirit  in 
which  the  two  offerings  were  made  caused 
the  diversity  of  acceptance.  The  Apostle 
says,  “ By  faith  Abel  offered  a more  excellent 
sacrifice.”  Faith,  therefore,  was  the  motive 
power;  yet  the  result  may  have  been  that  the 
sacrifice  so  offered  was  a better,  fuller,  and 
more  acceptable  sacrifice.  Some  have  main- 
tained that  Cain  brought  fruits  only,  that 
Abel  brought  both  fruits  and  the  firstlings  of 
his  flock  (see  Kennicott,  as  above,  p.  194)- 
The  wording  of  the  original  does  not  seem  to 
warrant  this.  But,  whilst  we  may  see  in  the 
difi'erent  spirit  and  disposition  of  the  offerers 
a reason  why  one  should  be  accepted  and  the 
other  rejected,  still  “the  view  so  often  ex- 
pressed, that  Abel’s  bloody  sacrifice  resulted 
from  a more  profound  religious  apprehension 
than  that  of  Cain,  which  was  ‘ without  shed- 
ding of  blood,’  seems  to  agree  with  the  gene- 
ral bearing  of  the  text”  (Kurtz,  ‘Hist,  of  O. 
C.’  Vol.  1.  p.  89);  even  if  it  be  not  admitted 
that  a Hivine  ordinance  had  already  sanction- 
ed animal  sacTifices. 

5.  countenance  fell]  Cp.  the  original  of 
Nehem.  vi.  16. 

7.  shalt  thou  twt  he  accepted]  Is  there 
not  acceptance?  Lit.  “ lifting  up”  either 
of  guilt  {i.e.  pardonV  or  of  the  countenance,  as 
when  a supjiliant  bending  down  his  face  is 
accepted,  and  so  his  face  raised  up  and  cheer- 
ed. Or  more  probably  as  the  A.  V.,  Is  there 
not  acceptance?  Shalt  thou  not  be  accepted 
by  God? 

if  thou  doest  not  etuelh  sin  lieth  at  the 
door]  I'his  is  generally  explained  as  mean- 
ing that  sin  crouches  at  the  door  of  the  soul, 
like  a wild  beast,  ready  to  devour  it.  Others 


understand  sin  to  mean  the  punishment  of  sin., 
in  which  sense  the  word  is  sometimes  used, 
see  Zech.  xiv.  19  (so  Onk.,  Vatablus,  Cornel, 
a Lapide).  Some  again  interpret  “a  sin  offer- 
ing” (another  frequent  sense  of  the  Hebrew 
word)  which  in  the  form  of  an  animal  victim 
lies  or  crouches  at  your  door  (see  Kennicott, 
as  above,  p.  216,  and  Lee,  ‘Lex.’  s.  v. 

The  chief  objection  to  this  latter  interpreta- 
tion is  that  there  is  no  instance  of  this  use  of 
the  word  before  the  giving  of  the  Law ; which 
Law  appears  to  have  brought  out  into  clearer 
relief  the  knowledge  of  sin  and  the  need  of 
sin-offering.  See  Rom.  iii.  20. 

And  unto  thee  shall  be  his  desire.,  &c.] 
There  are  two  principal  interpretations  of 
these  words,  which  have  divided  commenta- 
tors in  all  times,  the  one  set  referring  his  de- 
sire to  Abel,  the  other  to  sin.  The  LXX. 
Version  clearly  refers  it  to  Abel,  which  inter- 
pretation is  adopted  by  Chrysost.,  Ambrose, 
Augustine,  and  most  of  the  fathers,  by  Gro- 
tius, Vossius,  Heidegger,  by  our  own  trans- 
lators, and  by  a majority  of  English  commen- 
tators. The  sense  will  then  be,  that  Cain, 
whose  jealousy  had  been  excited  by  God’s 
acceptance  of  Abel,  need  not,  if  he  behaved 
well,  fear  that  Abel  should  be  preferred  be- 
fore him;  his  pre-eminence  of  birth  should 
still  be  preserved  to  him : the  desire  of  the 
younger  brother  should  be  towards  him  (an 
idiomatic  expression  specially  noting  the  long- 
ing of  one  who  looks  up  to  another  as  an  off 
ject  of  reverence,  and  so  noting  dependence, 
as  of  a younger  brother  on  an  elder,  cp.  Gen. 
iii.  16).  The  other  interpretation,  which  is 
apparently,  though  not  certainly,  favoured  by 
the  Vulgate,  is  given  in  the  Targums  of  Jeru- 
salem and  Pseudo- Jonathan,  and  adopted  by 
Rashi,  and  most  Jewish  writers,  by  Luther’s 
translation,  Munster,  Pererius,  Rosenmilller, 
Von  Bohlen,  Delitzsch,  Knobel,  Keil,  and 
most  of  the  Germans.  The  sense  of  the  pas- 
sage on  this  supposition  would  be,  “Sin  lieth 
crouching  like  a wild  beast  at  the  door  of  the 
soul;  its  desire  is  towards  thee,  yet  thou 
art  not  given  over  into  its  power ; but  if  thou 
wilt,  thou  shalt  be  able  to  keep  it  in  subjec- 
tion.” The  former  of  these  interpretations, 
which  is  also  the  more  ancient,  seems  both 
more  natural  and  more  according  with  the 
simple  meaning  of  the  original. 

8.  Cain  talked  with  Abel]  The  original 


V.  9—14- 


GENESIS.  IV. 


f Hen. 
bloods. 


they  were  in  the  field,  that  Cain  rose 
up  against  Abel  his  brother,  and  slew 
him. 

9 ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Cain, 
Where  is  Abel  thy  brother?  And  he 
said,  I know  not : Am  I my  brother’s 
keeper  ? 

10  And  he  said,  What  hast  thou 
done  ? the  voice  of  thy  brother’s  ^ blood 
crieth  unto  me  from  the  ground. 

1 1 And  now  art  thou  cursed  from 
the  earth,  which  hath  opened  her 
mouth  to  receive  thy  brother’s  blood 
from  thy  handj 


12  When  thou  tillest  the  ground,  it 
shall  not  henceforth  yield  unto  thee 
her  strength;  a fugitive  and  a vaga- 
bond shalt  thou  be  in  the  earth. 

13  And  Cain  said  unto  the  Lord, 
■'My  punishment  is  greater  than  I can  "Or, 
bear. 


14  Behold,  thou  hast  driven 


iniquity  is 
greater 
than  that 
it  may  be 

out  this  day  from  the  face  of  forgiven. 
earth;  and  from  thy  face  shall  I be 
hid;  and  I shall  be  a fugitive  and  a 
vagabond  in  the  earth ; and  it  shall 
come  to  pass,  that  every  one  that 
findeth  me  shall  slay  me. 


means  more  naturally  “ Cain  said  to  Abel.” 
Accordingly  in  some  few  of  the  Masoretic 
MSS.  there  is  the  mark  of  an  omission  here. 
The  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  the  LXX.,  Syr., 
Vulg.,  read  “Cain  said  to  Abel  his  brother. 
Let  us  go  into  the  field.”  These  latter  words, 
however,  do  not  occur  in  the  Greek  Versions 
of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  Theodotion,  or  the 
most  ancient  Targum,  that  of  Onkelos  it  is 
probable  that  the  words  were  inserted  in  the 
Sam.,  LXX.,  &c.  as  a gloss,  from  the  difficulty 
of  explaining  the  passage  without  them ; and 
that  this  is  really  an  example  of  an  ancient 
and  obsolete  usage  of  the  verb  to  say^  which 
here  means  either  to  talk  ^duith.,  as  the  A.  V., 
or  to  telh  as  Jerome,  or  to  command.,  to  lay  a 
command  upon.,  according  to  Arabic  usage,  as 
Prof.  Lee. 

10.  the  'voice  of  thy  brother's  blood  crieth 
unto  me\  The  verb  “crieth”  here  agrees 
with  “blood,”  which  is  in  the  plural,  in 
which  form  it  is  used  specially  of  blood  shed, 
drops  of  blood,  above  all  of  blood  shed  by 
violence  and  murder.  Murder  is  a crime 
which  cries  to  heaven  for  vengeance,  and 
though  the  blood  may  be  hidden,  its  voice 
cannot  be  silenced. 

11.  wow  art  thou  cursed from  the  earth"]  The 
words  are  variously  rendered  (i)  “ Cursed 
art  thou  from  the  ground,”  i.e.  the  curse  shall 
come  upon  thee  from  the  earth,  which  shall 
not  yield  thee  her  fruit  (Abenezra,  Kimchi, 
Knobel).  (2)  “ Cursed  art  thou  away  from 
the  land,”  i.e.  Thou  art  cursed  and  banished 
from  the  land,  in  which  thou  hast  dwelt,  and 
in  which  thy  father  and  brethren  are  dwelling 
(Rosenm.,Vater,Tuch, Knobel).  (3)  “Cursed 
art  thou  even  more  than  the  earth”  which 
had  been  cursed  (ch.  iii.  17).  Of  these  (3) 
seems  quite  inadmissible;  either  of  the  others 
yields  a pertinent  sense.  The  second  is  the 
most  probable. 

12.  -When  thou  tillest.,  &c.]  The  curse 
was  in  effect,  that  Cain  should  be  banished 
fi'om  the  land  inhabited  and  cultivated  by 


Adam  and  his  family,  should  wander  about 
without  a settled  habitation  or  a fertile  dwell- 
ing place,  living  hardly  in  a barren  and  inhos- 
pitable wilderness. 

13.  My  punishment]  There  is  great  va- 
riety of  interpretation  here.  The  Hebrews 
constantly  expressed  sin  and  punishment  for 
sin  by  the  same  words;  moreover  to  bear., 
and  to  take  a^ay  or  forgi-ve.,  were  thoughts 
closely  connected.  Hence  (i)  “ My  sin  is 
too  great  to  be  forgiven  ” (as  in  the  Marg.)  is 
the  rendering  of  LXX.,  Onk.,  Syr.,  Vulg., 
Saad.  Whilst  (2)  Abenezra,  Kimchi,  and 
the  majority  of  modern  commentators,  render 
as  the  A.  V.,  “ My  punishment  is  greater 
than  I can  bear.”  Both  these  renderings 
can  be  defended  on  good  grounds  by  Hebrew 
usage.  The  latter  seems  more  accordant  with 
the  temper  of  Cain’s  mind,  and  is  probably 
correct. 

14.  from  thy  face  shall  I be  hid]  Though 
God  no  longer  constantly  manifested  His 
presence  as  in  Eden,  yet  there  were  at  times 
some  indications  of  that  presence,  {e.g.  see  v. 
4).  It  may  perhaps  be  infen-ed  that  some 
special  place  had  already  been  set  apart  for 
Divine  worship  and  sacred  service.  (On  this 
subject  see  Blunt,  ‘Undesigned  Coincidences,’ 
I.  p.  9,  eighth  Edition,  1863). 

e'very  one  that  findeth  me  shall  slay  me] 
Josephus,  Kimchi,  Michaelis,  and  others, 
have  supposed  that  Cain  feared  death  from 
the  beasts  of  the  field ; but  most  commenta- 
tors rightly  understand  that  his  fear  was  from 
the  vengeance  of  his  own  kindred.  It  is  ob- 
served by  Kurtz  that,  according  to  hints  ga- 
thered from  Gen.  iv.  25,  the  murder  of  Abel 
probably  took  place  just  before  the  birth  of 
Seth,  i.e.  130  years  after  the  creation  of  man, 
Gf^n.  V.  3.  We  need  not  suppose  that  Cain, 
Abel,  and  Seth,  were  the  only  sons  of  Adam. 
Indeed,  from  Gen.  v.  4,  we  infer  that  there 
were  others.  Cain,  Abel,  and  Seth,  are  men- 
tioned for  obvious  reasons;  Abel  for  his  piety 
and  his  early  death,  Cain  for  his  wickedness 


56 


GENESIS.  IV. 


[v.  15—19. 


tHeb. 

Chanoch. 


15  And  the  Lord  said  unto  him, 
Therefore  whosoever  slayeth  Cain, 
vengeance  shall  be  taken  on  him  seven- 
fold. And  the  Lord  set  a mark  upon 
Cain,  lest  any  finding  him  should  kill 
him. 

16  ^ And  Cain  went  out  from  the 
presence  of  the  Lord,  and  dwelt  in 
the  land  of  Nod,  on  the  east  of  Eden. 

17  And  Cain  knew  his  wife;  and 
she  conceived,  and  bare  ^ Enoch:  and 


he  builded  a city,  and  called  the  name 
of  the  city,  after  the  name  of  his  son, 
Enoch. 

18  And  unto  Enoch  was  born  Irad : 

and  Irad  begat  Mehujael : and  Me- 
hujael  begat  Methusael : and  Me- 
thusael  begat  ^Lamech.  tHeb. 

19  And  Lamech  took  unto  him 
two  wives : the  name  of  the  one  vjas 
Adah,  and  the  name  of  the  other  Zil- 
lah. 


and  the  worldly  wisdom  of  his  posterity,  Seth 
because  he  was  the  ancestor  of  the  promised 
seed.  There  may  then,  in  130  years,  have 
grown  up  a very  considerable  number  of  chil- 
dren and  grandchildren  to  Adam  and  Eve. 
An  Eastern  tradition  assigns  to  them  no  less 
than  33  sons  and  27  daughters. 

15.  Therefore]  The  LXX.,  Symm., 
Theodot.,  Vulg.,  Syr.,  read  Not  so.  So 
Dathe  and  others. 

nvhosoe'ver  slayeth]  Cain,  though  guilty 
of  a terrible  sin,  may  not  have  had  the  full 
and  fixed  purpose  to  commit  murder,  but  in 
a moment  of  furious  anger  have  seized  a 
weapon  and  dealt  a murderous  blow,  perhaps 
hardly  aware  of  its  deadly  consequences. 
Hence,  it  may  be,  the  Most  High  forbids  him 
to  be  put  to  death,  but  sentences  him  to  a 
perpetual  banishment  from  his  early  home, 
and  to  a life  of  misery  and  sorrow.  Kalisch 
well  observes,  “The  early  death  of  Abel  can 
be  no  punishment;  he  seemed  in  fact  to  enjoy 
the  peculiar  favour  of  God ; his  offering  was 
graciously  accepted.  We  find,  therefore,  in 
this  narrative  the  great  and  beautiful  thought, 
that  life  is  not  the  highest  boon;  that  the 
pious  find  abetter  existence  and  a more  bless- 
ed reward  in  another  and  a purer  sphere;  but 
that  crime  and  guilt  are  the  greatest  evils; 
that  they  are  punished  by  a long  and  weari- 
some life,  full  of  fear  and  care  and  compunc- 
tion of  conscience.” 

set  a mark  upon  Cain]  Gave  a sign  to 
Cain.  LXX.  The  interpretation  that  God 
provided  Cain  with  some  mark  which  would 
make  him  known  is  adopted  by  Pseudo- Jona- 
than, most  of  the  Jewish  Commentators, 
Luther,  Calvin,  Piscator,  Wogal,  &c.  Most 
modern  commentators  agree  that  God  gave 
some  sign  to  Cain  to  assure  him  that  he 
should  not  be  slain,  (Abenezra,  Gabe,  Dathe, 
Rosenm.,  Gesen.,  iVlaurer,  Hitzig,  V.  Bohl., 
Tuch,  Baumg.,  Kalisch,  Dclitzsch).  Of 
what  nature  the  sign  may  have  been,  we  have 
now  no  means  of  learning. 

16.  the  presence  of  the  l.orcT]  It  is  ques- 
tioned wlicther  this  means  merely  from  con- 
versing with  the  .^.ord,  or  whether  Eden, 


though  not  the  garden  of  Eden,  in  which 
Adam  had  dwelt  since  the  fall,  was  esteemed 
a sacred  spot,  a spot  in  which  still  a peculiar 
presence  of  God  was  looked  for  by  man.  See 
on  V.  14. 

NocT]  i.e.  “wandering.”  It  is  impossible 
to  say  where  Nod  was  situated,  except  that 
it  lay  east  of  Eden. 

17.  Enoch]  It  has  been  contended  that 
in  these  genealogies  Adam  — Enosh,  Enoch 
or  Chanoch  = Enoch,  Cain  = Kenan,  Irad  = 
Jered,  Mehujael  = Mahalaleel,  Methusael  = 
Methuselah.  In  the  first  place,  however,  there 
is  a manifest  difference  in  the  roots  of  the 
names  so  identified;  next,  the  paucity  of 
names  at  this  early  period  may  have  natu- 
rally led  to  similar  names  being  adopted 
in  different  families;  3rdly,  the  relationship 
of  the  families  of  Seth  and  Cain,  and  the  pro- 
bably occasional  intercourse  between  them, 
would  not  unfiaturaily  tend  to  the  same 
result.  Dettinger  is  quoted  by  Kurtz  (Vol. 
I.  p.  91),  as  having  called  attention  to  the 
fact,  that  the  text  furnishes  more  detailed 
particulars  about  Enoch  and  Lamech,  whose 
names  were  so  similar  to  Sethite  names,  in 
order  to  prevent  the  possibility  of  their  being 
confounded,  and  to  shew  more  clearly  that 
the  direction  in  which  these  two  lines  tended 
was  markedly  opposite.  See  Kurtz  as  above, 
Hilvernick,  ‘Introd.  to  Pentateuch,’  p.  109. 

budded  a city]  Rather  “began  to  build  a 
city,”  lit.  “was  building  a city.”  It  is  not 
necessary  to  suppose  that  the  city  was  built 
immediately  on  the  birth  of  Enoch.  It  may 
have  been  built  when  Cain  had  lived  many 
years  and  was  surrounded  by  children  and 
grandchildren.  The  wqrd  city  is,  of  course, 
not  to  be  interpreted  by  modern  ideas;  a 
village  of  rude  huts,  which  was  distinguished 
from  the  booths  or  tents  of  the  nomads, 
would  satisfy  all  the  conditions  of  the  text. 

19.  Lamech  took  unto  him  t^vo  nvi'ves]  Here 
we  have  the  first  example  of  polygamy ; which, 
though  afterwards  tolerated,  had  its  rise 
among  the  sons  of  Cain,  and  is  evidently  men- 
tioned for  reprobation. 


GENESIS.  IV. 


57 


V.  20 — 23.] 


f Heb. 
xoJietter. 


20  And  Adah  bare  Jabal:  he  was 
the  father  of  such  as  dwell  in  tents, 
and  of  such  as  have  cattle. 

21  And  his  brother’s  name  was 
Jubal:  he  was  the  father  of  all  such 
as  handle  the  harp  and  organ. 

22  And  Zillah,  she  also  bare  Tu- 
bal-cain,  an  Mnstructer  of  every  arti- 


ficer in  brass  and  iron : and  the  sister 
of  Tubal-cain  zuas  Naamah. 

23  And  Lamech  said  unto  his  wives, 

Adah  and  Zillah,  Hear  my  voice;  ye  11  Or, 
wives  of  Lamech,  hearken  unto  my  ifya^ 
speech:  for  H have  slain  a man  to 
my  wounding,  and  a young  man  “ to 
my  hurt.  }7iy  hurt. 


20.  the  father  of  such  as  d-zvell  in  tents, 
and...ha‘ve  cattle']  Jabal  invented  tents  and 
introduced  the  custom  of  pasturing  cattle 
round  the  tents,  and  perhaps  even  of  stalling 
them  in  tents.  Moreover,  the  word  here 
used  for  cattle  implies  larger  cattle,  whereas 
that  used  of  Abel  v.  % applied  only  to  smaller 
cattle:  Jabal  therefore  was  the  first  who  in- 
troduced the  thorough  nomadic  life.  (See 
Bochart,  ‘Hieroz.’P.  i.  Lib.  ii.  c.  44.) 

21.  the  harp  and  the  organ]  The  kinnur, 
which  descended  to  the  Greeks  and  was  by 
them  called  Kinura,  is  described  by  Josephus 
as  having  ten  strings  and  as  played  on  by  a 
plectrum;  but  in  i Sam.  xvi.  23,  xviii.  10, 
xix.  9,  David  is  said  to  have  played  on  it 
with  his  hand.  It  was  probably,  when  in- 
vented by  J ubal,  the  simplest  form  of  stringed 
instrument.  The  word  rendered  organ  was 
apparently  a pipe,  bagpipe,  panpipe,  or  some 
very  sim.ple  wind  instrument:  Onkelos  renders 
it  by  pipe  or  flute.  “ It  is  not  an  accidental 
fact,  that  the  lyre  and  the  flute  were  intro- 
duced by  the  brothers  of  a nomadic  herds- 
man. It  is  in  the  happy  leisure  of  this* occu- 
pation that  music  is  generally  first  exercised 
and  appreciated.”  Kalisch. 

22.  an  instructer  of  e'very  artficer  in 
brass  and  iron]  So  Onkelos.  Perhaps  (with 
LXX.  and  Vulg.)  a sharpener  of  e’very  instru- 
rnent  in  bron%e  and  iron.  The  word  rendered 
brass  is  certainly  either  bronze,  or,  more  proba- 
bly, a native  metal,  copper  (see  Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of 
the  Bible,’  art.  Brass].  Bronze  is  an  alloy  of 
copper  and  tin,  very  much  harder  than  either 
of  them  and  also  than  brass,  v/ith  a little  more 
tin  it  becomes  bell-metal.  Previously  to  this 
time  all  weapons  for  defence  or  instrum.ents  of 
husbandry  may  have  been  of  flint,  or  wood, 
or  bone.  Uncivilized  nations  at  the  present 
time  have  weapons  made  of  flint,  wood,  bone, 
shark’s  teeth,  &c.  Where  nations  have  lost 
the  usages  of  more  civilized  life,  they  seem  to 
have  fallen  back  on  a flint  age,  then  to  have 
invented  bronze  weapons  (in  the  case  of  South 
America  weapons  of  gold),  and  lastly  to  have 
discovered  the  use  of  iron.  Tubal  Cain  is 
here  described  as  the  first  who  made  metal 
instruments  and  sharpened  them.  It  is  not  to 
be  objected,  that  this  was  too  early  for  the 
invention  of  metals.  If  Tubal  Cain  was  con- 
temporary with  Enoch  (the  descendant  of 
Seth  in  the  same  degree)  he  must  have  been 


born  at  least  500  years  after  the  creation  of 
Adam,  according  to  the  Hebrew  Chronology, 
or  1000  years  according  to  the  LXX.  Chrono- 
logy. Whether  we  must  understand  that 
he  invented  the  use  of  both  copper  and  iron, 
br  only  of  copper  or  bronze,  which  led  in 
course  of  time  to  the  farther  invention  cf 
iron,  it  may  be  difficult  to  decide  from  the 
concise  and  obscure  wording  of  the  text. 
That  the  most  ancient  inhabitants  of  Europe 
were  ignorant  of  the  use  of  metal,  as  indi- 
cated by  the  discovery  of  flint  weapons  in  the 
gravel,  can  be  no  proof  that  they  were  un- 
known to  the  early  descendants  of  Adam. 
If  the  colonists  of  Australia  were  for  the 
next  thousand  years  to  be  separated  from  all 
connection  with  the  rest  of  the  world,  it  is 
quite  possible,  notwithstanding  their  present 
high  state  of  civilization,  that  they  might 
utterly  lose  many  of  the  arts  of  civilized  life, 
and  perhaps,  if  there  were  a deficiency  of  coal, 
or  lime,  or  native  metals,  even  the  use  of  me- 
tallic instruments. 

Nothing  can  be  more  natural  or  probable 
than  the  difference  of  character  and  develop- 
ment in  the  descendants  of  Cain  and  Seth 
respectively.  In  the  former  we  see  the  chil- 
dren of  this  world  wise  in  their  generation, 
rapidly  advancing  in  art  and  the  acquire- 
ment of  riches,  but  sensual,  violent  and  god- 
less. In  the  latter  we  find  less  of  social  and 
political  advancement,  but  a life  more  regu- 
lated by  the  dictates  of  conscience  and  by 
faith  in  the  Providence  and  Grace  of  God. 

Resemblances  to  the  names  of  Lamech’s 
family  have  been  traced  in  the  names  of  those 
to  whom  the  Latins  attributed  similar  inven- 
tions. Thus  Tubal  Cain  has  been  thought 
= Vulcan,  Naamah,  “the  lovely,  or  beauti- 
ful,” may  then  = Venus,  Jubal,  the  inventor  of 
the  lyre  = Apollo.  It  is  observed  also  that 
the  refinement  and  perhaps  the  luxury  of  the 
descendants  of  Cain  appear  in  the  names  of 
their  wives  and  daughters,  Naamah,  lovely, 
Adah,  beauty  or  brnament,  Zillah,  shadow. 

23,  24.  A7id  Lamech  said,  &c.] 

And  Lamech  said  unto  his  wives, 

Adah  and  Zillah,  hear  my  voice. 

Ye  wives  of  Lamech,  give  ear  unto  my  speech; 
For  I slay  a man  if  he  woundeth  me. 

Even  a young  man,  if  he  hurteth  me, 

Lo  ! Cain  would  be  avenged  seven-fold. 

But  Lamech  seventy-and-seven  fold. 


58 


GENESIS.  IV.  [v.  24-26. 


t Heb. 
6'heih. 


24  If  Cain  shall  be  avenged  seven- 
fold, truly  Lamech  seventy  and  seven- 
fold. 

25  ^ And  Adam  knev/  his  wife 
again ; and  she  bare  a son,  and  called 
his  name  ^Seth:  For  God,  said  she^ 


hath  appointed  me  another  seed  in- 
stead of  Abel,  whom  Cain  slew.  f Heb. 

26  And  to  Seth,  to  him  also  there  (orftocaii 
v/as  born  a son  ; and  he  called  his  themselves 
name  ^Enos:  then  began  men  '^io^Lmeo/ 
call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord.  lord. 


The  speech  of  Lamech  has  exercised  the 
skill  of  translators  and  interpreters  of  all 
times.  Its  obscure  and  enigmatical  character 
is  admitted  as  a mark  of  its  remote  antiquity- 
even  by  the  most  unfavourable  critics.  The 
apparent  meaning  of  the  words  is  this.  Amid 
the  violence  of  the  times,  especially  among 
the  descendants  of  Cain,  Lamech  comforts 
his  wives  with  the  assurance  that  with  the  aid 
of  the  bronze  and  iron  instruments  now  in 
his  hands,  he  could  kill  any  one  who  injured 
him  (“I  slay  or  would  slay  a man  for 
wounding  me”);  and  that,  if  it  had  been 
promised  to  Cain,  that  he  should  be  avenged 
seven  fold,  there  was  power  in  the  hands  of 
I.amech’s  family  to  avenge  seventy-seven  fold. 
The  speech  is  one  of  confident  boasting.  La- 
mech trusts  in  his  weapons  of  brass  and  steel 
to  maintain  his  cause,  even  when  referring  to 
words  used  by  God  to  his  forefather  Cain. 

The  chief  difficulty  lies  in  the  use  of  the 
perfect  tense  in  the  verb  slay:  lit.  “I  have 
slain,”  (which  is  the  rendering  of  the  LXX. 
Vulg.,  Syr.,  &c.).  That  difiiculty  seems  to 
have  suggested  the  supposition  that  a not  may 
have  fallen  out  (which  is  the  rendering  of 
Onkelos,  “I  have  not  slain,”)  or  that  it  should 
be  rendered  interrogatively  (“  Have  I slain  ? ”) : 
but  the  more  probable  explanation  is,  that  in 
this  ancient  distich  the  perfect  tense  is  used  to 
express  the  arrogant  confidence  of  the  boast- 
er ; even  as  at  times  the  perfect  is  adopted  in 
the  most  sure  word  of  prophecy,  the  future 
being  represented  as  having  all  the  certainty 
of  the  past.  The  words  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  “ to  my  wounding” — “ to  my  hurt” — 
probably  mean  “ for  my  wounding,”  &c.  /.  e. 
‘Tor  wounding  me,”  or  “in  revenge  for  his 
wounding  me.” 

25.  Seth']  i.e.  “Foundation,”  from  the 
word  signifying  to  place.,  rendered  here  “ap- 
pointed.” Seth  came  into  the  place  of  Abel, 


as  the  ancestor  of  the  Theocratic  race  and  of 
the  promised  seed. 

26.  then  began  men  to  call  upon  the  name  of 
the  Lord]  Then  began  he  to  call  on  the 
name  of  the  LORD.  There  is  great  diversity 
in  the  interpretation  of  these  words.  The  Sa- 
maritan Pentateuch  and  the  Vulgate  refer  them 
to  Enos,  “Then  he,  i.e.  Enos,  began  to  call 
on  the  name  of  the  Lord.”  The  LXX.  has 
“Then  he  hoped,”  &c.  it  being  possible  to 
refer  the  verb  to  a root  signifying  “ to  hope,” 
whence  some  have  understood,  that  the  birth 
of  Enos  inspired  a new  hope  that  the  promise 
to  Eve  should  be  fulfilled.  The  Targum  of 
the  Pseudo- Jonathan  has  “In  those  days  men 
began  to  make  themselves  idols,  which  they 
called  after  the  name  of  the  Word  of  the 
Lord.”  This  interpretation  is  adopted  by 
some  celebrated  Jewish  commentators  (Kim- 
chi,  Rashi,  &c.),  who  derive  the  verb  from 
a root  signifying  “ to  profane,”  and  render 
“ Then  was  there  profanation  in  calling  on 
the  name  of  the  Lord.”  Jerome  (‘Qugest.’) 
mentions  this  as  the  opinion  of  many  Jews  in 
his  days.  The  most  natural  sense  of  the 
Hebrew  is,  that  when  Enos  was  born,  Seth 
his  father  in  gratitude  and  hope  then  began 
to  pra'se  the  Lord  and  to  call  on  Him  with 
reassured  hope  in  His  mercy  and  His  pro- 
'mises.  There  is  nothing  to  connect  the  verb 
with  Enos  as  its  nominative  case  rather  than 
with  Seth ; nor  again  is  there  any  good 
ground  for  the  notion  that  emphasis  is  to  be 
placed  on  the  special  name  of  God,  J ehovaii  ; 
as  though  then  for  the  first  time  He  was 
invoked  under  that  name.  The  sacred  narra- 
tive has  all  along  used  the  name  Jehovah  ; 
and  whether  we  believe  it  to  have  been  known 
from  earlier  times  or  to  have  been  revealed 
first  to  Moses,  there  is  nothing  whatever  to 
connect  its  revelation  and  acknowledgment 
with  the  birth  of  Enos. 


NOTE  A.  Additional  Note  on  Chap.  iv.  v.  2.  On  the  Early  Civiliza- 
tion OF  Mankind. 


Havernick  (‘Introd.  th  the  Pentateuch,’ 
Translation,  p.  104)  has  shewn  that  the  tra- 
ditions of  ancient  nations,  the  Phoenicians, 
Egyptians,  Greeks,  &c.  refer  the  invention 
of  agriculture  to  the  earliest  mythic  ages; 
and  that  the  investigators  of  history.  Her- 
der, Link,  Schlosser,  &:c.  have  been  led  to 
the  conclusion  that  “ the  discovery  of  the 
breeding  of  cattle,  of  agriculture,  and  of  the 


preparation  of  metals,  belong  to  prehistoric 
times,  and  that  in  the  historic  period  these 
arts  have  made  comparatively  no  great  ad- 
vances.” The  recent  discoveries  of  human 
remains,  and  of  the  implements  of  human  in- 
dustry in  the  gravel  and  drift  formations  on 
the  Earth’s  surface,  may  seem  to  contradict 
all  this.  Ethnologists  distinguish  a flint  age, 
a bronze  age,  and  an  iron  age,  as  having  ex- 


59 


GENESIS.  V. 


V.  I,  2.] 

istcd  in  ancient  Europe;  during  the  first  of 
which  only  flint  instruments,  during  the  se- 
cond bronze,  during  the  third,  iron  instru- 
ments appear  to  have  been  in  use.  And,  as 
for  the  most  part  in  the  earlier  periods,  the 
skulls  seem  to  have  been  smaller  and  of  a 
lower  type  than  those  of  later  date,  the  theory 
of  early  barbarism  and  of  progressive  civiliza- 
tion has  been  thought  to  derive  confirmation 
from  Geology.  Sir  Charles  Lyell  says  also, 
that  “ had  the  original  stock  of  mankind  been 
really  endowed  with  superior  intellectual 
power  and  with  inspired  knowledge,  and 
had  possessed  the  same  improvable  nature  as 
their  posterity,  the  point  of  advancement, 
which  they  would  have  realized  ere  this, 
would  have  been  immeasurably  higher”  (‘An- 
tiquity of  Man,’  p.  378).  He  goes  on  to  say 
that,  instead  of  rude  pottery  and  flint  wea- 
pons, we  should  in  that  case  have  found  works 
like  those  of  Phidias  and  Praxiteles.  It  may 
be  answered,  that  Scripture  does  not  repre- 
sent the  first  man  as  “endowed  with  superior 
intellectual  power  and  with  inspired  know- 
ledge.” All  that  we  learn  is,  that  Adam 
was  placed  in  Eden  to  till  it,  that  his  power 
of  sj)eech  was  exercised  by  having  to  name 
the  brute  creation,  that  he  hadra  simple  com- 
mand given  him,  and  afterwards  a special 
promise.  Morally  he  may  have  been,  in  the 
first  instance,  in  a state  of  innocence,  without 
behig  intellectually  in  a condition  of  emi- 
nence. As  for  the  advance  of  knowledge, 
many  nations  have  been  in  a state  of  mental 
cultivation  and  of  art  knowledge  incompa- 
rably beyond  that  of  Adam  and  his  children, 
and  yet  have  remained  for  centuries  upon 
centuries  without  any  apparent  progress  ; for 
instance,  the  people  of  China.  All  that  we 
say  is,  that  his  primary  state  was  not  a state 
of  savageness,  but  rather  of  rudimentary  civi- 
lization. And  this  is  really  not  opposed,  but 
confirmed,  by  the  records  of  Geology.  “ We 
must  remember,  that  as  yet  we  have  no  dis- 
tinct geological  evidence,  that  the  appearance 
of  what  are  called  the  inferior  races  of  man- 
kind has  always  preceded  in  chronological  or- 
der that  of  the  higher  races”  (Lyell,  as  above, 
p.  90).  On  the  contrary,  some  of  the  most 
ancient  remains  of  man  and  man’s  art  give 
indications  of  considerable  civilization.  In 
the  valley  of  the  Ohio  there  are  hundreds  of 
mounds,  which  have  served  for  temples,  for 


CHAPTER  V. 

I The  genealogy,  age,  and  death  of  the  patriarchs 
from  Adam  nnto  jVoah.  24  The  godliness 
and  translation  of  Enoch. 

i^Chron.  ' | ''HIS  IS  the  ‘^boolc  of  the  genera- 
X tions  of  Adam.  In  the  day  that 


places  of  defence  and  of  sepulture,  containing 
pottery,  ornamental  sculpture,  articles  in  sil- 
ver and  copper,  and  stone  weapons,  with 
skulls  of  the  Mexican  type.  Above  these 
have  grown  a succession  of  forests,  in  which 
the  Red  Indians  for  centuries  may  have 
housed  and  hunted  (Lyell,  pp.  39,  40). 
They  prove  that  in  those  very  ancient  days 
there  must  have  been  a civilization,  of  which 
all  traces  have  vanished  above  the  surface  of 
the  earth.  As  regards  the  fossil  skulls  found 
in  Europe,  that  known  as  “the  Neanderthal 
Skull”  is  of  the  lowest  type,  and  is  said  to  be 
the  m.ost  apelike  skull  ever  seen,  though  its 
capacity,  75  cubic  inches,  is  greater  than  that 
of  some  individuals  of  existing  races.  It  was 
discovered  in  a cavern  with  the  thigh  of  a 
bear:  but  there  is  nothing  to  prove  its  great 
antiquity.  It  may  be  very  ancient,  but  may 
be  comparatively  modern.  But  the  skull 
found  at  Engis  near  Liege,  which  appears  to 
have  been  contemporary  with  the  Mammoth, 
and  is  assigned  by  Lyell  to  the  post-pliocene 
age,  although  the  forehead  is  somewhat  nar- 
row, may  be  m.atched  by  the  skulls  of  indi- 
viduals of  European  race  (Lyell,  p.  80):  and 
the  skull  of  the  fossil  man  of  Denise,  though 
said  to  be  contemporary  with  the  Mammoth 
and  coeval  with  the  last  eruption  of  the  Puy 
Volcanoes,  and  therefore  as  old  as,  or  older 
than,  any  other  human  skull  yet  discovered, 
is  of  the  ordinary  Caucasian  or  European 
type  (Lyell,  p.  200).  No  prudent  Geologist 
will  admit,  concerning  any  of  these  crania, 
more  than  that  they  bear  marks  of  rude  as 
compared  with  civilized  races,  rather  more 
mastication,  more  prominent  marks  of  mus- 
cular attachment  and  the  like,  all  things  of 
every  day  occurrence.  So,  in  fact,  the  argu- 
ment from  Geology  is  really  coincident  with 
the  testimony  of  Scripture  and  of  universal 
primitive  tradition,  viz.  that  man,  in  his  ori- 
ginal condition,  was  not  a helpless  savage,  but 
had  at  least  the  rudiments  of  civilization  and 
intelligence. 

When  we  read  that  Cain  was  a tiller  of  the 
ground,  we  do  not  necessarily  conclude,  that 
he  cultivated  wheat  and  barley;  he  may  have 
known  only  of  fruits,  vegetables,  roots,  See. 
Yet  it  is  observable,  that  cereals  have  been 
discovered  with  some  of  the  very  early  re- 
mains of  human  industry. 


God  created  man,  in  the  likeness  of 
God  made  he  him; 

2 ‘^Male  and  female  created  he*wisd.2. 
them ; and  blessed  them,  and  called 
their  name  Adam,  in  the  day  when 
they  were  created. 


Chap.  V.  1.  the  book  of  the  generations']  history  of  Adam  and  his  descendants.  See 
The  record  or  recounting  of  the  genealogical  ch.  ii.  4. 


6o 


GENESIS.  V. 


[v.  3—20. 


3 ^ And  Adam  lived  an  hundred 
and  thirty  years,  and  begat  a son  in 
his  own  likeness,  after  his  image;  and 
called  his  name  Seth : 

Cl  Chron.  4 “^Aiid  the  days  of  Adam  after  he 
I,  I.  &c.  begotten  Seth  were  eight  hundred 

years : and  he  begat  sons  and  daughters  : 

5 And  all  the  days  that  Adam  lived 
were  nine  hundred  and  thirty  years : 
and  he  died. 

6 And  Seth  lived  an  hundred  and 
tHeb  five  years,  and  begat  ^Enos: 

y And  Seth  lived  after  he  begat 
Enos  eight  hundred  and  seven  years, 
and  begat  sons  and  daughters : 

8 And  all  the  days  of  Seth  were 
nine  hundred  and  twelve  years:  and 
he  died. 

9 H And  Enos  lived  ninety  years, 
and  begat  ^ Cainan: 

10  And  Enos  lived  after  he  begat 
Cainan  eight  hundred  and  fifteen- 
years,  and  begat  sons  and  daughters : 

1 1 And  all  the  days  of  Enos  were 
nine  hundred  and  five  years:  and  he 
died. 


Maleleel 


t Heb. 


12  ^ And  Cainan  lived  seventy 

years,  and  begat  ‘Mahalaleel : tCr. 

13  And  Cainan  lived  after  he  be- 
gat Mahalaleel  eight  hundred  and 
forty  years,  and  begat  sons  and 
daughters: 

14  And  all  the  days  of  Cainan  were 
nine  hundred  and  ten  years:  and  he 
died. 

15  ^ And  Mahalaleel  lived  sixty 
and  five  years,  and  begat  ^ Jared: 

16  And  Mahalaleel  lived  after  he 
begat  Jared  eight  hundred  and  thirty 
years,  and  begat  sons  and  daughters : 

17  And  all  the  days  of  Mahalaleel 
were  eight  hundred  ninety  and  five 
years:  and  he  died. 

18  ^ And  Jared  lived  an  hundred 
sixty  and  two  years,  and  he  begat 
Enoch. 

19  And  Jared  lived  after  he  begat 
Enoch  eight  Jiundred  years,  and  beg.at* 
sons  and  daughters : 

20  And  all  the  days  of  Jared  were 
nine  hundred  sixty  and  two  years : 
and  he  died. 


3.  Adam  lived^  &c,]  The  genealogy  given 
is  that  of  the  Sethites,  probably  as  the  line 
of  the  promised  seed.  The  genealogy  of  the 
(lainites  was  given  much  more  impertectly  in 
the  last  chapter,  and  with  no  dates  or  chro- 
nological marks,  because,  says  Keil,  being 
under  the  curse  of  God,  they  had  no  future. 
He  quotes  Baumgarten  as  saying,  that  this 


genealogy  was  “a  memorial  witnessing  both 
the  truth  of  God’s  promises  and  also  the  faith 
and  patience  of  the  fathers.”  The  chronology 
of  this  chapter  is  very  different  in  the  Hebrew, 
the  Samaritan  and  the  Septuagint,  as  will  be 
seen  in  the  following  table  of  the  generations 
from  Adam  to  the  flood  (see  also  note 
infra). 


Hebrew  Text. 

Samaritan  Text. 

! Septuagint. 

Years 
before 
birth  of 
Son. 

Rest 
of  Life. 

Whole 

Life. 

Years 
before 
birth  of 
Son. 

Rest 
of  Life. 

Whole 

Life. 

Years 
Ijefore 
birth  of 
Son. 

Rest 
j of  Life. 

Whole 

Life. 

yUlam 

130 

800 

9.^0 

130 

800 

930 

230 

700 

9.30 

Seth 

105 

807 

912 

105 

807 

912 

205 

707 

912 

Enosh 

90 

815 

905 

90 

8'5 

905 

190 

715 

905 

Cainan 

70 

G 

840 

910 

70 

840 

910 

170 

740 

910 

Mahalaleel 

830 

«95 

65 

830 

895 

•65 

7.30 

895 

Jared 

162 

800 

962 

62 

7^5 

847 

162 

800 

962 

i'inoch 

300 

365 

G 

300 

3^J5 

165 

200 

365 

Methuselah 

187 

7S2 

969 

67 

f>53 

720 

187 

782 

969 

Ivameeh 

Xoah 

Shein  at  the  Flood 
Date  of  Flood 

182 

500 

100 

1656 

595 

777 

53 

500 

100 

1307 

600 

653 

188 

500 

100 

^62^ 

1 

565 

753 

6.  Enos']  i.c.  man.  Adam  signifies  7nan^  9.  Cainan]  i.e.  possession. 

generally.  Enos,  or  Enosh,  is  rather  12.  Mahadaleet]  The  Praise  of  God. 

mortal^  rniserable  man.  The  now  growing  15.  Jared]  I'he  root  of  this  name  sig- 

expericnce  of  human  sorrow  and  fragility  nifies  to  descend.,  IDescent. 
may  have  suggested  this  name.  13.  Enoch]  i.  e.  consecrated. 


V.  21 32.] 


f Or. 

Mathii- 

•itiln. 


Ecclus. 
44.  t6. 

Heb.  II. 


f Heb. 
Levtech. 


GENESIS.  V. 


were  nine  hundred  sixty  and  nine 
years:  and  he  died. 

28  ^ And  Lamech  lived  an  hun- 
dred eighty  and  two  years,  and  begat 
a son : 

29  And  he  called  his  name  ^Noah,  ^Gr.  aw. 
saying,  This  same  shall  comfort  us 
concerning  our  work  and  toil  of  our 
hands,  because  of  the  ground  which 

the  Lord  hath  cursed. 

30  And  Lamech  lived  after  he  be- 
gat Noah  five  hundred  ninety  and  five 
years,  and  begat  sons  and  daughters : 

31  And  all  the  days  of  Lamech 
were  seven  hundred  seventy  and  seven 
years:  and  he  died. 

32  And  Noah  was  fiv^e  hundred 
years  old : and  Noah  begat  Shem, 

Ham,  and  Japheth. 


21  ^ And  Enoch  lived  sixty  and 
five  years,  and  begat  ^Methuselah: 

22  And  Enoch  walked  with  God 
after  he  begat  Methuselah  three  hun- 
dred years,  and  begat  sons  and  daugh- 
ters : 

23  And  all  the  days  of  Enoch  were 
three  hundred  sixty  and  five  years: 

24  And  ^Enoch  walked  with 
. God : and  he  was  not ; for  God  took 

him. 

25  And  Methuselah  lived  an  hun- 
dred eighty  and  seven  years,  and  begat 
^Lamech : 

26  And  Methuselah  lived  after  he 
begat  Lamech  seven  hundred  eighty 
and  two  years,  and  begat  sons  and 
daughters : 

27  And  all  the  days  of  Methuselah 

21.  Methuselah']  Perhaps  “the  missive  of 
death.”  Bochart  interprets  “ His  death  the 
sending  forth,”  as  indicating  that  his  death 
was  contemporary  with  the  pouring  forth  of 
the  waters,  for  Methuselah  must  have  died 
in  the  very  year  of  the  flood.  Gesenius  gives 
the  sense  of  the  word  as  njtr  teli^  “the  man 
of  the  sword”  or  “of  the  dart.”  From  its 
frequent  occurrence  in  Phoenician  inscriptions, 
&c.,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  Methu  = 
Betha  = man. 

24.  he  rjuas  not;  for  God  took  him]  The 
LXX.  rendering  seems  to  interpret  this  of 
translation.  So  do  all  the  Targums.  In 
Ecclus.  xliv.  16,  we  read  “ He  pleased  the 
Lord  and  was  translated  (into  Paradise,  ac- 
cording to  the  Vulgate),  being  a pattern  of 
repentance.”  The  words  are,  no  doubt,  ob- 
scure. Yet,  when  we  remember  how  uni- 
versally the  promise  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
of  life  and  blessing  in  this  world,  not  of  an 
early  and  happy  death,  we  could  scarcely 
doubt  th.it  the  ancient  interpretation  was  the 
true  one,  even  if  it  had  not  been  that  given 
in  Heb.  xi.  5.  The  history  of  Enoch  is  rea- 
sonably supposed  to  be  the  origin  of  the 
Phrygian  tradition  concerning  a certain  An- 
naeus or  Nannacus,  who  lived  upwards  of 
300  years,  concerning  whom  it  was  prophe- 
sied that  after  him  all  would  be  destroyed. 


This  caused  great  grief  among  the  Phrygians, 
whence  “ to  weep  as  in  the  days  of  Annaeus” 
became  a proverb.  At  his  death  cam.e  the 
deluge  of  Deucalion,  and  all  men  were  de- 
stroyed (Suidas,  V.  NawoKoy,  Steph.  Byz.  v. 
'Ikovlov). 

29.  he  called  his  name  Noah^  sayings  This 
same  shall  comfort  us,  &:c.]  The  name  “•  Noah  ” 
signifies  “Rest,”  and  the  connection  between 
the  thought  of  rest  and  that  of  comfort  is 
obvious.  Lamech  appears  as  one  oppressed 
with  the  toil  and  labour  needful  to  subdue 
the  earth,  and  with  the  feeling  that  God  had 
cursed  it  and  made  it  sterile.  He  expresses  a 
h'^pe,  that  Noah  would  be  a comfort  to  his 
parents  and  the  bringer  of  rest ; whether  the 
mere  natural  hope  of  a father  that  his  son 
should  be  a support  and  comfort  to  him,  or 
a hope  looking  to  the  promise  made  of  old 
to  Eve,  or  a hope  inspired  by  prophetic  vision 
that  Noah  should  become  the  second  founder 
of  a race,  the  head  of  a regenerated  world, 
it  may  be  hard  to  say.  There  may  have 
been  an  unconscious  prophecy  in  the  expres- 
sion of  a merely  pious  hope. 

Which  the  Lord  hath  curseef]  This  oc- 
curs in  a chapter  which  modern  critics  call 
Elohistic.  Therefore  they  consider  this  an  in- 
terpolation. The  truer  inference  would  be  that 
the  Elohistic  theory  is  unfounded. 


NOTE  A.  On  the  Chronology  in  Ch.  v. 

Difficulties  in  the  Chronology.  i Difference  of  texts.  2 Longevity  of  Patriarchs. 
3 Antiquity  of  human  race,  as  deduced  (i)  from  Geology,  (2)  from  History, 
(3)  from  Language,  (4)  from  Ethnology. 

The  genealogies  in  this  chapter  and  in  may  be  considered  together.  The  difficulties 
chapter  xi.  are  the  only  sources  extant  for  which  suggest  themselves  may  be  arranged  as 
the  construction  of  a chronology  of  the  patri-  follows : 

archal  ages.  The  que.stions  which  arise  are  i.  The  disagreement  between  the  Hebrew, 
of  the  same  kind  in  both  genealogies,  and  Samaritan  and  Septuagint  texts. 


62 


GENESIS.  V. 


a.  The  extreme  longevity  assigned  to  the 
patriarchs, 

3.  The  insufficient  time  allowed  for  the 
existence  of  man  upon  the  earth, 

1,  The  first  of  these  difficulties  is  such 
as  to  render  it  impossible  to  arrive  at  a 
certain  conclusion  as  to  the  exact  dates  of 
the  creation  of  man,  the  Deluge  and  the  call 
of  Abraham ; but  it  in  no  degree  affects  the 
veracity  of  the  Sacred  Record,  It  is  true, 
that  there  appears  something  like  design  in 
the  alterations  which  must  have  taken  place ; 
thus  the  Hebrew  gives  the  age  of  Adam 
as  130  + 800  = 930,  whilst  the  LXX,  give 
230  + 700  — 930,  and  so  on  in  the  case  of  most 
of  the  Patriarchs,  the  results  being  frequently 
made  to  tally,  whilst  the  constituents  of  these 
results  disagree.  Hence,  whilst  some  have 
charged  the  Alexandrian  translators  with 
lengthening  the  periods,  in  order  more  nearly 
to  satisfy  the  demands  of  Egyptian  chrono- 
logy, others  have  supposed  that  the  rabbins 
shortened  the  time,  to  escape  the  force  of  the 
Christian's  argument,  that  the  world  was 
six  thousand  years  old,  and  that  therefore 
the  Messiah  must  have  come.  If  either  of 
these  charges  be  true,  it  only  brings  us  in 
face  of  what  is  already  familiar  to  all  critics, 
viz,  that  the  errors  of  copyists  wei*e  some- 
times intentional,  but  that  even  these  do  not 
affect  the  general  integrity  of  the  text.  It  is 
well  known  that  there  have  been  some  few 
designed  corruptions  in  the  text  of  the  New 
Testament,  It  need  not  surprise  us  there- 
fore, if  we  find  reason  to  think  that  there 
were  some  attempts  of  a like  kind  in  the  text 
of  the  Old  Testament,  If  anywhere  the 
temptation  to  correct  existed,  it  could  never 
be  stronger  than  in  the  genealogical  tables  of 
the  ancestors  of  the  Jewish  race.  Indeed,  as 
numbers  are  of  all  things  the  most  liable  to 
become  confused  in  ancient  documents,  very 
great  errors  in  restoring  tliem  may  be  con- 
sistent with  the  most  honest  intention  on  the 
part  of  the  restorers.  And,  though  we  be- 
lieve in  the  Divine  guidance  and  inspiration 
of  the  original  writer,  we  have  no  right  to 
expect  that  a miraculous  power  should  have 
so  watched  over  the  transmission  of  the  re- 
cords, as  to  have  preser\-ed  them  from  all  pos- 
sible errors  of  transcription,  though  a special 
Providence  may  have  guarded  them  from  such 
loss  or  mutilation,  as  would  have  weakened 
their  testimony  to  Divine  and  spiritual  truth, 

2,  As  to  the  extreme  longevity  of  the 
Patriarchs,  it  is  observable  that  some  emiinent 
physiologists  have  thought  this  not  impos- 
-sible ; and  even  IRiftbn,  by  no  means  inclined 
to  credulity  on  the  side  of  Scripture,  ad- 
mitted the  truth  of  the  record,  and  could  see 
physical  causes  for  such  long  life  in  early 
times,  (See  ‘Aids  to  Faith,’ p,  278,)  It  is 
undoubted,  that  the  traditions  of  ancient 
nations,  as  Orceks,  Babylonians,  Egyptians, 
Hindoos,  and  others,  point  to  the  great 
longevity  of  the  early  inhabitants  of  the 


globe;  and  thou£i!i  sceptics  argue  that  this 
only  places  the  Scriptural  account  on  a level 
with  other  mythic  histories  (see  Von  Bohlen, 
Vok  II,  p,  100),  yet  we  may  reply  that,  if 
the  Scripture  account  were  true,  the  tradi- 
tions of  other  nations  would  be  almost  sure 
to  preserve  some  traces  of  the  truth,  and  that 
this  is  a more  probable  explanation  of  the 
fact,  than  the  supposition  that  all  these  na- 
tions, however  unconnected  with  each  other, 
should  have  stumbled  upon  the  same  fabulous 
histories. 

It  is  well  observed  by  Delitzsch ; “ We 
must  consider  that  all  the  old-world  popu- 
lation was  descended  from  a nature  originally 
immortal  (in  Adam  and  Eve),  that  the  cli- 
mate, weather,  and  other  natural  conditions 
were  very  different  from  those  which  suc- 
ceeded, that  the  life  was  very  simple  and 
even  in  its  course,  and  that  the  after-working 
of  the  Paradisiacal  state  was  not  at  once  lost 
in  the  track  of  antiquity,”  To  this  Keil  adds, 
that  this  long  life  must  have  been  very  fa- 
vourable to  the  multiplication  of  mankind, 
for  the  formation  of  marked  characters,  and 
the  developement  of  the  good  and  evil  quali- 
ties of  difterent  races.  Family  affection,  piety, 
good  discipline  and  morality  would  strike 
their  roots  deeper  in  pious  families ; whilst 
evil  propensities  would  be  more  and  more 
developed  in  godless  races.  Supposing,  hov/- 
ever,  that  physiology  should  ultimately  decide 
that  the  extreme  longevity  of  the  patriarchs 
was  not  possible,  without  a continued  mira- 
cle, \ve  should  only  be  driven  to  the  principle 
already  conceded,  that  numbers  and  dates, 
especially  in  genealogical  tables,  are  liable  in 
the  course  of  transcription  to  become  ob- 
scured and  exaggerated. 

3.  The  third  objection  is  derived  from  the 
opinion  now  very  generally  gaining  strength, 
that  man  must  have  been  in  existence  on  the 
earth  more  than  four  or  even  six  thousand 
years  before  the  Christian  era. 

The  arguments  for  the  antiquity  of  man 
are : 

(1)  Geological, 

(2)  flistorical, 

(3)  Linguistic, 

(4)  Ethnological, 

(1)  The  very  eminent  British  geologist, 
Sir  C,  Lyell,  has  attempted  to  prove,  that 
man,  having  been  contemporary  with  the 
mammoth  and  other  extinct  mammalia,  must 
have  been  living  at  least  100,000  years  on  the 
earth.  Although  unfortunately  in  physical 
science  a great  name  always  carries  with  it  a 
crowd  of  followers,  far  more  than  in  politics, 
literature  or  religion,  yet  in  the  present  in- 
stance Sir  C,  . Lyell  has  failed  to  carry  con- 
viction to  some  of  the  most  eminent  of  his  con- 
temporaries, Elie  de  Beaumont  on  the  conti- 
nent and  several  of  the  most  distinguished 
geologists  in  Imgland  demur  to  his  conclu- 
sions, The  conclusions  arc  based  on  two 
principal  assumptions;  first,  that  relics  of 


GENESIS.  V. 


63 


man,  flint  Instruments  or  the  like,  are  found 
in  recent  and  post-pliocene  formations,  which 
have  been  deposited  in  juxtaposition  with 
hones  of  the  mammoth  and  other  extinct 
mammalia ; secondly,  that  the  present  rate 
of  deposition  must  be  reckoned  as  the  normal 
rate,  and  that  at  that  rate  the  beds,  which 
overlie  the  extinct  mammal  and  human  re- 
mains, must  have  taken  a vast  time  to  form. 
Of  course  much  depends  on  the  argument 
fromi  uniformity.  There  are  many  men  of 
science,  who,  accepting  Lyell’s  general  prin- 
ciples, yet  believe  that  in  former  ages  there 
were  causes  at  work,  which  would  have  pro- 
duced much  speedier  deposition  and  great- 
er rapidity  in  the  formation  of  beds  of  all 
kinds,  than  we  see  going  on  at  present.  It 
may  perhaps  be  true,  that  man  was  coeval 
with  the  mammoth;  but  a mammoth  was 
found  early  in  this  century,  in  Siberia  pre- 
served in  the  ice,  with  skin  and  hair  fitting  it 
to  live  in  a cold  climate,  and  with  flesh  upon  it, 
of  which  it  was  possible  to  make  soup.  Now, 
even  allowing  for  the  great  preserving  power 
of  ice,  there  is  neither  proof  nor  probability 
that  this  animal  had  been  dead  100,000  years 
or  even  more  than  6,000  years.  But  again,  it 
seems  probable  that  man  was  in  existence  at 
a time  when  animals  now  inhabiting  tropical 
climates  roamed  at  large  in  the  forests  of  Gaul 
and  Britain.  How  long  it  may  have  taken  to 
i-cduce  the  climate  of  Great  Britain  from  a 
tropical  to  its  present  temperate  condition,  is 
a (juestion  very  difficult  to  solve.  A change 
in  the  Gulf  Stream,  an  alteration  in  the  re- 
spective elevation  of  land  and  water,  let  alone 
all  question  of  the  gradual  cooling  down  of 
the  earth  itself,  would  do  mudi  towards  this. 
Besides,  not  human  bones^  but  only  flint  in- 
stTuments  are  found  in  the  gravel  and  caverns 
with  bones  of  extinct  mammals.  Moreover, 
the  present  opinions  of  geologists  rather  go  to 
negative  entirely  the  tropical  character  of  the 
British  climatein  the  mammoth  and  tiger  periods. 
Sir  Chas.  Lyell  admits  that  even  now  “ the 
Bengal  tiger  ranges  occasionally  to  latitude  52® 
North”  (/.  e.  the  latitude  of  England,  and  pro- 
bably in  a climate  much  colder  than  England), 
“and  abounds  in  latitude  48®,  to  which  the 
small  tailless  hare  or  pika,  a polar  resident, 
sometimes  wanders  southwards”  (‘Antiq.  of 
Man,’  p.  158).  We  may  see  therefore  many 
contingencies  which  might  have  brought  hu- 
man remains  into  contact  with  the  remains  of 
tropical  animals,  at  a period  much  more  recent 
than  that  assigned  to  such  proximity  by  this 
eminent  writer: 

Difficulties  of  various  kinds  attach  to  Sir 
Charles  Lyell’s  very  large  numbers;  for  in- 
stance, at  anything  approaching  to  the  present 
rate  of  increase  the  descendants  of  a single 
couple  would  have  multiplied  to  nearly  the 
number  of  the  present  population  in  about 
6000  years.  Again,  according  to  Sir  C.  Lyell’s 
own  admission,  “ we  must  remember,  that 


as  yet  we  have  no  distinct  geological  evidence 
that  the  appearance  of  what  are  called  the 
infer’or  races  of  mankind  has  always  preceded 
in  chronological  order  that  of  the  higher  races.” 
p.  90.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  shewn  above 
that  the  evidence  which  we  have  points  to 
some  degree  of  civilization  in  the  earliest 
periods.  Indeed  had  it  not  been  so,  it  is 
hardly  possible  that  man  should  not  saon  have 
become  extinct  in  the  presence  of  so  many 
animals  whose  mere  physical  powers  were  so 
much  greater  than  man’s.  But  then  is  it 
credible,  that  for  some  90,000  years  the  hu- 
man race  should  have  been  stationary,  having 
acquired  almost  from  the  first  the  art  of  mak- 
ing flint  instruments,  but  all  farther  progress 
in  the  arts  of  civilization  having  apparently 
been  reserved  to  the  last  6,000  years  ? On  the 
whole,  it  seems  impossible  not  to  conclude  that 
the  geological  evidence  as  to  the  antiquity  of 
man  is  as  yet  imperfect  and  imperfectly  read. 

(2)  The  historical  arguments  are  chiefly 
derived  from  Egyptian  sources;  for,  though 
the  Indians,  the  Chinese,  and  the  Babylonians 
profess  to  go  back  to  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  years  of  past  history,  it  is  generally  ad- 
mitted that  their  historic  times  do  not  at  the 
very  utmost  extend  farther  back  than  to  the 
27th  century  b.  c.  The  eminent  Egyptologers, 
Bunsen  and  Lepsius,  relying  on  the  monuments 
of  Egypt  and  the  statements  of  Manetho,  claim 
for  Egypt  a national  history  from  nearly  io,oco 
years  b.c.  It  is,  however,  quite  certain  that 
much  of  the  evidence  for  this  is  of  the  vaguest 
possible  character,  and  that  very  large  deduc- 
tions must  be  made  for  myth  and  for  con- 
temporary dynasties.  In  all  probability  the 
earliest  Egyptian  dynasty  cannot  be  dated 
farther  back  than  B.c.  2700.  (See  ‘Aids  to 
Faith,’  Essay  vi.  17,  pp.  252  sq.,  also  ‘Biblical 
Diet.’  Arts.  Chronology^  Egypt^  and  the  Ex- 
cursus at  the  end  of  this  volume). 

(3)  The  linguistic  argument  is  of  this  na- 
ture. Languages  are  of  slow  growth.  The 
divergence  of  several  modern  European  lan- 
guages from  Latin  has  been  comparatively 
inconsiderable  in  1500  years.  Can  we  then 
believe  all  languages  to  have  been  formed,  and 
to  have  diverged  so  widely  from  each  other, 
since  the  dispersion  at  Babel  ? One  answer 
to  this  is,  that  only  those  languages  which 
have  a liteiature  change  slowly.  As  long 
as  the  Authorised  Version  of  the  Scriptures 
and  the  works  of  Shakspeare  are  read  in 
English,  the  English  language  will  never  In? 
much  unlike  what  it  is  now,  or  what  it  was 
three  centuries  ago.  But  where  there  is  no 
literature,  a few  years  create  a complete  re- 
volution; wild  tribes  in  a single  generation 
cease  to  understand  each  other.  And,  even 
keeping  out  of  sight  the  miracle  of  the  disper- 
sion at  Babel,  emigration,  which  carried  no 
literature  with  it,  would  soon  have  created 
an  endless  diversity  of  tongues.  The  chief 
difficulty,  however,  is  in  tlie  slow  growth  of 


64 


GENESIS.  VI. 


languages  to  a high  degree  of  grammatical 
perfection,  such  as  of  Greek  to  the  language  of 
Homer  some  900  years  b.c.,  and  of  Sanskrit 
to  the  language  of  the  Vedas,  nearly -1200 
years  b.c.  But  we  must  remember,  that  the 
Samaritan  and  LXX.  chronology  allow  an 
interval  of  more  than  3000  years  from  the 
Flood  to  the  Christian  era,  and  1800  years 
(the  difference  between  3000  and  1200)  will 
give  considerable  scope  for  grammatical  de- 
velopement. 

(4)  The  ethnological  argument  is  ground- 
ed principally  on  the  apparently  unchanging 
character  of  some  of  the  races  of  mankind. 
Especially  it  is  observed,  that  in  very  ancient 
Egyptian  monuments  the  negro  race  is  de- 
picted with  all  its  present  features  and  pecu- 
liarities. It  would  therefore  be  impossible,  it 
is  argued,  that  all  the  varieties  of  man  should 
have  sprung  up,  if  their  ancestors  were  a 
single  pair,  brought  into  being  not  more  than 
6000  or  8000  years  since.  It  is  replied,  that 
supposing,  which  is  disputed,  the  alleged  an- 
tiquity of  the  monuments  in  question,  still 
a race,  continuing  under  nearly  the  same  cir- 
cumstances, is  not  likely  to  change'  since  first 
its  peculiarities  were  produced  by  those  very 
circumstances.  Such  has  been  the  case  with 
the  negroes  since  the  time  of  the  Egyptian 
monuments.  If  we  take  the  LXX.  chronology 
as  correct,  the  negroes  may  have  been  In  Africa 
for  nearly  1500  years  before  the  reign  of 
Sethos  I.,  when  we  find  them  so  clearly  de- 
picted on  the  monuments.  Their  change  to 
that  climate,  their  fixed  habits  of  life,  and 
isolation  from  other  races,  may  have  soon  im- 
pressed a character  upon  them,  which  whilst 
continuing  to  live  under  the  same  condition 
ever  since,  they  have  never  lost  for  a period 
extending  now  to  more  than  3000  years.  But 
we  witness  rapid  changes  in  race  when  cir- 
cumstances rapidly  change.  The  European 
inhabitants  of  the  North  American  States  are 
said  even  in  two  or  three  generations  to  be 
rapidly  acquiring  a similarity  of  feature  and 
conformation  to  the  original  inhabitants  of 
the  soil,  though  not  losing  their  European 
intelligence  and  civilization.  IMany  similar 
facts  arc  noticed ; which  prove  that  changes 
of  race,  though  sometimes  so  slow  as  to  be 


[v.  1—3. 

imperceptible,  are  at  other  times  extremely 
rapid.  The  early  condition  of  mankind,  with 
its  frequent  migrations,  wide  separations  and 
little  intercommunion,  must  have  been  favour- 
able to  rapid  change,  whilst  its  later  more 
stationary  condition  is  favourable  to  conti- 
nuance and  perpetuity  of  type. 

There  is  one  other  important  objection 
made  to  the  genealogies  in  this  chapter  and  in 
Chapter  xi.  viz.  that  each  gives  a catalogue 
of  but  ten  generations ; which  looks  as  if 
neither  were  historical.  A probable  solution 
of  this  difficulty  would  seem  to  be,  that  the 
genealogies  neither  were,  nor  were  intended 
to  be,  complete.  Like  other  • genealogies  or 
pedigrees,  sacred  and  profane,  they  omitted 
certain  links,  and  perhaps  only  recorded  and 
handed  down  to  posterity  those  ancestors  of 
the  race  who,  for  some  reason  or  other,  were 
more  than  the  rest  deserving  of  remembrance. 
This  solution  would  be  entirely  satisfactory, 
if  it  were  not  for  the  appearance  of  chronologi- 
cal completeness  which  both  the  genealogies 
exhibit  in  their  present  form ; the  age  of  the 
patriarch  at  the  birth  of  his  son  and  suc- 
cessor, and  the  number  of  years  which  he 
lived  after  that  birth,  being  given  in  every 
case.  If  therefore  the  above  explanation  be 
adopted,  it  would  almost  be  necessary  to  add 
that,  in  the  course  of  transmission  and  tran- 
scription, a greater  appearance  of  completeness 
had  been  given  to  the  catalogues  than  had 
existed  in  the  original  record.  Such  hypo- 
theses are  never  to  be  too  lightly  adopted ; 
but  they  are  far  more  probable  than  those  of 
the  modern  critical  school,  which  reject  the 
historical  truth  of  the  earlier  books  of  the 
Bible.  The  genealogies  of  our  Lord  given  in 
the  Gospels  have  undoubtedly  some  links 
omitted,  and  yet  are  reduced  to  a form  of 
great  completeness.  This  is  a strong  argu- 
ment for  believing  that  the  genealogies  in 
Genesis  may  have  been  treated  in  the  same 
manner.  We  may  observe  that  this  suppo- 
sition, viz.  that  some  links  are  omitted,  will 
allow  a much  greater  antiquity  to  the  race 
of  man,  than  may  at  first  appear  on  the  face 
of  the  text  of  Scripture.  In  fact,  if  it  be  cor- 
I'ect,  the  time  which  it  would  allow,  is  almost 
unlimited. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

I Thr  'iuiikcdncss  of  the  world,  which  proz'okcd 
Cod's  ivrath,  and  caused  the  flood.  8 Noah 
finddh  j^race.  1 4 The  order,  form,  and  end 
of  the  ark. 


K 


ND  it  came  to  pass,  when  men 
began  to  multiply  on  the  face  of 


the  earth,  and  daughters  were  born 
unto  them, 

2 That  the  sons  of  God  saw  the 
daughters  of  men  that  they  fair ; 
and  they  took  them  wives  of  all  which 
they  chose. 

3 And  the  Lord  said.  My  spirit 


(liiAi*.  VI.  1.  .^nd  it  came  to  pass'\  The  of  the  first  rise  of  sin,  of  its  terrible  manifest- 
inspired  writer  has  now  given  us  an  account  ation  in  the  murder  Of  Abel,  of  its  further 


GENESIS.  VI. 


65 


y-  3-] 

shall  not  always  strive  with  man,  for  shall  be  an  hundred  and  twenty 
that  he  also  is  flesh : yet  his  days  years. 


devclopement  in  the  race  of  the  first  murder- 
er, and  of  the  separation  from  the  profane  of 
the  descendants  of  the  pious  Seth.  He  pro- 
ceeds in  this  chapter  to  assign  a reason  for 
the  still  more  universal  spread  of  ungodliness 
throughout  the  world,  such  as  to  call  down 
from  heaven  a great  general  judgment  on 
mankind. 

2.  the  sons  of  God  saw  the  daughters  of 
men\  Who  were  the  sons  of  God?  and  who 
the  daughters  of  men  ? 

1.  Perhaps  the  most  ancient  opinion  was 
that  the  sons  of  God  were  the  young  men  of 
high  rank  (as  in  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6,  “I  have  said, 
Ye  are  gods,  and  ye  are  all  the  sons  of  the 
most  Highest”),  whilst  the  daughters  of  men 
were  the  maidens  of  low  birth  and  humble 
condition;  the  word  for  men  in  this  passage 
being  a word  used  at  times  to  signify  men  of 
low  estate  (cp.  Isai.  ii.  9,  v.  15).  According 
to  this  interpretation  the  sin  lay  in  the  un- 
bridled passions  of  the  higher  ranks  of  so- 
ciety, their  corrupting  the  wives  and  daugh- 
ters of  their  servants  and  dependants,  and  the 
consequent  spread  of  universal  licentiousness. 
This  seems  to  have  been  the  earliest  intei*pre- 
taticn  among  the  Jews.  It  is  adopted  by  the 
Targums  of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan,  by  Sym- 
machus,  Abenezra,  Rashi,  Kimchi,  and  by 
some  moderns,  Selden,  Vorstius,  and  others. 
The  chief  objection  to  this  is  that  there  is 
scarcely  proof  enough  that  the  name  “sons 
of  God”  was  ever  given  to  men  of  high  rank, 
or  that  the  word  for  man  (Adam')  ever  meant 
people  of  low  rank,  except  when  contrasted 
with  another  word  for  man  (namely,  Ish). 
Compare  wr  and  homo  in  Latin. 

2,  A second  interpretation,  also  of  great 
antiquity,  is  that  the  sons  of  God  were  the 
angels,  who,  moved  to  envy  by  the  connubial 
happiness  of  the  human  race,  took  to  them- 
selves human  bodies,  and  married  the  fair 
daughters  of  men.  This  interpretation  is 
supposed  to  have  the  support  of  some  ancient 
MSS.  of  the  LXX.  (as  mentioned  by  August. 
‘De  Civ.  Dei,’  xv.  23).  It  is  argued  that  St 
Jude  (6,  7)  evidently  so  understood  it,  as  he 
likens  the  sin  of  the  angels  to  the  sin  of  the  cities 
of  the  plain,  “the  going  after  strange  flesh.” 
The  same  is  thought  to  be  alluded  to  in  2 Pet. 
ii.  4.  Philo  (‘De  Gigant.’ Vol.  I.  p.  262);  Jo- 
sephus (‘  Antiq.’  Lib.  i.  c.  4,  § i) : and  the  most 
ancient  of  the  Christian  fathers,  as  Justin 
Martyr,  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  Lactantius, 
moved  probably  by  their  reading  of  the  LXX. 
and  being  ignorant  of  Hebrew,  adopted  this 
interpretation.  The  Apocryphal  Book  of 
Enoch  and  some  of  the  Jewish  writers  also 
expounded  it  so.  The  later  fathers,  Chryso- 

VoL.  I. 


stom,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and  Theodoret, 
condemn  this  view  as  monstrous  and  profane. 
The  rationalistic  interpreters  (Gesenius,  Ro- 
senmuller.  Von  Bohlen,  Tuch,  Knobel,  Ewald, 
Hupfeld,  Kalisch,  Davidson,  &c.)  naturally 
prefer  it,  as  favouring  their  belief,  that  the 
first  chapters  of  Genesis  exhibit  m.erely  the 
Hebrew  mythology.  But  it  is  also  adopted 
by  several  of  the  more  orthodox  German 
commentators,  as  Hofrnann,  Baumgarten, 
Delitzsch,  Kurtz,  who  contend  that  some 
very  portentous  wickedness  and  excess  of  sin 
must  have  been  the  cause  of  the  Deluge;  a 
complete  subverting  of  the  whole  order  of 
God’s  creation,  so  that  the  essential  condition 
of  man’s  social  life  was  imperilled  and  over- 
thrown. The  chief  arguments  in  favour  of 
this  view  are  (i)  that  “sons  of  God”  mostly 
mean  angels,  see  Ps.  xxix.  i,  Ixxxix.  7;  Job  i. 
6,  ii.  I,  xxxviii.  7;  Dan.  iii.  25;  (2)  that 

the  “daughters  of  men”  can  only  be  anti- 
thetic to  something  not  human ; (3)  that  the 
context  assigns  a ^monstrous  progeny  to  this 
unnatural  union;  (4)  that  St  Jude  and  St  Pe- 
ter appear  to  sanction  it;  (5)  that  any  ordi- 
nary promiscuous  marriages  are  not  sufficient 
to  account  for  the  judgment  of  the  flood. 

3.  The  third  interpretation  is  that  “the 
sons  of  God”  were  the  descendants  of  Seth, 
who  adhered  to  the  worship  and  service  of 
the  true  God,  and  who,  according  to  some 
interpretations  of  ch.  iv.  26,  were  from  the 
time  of  Enos  called  by  the  name  of  the  Lord, 
and  that  “the  daughters  of  men”  were  of  the 
race  of  the  ungodly  Cain.  This  was  the  be- 
lief of  the  eminent  Church  fathers,  Chryso- 
stom, Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Theodoret,  Augus- 
tine, and  Jerome.  It  was  adopted  by  Luther, 
Calvin,  and  most  of  the  reformei's,  and  has 
been  the  opinion  of  a great  majority  of  mo- 
dern commentators, 

4.  It  was  suggested,  by  Ilgen,  that  the 
Cainites  were  called  “sons  of  the  gods”  be- 
cause of  their  ingenuity  and  inventions,  and 
that  their  intermingling  themselves  with  the 
other  races  of  men  caused  the  general  corrup- 
tion of  mankind. 

5.  The  author  of  ‘the  Genesis  of  tlje 
earth  and  of  man’  suggests  that  “ the  sons  of 
the  gods”  (so  he  would  render  it)  may  mean 
the  worshippers  of  false  gods.  These  he  looks 
on  as  a pre-Adamite  race,  and  would  render, 
not  “ daughters  of  men,”  but  “ daughters  of 
Adam.”  The  pre- Adamite  worshippers  of  the 
false  gods  intermarried  with  the  daughters  of 
Adam. 

Of  these  interpretations  it  appears  most 
probable  that  the  right  is  a modification  of  3. 
We  are  not  probably  justified  in  saying  that 
there  were  but  two  races  descended  from 

E. 


66 


GENESIS.  VI. 


[v.  4,  5. 


4 There  were  giants  in  the  earth 
in  those  days ; and  also  after  that, 
when  the  sons  of  God  came  in  unto 
the  daughters  of  men,  and  they  bare 


children  to  them,  the  same  became 
mighty  men  which  were  of  old,  men 
of  renown. 

5 ^ And  God  saw  that  the  wicked- 


Adam,  the  race  of  Cain  and  the  race  of  Seth. 
Adam  may  have  had  many  sons;  but  the  his- 
tory of  the  Cainites  is  preserved  because  both 
of  their  impiety,  and  of  their  ingenuity ; that 
of  the  Sethites,  because  at  least  in  one  line  of 
that  race  piety  and  true  religion  flourished, 
and  of  them  came  the  family  of  Noah  which 
was  preserved  in  the  ark.  There  appears  to 
have  been  a growing  corruption  of  mankind, 
more  rapid,  no  doubt,  in  the  family  of  Cain 
than  in  any  other  race,  but  still  spreading  far 
and  wide.  The  line  of  the  Sethites,  traced  in 
ch.  V.,  alone  appears  to  have  kept  itself  pure, 
the  little  Church  of  God,  in  the  midst  of 
gathering  darkness  of  the  world  around.  This 
little  Church  may  well  have  been  called  “the 
children  of  God,”  a term  by  no  means  limited 
in  Scripture  to  the  holy  angels.  They  alone 
were  the  salt  of  the  earth;  and  if  that  salt 
should  lose  its  savour,  all  would  become 
worthless  and  vile.  When  therefore  some  of 
these  “sons  of  God”  went  out  from  their 
own  little  home  circle,  to  make  mixed  mar- 
riages with  the  general  heathenized  races 
round  them,  the  elements  of  corruption  were 
brought  from  the  world  into  the  Church,  the 
Church  itself  became  corrupted,  and  the  sin- 
gle family  of  Noah  appears  to  have  been  kept 
pure  from  that  corruption,  just  as  afterwards 
the  family  of  Lot  was  the  only  family  in 
Sodom  free  from  the  pollution  and  depravity 
of  the  cities  of  the  plain.  The  salt  had  lost 
its  savour.  At  all  events  too  little  was  left 
to  purify  and  to  save  the  world.  It  could 
but  save  th.e  souls  of  the  few  righteous  that 
were  therein. 

Concerning  the  giants^  see  note  on  v.  4. 

3.  My  spirit  shall  not  alnvays  strl've\  Is 
rendered,  (i)  “shall  not  dwell”  by  LXX., 
Vulg.,  Syr.,  Onk.,  Saad.,  and  others.  (2) 
“ Shall  not  judge,”  or  which  probably  is  the 
same  thing,  “shall  not  strive,”  by  Symm., 
Targg.  Joh.  and  Jems.,  Rashi,  Kimchi,  Lu- 
ther, Rosenmiiiler,  &c.  This  is  the  rendering 
of  the  A.  V.  and  is  probably  correct.  (3) 
“ Shall  not  rule,”  by  De  Wette,  Rosenmiiiler, 
Maurer,  Knobel,  Delitzsch,  &c.  (4)  “Shall 

not  be  humbled,”  Gesenius,  Tuch,  &c.  No 
great  difference  in  the  general  significance  of 
the  passage  will  be  produced  by  adopting  a 
different  translation.  Kimchi,  and  some  of 
the  German  commentators,  understand,  not 
that  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  no  longer  dwell  or 
strive  with  man,  but  that  the  spiritual  princi- 
ple implanted  by  God  in  man  shall  no  longer 
rule  in  him,  or  no  longer  contend  against  his 
animal  nature. 


for  that  he  also  is  Jleslf\  The  modern 
interpreters,  Gesenius,  Vater,  Schum,  Tuch, 
render  “ Because  of  his  error  he  is  become 
wholly  flesh,”  or,  as  Rosenmiiiler,  “ whilst 
their  flesh  causceth  them  to  err.”  The  objec- 
tion to  the  reading  of  the  Authorized  Version, 
which  is  that  of  all  ancient  Versions  and  com- 
mentators, is  that  the  particle  rendered  that 
never  occurs  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  only  in 
the  later  Psalms  and  other  clearly  more 
modern  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is 
in  fact  an  Aramcean  particle.  But  it  must 
never  be  forgotten,  that  Aramaisms  are  to  be 
expected,  either  in  the  most  modern,  or  in 
the  most  ancient  portions  of  Scripture..  There 
is  therefore  good  reason  to  adhere  to  the 
Authorized  Version. 

yet  his  days  shall  be  an  hundred  and 
tvjenty  years'^  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  I.  3,  2)  and 
after  him,  Tuch,  Ewald,  Havernick,  Baum- 
garten,  Knobel,  Hupfeld,  Davidson,  &c., 
suppose  that  this  alludes  to  the  shortening 
of  the  term  of  human  life.  But  all  the 
Targums,  Saacl.,  Luther’s  Version,  Rosenm., 
Hengst.,  Ranke,  Hofmann,  Kurtz,  Delitzsch, 
understand  “There  shall  yet  be  a respite  or 
time  for  repentance  of  120  years,  before  the 
threatened  vengeance  shall  overtake  them.” 
The  normal  duration  of  human  life  did  not, 
as  Delitzsch  truly  observes,  become  from 
this  time  120  years,  and  the  whole  context 
shews,  that  the  judgment  impending  was  that 
of  the  Flood,  and  that  it  was  a respite  from 
that,  which  is  here  promised,  that  time  might 
be  given  for  Noah’s  preaching,  and  man’s 
repentance.  The  only  argument,,  that  can 
even  appear  to  have  weight  against  this  in- 
terpretation is  that  of  Tuch,  repeated  by  Bp. 
Colenso,  viz.  that  Noah  was  500  years  old 
(cp.  ch.  V.  32)  when  this  saying,  “ His  days 
shall  be  120,”  is  ascribed  to  the  Almighty, 
and  that  he  was  6co  years  old  (c.  vii.  6) 
when  the  Flood  came.  Hence  there  were 
but  100  years,  not  120  given  as  a respite. 
But  there  is  really  no  ground  whatever  for 
asserting  that  all  which  is  related  in  ch.  vi. 
took  place  after  Noah  was  500  years  old. 
What  is  said  in  v.  32  is  that  Noah  was  500 
years  old,  when  his  three  sons  were  born. 
The  Deluge  may  have  been  threatened  long 
before  this. 

4.  There  n.verc  giants  in  the  earth  in  those 
days,  and  also  after  that,  &c.]  It  is  hence 
argued  that  by  “Sons  of  God”  must  be 
meant  angels  or  fallen  angels;  from  the 
union  of  whom  with  the  daughters  of  man 
sprang  the  race  of  giants.  But  there  is  no- 


V.  6—15.] 


GENESIS.  VI. 


67 


!l  Or,  the 
whole  ima- 
gination. 
The  He- 
brew word 
signifieth 
not  only 
the  imagi- 
nation, 
but  also 
the  pur- 
poses  and 
desires. 

chap.  8. 
21. 

Matt.  15. 
19. 

IHeb. 
every  day. 
tHeb. 
from  7nan. 
unto  beast. 


Ecclus. 
44-  17. 

2 Pet.  2.  5 
II  Or, 
upright. 


ness  of  man  was  great  in  the  earth,  and 
that  'I  every  imagination  ofthe  thoughts 
of  his  ^heurttvas  only  evil  ^continu- 
ally. 

6 And  it  repented  the  Lord  that 
he  had  made  man  on  the  earth,  and 
it  grieved  him  at  his  heart. 

7 And  the  Lord  said,  I will  de- 
stroy man  whom  I have  created  from 
the  face  of  the  earth;  ^both  man,  and 
beast,  and  the  creeping  thing,  and  the 
fowls  of  the  air;  for  it  repenteth  me 
that  I have  made  them. 

8 But  Noah  found  grace  in  the 
eyes  of  the  Lord. 

9 ^ These  are  the  generations  of 
Noah:  ^Noah  was  a just  man  and 
•'perfect  in  his  generations,  and  Noah 
walked  with  God. 


10  And  Noah  begat  three  sons, 
Shem,  Han^,  and  Japheth. 

1 1 The  earth  also  was  corrupt  be- 
fore God,  and  the  earth  v/as  filled 
with  violence. 

12  And  God  looked  upon  the  earth, 
and,  behold,  it  was  corrupt;  for  all 
flesh  had  corrupted  his  way  upon  the 
earth. 

13  And  God  said  unto  Noah,  The 

end  of  all  flesh  is  come  before  me; 
for  the  earth  is  filled  with  violence 
through  them ; and,  behold,  I will 
destroy  "them  with  the  earth.  nor./^, 

14  ^ Make  thee  an  ark  of  gopher 
wood;  Tooms  shalt  thou  make  in  the  t Heb. 
ark,  and  shalt  pitch  it  within  and 
without  with  pitch. 

15  And  this  is  the  fashion  which 


thing  said  of  a race  of  giants  springing  from 
this  union,  “ In  those  days  were  the  (well- 
known)  Nephillm  in  the  earth”  cannot  have 
such  a sense,  especially  when  what  follows 
is  taken  into  account,  “and  also  after  that, 
when  the  sons  of  God  went  in  unto  the 
daughters  of  men,  and  they  bore  children 
to  them,  these  became  mighty  men,  men  of 
renown.”  Evidently  the  passage  shews,  that 
Nephillm  were  on  earth  before  this  union, 
and  afterwards  also  from  these  marriages 
sprang  men  of  warlike  spirit,  who  made 
themselves  a name.  The  result  was,  as  when 
the  Israelites  afterwards  made  marriages  with 
the  Midianites,  a great  and  general  corruption 
of  manners.  The  warlike  character  and  per- 
haps bodily  strength  of  these  Nephillm  is  speci- 
ally noted,  as  explaining  what  is  said  in  v.  13, 
that  the  earth  was  filled  with  'violence. 

Nepliilim.  The  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Syr.,  and 
Targum  render  “Giants;”  Aq.  and  Symm. 
“violent  men.”  Most  derive  the  word  from  a 
root  signifying  to  fall]  and  understand  “the 
fallen  ” (wTether  men  or  angels),  or,  more 
probably,  “those  who  fall  on  others,”  rob- 
hers  or  tyrants.  (Aquila,  Rosenm.,  Gesenius, 
Kurtz.)  Others  (among  whom  Tuch  and 
Knobel)  derive  from  a root  signifying  <voon- 
der,  and  understand  monsters,  prodigies.  We 
meet  w'ith  the  name  again  Num.  xiii.  33,  as 
that  of  one  of  the  Canaanitish  tribes,  who 
appear  to  have  been  men  of  large  stature, 
as  w^ere  the  Rephaim,  the  Anakim  and  others. 
This  very  likely  was  the  reason,  why  the 
word  came  to  be  rendered  “giants,”  which 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  its  original 
meaning. 

6.  it  repented  the  Lord]  All  the  language 
of  this  portion  of  Scripture  is  suited  to  the 
infant  condition  of  the  world.  Hence  human 


sentiments  are  even  more  than  in  the  later 
books  of  Scripture  attributed  to  the  Almighty, 
No  sound  criticism  w'ould  see  any  appearance 
of  myth  in  this. 

9.  These  are  the  generations  of~\  See  note 
on  ch.  ii.  4. 

14.  an  ark  of  gopher  q.vood~\  Tire  word 

for  occurs  only  here  and  in  Exod.  ii.  3, 

5 of  the  ark  or  boat  of  papyrus  or  bulrushes. 
This  word  might  perhaps  lead  us  to  suppose 
that  the  ark  was  of  the  form  of  a vast  chest 
or  coffer,  rather  than  of  the  form  of  a ship ; 
fitted  to  carry  a heavy  burden,  not  to  sail 
over  the  waters;  yet  the  proportions  given 
are  those  of  a ship,  though  of  rather  greater 
width  than  usual,  see  on  v.  15. 

gopher  qjuood]  It  is  uncertain  what  this 
wood  w^as.  The  Targumists  followed  by 
many  Jewish  and  Christian  commentators 
rendered  Cedar,  others  Juniper  or  Box.  Ful- 
ler, Bochart  and  Celsius  suggested  Cypress,  in 
which  they  have  been  followed  by  most 
modern  commentators.  The  affinity  between 
the  remits  gophar  and  ciipar  is  great,  and  cypress 
is  a wood  well  fitted  for  ship-building  and 
abounding  in  the  parts  of  Syria  next  to  Ba- 
bylon, wffiich  many  have  supposed  to  be  the 
country  inhabited  by  Noah. 

rooms'\  literally  nests,  different  compart- 
ments fitted  for  the  habitation  of  men  and 
animals. 

pitch'\  more  probably  asphaltos,  bitumen, 
which  is  said  to  be  particularly  suited  for 
closing  up  the  interstices  of  the  timbers  and 
making  a vessel  watertight. 

15.  this  is  the  fashion']  The  actual  form 
of  the  ark  is  not  described.  The  propor- 
tions only  are  given,  which  are  not  very 

E 2 


68 


GENESIS.  VI. 


[v.  16—19 


thou  shalt  make  it  of:  The  length  of 
the  ark  shall  be  three  hundred  cubits, 
the  breadth  of  it  fifty  cubits,  and  the 
height  of  it  thirty  cubits. 

16  A window  shalt  thou  make  to 
the  ark,  and  in  a cubit  shalt  thou 
finish  it  above  ; and  the  door  of  the 
ark  shalt  thou  set  in  the  side  thereof; 
with  lower,  second,  and  third  stories 
shalt  thou  make  it. 

17  And,  behold,  I,  even  I,  do  bring 


a flood  of  waters  upon  the  earth,  to 
destroy  all  flesh,  wherein  is  the  breath 
of  life,  from  under  heaven  ; and  every 
thing  that  is  in  the  earth  shall  die. 

18  But  with  thee  will  I establish 
my  covenant ; and  thou  shalt  come 
into  the  ark,  thou,  and  thy  sons,  and 
thy  wife,  and  thy  sons’  wives  with 
thee. 

19  And  of  every  living  thing  of  all 
flesh,  two  of  every  sort  shalt  thou 


different  from  those  of  “The  Great  Eastern.” 
Reckoning  the  cubit  at  21  inches;  the  pro- 
portions would  be  length  525  ft.,  breadth  87 
ft.  6 in.,  height  52  ft.  6 in. ; those  of  “The 
Great  Eastern”  being  length  680,  breadth  83, 
depth  58.  (See  Smith’s  ‘Diet,  of  Bible,’  Art. 
Nnab.)  The  length  of  the  cubit  is  doubtful, 
as  there  appear  to  have  been  2 or  3 differ- 
ent measures  so  called.  In  all  probability 
it  means  the  length  from  the  elbow  to  the 
end  of  the  hand,  a variable  measure,  of 
course,  but  sufficiently  accurate  for  the  pur- 
pcses  of  those  simple  times.  It  is  mentioned 
by  the  German  commentators  that  Peter  Jan- 
sen in  1609  built  a vessel  of  the  same  pro- 
portions as  the  ark,  though  smaller,  viz. 
Length  120,  width  20,  depth  12  ft.  It  was 
found  most  convenient  for  stowage,  contain- 
ing one-third  more  freight  than  ordinary  ves- 
sels of  the  same  tonnage,  though  it  was 
unsuited  for  making  way  quickly  through 
the  water. 

John  Temporarius  quoted  by  Heidegger 
(‘  Historia  Sacra,’  i.  p.  338)  made  a curious 
calculation,  according  to  which  the  ark  would 
have  afforded  abundant  room  for  all  the 
animals  then  known,  and  food  for  their 
voyage.  Tiele  also  in  his  commentary  cal- 
culate that  there  was  room  for  7000  distinct 
species.  (See  Kurtz,  i.  p.  loi.) 

16.  A nvindo^v  shalt  thou  make  to  the 
ark^  and  in  a cubit  shalt  thou  finish  it  abo’ve^ 
'Pherc  is  a great  variety  of  interpretation 
here,  some  rendering  a nvindow^  others  lights 
or  daylight  or  a transparent  substance^  others, 
after  the  LXX.,  an  inclined  roofi^  ox  sloping  deck. 
Much  too  has  been  said  against  the  historical 
truth  of  a narrative,  which  could  assign  but 
one  window  of  a cubit  long  to  so  vast  a 
ship.  The  interpretation  of  Gesenius  seems 
evidently  the  true,  viz.  that  the  unusual  word 
translated  “window”  (the  word  in  ch.  viii.  6,  is 
(juite  another  word)  means  really  a set  of 
windows,  a window  course,  a system  of 
lighting : and  the  use  of  the  feminine  gender 
in  the  pronoun  suggests  to  the  same  high 
authority,  that  the  right  rendering  would  be, 
“ A window  system  shalt  thou  make  to  the 


ark,  and  in  a cubit  shalt  thou  finish  them 
from  above.”  It  is  quite  possible  that  it  may 
have  been  a window  course  running  for  a 
cubit  long  under  the  top  or  deck  of  the  ark, 
lighting  the  whole  upper  story  very  similar  to 
the  clerestory  of  churches  (see  Knobel  here). 
The  word  is  translated  by  Symmachus 
transparency.^'  It  seems  not  impossible  that 
some  transparent  substance  was  used.  This 
may  easily  have  been  known  to  the  Ante- 
diluvians, who  had  made  the  progress  in  arts 
described  ch.  iv.  21,  22.  Perhaps  the  inven- 
tion was  lost  after  the  Deluge,  an  event 
which  must  have  reduced  mankind  to  almost 
original  simplicity  and  rudeness.  It  is  by 
no  means  clear,  that  these  windows  were  all 
in  the  roof  or  deck.  They  may  have  been  in 
the  gunwales,  i.e.  on  the  higher  part  of  the 
sides  of  the  vessel,  like  the  port-holes  of  a 
modern  ship  of  war.  And,  if  they  were 
covered  with  a transparent  substance,  it  is 
quite  possible  that  they  may  not  have  been 
confined  to  the  upper  story  of  the  ship,  as 
the  word  abonje"  does  not  necessarily  mean 
on  the  upper  part  of  the  vessel,  but  may 
mean  the  top  of  the  window  course. 

the  door  ofi  the  ark']  There  was  naturally 
but  one  opening  beside  the  window  course, 
through  which  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  ark 
were  to  be  let  into  it. 

19.  /wo  ofi  e'very  sort  shalt  thou  bring 
into  the  ark]  Of  course  if  we  will  admit  no- 
thing out  of  the  ordinary  course  of  nature, 
we  shall  be  unable  to  receive  the  Mosaic 
history  of  the  Deluge.  Yet,  even  on  natural 
principles,  we  may  in  some  measure  explain 
Noah’s  power  over  the  beasts.  When  a , 
terrible  catastrophe  is  closely  impending, 
there  is  often  a presentiment  of  it  in  the 
brute  creation.  Under  the  pressure  of  great 
danger  or  great  suffering,  the  wildest  animals 
will  at  times  become  perfectly  tame  and 
tractable.  Most  likely  too,  Noah  and  his 
family  would  choose  pairs  of  very  young 
animals,  just  old  enough  to  feed  them- 
selves, as  being  the  m.ost  tractable  and  as 
requiring  less  room  than  those  full  grown. 


V.  20 4-] 


GENESIS.  VI.  VII. 


69 


f Heb. 

7- 


bring  into  the  ark,  to  keep  them  alive 
with  thee;  they  shall  be  male  and 
female. 

20  Of  fowls  after  their  kind,  and 
of  cattle  after  their  kind,  of  every 
creeping  thing  of  the  earth  after  his 
kind,  two  of  every  sort  shall  come 
unto  thee,  to  keep  them  alive. 

21  And  take  thou  unto  thee  of  all 
food  that  is  eaten,  and  thou  shalt 
gather  it  to  thee ; and  it  shall  be  for 
food  for  thee,  and  for  them. 

22  “^Thus  did  Noah;  according  to 
all  that  God  commanded  him,  so  did  he. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

I Noah,  with  his  family,  and  the  living  crea- 
tures, enter  into  the  ark.  The  beginning, 
increase,  and  continuance  of  the  flood. 


K 


ND  the Lord  said  unto  Noah,  « 2 Pet. 


Come  thou  and  all  thy  house 
into  the  ark;  for  thee  have  I seen 
righteous  before  me  in  this  genera- 
tion. 

2 Of  every  clean  beast  thou  shalt 

take  to  thee  by  ^sevens,  the  male  and  tHeb.  ^ 
his  female  : and  of  beasts  that  are  not 
clean  by  two,  the  male  and  his  female. 

3 Of  fowls  also  of  the  air  by  sevens, 
the  male  and  the  female  ; to  keep 
seed  alive  upon  the  face  of  all  the 
earth. 

4 For  yet  seven  days,  and  I will 
cause  it  to  rain  upon  the  earth  forty 
days  and  forty  nights;  and  every  liv- 
ing substance  that  I have  made  will  I 
Mestroy  from  off  the  face  of  the  earth, 


If  the  ark  was  to  hold,  not  only  birds  and 
quadrupeds,  but  insects  and  reptiles,  possibly 
eggs  or  larvas  may  have  been  preserved. 

Chap.  VII.  1.  jtnd  the  Lord  said  unto 
Noalf  The  preceding  chapter  accounts  for 
a period  of  120  years.  At  the  beginning  of 
that  period,  God  had  declared  His  will  to 
destroy  mankind  by  a flood,  unless  they 
profited  by  the  time  still  given  them  for 
repentance.  Noah  is  ordered  to  prepare  an 
ark,  the  building  of  which  may  have  occu- 
pied the  greater  part  of  this  season  of  respite 
He  is  told  at  the  very  first  that  he  and  his 
sons  are  to  go  into  the  ark,  and  that  a pair 
of  every  kind  of  cattle  and  fowls  and  moving 
things  should  go  in  with  him  and  be  pre- 
served alive.  In  the  present  chapter  we 
reach  the  end  of  the  120  years.  The  ark 
has  been  built  in  the  prescribed  form  with 
due  preparation  and  capacity.  Noah  has 
done  according  to  all  that  God  had  com- 
manded him  (ch.  vi.  22),  and  now  the  Lord 
gives  to  Noah  fuller  directions  concerning  the 
animals  which  he  was  to  take  with  him. 

2.  Of  e-very  clean  beast  thou  shah  take  to 
thee  by  se-vens,  the  male  and  his  female~\  It  is 
questioned  whether  there  were  to  be  seven  or 
seven  pairs  of  every  clean  beast.  Some  think 
there  were  to  be  only  seven,  the  odd  number 
being  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the 
clean  beasts  were  preserved  for  sacrifice,  that 
therefore  more  of  them  were  needed  than  of 
unclean  beasts,  and  the  number  seven  was 
adopted  as  a sacred  number.  The  addition 
of  the  words  “the  male  and  his  female” 
(comp,  V.  9),  seems  to  favour  the  belief  that 
seven  pairs  are  intended.  In  any  case  there  is 
no  inconsistency  between  this  verse  and  ch. 
vi.  20,  “ two  of  every  sort.”  The  command 


here  is  but  an  amplification  of  the  former 
injunction,  which  had  probably  been  given 
120  years  before.  In  the  first  instance  it 
was  said  that  Noah’s  family  should  be  pre- 
served together  v»^ith  a pair  of  every  kind,  of 
beast.  In  the  second,  that,  whilst  the  general 
rule  should  be  the  saving  of  a single  pair, 
yet,  in  the  case  of  the  few  clean  beasts,  there 
should  be  preserved,  not  one  pair  only  but 
seven.  The  objection  that  this  was  an  anti- 
cipation of  the  Levitical  distinction  of  beasts 
into  clean  and  unclean,  is  wholly  groundless. 
The  boundary  line  between  clean  and  un- 
clean animals  is  marked  by  nature.  Every 
tribe  of  mankind  would  distinguish  between 
the  sheep  and  the  hyasna,  between  the  dove 
and  the  vulture.  \\^hether  animal  food  was 
eaten  before  the  Deluge  or  not,  it  is  certain 
that  flocks  and  herds  were  fed  for  the  sake  of 
their  milk  and  wool,  and  that  of  them,  victims 
were  offered  in  sacrifice.  This  alone  would 
separate  between  the  clean  and  the  unclean. 
It  is  not  improbable,  that  the  distinction  even 
of  the  names  “clean  and  unclean”  had  been 
fully  established  by  custom,  long  before  it 
was  recognized  and  ratified  by  the  Law. 

3.  Of  fowls  also  of  the  air  by  sevens^  In  the 
Samaritan,  the  LXX.  and  Syr.  this  verse  runs, 
“ And  of  all  the  fowls  of  the  air  which  are 
clean  by  sevens,  the  male  and  the  female,  and 
of  all  fowls  which  are  not  clean  by  two,  the 
male  and  the  female,  to  keep  seed  alive  upon 
the  face  of  all  the  earth.”  This  must  have 
been  a very  ancient  reading ; but  it  appears 
to  have  arisen  from  a gloss  or  commentary 
having  crept  into  the  text.  It  probably  gives 
the  true  sense  of  the  passage. 

4.  yet  se-ven  days'\  The  120  years  ended 
and  the  ark  prepared  for  the  saving  of  his 
house,  Noah  is  allowed  yet  seven  days  more 


1 


70 


GENESIS.  VIE 


[v.  5—15- 


5 And  Noah  did  according  unto  all 
that  the  Lord  commanded  him. 

6 And  Noah  was  six  hundred  years 
old  when  the  hood  of  waters  was  up- 
on the  earth. 

7 ^ And  Noah  went  in,  and  his 
sons,  and  his  wife,  and  his  sons’  wives 
with  him,  into  the  ark,  because  of  the 
waters  of  the  flood. 

8 Of  clean  beasts,  and  of  beasts 
that  are  not  clean,  and  of  fowls,  and 
of  every  thing  that  creepeth  upon  the 
earth, 

9 There  went  in  two  and  two  unto 
Noah  into  the  ark,  the  male  and  the 
female,  as  God  had  commanded 
Noah. 

! Or,  m 10  And  it  came  to  pass  after  seven 
days,  that  the  waters  of  the  flood  were 
upon  the  earth. 

1 1  fl  In  the  six  hundredth  year  of 


Noah’s  life,  in  the  second  month,  the 
seventeenth  day  of  the  month,  the 
same  day  were  all  the  fountains  of 
the  great  deep  broken  up,  and  the 
I* windows  of  heaven  were  opened.  "Or, 

...  . ^ , JJoodgatef 

12  And  the  ram  was  upon  the 
earth  forty  days  and  forty  nights. 

13  In  the  selfsame  day  entered 
Noah,  and  Shem,  and  Ham,  and  Ja- 
pheth,  the  sons  of  Noah,  and  Noah’s 
wife,  and  the  three  wives  of  his  sons 
with  them,  into  the  ark ; 

14  They,  and  every  beast  after  his 
kind,  and  all  the  cattle  after  their  kind, 
and  every  creeping  thing  that  creepeth 
upon  the  earth  after  his  kind,  and 
every  fov/1  after  his  kind,  every  bird 

of  every  ^sort.  tHeb. 

15  And  they  went  in  unto  Noah 
into  the  ark,  two  and  two  of  all  flesh, 
wherein  is  the  breath  of  life. 


for  gathering  all  safely  into  the  place  of 
refuge  before  the  flood  sets  in. 

9.  ani/  /•wo]  This  again  is  no  con- 

tradiction to  V,  2.  The  rule  was  that  all 
animals,  clean  or  unclean,  should  go  in  two 
and  two,  that  rule  was  not  broken,  but  am- 
plified, by  the  direction  in  verse  2,  that  of 
clean  animals  there  should  be  more  than  a 
single  pair,  viz.  seven  or  seven  pairs. 

11.  In  the  six  hundredth  year  of  Noah's 
life^  in  the  second  months  the  senjeiiteenth  day 
of  the  mo7ith']  The  questions  concerning  the 
i)eluge  year  are  complicated  by  the  uncer- 
tainty, I.  whether  the  year  was  the  old  civil 
year  beginning  with  the  month  Tisri  in  the 
autumn,  or  the  sacred  year  which  from  the 
time  of  the  Exodus  was  appointed  to  begin 
with  the  month  Abib,  the  Passover  month, 
in  the  spring : 2.  whether  the  calculation  be 
Lunar  or  Solar. 

As  regards  the  first  question,  we  may  no- 
tice that  the  year  did  not  begin  from  Abib,  un- 
til the  time  of  the  Exodus,  and  that  even  then 
the  civil  year  was  reckoned  from  Tisri.  Hence 
we  may  naturally  conclude,  that  the  year  of 
the  Flood  began  with  Tisri,  or  about  the 
autumnal  Equinox.  If  so,  the  17th  day  of 
the  second  month  would  bring  us  to  the 
middle  of  November,  the  beginning  of  the 
wintry  and  rainy  season. 

'Idle  second  cjuestion  seems  at  first  sight 
resolved  by  comparing  this  verse  (vii.  ii)  with 
vii.  24  and  viii.  4,  from  which  comparison  it 
appears  that  the  flood  began  on  the  17th  of 
the  second  month,  lasted  150  days,  i.e.  five 
months  of  30  days,  and  had  subsided,  so  that 


the  ark  could  rest  on  Ararat  on  the  17th  of 
the  seventh  month.  Thus  the  17th  of  the 
seventh  month  appears  to  have  been  exactly 
five  months  of  thirty  days  after  the  17th  of 
the  second  month.  This  would  make  the 
Noachic  year  a year  of  360  days,  correspond- 
ing with  the  old  Egyptian  year,  unless  any 
intercalation  of  five  days  was  made  use  of. 
On  the  presumption  that  this  reckoning  is 
conclusive,  it  has  been  argued  that  the  account 
of  the  Flood  must  have  been  of  much  later 
date  than  Moses,  as  the  Israelites  never  learn- 
ed to  reckon  by  solar  time  till  after  the  Baby- 
lonish captivity.  It  is  certain  however  that 
the  Egyptians  used  solar  time  long  before  the 
date  of  the  Exodus,  which  is  answer  enough 
to  this  difficulty. 

With  regard  to  the  forty  days’  rain,  it 
seems  pretty  certain  that  those  were  not  addi- 
tional to,  but  part  of,  the  150  days  of  the 
prevalence  of  the  flood.  Supposing  the  above 
calculation  to  be  correct,  we  have  the  very 
remarkable  coincidences  that  on  the  17th  day 
of  Abib  the  ark  rested  on  Mount  Ararat — on 
the  17th  day  of  Abib  the  Israelites  passed 
over  the  Red  Sea — on  the  17th  day  of  Abib 
Christ  our  Lord  rose  again  from  the  dead. 

^ere  all  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep 
broken  up^  and  the  (ivindo^jjs  of  heansen  (were 
opened]  It  cannot  be  imagined,  that  this  is  a 
philosophical  explanation  of  the  flood.  The 
use  of  Scripture  is  always  to  describe  the 
phenomena  of  nature,  not  to  trace  their  hid- 
den causes.  The  words  here  written  express 
only  the  effect  produced  upon  man’s  senses. 
I'here  was  a flood  of  waters  from  above  and 


V.  1 6 — 4.] 


GENESIS.  VII.  VIII. 


71 


16  And  they  that  v/ent  in,  went 
in  male  and  female  of  all  flesh,  as  God 
had  commanded  him  : and  the  Lord 
shut  him  in. 

17  And  the  flood  was  forty  days 
upon  the  earth;  and  the  waters  in- 
creased, and  bare  up  the  ark,  and  it 
was  lift  up  above  the  earth. 

18  And  the  waters  prevailed,  and 
were  increased  greatly  upon  the  earth  ; 
and  the  ark  went  upon  the  face  of 
the  waters. 

19  And  the  waters  prevailed  ex- 
ceedingly upon  the  earth ; and  all  the 
high  hills,  that  were  under  the  whole 
heaven,  were  covered. 

20  Fifteen  cubits  upward  did  the 
waters  prevail  ; and  the  mountains 
were  covered. 

*wisd.  10.  21  “^And  all  flesh  died  that  moved 

upon  the  earth,  both  of  fowl,  and  of 
cattle,  and  of  beast,  and  of  every  creep- 
ing thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth, 
and  every  man : 

> Heb.  ^ 22  All  in  whose  nostrils  was  Ehe 

breath  of  life,  of  all  that  was  in  the 
dry  land,  died. 

23  And  every  living  substance  was 
destroyed  which  was  upon  the  face  of 
the  ground,  both  man,  and  cattle,  and 


the  creeping  things,  and  the  fowl  of 
the  heaven ; and  they  were  destroyed 
from  the  earth:  and  “^Noah  only  re-  ‘^Wisdio. 
mained  alive,  and  they  that  were  with  J’pet.  2.  5. 
him  in  the  ark. 

24  And  the  waters  prevailed  upon 
the  earth  an  hundred  and  fifty  days. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

I The  waters  assT.vage.  4 The  ark  resteth  on 
Ararat.  *i  The  raven  and  the  dove,  Noah, 

being  commanded,  1 8 goeth  forth  of  the  ark. 

20  He  hnldeth  an  altar,  and  offer eth  sacrifice, 

'I  I which  God  accepteth,  and promiseth  to  curse 
the  earth  no  more. 

AND  God  remembered  Noah,  and 
£\,  every  living  thing,  and  all  the 
cattle  that  was  with  him  in  the  ark : 
and  God  made  a wind  to  pass  over 
the  earth,  and  the  waters  asswaged ; 

2 The  fountains  also  of  the  deep 
and  the  windows  of  heaven  were 
stopped,  and  the  rain  from  heaven 
was  restrained; 

3 And  the  waters  returned  from  off 

the  earth  Continually:  and  after  the  t Heb. 
end  of  the  hundred  and  fifty  days 
the  waters  were  abated.  tumwg. 

4 And  the  ark  rested  in  the  seventh 
month,  on  the  seventeenth  day  of  the 
month,  upon  the  mountains  of  Ara- 
rat. 


from  beneath.  The  clouds  poured  down  rain, 
and  the  seas  and  rivers  swelled  and  burst  their 
boundaries ; so  that  to  one  who  witnessed  it 
it  seemed  as  though  “the  fountains  of  the 
great  deep  were  broken  up,  and  the  windows 
of  heaven  were  opened,” 

16.  attd  the  Lord  shut  him  /«]  By  some 
providential  or  supernatural  agency  the  door 
of  the  ark,  which  could  not  have  been  secured 
with  pitch  or  bitumen  by  Noah,  was  secured 
and  made  water-tight. 

17,  18,  19.  In  these  verses  the  frequent 
repetition  of  the  same  thought  in  almost  the 
same  words  has  been  supposed  by  Astruc  and 
others  to  evidence  the  work  of  different 
hands.  Repetition,  however,  is  universal  in 
a simple  state  of  society,  wherever  great 
strength  of  expression  is  aimed  at.  Even  in 
hte  Hebrew  such  repetition  is  familiar,  but  in 
early  Hebrew  it  meets  us  at  every  turn. 

20.  Fifteen  cubits  up^vard~\  t.  e.  from  25 
to  28  feet:  a depth  apparently  above  the 
neighbouring  mountains,  perhaps  depressed  by 
convulsion,  or  otherwise.  See  note  on  the 
Deluge  at  the  end  of  the  eighth  chapter. 


Chap.  VIII.  1.  God  remembered  Noalf 
As  it  is  said,  i Sam.  xv.  ii,  “It  repenteth 
Me  that  I have  anointed  Saul  to  be  king,” 
t.  e.  I have  decreed  to  put  another  in  * his 
place,  and  above  (Gen.  vi,  7),  “ It  repenteth 
Me  that  I have  made  man,”  i.e.  I have  deter- 
mined to  destroy  man;  so  here  “The  Lord 
remembered  Noah”  does  not  point  to  a pre- 
vious forgetfulness,  but  to  God’s  great  mercy 
towards  him  (Theodoret). 

2.  The  fountains,  &c.]  The  clouds  were 
dispersed  by  a wind,  the  waters  no  longer 
increased,  and  the  effect  was,  as  though,  after 
the  forty  days  of  rain  and  flood,  the  foun- 
tains of  the  deep  and  the  windows  of  heaven 
were  closed. 

4.  Ararat]  The  belief  that  this  is  the 
mountain-range  now  commonly  called  Mount 
Ararat,  the  highest  peak  of  which  rises  nearly 
17,000  feet  above  the  level  of  the  sea,  rests  on 
a very  uncertain  foundation.  Far  more  pro- 
bable is  the  opinion  that  Ararat  was  the 
ancient  name  of  Armenia  itself,  or,  rather,  of 
the  Southern  portion  of  Armenia.  The  name 
occurs  only  here,  and  in  2 Kings  xix.  37;  Is. 
xxxvii.  38,  where  it  is  mentioned  as  the  place 


72 


GENESIS.  VIII. 


[v.  5 — lo. 


} Keb.  5 And  the  waters  Mecreased  con- 
'^olljlnd  tinually  until  the  tenth  month : in  the 
^jecreas-  tenth  mofith^  on  the  first  day  of  the 
month,  were  the  tops  of  the  mountains 
•<  seen. 

6 ^ And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end 
of  forty  days,  that  Noah  opened  the 
windov/  of  the  ark  which  he  had 
made : 

‘ Hcb  7 forth  a raven,  which 

went  forth  Eo  and  fro,  until  the  waters 
■^returnufe.  wcTc  dried  up  from  off  the  earth. 

to  which  the  sons  of  Sennacherib  fled,  after 
the  murder  of  their  father.  Most  of  the 
ancient  VSS.  render  the  word  by  Armenia 
(Aq.,  Symm.,  Theod,,  Vulg.,  and  in  Kings 
and  Isaiah  the  LXX.,  though  in  Gen.  the 
JvXX.  leave  it  untranslated).  The  Targums 
render  Kardu  or  Kardon,  probably  meaning 
Kurdistan,  or  the  Gordyaean  mountains, 
which  run  to  the  South  of  Armenia,  dividing 
the  valley  of  the  Tigris  from  Iran,  on,  or 
near  to  which  mountains,  in  the  Chaldaean 
tradition  of  the  Deluge  preserved  by  Bero- 
sus,  Xisuthrus  is  said  to  have  landed.  Jerome 
(‘on  Isai.’  xxxvii.)  tells  us,  that  “ Ararat  is  a 
champaign  country  of  incredible  fertility, 
situated  in  Armenia,  at  the  base  of  Mount 
Taurus,  through  which  flows  the  river 
Araxes.”  Moses,  Archbishop  of  Chorene,  A. o'. 
460,  the  famous  historian  of  Armenia,  also 
tells  us  that  Ararat  was  a region,  not  a moun- 
tain. A Mohammedan  tradition  has  no  doubt 
placed  the  site  of  the  ark’s  resting  on  the 
top  of  the  highest  ridge  of  the  mountain, 
called  anciently  Macis,  by  the  Persians  Coh 
Noah;  and  this  has  been  thought  to  corre- 
spond with  wTat  is  related  by  Nicolaus  of 
Damascus,  that  there  was  a mountain  in  Ar- 
menia called  Baris,  to  wfliich  people  escaped 
in  the  general  Deluge,  and  on  which  a vessel 
struck,  parts  of  which  long  remained  (Jo- 
seph. ‘Ant.’  I.  4).  All  this,  how'ever,  is  some- 
wliat  vague.  We  can  only  say  v/ith  certainty 
that,  so  long  as  the  time  wflien  the  LXX.  VS. 
was  made,  Ararat  was  believed  to  correspond 
with,  or  to  constitute  a part  of  Armenia. 
Moreover,  general  belief  has  pointed  to  the 
neighbourhood  of  Armenia  as  the  original 
dwelling-place  of  the  first  fathers  of  man- 
kind. 

Yet  the  claims,  not  only  of  the  central 
mountain  peak,  but  even  of  any  portion  of 
Armenia,  to  be  the  site  of  Noah’s  landing- 
place,  have  been  disputed  by  many.  In  Gen. 
xi.  2 the  migration  of  the  sons  of  Noah  to- 
wards Shinar  is  said  to  be  “ from  the  East.” 
If  so,  it  could  not  have  been  from  Armenia. 
It  is,  however,  most  probable  that  the  right 
rendering  should  be,  as  in  Gen.  ii.  8,  xiii.  ii, 
not  “from  the  East”  but  “eastward,”  and 


8 Also  he  sent  forth  a dove 
from  him,  to  see  if  the  waters  were 
abated  from  off  the  face  of  the 
ground ; 

9 But  the  dove  found  no  rest  for 

the  sole  of  her  foot,  and  she  returned 
unto  him  into  the  ark,  for  the  waters 
were  on  the  face  of  the  whole  earth : 
then  he  put  forth  his  hand,  and  took 
her,  and  G'-ilEd  her  in  unto  him  into^Heb. 
the  ark.  , to  come. 

TO  And  he  stayed  yet  other  seven 


'such  is  the  marginal  rendering  of  the  A.V. 
which  though  not  supported  by  the  VSS.  is 
accordant  with  other  Hebrew  idioms  (see 
Quarry,  ‘ Gen.’  p.  397).  Another  objection  to 
Armenia  is  found  in  the  statement  of  Strabo 
(lib.  XI.  p.  527),  that  the  vine  does  not  grow 
there  (cp.  Gen.  ix.  20).  Accordingly  Har- 
douin  contends  that  Ararat  could  not  have 
been  in  Armenia,  but  is  to  be  sought  for  in 
the  North  of  Palestine,  where  it  borders  on 
Antilibanus  and  Syria  (‘  De  Situ  Parad.  terres.’ 
in  Franzii,  Edit.  Plin.  ‘Nat.  Hist.’  Tom.  x. 
pp.  259,  260).  Yet  the  10,000  are  said  to 
have  found  old  wane  in  Armenia  (Xen.  ‘ Anab.’ 
4.  4',  9) ; and  vines  are  said  at  this  day  to 
grow  in  the  highlands  of  Armenia,  at  a level 
of  4000  feet  above  the  sea.  (See  Ritter,  quoted 
by  Knobel,  on  ch.  ix.  20.)  Von  Bohlen, 
arguing  from  Gen.  xi.  2 that  Ararat  lay  east- 
w^ard  of  Shinar,  identifies  it  with  Aryavarta, 
the  sacred  land  to  the  North  of  India,  to 
which  the  Hindoo  tradition  points.  The 
Samaritan  VS.  places  it  in  the  Island  of 
Ceylon.  Though  on  such  a question  cer- 
tainty is  impossible,  the  arguments  in  favour 
of  A rmenia  are  very  strong. 

6.  the  qjjindo^ju]  or  opening.,  from  a verb 
meaning  to  perforate  or  open.  This  is  quite 
a different  word  from  that  used  vi.  16.  The 
A.V.  would  suggest  the  idea,  that  Noah  was 
commanded  (vi.  16)  to  make  a window',  and 
that  now  he  opened  that  window;  whereas 
the  original  expresses  the  fact,  that  Noah  was 
commanded  to  make  a wfindow-course,  or 
light  system,  and  that  now  he  opens  the  win- 
dow', or  casement,  in  the  ark,  which  he  had 
made  on  purpose  to  open. 

7.  <ivcnt  forth  to  and  fro'\  It  has  been 
supposed  that  there  w'cre  carcases  of  men  and 
beasts  floating  on  the  w'aters,  that  from  them 
the  raven  found  a place  to  light  upon,  and 
also  food;  and  hence,  though  it  returned 
from  time  to  time  and  rested  on  the  ark,  it 
never  again  sought  an  entrance  into  it. 

8.  a do've'\  Noah,  finding  no  sufficient 
indication  from  the  raven,  now  sends  forth 
the  dove,  a bird  which  rests  only  on  dry 
places  and  feeds  only  on  }^rain. 


V.  II 20.] 


GENESIS.  VIII. 


73 


days ; and  again  he  sent  forth  the 
dove  out  of  the  ark ; 

1 1 And  the  dove  came  in  to  him 
in  the  evening;  and,  lo,  in  her  mouth 
was  an  olive  leaf  pluckt  off:  so  Noah 
knew  that  the  waters  were  abated 
from  off  the  earth. 

12  And  he  stayed  yet  other  seven 
days ; and  sent  forth  the  dove ; which 
returned  not  again  unto  him  any  more. 

13  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  in  the 
six  hundredth  and  first  year,  in  the 
first  mouthy  the  first  day  of  the  month, 
the  waters  were  dried  up  from  off  the 
earth:  and  Noah  removed  the  cover- 
ing of  the  ark,  and  looked,  and,  be- 
hold, the  face  of  the  ground  was  dry. 

14  And  in  the  second  month,  on 
the  seven  and  twentieth  day  of  the 
month,  was  the  earth  dried. 

15  ^ And  God  spake  unto  Noah, 
saying. 


11.  an  oli’vs  leaf~\  Theophr.  ‘ Hist. 
Plant.’  L.  IV.  c.  8,  and  Pliny,  ‘ Hist.  Nat.’  L. 
XIII.  c.  25,  are  cited  as  saying  that  the  olive 
grew  under  water  in  the  Red  Sea,  and  bore 
berries  there.  Whether  this  be  so  or  not,  it 
is  probable  that  the  olive  may  live  more 
healthily  under  a flood  than  most  other  trees. 
It  is  eminently  hardy,  and  will  grow  in  a 
favourable  soil  without  care  or  culture.  The 
following  passage  illustrates  the  extraordinary 
powers  of  adaptation  to  circumstances  pos- 
sessed by  some  plants.  “The  formation  of 
sprouts  gives  the  plant  the  means  of  attach- 
ing itself  to  the  most  varied  conditions,  of 
persisting  through  periods  of  continued  cold 
and  heat,  damp  or  drought,  according  as  the 
climate  may  produce,  and  guarding  against 
death  in  all  cases  of  frustrated  seed-develop- 
ment  Thus  Littorella  lacustris^  which 

never  flowers  under  water,  maintains  and  in- 
creases itself  by  lateral  runners,  year  after 
year,  at  the  bottom  of  the  lakes  of  the  Black 
Forest,  and  only  comes  into  flower  when  the 
water  retreats  in  the  driest  years,  which 
scarcely  occur  oftener  than  once  in  ten”  (A. 
Braun,  ‘Rejuvenescence  in  Nature,’  p.  41,  42, 
Ray  Society).  The  olive  (Olea  Europea)  is 
generally  a plant  of  the  Mediterranean:  other 
species  occur  at  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope, 
the  Himalaya  mountains,  and  elsewhere. 

pluckt  ojf]  rather,  as  Vulg.,  fresh. 

20.  e'very  clean  beast']  Probably  not 
every  beast  which  was  afterwards  permitted 
to  the  Israelites  for  food,  but  those  which 
were  esteemed  clean  for  sacrifice;  viz.  oxen, 
sheep  and  goats,  doves  and  pigeons.  Some 


16  Go  forth  of  the  ark,  thou,  and 
thy  wife,  and  thy  sons,  and  thy  sons’ 
wives  with  thee. 

17  Bring  forth  with  thee  every 
living  thing  that  is  with  thee,  of  all 
flesh,  both  of  fowl,  and  of  cattle,  and 
of  every  creeping  thing  that  creepeth 
upon  the  earth ; that  they  may  breed 
abundantly  in  the  earth,  and  be 
fruitful,  and  multiply  upon  the 
earth. 

18  And  Noah  v/ent  forth,  and  his 
sons,  and  his  wife,  and  his  sons’  wives 
with  him: 

19  Every  beast,  every  creeping 
thing,  and  every  fowl,  and  whatso- 
ever creepeth  upon  the  earth,  after 
their  Heinds,  went  forth  out  of  the  ^ 
ark. 

20  ^ And  Noah  builded  an  altar 
unto  the  Lord;  and  took  of  every 
clean  beast,  and  of  every  clean  fowl. 


of  the  German  commentators  see  in  the  ac- 
count of  this  sacrifice  a late  interpolation, 
derived  from  the  Mosaic  or  Levitical  customs 
of  sacrifice.  Delitzsch  justly  observes  that 
in  most  of  the  traditions  of  the  Deluge,  ex- 
ternal to  the  Israelites,  as  the  Phoenician, 
Indian,  Greek,  &c.,  a sacrifice  forms  part  of 
the  legend.  The  pretence,  therefore,  that  in 
the  Biblical  narrative  this  was  an  afterthought 
of  a Jehovist  interpolater  must  be  gratuitous. 

21.  a s^jjeet  sa-vour]  Lit.  “ the  savour 
of  satisfaction  or  delectation,”  the  word 
Nichoach^  “ satisfaction,”  having  a reference 
to  Noach^  “rest.”  Cp.  like  expressions  in 
Lev.  ii.  12,  xxvi.  31;  Ezek.  vi.  13,  xx.  41. 
The  gratitude  of  Noah,  and  his  faith  as  mani- 
fested by  the  sacrifice,  were  acceptable  to 
God.  • 

for  the  imagination  of  mads  heart  is 
e’v'il  from  his  youth]  In  ch.  vi.  5,  it  is  writ- 
ten that  God’s  anger  was  moved,  “ because 
every  imagination  of  the  thoughts  of  his  heart 
was  only  evil  continually.”  Here,  on  the 
contrary  it  is  said,  that  “ the  Lord  said  in  Llis 
heart,  I will  not  curse  the  ground  any  more 
for  man’s  sake,  for  the  imagination  of  his 
heart  is  evil  from  his  youth.”  The  Germans 
discover  an  inconsistency  between  the  words 
of  the  Elohist  in  vi.  5,  and  those  of  the  Je- 
hovist here.  Some  have  endeavoured  to  recon- 
cile these  passages  by  translating  “although” 
instead  of  “ for.”  The  true  solution  is,  that 
in  the  first  instance  (ch.  vi.  5)  the  actuai  sin- 
fulness of  man,  the  constant  tendency  of  every 
imagination  of  his  thoughts  to  evil,  is  repre- 
sented as  moving  the  anger  of  God,  and  tend- 


74 


GENESIS.  VIII. 


[v.  2 1,  2 2. 


and  offered  burnt  offerings  on  the 
altar. 

♦ Heb.  21  And  the  Lord  smelled  G sweet 
savour ; and  the  Lord  said  in  his 
heart,  I will  not  a2:ain  curse  the 

« chap.  6.  ^ j r ^ , 1 

5.  ground  any  more  ror  mans  sake; 

Matt.  15.  imagination  of  man’s  heart 


is  evil  from  his  youth ; neither  will  I 
again  smite  any  more  every  thing  living, 
as  I have  done. 

22  ^ While  the  sarth  remaineth,  t Heb. 
seedtime  and  harvest,  and  cold  and  Thldaflo/ 
heat,  and  summer  and  winter,  and 
day  and  night  shall  not  cease. 


ing  to  man’s  destruction ; but  in  the  present 
instance  (ch.  viii.  21)  the  Lord  is  described  as 
considering  the  feebleness  of  his  nature,  and 
pitying  that  natural  propensity  to  evil,  which 
every  man  inherits  at  his  birth. 

The  word  in  the  original  for  imagination, 
is  the  word  which  the  Rabbins  used  to  ex- 
press that  desire  of  evil,  which  results  from 
original  sin  (Buxt.  ‘Lex.  Chald.’  p.  973;  Ges. 
‘Thes,’  p.  619).  Accordingly  in  ch.  vi.  we  see 
God’s  righteous  indignation  against  the  hard- 
ened, impenitent,  unbelieving  sinner.  Here, 
on  the  contrary,  we  read  of  the  Lord’s  com- 
passionate kindness  to  His  feeble  and  erring 


creatures,  and  how  He  is  moved  not  to  curse, 
but  to  pity  and  to  bless  those  who  turn  to 
Him  with  penitent  hearts,  and  faith  in  that 
great  Sacrifice,  of  which  Noah’s  offering  was 
a type  and  a prophecy. 

22.  seedtime  and  har‘vest~\  The  Deluge 
had  confounded  earth  and  sea.  There  reign- 
ed as  it  were  one  long  winter,  almost  one  un- 
broken night,  over  the  whole  world.  But 
thenceforth  the  Lord  decreed,  that  seasons 
should  follow  in  their  course,  the  season  of 
sowing  and  the  season  of  reaping,  the  cold 
and  the  heat,  the  summer  and  the  winter,  the 
day  and  the  night. 


NOTE  A on  Chap.  viii.  The  Deluge. 

I.  Was  it  historical?  (a)  Traditions  among  all  races  of  men.  (j^^  Explicable  only  on 
the  supposition  of  historical  foundation.  2.  Was  it  universal  ? (a)  How  to 
judge  of  the  narrative.  (/S)  Universal  probably  to  mankind,  (y)  Geological  diffi- 
culties. (6')  Rationale  of  Deluge. 

Two  great  questions  concerning  the  Flood  of 
Noah  naturally  present  themselves  : i.  Is  the 
account  of  it  historical  or  mythical  ? 2.  Was 
the  IDeluge  partial  or  universal  ? 

1.  Many  of  the  Germans,  and  according 
to  Davidson  “ all  good  critics”  have  aban- 
doned the  historical  character  of  the  narra- 
tive. The  physical  difficulties  are  supposed 
to  be  insuperable.  The  whole  therefore  is 
said  to  be  “mythical,  embodying  the  old 
Hebrew  belief  in  the  retributive  character  of 
sin”  (Davidson,  ‘Introd.  to  O.  T.’  Vol.  i.  p. 

187).  How  then,  it  may  be  asked,  does  it 
happen,  that  so  many  nations  retained  a recol- 
lection of  tlie  same  great  event  ? The  races 
of  mankind  have  been  divided  by  modern 
Ethnologists  into  Semitic,  Aryan  (Iranian  or 
Indo-European)  and  Turanian.  It  will  be 
found,  that  in  all  these  races  there  are  tradi- 
tions of  a flood,  which  destroyed  all  mankind 
except  one  family.  The  Semitic  account  is 
to  be  found  in  the  Bible  and  in  the  Chaldaean 
tradition,  which  is  the  nearest  to  that  of  the 
Bible,  and  which  comes  down  to  us  in  the 
fragments  of  Berosus  preserved  by  Josephus 
and  Eusebius.  According  to  that  tradition, 

Sisuthrus  or  Xisuthrus  being  warned  of  a flood 
l)y  the  god  Cronus,  built  a vessel  and  took 
into  it  his  relatives  and  near  friends,  and  all 
kinds  of  birds  and  (piadrupeds.  'I'he  vessel 
was  five  stadia  in  length  and  two  in  breadth. 

When  the  flood  had  abated,  he  sent  out  birds, 
which  first  of  all  returned  to  him,  but,  after 


the  second  trial,  returned  no  more.  Judging 
then  that  the  flood  was  abated,  he  took  out 
some  of  the  planks  of  the  vessel,  and  found 
that  it  had  stranded  on  the  side  of  a moun- 
tain. Whereupon  he  and  all  his  left  the  ship, 
and  offered  sacrifice  to  the  gods.  The  place 
of  landing  was  in  Armenia ; where  part  of  the 
vessel  still  remained,  from  vrhich  the  people 
of  the  country  scraped  off  the  bitumen  and 
made  amulets  (see  Gory’s  ‘Ancient  Fragm.’ 
pp.  22,  29,  ist  Edition).  Of  the  Aryan  tradi- 
tions, first,  the  Greek  is  to  be  found  in  the  well 
known  classical  legend  of  the  floods  of  Ogyges 
and  Deucalion.  Pindar  (‘01.’  IX.  37),  first 
mentions  the  flood  of  Deucalion.  The  ac- 
count is  given  at  length  by  Ovid ; by  whom 
the  reason  assigned  is  the  general  prevalence 
of  violence  and  wickedness  (‘  Metam.’  I.  240, 
8cc.).  Apollodorus  (Lib.  i.)  ascribes  the  de- 
luge of  Deucalion  to  the  determination  of 
Jupiter  to  destroy  the  men  of  the  brazen  age. 
And  Lucian  (‘De  Syra  Dea’)  speaks  of  it  as 
having  destroyed  the  whole  human  race.  The 
Persian  tradition  may  be  that  embodied  in 
the  Koran,  though  there  probably  incorpo- 
rated with  the  Scriptural  narrative.  The 
Hindoo  tradition  represents  Manu  as  warned 
by  a great  fish  to  build  a ship,  that  he  might 
be  preserved  during  an  impending  deluge. 
The  ship  was  saved  by  being  lashed  on  to  the 
horn  of  the  fish,  and  was  ultimately  landed  on 
a northern  mountain.  (See  the  tradition  at 
length,  Hard'vN-ick,  ‘ Christ  and  other  Masters,’ 


GENESIS.  VIII. 


75 


p.  ii.  ch.  III.  § 3.)  The  Phrygian  story  of 
Annakos  (supposed  to  be  Enoch)  who  foretold 
the  Deluge,  is  singularly  confirmed  by  a medal 
struck  at  Apamea  (called  Apamea  Kibotus,  i.e. 
Apamea,  the  Ark)  in  the  reign  of  Septimius 
Severus,  on  which  is  depicted  an  ark  or  chest 
floating  on  the  waters.  Two  people  are  seen 
within  it  and  two  going  out  of  it.  On  the 
top  of  the  ark  a bird  perches,  and  another 
flies  towards  it  with  a branch  between  its 
feet,  on  the  vessel ; in  some  specimens  of  this 
coin,  are  the  letters  NO.  It  can  hardly  be 
doubted,  however,  that  this  coin,  and  the  tra- 
dition connected  with  it,  come  somewhat 
directly  from  Hebrew  sources.  The  third 
division  of  the  Human  Race,  the  Turanian, 
has  also  everywhere  traditions  of  the  Deluge. 
In  China,  Fa-he,  the  reputed  founder  of 
Chinese  civilization,  is  represented  as  escap- 
ing from  the  waters  of  a deluge,  and  he 
reappears  as  the  first  man  at  the  produc- 
tion of  a renovated  world,  attended  by  his 
wife,  three  sons  and  three  daughters  (fiard- 
wick.  Part  ill,  p.  16).  The  inhabitants  of 
the  Polynesian  Islands,  who  are  probably  of 
Malay  origin,  especially  the  Figi  islanders, 
have  distinct  accounts  of  a deluge,  in  which  a 
family,  eight  in  number,  was  saved  in  a 
canoe  (Hardwick,  iii.  185).  Similar  tradi- 
tions prevailed  throughout  the  continent  of 
America,  the  aboriginal  inhabitants  of  which 
are  now  generally  believed  to  be  all  of  one 
stock,  and  by  their  physical  and  linguistic 
peculiarities  are  by  the  greatest  ethnologists 
identified  with  the  Turanian  races  of  Asia. 
(See  Bunsen,  ‘Philos,  of  Univ.  Flist.’  Vol.  ii. 
p.  1 1 2.)  In  South  America,  the  inhabitants 
of  Mexico  had  paintings  representing  the  De- 
luge, a man  and  his  wife  in  a bark  or  on  a 
raft,  a mountain  rising  above  the  waters,  and 
birds,  the  dove,  the  vulture,  &c.  taking  part 
in  the  scene.  In  North  America,  the  Chero- 
kee Indians  had  a legend  of  all  men  destroyed 
by  a deluge,  except  one  family  saved  in  a 
boat,  to  the  building  of  which  they  had  been 
incited  by  a mysterious  dog,  which  recalls  the 
Indian  fable  of  the  friendly  fish  (see  Hard- 
wick, Part  III.  pp.  161 — 164). 

Thus  among  the  more  civilized  countries 
of  Europe,  and  in  well  nigh  every  portion  of 
Asia  and  America,  in  every  diflerent  race  of 
mankind,  we  find  traditionary  accounts  of 
this  great  catastrophe,  and  of  the  miraculous 
deliverance  of  a single  family.  The  mythical 
interpreters  insist,  that  every  nation  had  its 
mythic  age,  its  mythic  traditions,  and  that  as 
we  discover  the  same  myth  of  a deluge  in  all 
other  nations,  we  naturally  conclude  that 
the  Hebrew  narrative  is  in  like  manner  my- 
thical, But  how  can  it  be  explained,  that  in 
all  parts  of  the  world,  people  have  stumbled 
on  the  same  myth  ? What  is  there,  apart 
from  tradition,  that  so  commends  the  fable  of 
a Deluge  and  of  the  saving  of  one  household 
to  the  imagination  and  invention  of  mankind? 


The  existence  of  cosmogonies,  more  or  less 
alike,  may  be  easily  conceived  of.  But,  that 
in  all  parts  of  the  world,  among  races  the 
most  remote  and  dissimilar,  there  should  pre- 
vail a belief,  that,  after  man  was  created  on 
the  earth,  all  men  but  one  family,  were  de- 
stroyed by  a Deluge,  is  intelligible  only  on 
the  supposition,  that  some  such  event  ac- 
tually did  occur;  an  event  simply,  graphically 
and  accurately  related  in  the  Book  of  Genesis, 
but  variously  distorted  and  disguised  in  the 
legends  of  the  heathen  world.  An  universal 
belief,  not  springing  directly  from  some  in- 
stinctive principle  in  our  nature,  can  with 
reason  only  be  ascribed  to  tradition  of  an 
historical  fact.  The  only  other* explanation 
suggested  is  utterly  impossible,  viz.  that  in 
many  parts  of  the  world  among  the  more 
civilized  and  the  most  barbarous  alike,  re- 
mains of  marine  animals  found  beneath  the 
Earth’s  surface  had  suggested  the  same  be- 
lief, viz.  that  there  must  have  been  an  univer- 
sal Flood.  Even  supposing  this  possible,  how 
does  this  account  for  the  similarity  of  the 
tradition  not  generally  only,  but  in  minute 
particulars  in  the  remotest  parts  of  the  in- 
habited world  ? 

2.  The  second  question.  Was  the  Deluge 
Universal  ? has  long  divided  those  who  be- 
lieve that  it  was  historically  true,  and  that  it  is 
correctly  related  by  Moses.  The  most  literal 
interpretation  of  the  language,  especially  of 
the  words,  Gen.  vii.  19,  “all  the  high  hills 
that  were  under  the  whole  heaven,  were 
covered,”  would  lead  to  the  conviction  that 
it  must  have  been  universal.  Yet  it  is  cer- 
tain, that  many,  who  accept  implicitly  the 
historical  truth  of  the  narrative,  believe  the 
inundation  to  have  been  partial.  Of  such 
we  may  distinguish  two  classes  of  writers, 
I St  those  who  think  that  all  the  then  living 
race  of  man  was  destroyed;  but  that  those 
regions  of  the  earth  not  tlien  inhabited  by 
man  were  unaffected  by  the  Flood : 2nd, 
those  who  believe  that  the  Flood  swept 
away  only  that  portion  of  mankind  with 
which  the  Sacred  narrative  is  chiefly  con- 
cerned ; and  which  had  become  corrupted 
and  vitiated  by  the  promiscuous  marriages 
mentioned  in  ch.  vi.  i,  2. 

• In  order  to  place  ourselves  in  a fair  posi- 
tion forjudging  of  these  questions,  it  may  be 
well  to  consider  the  nature  of  the  narrative, 
and  the  common  use  of  language  among  the 
Hebrews.  And  if  we  do  so  carefully,  we 
shall  surely  be  led  to  conclude,  that  the 
Deluge  is  described  as  from  the  point  of 
view  of  an  eye-vvitness.  It  has  been  so  much 
our  wont  to  look  on  all  the  early  portions  of 
Genesis  as  a direct  revelation  from  God  to 
Moses,  that  we  rather  consider  the  picture  to 
be  drawn,  if  we  may  speak  so,  as  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  Omnipotent.  Yet,  even 
if  we  are  right  in  esteeming  all  as  a simply 
direct  revelation,  it  may  be,  that  the  reve- 


76 


GENESIS.  VIII. 


lation  was  given  in  prophetic  vision,  and  that 
Moses  wrote,  not  merely  what  he  had  heard, 
but  also,  and  rather,  what  he  had  seen.  But 
we  may  remember  too,  that  the  custom  of 
Scripture  is  to  refer  historical  records  to  the 
evidence  of  eye-witnesses.  This  is  very  much 
the  case  in  the  New  Testament.  The  Apostles 
and  Evangelists  constantly  claim  to  have  been 
present  at  the  scenes  which  they  relate  (see 
especially  Luke  i.  i,  2;  Joh.  xix.  35,  xxi.  24; 
Acts  i.  3 ; I Cor.  xv.  3 — 8 ; 2 Pet.  i.  16 ; i Joh. 
i.  i);  and  they  relate  them  as  those  scenes  ap- 
peared to  them.  The  baptism  of  Jesus,  the 
transfiguration,  the  walking  on  the  waters,  the 
multiplying  the  loaves  and  fishes,  the  Cruci- 
fixion, the  Resurrection,  the  Ascension,  the 
tongues  of  fire  at  Pentecost,  are  all  simply 
painted  as  they  who  were  present  saw  and  con- 
ceived of  them.  And  this  is  equally  true  in  the 
Old  Testament.  Take  for  instance  the  much 
debated  miracle  of  the  sun  and  the  moon 
standing  still  at  the  command  of  Joshua. 
The  phenomenon  is  related  just  as  the  con- 
tending armies  witnessed  it.  It  is  not  re- 
ferred to  its  natural  causes,  whatever  they 
may  have  been.  That  merely  is  related 
which  actually  appeared.  At  Joshua’s  com- 
mand, and  of  course  by  Divine  intervention, 
the  Sun  and  the  Moon,  which  would  natu- 
rally have  seemed  to  describe  an  arc  in  the 
heavens  and  to  descend  into  the  west,  then, 
on  the  contrary,  seemed  to  stand  still  in  the 
midst  of  heaven.  Now  just  so  is  the  Deluge 
described  in  Genesis.  It  is  pictured,  as  it 
would  have  presented  itself  to  the  eyes  of 
Noah  and  his  family.  Moreover,  on  the 
principle  just  mentioned,  it  is  in  the  highest 
degree  probable,  that  the  description  is  really 
that  which  was  given  bygone  of  such  eye- 
witnesses. It  would  have  been  very  strange 
if  no  such  description  had  been  given  and 
preserved.  Shem  would  almost  certainly 
have  related  it,  over  and  over  again,  to  his 
children  and  grand-children.  They  would 
have  treasured  it  up  in  their  memories  and 
have  handed  it  on.  As  has  been  so  notori- 
ously the  case  among  later  nations  (see  Max 
Muller’s  ‘Sans.  Lit’  p.  500)  the  very  words 
of  the  original  narrative  would  be  carefully 
recorded  from  father  to  son,  whether  in 
writing  or  by  oral  tradition ; and  so,  in  all 
probability,  we  have  in  Genesis  the  very 
syllables  in  which  the  Patriarch  Shem  de- 
scribed to  the  ancestors  of  Abraham  that 
which  he  himself  had  seen,  and  in  which  he 
had  borne  so  great  part.  The  Divine  autho- 
rity of  the  narrative  would  be  no  more 
affected  by  this,  than  the  authority  of  the 
Gospel  of  St  Mark  is  affected  by  the  pro- 
bable fact  that  St  .Mark  relates  that  which 
St  Peter  communicated  to  him  as  the  result 
of  his  own  ocular  and  aural  experience. 
I-ct  us  then  view  it  thus.  One  of  the  eight 
human  beings  saved  in  the  ark  relates  all  that 
he  saw.  Me  mentions  first  God’s  warning  to 


Noah  and  denunciation  of  judgment  on  man- 
kind. He  describes  the  building  and  the 
proportions  of  the  ark.  He  narrates  the  40 
days  of  rain  and  the  swelling  of  the  rivers 
and  of  the  ocean,  in  the  words  which  most 
forcibly  describe  that  great  catastrophe  (Gen. 
vii.  ii).  He  then  describes  how  the  waters 
prevailed,  till  the  ark  was  raised  up  and 
floated  over  them  (v.  18).  At  length,  not 
only  did  the  ark  float,  but  the  highest  hills 
disappeared  (v.  19) ; nothing  was  visible 
under  the  whole  vault  of  heaven,  but  sea  and 
air.  The  very  words  are  “ All  the  high  hills 
under  the  whole  heaven  were  covered.” 
Where  the  ark  was  at  this  time,  or  where 
Noah  and  his  family  had  been  dwelling 
before,  we  cannot  tell.  The  country  may 
have  been  mountainous,  and  so,  in  order  to 
hide  the  hills  from  view,  the  waters  must 
have  been*  very  deep,  or  it  may  have  been  a 
plain  country,  as  many  think  the  region 
round  about  Babylon,  with  few  hills  in  sight 
and  those  not  of  great  altitude;  in  which 
case  but  a moderate  depth  of  water  would 
have  sufficed  to  cover  all  the  highest  hills 
under  the  whole  canopy  of  heaven.  The 
inhabitants  of  the  ark  probably  tried  the 
depth  of  the  Deluge  by  a plumb  line,  an 
invention  surely  not  unknown  to  those  who 
had  acquired  the  arts  of  working  in  brass  and 
iron  (ch.  iv.  22),  and  they  foil nd  a depth  of 
15  cubits.  Then  all  flesh,  all  that  was  on 
the  dry  land,  died.  And,  as  the  gathering  of 
the  waters  is  thus  described,  so  in  ch.  viii. 
the  subsidence  is  given  in  the  same  simple 
graphic  style.  At  length,  on  a specified  day, 
the  ark  rests.  It  is  found  that  it  had  strand- 
ed near  to  some  of  the  hills  in  a generally 
plain  country,  perhaps  to  the  south  of  Arme- 
nia, perhaps  in  the  north  of  Palestine,  per- 
haps somewhere  in  Persia,  or  in  India  or 
elsewhere.  The  waters  continually  decrease, 
it  may  be  the  vapours  also  clear  off ; and  at 
length  the  summits  of  the  surrounding  hills 
become  visible,  though  the  plain  country  still 
is  flooded.  Noah  then  sends  out  the  Raven. 
It  goes  to  and  fro,  but  returns  no  more  to 
the  ark.  No  account  is  given  of  its  wander- 
ings; what  appears  to  Noah  and  his  family 
is  all  that  we  learn.  So  too  of  the  Dove. 
It  goes  forth  and,  finding  no  rest,  comes  back 
again.  Once  more  it  is  sent  out.  Whither 
it  goes  no  one  can  tell,  all  that  appears  is, 
that  it  has  found  dry  land.  It  brings  back 
an  olive  leaf  in  its  beak;  and  Noah  judges 
that  the  waters  were  abated.  From  first  to 
last  the  description  is  just  that  which  Shem 
or  Noah  would  have  given  of  all  that  he  had 
himself  seen. 

If  this  be  the  true  explanation  of  the 
narrative,  we  may  then  more  readily  see 
how  the  question  of  the  universality  of  the 
Deluge  stands.  The  words  used  may  certain- 
ly mean  that  the  Deluge  was  universal,  that  it 
overwhelmed,  not  only  all  the  inhabited  parts 


GENESIS.  VIII. 


77 


of  Asia,  but  also  Europe,  Africa,  and  America, 
Australia,  New  Zealand,  andOceanica;  most, 
if  not  all,  of  which  Islands  and  Continents 
were  probably  then  without  human  inhabit- 
ants. Yet,  if  only  the  inhabited  world  was 
inundated,  and  all  its  inhabitants  destroyed; 
the  elfect  would  have  been  the  same  to  Noah, 
and  would,  most  likely,  have  been  described 
in  the  same  words.  The  purpose  of  God 
was  to  sweep  away  the  sinful  race  of  Adam. 
That  purpose  would  have  been  effected  by  a 
Deluge,  which  covered  the  whole  of  that 
portion  of  the  globe,  which  may  be  called 
the  cradle  of  the  human  race.  The  words  of 
the  narrative  are  perhaps  no  stronger  than 
would  have  been  naturally  used  to  describe 
such  a catastrophe.  The  most  striking  is 
the  passage,  “ All  the  high  hills  under  the 
whole  heaven,”  ch.  vii.  19.  But  this  is  no 
more  than  such  expressions  as,  “I  begin  to 
put  the  dread  of  thee  upon  the  nations  that 
are  under  the  whole  heaven,”  Deut.  ii.  25  : 
•‘all  countries  came  into  Egypt  to  Joseph  to 
buy  corn,”  Gen.  xli.  57:  “as  the  Lord  thy 
God  liveth,  there  is  no  nation  or  kingdom 
whither  my  lord  hath  not  sent  to  seek  thee, 
&c.,”  I Kings  xviii.  10.  When  the  ancients 
speak  of  the  whole  world,  they  mean  at  most 
the  whole  world  as  known  to  the  ancients. 
When  they  speak  of  the  whole  heaven,  they 
mean  the  whole  visible  canopy  or  expanse  of 
the  sky ; and  so,  when  they  speak  of  the  earth, 
the  land,  the  dry  ground,  they  mean  at  times 
very  limited  portions  indeed  of  the  earth’s 
surface.  The  strictest  interpretation  of  the 
record,  according  to  the  habit  of  speech 
among  Semitic  nations,  will  allow  us  to  un- 
derstand that  a Deluge  prevailed,  extensive 
enough  to  destroy  all  the  living  race  of  man, 
and  to  cover  with  water  the  whole  visible  face 
of  nature.  It  is  another  question,  whether 
we  may  admit,  that  any  portion  of  the  human 
race,  except  the  eight  persons  miraculously 
preserved,  can  have  escaped.  Some  suppose 
the  descendants  of  Cain  to  have  peopled 
China,  and  not  to  have  been  involved  in  the 
Deluge,  which,  in  their  belief,  was  sent  on 
purpose  to  destroy  those  apostate  and  dege- 
nerate Sethites,  who  had  defiled  the  chosen 
race  by  intermarrying  with  unbelievers. 
Others  think  that  the  Nephilim  of  Numb, 
xiii.  33  were  descendants  of  the  Nephilim  of 
Gen.  vi.  4,  who  must  therefore  have  survived 
the  Deluge.  Others  again,  as  the  authors 
of  ‘The  Genesis  of  the  Earth  and  Man,’ 
and  of  ‘ Adam  and  the  Adamites,’  suppose 
that  there  was  a pre-Adamite  race  of  men, 
and  that  the  history  in  Genesis  relates  only 
the  fortunes  of  the  Adamites,  having  no  re- 
ference to  the  rest.  Without  pronouncing 
too  hastily  on  any  fair  inference  from  the 
words  of  Scripture,  we  may  reasonably  say, 
that  their  most  natural  interpretation  is,  that 
the  whole  race  of  man  had  become  grievously 
corrupted,  since  the  faithful  had  intermingled 


with  the  ungodly;  that  the  inhabited  world 
Avas  consequently  filled  with  violence,  and 
that  God  had  decreed  to  destroy  al)  mankind, 
except  one  single  family;  that  therefore  all 
that  portion  of  the  earth,  perhaps  as  yet  a 
very  small  portion,  into  which  mankind  had 
spread,  was  overwhelmed  by  water.  The  ark 
was  ordained  to  save  the  one  faithful  family ; 
and  lest  that  family,  on  the  subsidence  of  the 
waters,  should  find  the  whole  country  round 
them  a desert,  a pair  of  all  the  beasts  of  the  land 
and  of  the  fowls  of  the  air  were  preserved  along 
with  them,  and  along  with  them  went  forth  to 
replenish  the  now  desolated  continent.  The 
words  of  Scripture  (confirmed  as  they  are  by 
an  universal  tradition),  appear,  at  least,  to 
mean  as  much  as  this.  They  do  not  neces- 
sarily mean  more. 

The  geological  objections  to  the  history  of 
the  Deluge  are  chie%  such  as  the  discovery 
of  loose  sconce  on  the  tops  of  the  extinct  vol- 
canoes of  Auvergne  and  Languedoc,  the  im- 
possibility of  the  waters  extending  to  the 
height  of  15  cubits  above  the  mountains,  and 
the  permanent  distribution  of  the  animal  king- 
dom over  the  different  parts  of  the  world. 

It  is  said  the  loose  scoriae  on  the  mountains 
of  Auvergne  and  Languedoc  must  have  been 
swept  away  by  an  universal  flood.  It  is, 
however,  quite  conceivable,  even  if  the  Deluge 
extended  to  those  regions  and  to  the  tops  of 
those  hills,  that  the  gradual  rise  and  subsi- 
dence of  the  waters  may  have  left  there  re- 
mains of  volcanic  action,  which  are  not  so 
light  as  has  been  asserted,  almost  untouched. 
The  difficulty  in  conceiving  of  the  watei's 
rising  15  cubits  above  the  highest  mountains 
is  a difficulty  in  the  mind  of  the  objector,  not 
in  the  text  of  Scripture,  which  nowhere 
speaks  of  such  a rise.  (See  the  earlier  part  of 
this  note.)  The  possibility  of  vegetation  sur- 
viving has  been  considered  in  the  note  on  ch. 
viii.  II.  The  most  serious  difficulty  in  con- 
ceiving of  a Flood  universal  (not  only  to  the 
world  inhabited  by  man,  but  to  the  whole 
surface  of  the  globe)  is  in  the  history  of  the 
distribution  of  the  animal  kingdom.  For  ex- 
ample, the  animals  now  living  in  South 
America  and  in  New  Zealand  are  of  the  same 
type  as  the  fossil  animals  which  lived  and  died 
there  before  the  creation  of  man.  Is  it  con- 
ceivable that  all  should  have  been  gathered 
together  from  their  original  habitats  into 
the  ark  of  Noah  and  have  been  afterwards 
redistributed  to  their  respective  homes?  The 
difficulty,  however,  vanishes  entirely,  if  the 
sacred  narrative  relates  only  a submersion  of 
the  human  race  and  of  its  then  dwelling-place, 
a sense  of  that  narrative,  which  exact  criti- 
cism shews  to  be  possible,  perhaps  even  the 
most  probable,  irrespective  of  all  questions  of 
natural  science.  The  cavils  against  the  single 
window,  the  proportions  of  the  ark.  See. 
have  been  considered  in  their  respective  places. 
The  peculiar  unfairness  of  the  objections 


GENESIS.  IX. 


■—3. 


7S 

urged  is  to  be  found,  not  so  much  in  the  ob- 
jections themselves,  as  in  the  insisting  at  the 
same  time  on  an  interpretation  of  the  Scrip- 
ture narrative,  on  principles  which  would  not 
be  applied  to  any  other  history  whatever. 
Not  only  are  we  required  to  expound  ancient 
and  Eastern  phraseology  with  the  cold  exact- 
ness applicable  only  to  the  tongues  of  Nor- 
thern Europe,  but  moreover  to  adhere  to  all 
the  interpretations  of  past  uncritical  ages,  to 
believe  that  there  was  but  a single  window  in 
the  ark,  that  the  ark  stranded  on  the  top  of  a 
mountain,  within  sight  of  which  it  very  pro- 
bably never  sailed,  that  the  waters  of  the 
Flood  rose  three,  or  even  live  miles  above  the 
sea  level,  and  other  prodigies,  which  the  sa- 
cred text,  even  in  its  most  natural  signifi- 
cance, nowhere  either  asserts  or  implies. 

If  it  be  inquired,  why  it  pleased  God  to 
save  man  and  beast  in  a huge  vessel,  instead 
of  leaving  them  a refuge  on  high  hills  or  in 
some  other  sanctuary,  we  perhaps  inquire  in 


vain.  Yet  surely  we  can  see,  that  the  great 
moral  lesson  and  the  great  spiritual  truths 
exhibited  in  the  Deluge  and  the  ark  were 
well  worth  a signal  departure  from  the  com- 
mon course  of  nature  and  Providence.  The 
judgment  was  far  more  marked,  the  deli- 
verance far  more  manifestly  Divine,  than  they 
would  have  been,  if  hills  or  trees  or  caves 
had  been  the  shelter  provided  for  those  to  be 
saved.  The  great  prophetic  forepicturing  of 
salvation  from  a flood  of  sin  by  Christ  and 
in  the  Church  of  Christ  would  have  lost  all 
its  beauty  and  symmetry,  if  mere  earthly 
refuges  had  been  sufficient  for  deliverance. 
As  it  is,  the  history  of  Noah,  next  after  the 
history  of  Christ,  is  that  which  perhaps  most 
forcibly  arrests  our  thoughts,  impresses  our 
consciences  and  yet  revives  our  hopes.  It 
was  a judgment  signally  executed  at  the 
time.  It  is  a lesson  deeply  instructive  for  all 
time. 


c ch.-ip.  I. 
28. 


& ?.  17. 


CHAPTER  IX, 


I God  blesscth  Noah.  4 Blood  and  innrder  are 
forbidden.  8 God's  covenant,  signified  by 
the  rainbow.  18  Noah  replenisheth  the  zmrld, 
70  planteth  a vineyard,  21  is  drunken,  and 
mocked  of  his  son,  25  enrseth  Canaan,  26  bless- 
eth  Sheut,  27  prayeth  for  Japheth,  29  anddieth. 


AND  God  blessed  Noah  and  his 
sons,  and  said  unto  them,  "Be 
fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  replenish 
the  earth. 


2 And  the  fear  of  you  and  the 
dread  of  you  shall  be  upon  every  beast 
of  the  earth,  and  upon  every  fovv^l  of 
the  air,  upon  all  that  moveth  upon  the 
earth,  and  upon  all  the  fishes  of  the 
sea ; into  your  hand  are  they  delivered. 

3 Every  moving  thing  that  liveth 
shall  be  meat  for  you;  even  as  the 

green  herb  have  I given  you  alEc^api. 
things. 


Chap.  IX.  1.  And  God  blessed  Noah,  &c.] 
Noah,  now  become  the  second  head  of  the 
human  family,  receives  a blessing,  the  former 
part  of  which  is  but  a repetition  of  the  bless- 
ing first  pronounced  on  Adam,  ch.  i.  28. 
The  sin  of  man  had  frustrated  the  intent 
of  the  first  blessing.  The  earth  had  been 
filled  with  licentiousness  and  violence,  fatal 
to  th.e  increase  of  mankind,  and  at  length 
bringing  down  a judgment,  which  swept  all 
but  one  family  away.  Now  all  begins  anew ; 
and  God  repeats  the  promise  of  fecundity, 
which  sin  had  made  of  none  effect. 

2.  the  fear  of  you  and  the  dread  of  yoii] 
The  small  remnant  of  mankind  just  rescued 
from  the  Deluge  might  have  perished  fi-om 
the  attacks  of  wild  beasts,  which  had  pro- 
bably been  young  and  tame  in  the  ark,  but 
were  now  adult  or  adolescent  and  returning 
to  their  own  wild  natures.  The  assurance 
given  in  this  verse  was  therefore  a very  need- 
ful comfort  to  Noah  and  his  family. 

3.  Eaeery  monjing  thing  that  Irveth  shall 
be  meat  for  yoii\  In  the  primal  blessing  (ch. 
i.  28,  29,  30)  there  had  been  mention  of 


man’s  supremacy  and  power  over  the  inferior 
animals.  It  has  been  a question  whether 
there  had  been  a permission  of  animal  food 
or  not.  The  almost  universal  opinion  of  the 
ancients  was  that  only  vegetable  food  was 
then  permitted;  and  if  we  remember  that 
most  probably  the  early  race  of  men  lived 
in  a warm  and  genial  climate,  and  that  even 
now  some  of  the  Eastern  nations  are  con- 
tented and  healthy  upon  a vegetable  diet, 
we  shall  be  the  more  disposed  to  acquiesce 
in  an  interpretation  which  seems  to  do  less 
violence  to  the  text.  It  cannot,  however, 
be  said  that  there  was  from  the  first  a 
prohibition  of  animal  food.  From  very  early 
times  we  find  sheep  and  cattle  kept  at  least 
for  milk  and  wool,  and  slain  for  sacrifice, 
ch.  iv.  2,  20.  Whether  then  it  had  been 
conceded  or  not  from  the  first ; it  is  likely 
that  those  who  fed  and  sacrificed  sheep,  like 
Abel,  who  kept  cattle,  like  Jabal,  or  who 
handled  instruments  of  bronze  and  iron,  like 
Tubal  Cain,  would  in  the  course  of  time 
have  learned  the  use  of  animal  food.  If  so, 
we  may  consider  the  words  of  this  verse  as 
a concession  to  the  infirmities  or  the  neces- 
sities of  mankind,  coupled  with  restrictions, 


V.  4 — IO-] 


GENESIS.  IX. 


79 


f Lev.  17.  4 ^But  flesh  with  the  life  thereof, 

zvhich  is  the  blood  thereof,  shall  ye 
not  eat. 

5 And  surely  your  blood  of  your 
lives  will  I require  ; at  the  hand  of 
every  beast  will  I require  it,  and  at 
the  hand  of  man  ; at  the  hand  of 
every  man’s  brother  will  I require  the 

^Matt.=6.  life 

52-  6 Whoso  sheddeth  man’s  blood, 

10.  by  man  shall  his  blood  be  shed;  “^for 
' chap.  I.  image  of  God  made  he  man. 


7 And  you,  be  ye  fruitful,  and 
multiply;  bring  forth  abundantly  in 
the  earth,  and  multiply  therein. 

8 ^1  And  God  spake  unto  Noah, 
and  to  his  sons  v/ith  him,  saying, 

• 9 And  I,  behold,  I establish  my 
covenant  with  you,  and  with  your 
seed  after  you ; 

10  And  with  every  living  creature 
that  is  with  you,  of  the  fowl,  of 
the  cattle,  and  of  every  beast  of  the 
earth  with  you;  from  all  that  go 


which  may  have  been  called  for  by  the  savage 
practices  of  the  Antediluvians. 

4.  flesh  <Lvith  the  life  thereof^  Rashi  and 
some  other  Jewish  commentators  understand 
a prohibition  of  the  practice  of  eating  flesh 
cut  from  the  living  animal,  and  so  Luther 
translated,  “ the  flesh  which  yet  lives  in  its 
blood.”  The  monstrous  wickedness  of  the 
Antediluvians,  by  which  the  earth  was  filled 
with  violence,  may  have  taken  this  form 
among  others ; and  these  words  without  doubt 
condemn  by  implication  all  such  fiendish 
cruelty.  They  prohibit  also  the  revolting 
custom  of  eating  raw  flesh;  for  civilization 
is  ever  to  be  a handmaid  to  religion.  But 
over  and  above  all  this,  there  is  reference  to 
that  shedding  of  blood,  or  pouring  out  of 
life,  which  formed  so  great  a part  of  typical 
sacrifice,  and  which  had  its  full  significance 
in  that  pouring  out  of  the  soul  unto  death, 
which  won  for  man  the  resurrection  to  eter- 
nal life.  We  need  not  look  for  any  scientific 
explanation  of  'the  connection  between  life 
and  blood  here,  or  in  the  subsequent  legal 
enactments  {e.g.  Lev.  iii.  17,  vii.  26,  xvii.  10; 

I Sam.  xiv.  32;  Ez.  xxxiii.  25).  The  ancients 
no  doubt  generally  believed  the  blood  to  be 
the  seat  of  the  life;  but  it  is  also  literally 
true,  that  the  shedding  of  blood  is  equivalent 
to  the  destruction  of  life;  and  so  in  these 
early  injunctions  the  God  of  mercy  taught 
the  value  not  only  of  human,  but  of  all 
animal  being,  and  along  with  the  forbidding 
of  manslaughter  forbade  wanton  cruelty  and 
indifference  to  the  sufferings  of  His  brute 
creatures. 

5.  And  surely  your  blood  of  your  Hues  nvill 
I require^  &c.]  There  have  been  many  pro- 
posed translations  of  this  verse.  The  A.V., 
which  accords  with  .the  most  im.portant  an- 
cient versions,  no  doubt  gives  the  true  mean- 
ing. “The  blood  of  your  lives”  probably 
signifies  “your  life  blood.”  Under  the  law 
. the  ox  that  gored  was  to  be  killed  (Ex.xxi. 
28),  which  seems  a comment  on  this  passage. 
In  Ps.  ix.  12  God  is  said  to  be  the  requirer 
of  blood,  a phrase  id^nti#,*;!  with  that  made 
use  of  here. 


6.  Vr^oso  sheddeth  inar{s  hloo(I\  Here  the 
manner  in  which  God  will  require  the  blood 
of  the  murdered  man  is  specified.  There 
shall  be  a legal  retribution,  life  for  life. 

for  in  the  image  of  God  made  he  man\ 
The  slaughter  of  brute  animals  was  per- 
mitted, though  wanton  cruelty  towards  them 
was  forbidden;  but  man  was  made  in  the 
image  of  God,  and  to  destroy  man’s  life  has 
in  it  the  sin  of  sacrilege.  Moreover,  the 
image  of  God  implies  the  existence  of  a per- 
sonal, moral,  and  therefore,  in  the  creature, 
a responsible  will.  Though  the  holiness, 
which  was  part  of  the  likeness,  was  lost  in 
the  fall,  still  the  personality  and  the  moral 
being  remained.  To  destroy  the  life  of  such 
an  one  is  therefore  to  cut  short  his  time  of 
probation,  to  abridge  his  day  of  grace,  to 
step  in  between  him  and  his  moral  Governor, 
to  frustrate,  as  far  as  may  be,  God’s  purposes 
of  love  and  mercy  to  his  soul.  Hence  the 
sin  of*murder  is  the  greatest  wrong  which 
man  can  do  to  his  brother  man ; perhaps  also 
the  greatest  insult  which  man  can  offer  to 
Him  who  is  the  loving  Father  of  all  men. 
The  Jews  held  that  there  were  seven  pre- 
cepts given  to  Noah,  which  were  binding  on 
all  mankind,  to  be  observed  by  proselytes  of 
the  gate  and  by  pious  Gentiles,  viz.  abstinence 
from  murder,  from  eating  the  flesh  of  living 
animals,  from  blasphemy,  idolatry,  incest, 
theft,  and  the  submission  to  constituted  au- 
thority; the  first  two  and  the  last  are  ex- 
pressly enjoined  in  the  words  recorded  in 
this  chapter,  the  other  four  result  from  the 
dictates  of  natural  religion. 

9.  I establish  my  couenant  uoiih  you^  and 
uoith  your  seed  after  yoii\  A new  covenant  is 
now  made  with  all  the  human  beings  rescued 
from  the  flood,  and  through  them  even  with 
the  beasts  of  the  field,  that  there  should  not 
again  be  a flood  to  destroy  all  flesh.  This, 
perhaps,  more  than  any  other  part  of  the 
history,  seems  to  prove  that  the  Deluge  ex- 
tended Rt  least  to  the  destruction  of  all  the 
then  living  race  of  man. 

10*  from  all  that  go  out  of  the  ark,  to 
euery  beast  of  the  earthy  An  idiomatic  ex- 


8o 


GENESIS.  IX. 


V.  II 21. 


/"  Isai.  54. 

9- 


r Ecclus. 
^3.  II,  12. 


out  of  the  ark,  to  every  beast  of  the 
earth. 

1 1 And  v/ill  establish  my  cove- 
nant with  you ; neither  shall  all  flesh 
be  cut  off  any  more  by  the  waters  of 
a flood ; neither  shall  there  any  more 
be  a flood  to  destroy  the  earth. 

12  And  God  said,  This  is  the 
token  of  the  covenant  which  I make 
between  me  and  you  and  every  liv- 
ing creature  that  is  with  you,  for  per- 
petual generations: 

13  I do  set  my  bow  in  the  cloud, 
and  it  shall  be  for  a token  of  a cove- 
nant between  me  and  the  earth. 

14  ^ And  it  shall  come  to  pass, 
when  I bring  a cloud  over  the  earth, 
that  the  bow  shall  be  seen  in  the 
cloud : 

1 5 And  I will  remember  my  cove- 
nant, which  is  between  me  and  you 
and  every  living  creature  of  all  flesh ; 
and  the  waters  shall  no  more  become 
a flood  to  destroy  all  flesh. 


16  And  the  bow  shall  be  in  the 
cloud ; and  I will  look  upon  it,  that 
I may  remember  the  everlasting  cove- 
nant between  God  and  every  living 
creature  of  all  flesh  that  is  upon  the 
earth. 

17  And  God  said  unto  Noah, 

This  is  the  token  of  the  covenant, 
which  I have  established  between 
me  and  all  flesh  that  is  upon  the 
earth. 

18  ^ And  the  sons  of  Noah,  that 
went  forth  of  the  ark,  were  Shem, 
and  Ham,  and  Japheth:  and  Ham  is 

the  father  of  ^ Canaan.  t Heb. 

19  These  are  the  three  sons 
Noah:  and  of  them  was  the  whole 
earth  overspread. 

20  And  Noah  began  to  be  an  hus- 
bandman, and  he  planted  a vine- 
yard : 

2 1 And  he  drank  of  the  wine,  and 
was  drunken ; and  he  was  uncovered 
within  his  tent. 


pression,  signifying  that  the  covenant  shall 
extend  not  only  to  those  that  go  out  of  the 
ark,  but  also  to  every  beast  of  the  earth. 
Not  only  those  preserv'cd  in  the  ark,  but  all 
other  animals  are  to  be  interested  in  this  pro- 
mise. From  which  we  can  hardly  fail  to 
infer  that  the  destruction  of  the  lower  iinimals 
was  confined  to  a certain  district,  and  not 
general  throughout  the  earth. 

13.  I do  set  my  bo^v  in  the  cloud~\  Lit. 
I have  set  My  bow.  The  covenant  was 
an  universal  covenant;  the  sign  of  the  cove- 
nant was  therefore  to  be  one  visible  to  all 
nations,  and  intelligible  to  all  minds.  It 
appears  at  first  sight  as  if  the  words  of  the 
sacred  record  implied  that  this  was  the  first 
rainbow  ever  seen  on  earth.  But  it  would 
l)e  doing  no  violence  to  the  text  to  believe, 
that  the  rainbow  had  been  already  a familiar 
sight,  but  that  it  was  newly  constituted  the 
sign  or  token  of  a Covenant,  just  as  after- 
wards the  familiar  rite  of  baptism  and  the 
customary  use  of  bread  and  wine  were  by 
our  Blessed  Lord  ordained  to  be  the  tokens 
and  pledges  of  the  New  Covenant  in  Christ 
l)etween  His  Heavenly  Father  and  every 
Christian  soul. 

20.  Noah  began  to  be  an  husbandman~\ 
Husbandry  had  been  much  used  before  the 
flood ; but  now  there  was  a new  condition  of 
the  earth,  and  all  was,  as  it  were,  begun 
again.  As  an  incursion  of  barbarians  has 
often  swept  away  the  civilization  of  a whole 


region  or  continent,  so  the  Hood  had  reduced 
mankind  almost  to  the  simplicity  of  the  days 
of  Adam.  Still,  without  doubt,  many  of  the 
inventions  of  the  antediluvian  race  would 
have  been  preserved  by  the  family  of  Noah; 
and  probably  among  the  rest  the  cultivation 
of  the  vine. 

21.  he  drank  of  the  oe/V]  Many  have 
supposed  that  Noah  was  the  discoverer  of 
the  art  of  making  wine,  and  even  that  he 
was  the  great  planter  of  the  vine.  So  they 
have  palliated  his  fault  by  ascribing  it  to 
ignorance  of  the  effects  of  wine.  It  is  hardly 
probable  that,  with  all  the  difficulties  of  his 
new  position,  Noah  should  have  invented  fer- 
mentation. More  likely  is  it,  that  the  inge- 
nious and  intemperate  descendants  of  Cain 
had  long  before  discovered  it.  Noah  may 
have  been  but  little  used  to  strong  drink,  and 
hence  may  not  have  known  that  it  would  so 
soon  overcome  him ; yet  we  may  well  follow 
the  wisdom  of  Calvin,  and  say,  “ Leaving  all 
this  in  uncertainty,  let  us  learn  from  Noah’s 
intemperance  how  foul  and  detestable  a vice 
drunkenness  is.”  The  Holy  Scriptures  never 
conceal  the  sins  even  of  God's  greatest  saints, 
and  the  sins  of  saints  are  sure  to  meet  with 
chastisement.  Noah’s  piety  is  plainly  recorded. 
It  is  also  plainly  recorded  that  he  fell  into 
sin,  whether  partly  of  ignorance  or  wholly  of- 
infirmity;  that  sin  brought  with  it  shame, 
and,  as  is  so  often  found,  was  the  occasion  of 
sin  to  others,  and  led  on  to  consequences 
disastrous  to  the  descendants  of  all  those  who 


V.  2 2 27.] 


GENESIS.  IX. 


81 


22  And  Ham,  the  father  of  Canaan, 
saw  the  nakedness  of  his  father,  and 
told  his  two  brethren  without. 

23  And  Shem  and  Japheth  took  a 
garment,  and  laid  it  upon  both  their 
shoulders,  and  went  backward,  and 
covered  the  nakedness  of  their  father; 
and  their  faces  were  backward,  and 
they  saw  not  their  father’s  naked- 
ness. 


24  And  Noah  awoke  from  his  wine, 
and  knew  what  his  younger  son  had 
done  unto  him. 

25  And  he  said.  Cursed  be  Canaan  ; 
a servant  of  servants  shall  he  be  unto 
his  brethren. 

26  And  he  said.  Blessed  be  the 
Lord  God  of  Shem;  and  Canaan  \2ut]7' 
shall  be  "his  servant. 

27  God  shall  "enlarge  Japheth,  and  suade. 


in  any  degree  shared  in  the  guilt  of  it.  Noah 
sinned,  Ham  sinned,  perhaps,  too,  Canaan 
sinned.  So  there  was  a heritage  of  sorrow 
to  the  descendants  of  Noah  in  the  line  of 
Ham,  to  the  descendants  of  Ham  in  the  line 
of  Canaan. 

22.  Ham^  the  father  of  Canaan]  The 
great  difficulty  in  this  history  is  that  Ham 
appears  to  have  sinned,  and  Canaan  is  curs- 
ed. Some  see  in  this  simply  the  visiting 
of  the  sins  of  the  fathers  on  their  children. 
But  then  why  only  on  one  of  those  children  ? 
A propriety  has  been  discovered  in  the  curse 
on  Canaan,  as  he  was  Ham’s  youngest  son, 
just  as  Ham  was  the  youngest  son  of  Noah. 
Yet  this  is  all  gratuitous  and  without  autho- 
rity from  the  text  of  Scripture.  It  has  been 
thought,  once  more,  that  Noah’s  prophecy  ex- 
tended to  all  the  posterity  of  Ham,  but  that 
only  that  portion  which  affected  Canaan  was 
preserved  by  Moses,  in  order  to  animate  the 
Israelites  in  their  wars  against  the  Canaanites ; 
others  again  have  conjectured,  that  in  the 
prophecy  of  Noah,  instead  of  “curSed  be 
Canaan,”  we  ought  to  read,  “ cursed  be  Ham 
the  father  of  Canaan,”  but  such  conjectures, 
without  authority  of  MSS.  are  quite  inadmis- 
sible. The  extreme  brevity  of  the  narrative 
renders  it  impossible  to  explain  it  fully.  No- 
thing is  said,  save  only  that  Ham  saw  his 
father  naked,  and  then  told  his  brethren.  We 
are  even  left  to  infer  that  he  told  this  scoff- 
ingly ; but  for  the  curse  that  follows,  we 
might  suppose  that  he  had  only  consulted 
them  as  to  how  best  to  conceal  their  father’s 
shame.  Something  therefore  there  plainly  is, 
which  requires  to  be  supplied  in  order  fully 
to  clear  up  the  obscurity.  Yet  this  cannot 
now  be  discovered.  Conjecture  only  is  pos- 
sible. 

Origen  mentions  as  a tradition  among  the 
Jews,  that  Canaan  first  saw  the  shame  of  his 
grandfather  and  told  it  to  his  father.  In  that 
case,  it  may  have  been  that  the  chief  sin  lay 
with  Canaan,  and  hence  that  he  especially  in- 
herited the  curse.  Many  commentators  have 
adopted  this  opinion,  and  it  would  certainly 
solve  most  of  the  difficulty. 

24.  His  younger  sen]  Ham  is  always 
named  second  among  the  sons  of  Noah ; but 
VOL.  I. 


it  has  sometimes  been  thought,  that  Japheth 
was  the  eldest  and  Ham  the  youngest,  the 
order  being  changed  for  the  sake  of 'putting 
first  Shem,  who  was  the  progenitor  of  the 
chosen  seed.  Yet  many  writers  of  great  au- 
thority, both  Jewish  and  Christian,  under- 
stand by  the  term  here  used,  “ his  younger 
(lit.  little)  son,”  not  his  son  Ham,  but  his 
grandson  Canaan.  (So  Levi  Ben  Gerson, 
Abenezra,  Theodoret,  Procopius,  Joseph  Sca- 
liger,  &c.).  This  would  correspond  with  the 
tradition  mentioned  by  Origen  (see  last  note), 
that  the  sin  of  Ham  was  shared  by  Canaan, 
or  perhaps  that  Canaan  was  the  guilty  per- 
son, his  father  only  not  having  condemned, 
but  rather  joined  in  his  wickedness. 

25.  Cursed  be  Canaan^  &c.]  In  the  patri- 
archal ages,  when  there  was  no  regular  order 
of  priests  or  prophets,  the  head  of  the  family 
was  the  priest,  and  these  blessings  and  curses 
spake  they  not  of  themselves,  but  being  high 
priests  they  prophesied.  Yet  we  can  hardly 
fail  to  see  also  in  these  histories  a lesson,  that 
a parent’s  blessing  is  to  be  valued,  a parent’s 
curse  to  be  dreaded. 

26.  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Shem] 
The  prophecy  here  assumes  the  form  of  a 
thanksgiving  to  God,  from  whom  all  holy 
desires  and  good  counsels  come,  and  who  had 
put  into  the  heart  of  Shem  to  act  piously.  At 
the  same  time,  it  is  clearly  implied,  that  the 
Lord,  JEHOVAH,  should  be  very  specially 
the  God  of  Shem,  which  was  fultilled  in  the 
selection  of  the  descendants  of  Abraham  to 
be  the  peculiar  people  of  God. 

Canaan  shall  be  his  ser-vant]  Noah  fore- 
tells the  subjugation  of  the  land  of  Canaan 
by  the  people  of  Israel,  when  the  Canaanites 
should  become  servants  of  the  descendants  of 
Shem. 

27.  God  shall  enlarge  Japheth]  There  is 
a paronomasia  on  the  name  Japheth,  which 
probably  signifies  “enlarged.”  The  Hebrew 
word  “ shall  enlarge”  is,  neglecting  the  vowel 
points,  letter  for  letter  the  same  as  the  word 
Japheth.  The  prophecy  looked  forward  to 
the  wide  territory  which  was  assigned  to  the 
descendants  of  Japheth,  reaching  from  India 
and  Persia  in  the  East  to  the  remotest  boun- 

F 


82 


GENESIS.  IX.  X. 


[v.  28,  I. 


he  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem ; 
and  Canaan  shall  be  his  servant. 

28  ^ And  Noah  lived  after  the 
flood  three  hundred  and  fifty  years. 

29  And  all  the  days  of  Noah  were 
nine  hundred  and  fifty  years : and  he 
died. 


CHAPTER  X. 

I The  generafio7ts  of  Noah.  1 The  sons  of  fa- 
pheth.  6 The  sons  of  Ham.  8 Nimrod  the 
first  mona7‘ch.  2 1 The  sons  of  Shem. 

T OW  these  are  the  generations 
of  the  sons  of  Noah,  Shem, 


daries  of  Europe  in  the  West,  and  now- 
spreading  over  America  and  Australia. 

and  he  shall  dnjjell  in  the  tents  of  Shem'] 

(1)  The  Targum  of  Onkelos,  Philo,  Theo- 
doret  and  some  other  interpreters,  Jewish  and 
Christian,  understood  He  i.e.  God,  shall  dwell 
among  the  descendants  of  Shem.”  (2)  Many 
more,  {e.g.  Calvin,  Bochart,  Rosenm.,  Tuch, 
Del,,  Reinke,  Keil),  following  the  Targum  of 
the  Pseudo- Jonathan,  consider  Japheth  to  be 
the  subject  of  the  proposition.  J onathan’s  para- 
phrase is  “The  sons  of  Japheth  shall  be  pro- 
selyted and  dwell  in  the  schools  of  Shem,” 
and  the  majority  of  Christian  interpreters  un- 
derstood the  prophecy  to  be  similar  to  that 
in  Isai.  lx.  3,  5,  “ Gentiles  shall  come  to  thy 
light,  and  kings  to  the  brightness  of  thy  rising 
...the  abundance  of  the  sea  shall  be  converted 
unto  thee,  the  forces  of  the  Gentiles  shall 
come  unto  thee.”  Nearly  all  those  nations 
whose  history  and  language  shew  them  to  be 
Japhetic  have  been  converted  to  a belief  in 
the  religion  of  the  God  of  Shem,  which  has 
long  been  the  religion  of  all  Europe,  and 
which  is  now  making  way  even  among  the 
Aryan  races  of  Asia.  (3)  It  has  been  sug- 
gested by  some,  though  with  little  ground  of 
probability,  that  instead  of  “ tents  of  Shem,” 
we  should  render  “tents  of  renown,”  the  taber- 
nacles of  Japheth  being  spoken  of  as  famous 
and  illustrious.  Of  the  three  interpretations, 

(2)  may  be  pronounced  somewhat  confidently 
to  be  the  true.  By  that  the  continuity  of 
the  whole  prophecy  is  preserved.  The  first 
part,  V,  25,  refers  only  to  the  descendants  of 
Ham  and  Canaan.  The  second  is  the  blessing 
on  Sliem,  with  a repetition  of  the  condem- 
nation of  Canaan.  The  third  is  the  blessing 
on  Japheth,  concluding  also  with  the  condem- 
nation of  Canaan. 

The  prophecy  then  embraces  the  following 
particulars:  i.  That  the  world  should  be 
divided  among  the  descendants  of  Noah,  but 
that  Japheth  should  have  the  largest  portion 
for  his  inheritance.  2.  That  the  descendants 
of  Shem  should  preserve  the  knowledge  of  the 
true  God,  and  be  specially  chosen  to  be  His 
inheritance  and  His  peculiar  people.  3.  That 
the  descendants  of  Japheth  should  ultimately 
dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem,  that  is,  according 
to  Jewish  interpretation,  should  learn  from 
the  descendants  of  Shem  the  knowledge  of  the 
true  God.  4.  That  Canaan,  and  perhaps  other 
Hamitic  nations,  should  be  depressed  and 
“educed  to  a condition  of  servitude. 


How  fully  all  these  predictions  have  been 
carried  out  in  the  history  of  Asia,  Europe 
and  Africa,  hardly  need  be  .said. 

28.  And  Noah  lived.,  &c.]  These  two 
verses  seem  the  natural  conclusion  of  ch.  v. 
but  are  disjoined  from  it  in  order  to  insert 
the  history  of  the  life  of  Noah. 

Chap.  X.  1.  Novj  these  are  the  genera- 
tions] From  the  history  of  Noah  the  sacred 
narrative  proceeds  to  the  genealogy  of  the 
sons  of  Noah.  It  is  admitted  on  all  hands 
that  there  exists  no  more  interesting  record, 
ethnological  and  geographical,  independently 
of  its  Scriptural  authority. 

The  genealogy  traces  the  origin  of  all  na- 
tions from  a single  pair.  The  human  race  de- 
scended from  Adam  had  been  destroyed  by 
the  flood,  with  the  exception  of  Noah  and 
his  family.  Though  it  is  quite  possible  to 
interpret  the  language  cf  the  sacred  narrative 
consistently  with  the  belief  that  the  Deluge 
was  not  universal,  it  at  least  appears  most 
probable  that  the  man -inhabited  world  was 
submerged.  And  again,  although  some  have 
contended  that  the  different  races  of  man  are 
so  dissimilar,  that  they  must  have  descended 
from  different  primitive  stocks;  yet  the  in- 
quiries of  naturalists  and  physiologists  at  pre- 
sent tend  rather  to  diminish  than  to  increase 
the  number  of  distinct  species,  both  in  the 
animal  and  the  vegetable  world,  and  so  to 
make  it  even  the  more  certain  that  human 
beings  constitute  but  one  species  deducible 
from  a single  pair.  The  same  anatomical 
structure,  especially  of  the  skull  and  brain, 
the  same  intellectual  capacities,  though  differ- 
ently developed  in  different  nations,  the  same 
general  duration  of  life,  the  same  liability  to 
disease,  the  same  average  temperature  of  the 
body,  the  same  normal  frequency  of  the  pulse, 
the  fruitful  intermarriage  of  all  races,  and 
that  with  no  instinctive  natural  repugnances, 
are  manifest  indications  of  an  unity  of  species 
(Del.).  From  the  time  of  Blumenbach  (whose 
book  ‘De  naturae  generis  humani  unitate’  is 
still  a standard  work  on  this  subject)  down  to 
the  present  day,  the  most  eminent  physiologists 
agree  in  considering  these  and  similar  argu- 
ments well  nigh  conclusive  in  favour  of  the 
unity  of  the  human  race.  (Consult  especially 
Prichard,  ‘Phys.  Hist,  of  Mankind;’  Smyth, 
‘Unity  of  Human  Race;’  Quatrefages,  ‘ L’unitc 
de  i’espece  humaine,’and  his  report  on  ‘Aiithro- 
pologie’).  To  these  physiological  considera- 


GENESIS.  X. 


83 


V.  2.] 

Ham,  and  Japheth  : and  unto  them  and  Magog,  and  Madai,  and  Javan, 
were  sons  born  after  the  flood.  and  Tubal,  and  Meshech,  and  Ti- 

2 '^The  sons  of  Japheth;  Gomer,  ras. 


tions  we  may  now  add  the  evidence  to  be  de- 
rived from  human  language.  “It  was  a pro- 
found saying  of  William  Humboldt,  that 
man  is  man  only  by  means  of  speech,  but  that 
in  order  to  invent  speech,  he  must  be  man  al- 
ready” (Lyell,  ‘Antiquity  of  Man,’  468). 
This  alone  is  an  argument  for  the  unity  of 
that  race  which  is  distinguished  from  all  other 
animals  by  the  possession  of  articulate  lan- 
guage. But,  moreover,  the  greatest  philolo- 
gists of  the  present  day  seem  to  be  approach- 
ing the  conclusion  that  the  evidence  of  com- 
parative grammar,  so  far  as  it  goes,  is  in  fa- 
vour of  the  original  unity  of  human  language. 
“One  of  the  grandest  results  of  modern  com- 
parative philology  has  been  to  shew  that  all 
languages  belonging  to  one  common  stock — 
and  we  may  say,  enlarging  this  view,  all  lan- 
guages of  the  earth — are  but  scattered  indica- 
tions of  that  primitive  state  of  human  intel- 
lect, and  more  particularly  of  the  imitative 
faculty,  under  the  higher  excitement  of  poeti- 
cal inspiration,  in  which  the  language  origi- 
nated, and  with  which  every  language  remains 
connected,  as  well  through  the  physiological 
unity  of  the  human  race,  as  through  the  his- 
torical unity  of  the  family  to  which  it  more 
especially  belongs”  (Meyer ap.  Bunsen,  ‘Chris- 
tianity and  Mankind,’  Vol.  iii.  p.  163).  So 
writes  Dr  Meyer:  and  Prof.  Max  Muller 
says,  “ These  two  points  Comparative  Philo- 
logy has  gained.  (i)  Nothing  necessitates 
the  admission  of  different  independent  begin- 
nings for  the  material  elements  of  the  Tura- 
nian, Semitic,  and  Aryan  branches  of  speech: 
nay,  it  is  possible  even  now  to  point  out  radi- 
cals, which,  under  various  changes  and  dis- 
guises, have  been  current  in  these  three 
branches  ever  since  their  first  separation.  (2) 
Nothing  necessitates  the  admission  of  different 
beginnings  for  the  formal  elements  of  the  Tu- 
ranian, Semitic,  and  Aryan  branches  of  speech ; 
and  though  it  is  impossible  to  derive  the 
Aryan  system  of  grammar  from  the  Semitic, 
or  the  Semitic  from  the  Turanian,  we  can 
perfectly  understand  how,  either  through  in- 
dividual influences,  or  by  the  wear  and  tear 
of  grammar  in  its  own  continuous  working, 
the  different  systems  of  grammar  of  Asia  and 
Europe  may  have  been  produced”  (Max 
Muller,  Ibid.  pp.  479,  480).  Once  more,  al- 
though it  may  not  be  possible  simply  to  as- 
sign all  Semitic  tongues  to  the  descendants  of 
Shem,  Aryan  to  the  descendants  of  Japhet, 
and  Turanian  to  the  descendants  of  Ham;  it 
is  , still  observable  that  comparative  philology 
seems  to  have  reduced  all  languages  to  three 
distinct  stocks,  even  the  rapid  degeneracy  of 
barbarian  dialects  not  wholly  obscuring  their 
relationship  to  one  of  these  three  families. 


This  is  the  more  to  be  noticed,  when  we 
learn  that  in  savage  tribes  those  who  speak 
the  same  dialect  will  sometimes,  by  separa- 
tion and  estrangement,  become  in  the  course 
of  a single  generation  unintelligible  to  each 
other. 

Certain  rules  are  to  be  observed  for  the 
clearing  up  of  some  difficulties  in  the  gene- 
alogy of  this  chapter,  i.  Though  some  no- 
tice may  be  taken  of  the  progenitors  of  all 
nations,  yet  naturally  those  families,  more  or 
less  connected  with  the  Hebrews,  are  the 
longest  dwelt  upon.  2.  Whereas  alb  are  said 
to  Lave  settled  and  dispersed  themselves 
“after  their  families  in  their  nations,”  it  will 
appear  that  only  the  larger  division  by  na- 
tions is  traced  in  the  case  of  more  remote 
peoples,  whereas  those  related  to  or  border- 
ing on  the  Hebrews  are  traced  both  according 
to  the  wider  division  of  nations.,  and  the 
narrower  of  families.  3.  Although  the  first 
division  of  the  earth  is  spoken  of  as  made  in 
the  time  of  Peleg,  and  some  families  may  be 
traced  no  farther  than  up  to  the  time  of  such 
division,  yet  the  developement  of  those  more 
specially  treated  of  is  brought  down  to  the 
time  of  Moses.  4.  For  none,  however,  must 
we  seek  a very  remote  settlement,  as  the 
original  dispersion  could  not  have  extended  so 
far.  5.  In  some  cases  the  names  of  nations 
or  tribes  appear  to  be  substituted  for  the 
names  of  individuals,  such  as  the  Jebusite,  the 
Hivite,  the  Arkite  &c.,  very  probably  also  such 
as  Kittim,  Dodanim,  Mizraim  <&c.;  and  even 
perhaps  Aram,  Canaan  and  the  like.  This 
may  be  accounted  for  in  more  than  one  way. 
The  purpose  of  the  sacred  writer  was  to 
trace  nations  and  families,  rather  than  to  give 
a history  of  individuals,  and  he  therefore 
speaks  of  nations  known  by  name  to  the 
Israelites  as  begotten  by  {i.e.  descended  from) 
certain  patriarchs,  in  preference  to  tracing 
their  descent  through  unknown  individuals. 
Perhaps  too  individual  patriarchs  and  proge- 
nitors had  become  known  by  tradition  to 
posterity,  not  by  their  own  original  names, 
but  by  the  name  of  the  place  they  had  settled 
in,  or  by  the  name  of  the  tribe  which  they 
had  founded  and  ruled.  The  origin  of 
names  is  often  very  obscure,  and  it  has  been 
common  in  most  rude  societies  for  persons  to 
be  called  after  places  or  properties.  It  is 
quite  possible  that  even  the  very  earliest  patri- 
archs, as,  Shem,  Ham  and  Japheth,  Canaan 
and  the  like,  may  have  been  known  in  after 
ages  by  names  which  adhered  to  them 
through  events  in  their  history  or  places 
where  they  had  fixed  themselves.  Thus 
Shem  may  have  been  the  man  of  rame.,  the 
most  renowned  of  Noah’s  sons.  Ham,  the 

F 2 


■84 


GENESIS.  X. 


[v-  3- 


3 And  the  sons  of  Gomer;  Ash-  kenaz,  and  Riphath,  and  Togarmah. 


man  who  settled  in  the  c^varm  regions  of 
Africa,  Japheth  the  father  of  the  fair  people  of 
Europe,  or  perhaps  the  man  whose  descend- 
ants spread  abroad  more  widely  than  the 
rest.  Canaan  again  may  have  been  the  dwell- 
er in  low  lands,  while  ylram  may  have  derived 
a title  from  having  chosen  the  high  lands  for 
his  home.  This  theory,  if  true,  would  not 
interfere  with  the  historical  character  of  this 
Chapter ; especially  if  we  consider  that  He- 
brew may  not  have  been  the  primitive  tongue, 
in  which  case  all  these  names  must  either 
have  been  translations  of  the  original  names, 
or  names ‘by  which  the  bearers  had  become 
known  to  posterity.  We  have  many  ex- 
amples in  Scripture  of  persons  changing  their 
names  or  adopting  new  names  from  events 
in  their  history,  e.g.  Abram  changing  into 
Abraham  ; Esau  to  Edom  ; Jacob  to  Israel ; 
Saul  to  Paul,  &c.,  &c.  The  whole  number 
of  families  noticed  in  this  chapter  amounts  to 
70 ; but  it  is  to  be  observed  that  in  some 
cases  the  descent  is  traced  only  to  the  grand- 
sons, in  other  cases  to  the  great  grandsons 
of  Noali:  in  the  family  of  Shem  only,  the 
ancestor  of  the  Hebrews,  the  descent  is 
traced  through  six  generations. 

2.  Japheth']  It  is  doubtful  whether  Ja- 
pheth was  the  eldest  or  the  second  son  of 
Noah,  see  in  v.  21.  He  is  generally  men- 
tioned last  in  order,  Shem,  Ham  and  Japheth, 
but  from  ix.  it  is  generally  infen'ed  that 
Ham  w:is  the  youngest.  In  this  genealogy  he 
occurs  first,  the  reason  being  probably  this; 
Shem  is  reserved  to  the  last  that  his  descent 
may  be  traced  to  a greater  length,  and  Ham 
last  but  one,  because  his  descendants  were 
those  most  closely  connected  with  the  de- 
scendants of  Shem.  The  etymology  of  the 
name  Japheth  should  seem  from  ix.  27  to  be 
from  the  root  Pathah^  to  extend.  But  the 
language  in  ix.  27,  may  be  only  an  example 
of  the  paronomasia  so  common  in  Hebrew 
poetry ; and  Gesenius,  Knobel  and  others 
prefer  to  derive  from  Taphah.^  to  be  fair.^  from 
the  fair  complexion  of  Japheth  and  his  de- 
scendants. 

Comer]  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  i.  7)  says  that 
Comer  was  the  ancestor  of  those  whom  the 
Greeks  called  Galatians,  who  were  formerly 
called  Gomarites.  The  descendants  of  Corner 
have  accordingly  been  generally  identified  with 
the  (leltic  race  called  in  the  time  of  Homer 
Cimmerii,  who  are  first  known  as  inhabiting 
the  Chersonesus  Taurica,  which  still  re- 
tains the  name  Crimea.  (See  Herod,  iv.  12, 
45.  A^sch.  ‘Prom.’  V.  729.)  The  relation  of 
Comer  to  Magog  and  Madai  corresponds 
with  the  original  juxtaposition  of  the  Cimme- 
rians to  the  Scythians  and  Modes,  the  Cim- 
merians dwelling  first  on  the  confines  of 
Asia  and  Europe.  Being  driven  thence  by 


the  Scythians  in  the  reign  of  Cyaxares,  they 
made  an  irruption  into  Asia  Minor,  frorn 
w^hich  they  w^ere  driven  back  again  by 
Alyattes.  Their  name,  wTich  then  nearly 
disappears  in  Asia,  is  recognized  again  in  the 
Cimbri,  who  occupied  the  Cimbrian  Cher- 
sonesus and  other  parts  of  the  North  of 
Europe,  and  in  the  great  Celtic  tribe  of 
Cymry,  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  Britain 
and  the  present  inhabitants  of  Wales. 

Magog]  The  statement  ©f  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’ 
I.  6),  that  the  descendants  of  Magog  were 
the  Scythians  is  generally  accepted  as  true. 
In  Ezek.  xxxviii.  2,  14  ; xxxix.  2.  6,  w'e  find 
Magog  as  the  name  of  a people  inhabiting 
“the  sides  of  the  North”  closely  connected 
with  Meshech,  the  Moschi,  and'  Tubal,  the 
Tibarenes,  with  a prince  named  Gog,  having 
horses  and  armed  with  bows,  wTich  corre- 
sponds with  the  local  position  and  military 
habits  of  the  Scythians.  The  Scythians,  ac- 
cording to  their  own  traditions,  lived  first  in 
Asia  near  the  river  A raxes,  afterw'^ards  they 
possessed  the  whole  country  to  the  ocean  and 
the  lake  Mceotis,  and  the  rest  of  the  plain  to 
the  river  Tanais  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  3).  Herodotus 
(i.  103 — 106)  relates  their  descent  upon 
Media,  and  Egypt,  till  they  were  surprised 
and  cut  off  at  a feast  by  Cyaxares.  From 
their  intei*mixture  with  the  Medes,  the  Sar- 
matians  appear  to  have  arisen,  and  from  them 
the  Russians.  See  Knobel. 

Madai]  The  Medes  were  called  Mada 
by  themselves,  as  appears  from  the  arrow- 
headed  inscriptions,  changed  in  the  Semitic 
to  Madai,  and  by  the  Greeks  to  Medoi. 
They  dwelt  to  the  S.  and  S.  W.  of  the  Cas- 
pian, and  coming  over  to  Europe  in  small 
parties  mingled  with  the  Scythians,  whence 
sprang  the  Sarmatians. 

Javan]  From  Javan  was  “Ionia  and  the 
whole  Hellenic  people”  (Jos.  ‘Ant’  i.  6). 
Cp.  Is.  Ixvi.  19,  Ezek.  xxvii.  13,  Daniel  viii. 
21,  where  Alexander  is  called  king  of  Javan  ; 
Joel  iii.  6,  where  “the  sons  of  the  Javanites” 
are  put  for  the  Grecians  (ufes  ’Axat&jv),  Zech. 
ix.  13.  Greece  is  called  Ionia  in  Egyptian 
hieroglyphics  and  Yuna  in  a Cuneiform  in- 
scription at  Persepolis  (Gesen.  s.v.).  The 
lonians  were  the  most  Eastern  of  the  Hel- 
lenic races,  and  so  were  the  best  known  to 
the  Asiatics.  The  course  of  migration  had 
evidently  been  from  Ionia  to  Attica  and  other 
parts  of  Greece. 

Tubal.,  and  Meshech]  These  names  con- 
stantly occur  together;  see  Ezek.  xxvii.  13, 
xxxii.  26,  xxxviii.  2,  3,  xxxix.  i ; where  we 
find  them  joined  with  the  invading  army  of 
Gog  and  Magog,  and  going  with  Javan  to 
Tyre  to  j>urchase  slaves  and  vessels  of  brass. 
Meshech  is  by  Josephus  said  to  be  the  father 


V.  4.]  GENESIS.  X.  8 

4 And  the  sons  of  Javan;  Elishah,  and  Tarshish,  Kittim,  and  Dodanim. 


of  the  Cappadocians,  who  had,  he  tells  us, 
a city  called  Mazacha,  and  to  Tubal  he 
traces  the  Iberians  who  dwelt  between  the 
Euxine  and  the  Caspian.  Later  writers  have 
long  identified  Meshech  with  the  Moschi,  in- 
habitants of  the  Moschian  mountains  between 
Armenia,  Iberia  and  Colchis.  Bochart  was 
the  first  to  identify  Tubal  with  the  Tibareni, 
who  dwelt  on  the  Southern  shore  of  the  Eux- 
ine towards  the  East  and  near  to  the  Moschi. 
Knobel  considers  the  Tibareni  to  be  con- 
nected with  the.  Iberians:  Tubal=Tibar  = 
Iber. 

Tiras"]  Josephus  identifies  the  descendants 
of  Tiras  with  the  Thracians.  So  Jerome, 
the  Targums,  and  most  modern  commenta- 
tors. The  Get®  and  Daci,  north  of  the 
Danube,  belonged  to  the  Thracian  stock. 
According  to  Grimm  and  some  other  au- 
thorities, the  Get®  were  the  ancestors  of  the 
Goths,  which  would  immediately  connect  the 
Thracian  and  Teutonic  races  together.  The 
chief  reason,  however,  for  considering  Tiras 
the  ancestor  of  the  Thracians  seems  to  be  the 
similarity  of  the  names.  Accordingly  other 
resemblances  have  been  found.  Tuch  for  in- 
stance is  in  favour  of  the  Tyrseni  or  Tyr- 
rheni. 

3.  the  S071S  of  Corner;  Ashkenaz]  There 
is  little  to  guide  us  to  the  identification  of 
Ashkenaz,  except  the  name  and  the  mention 
of  Ashkenaz  Jer.  li.  27  in  company  with 
Ararat  and  Minni,  which  makes  it  probable 
that  the  descendants  of  Ashkenaz  dwelt  near 
the  Euxine  and  the  Caspian.  Bochart  sug- 
gests Phrygia,  where  were  the  lake  and  river 
Ascanius.  The  Rabbi  Saadias  says  the  Slavi. 
Targ.  of  Jonathan  gives  Adiabene.  Some 
have  discovered  a resemblance  of  sound  in 
Scandinavian  and  also  to  Saxon.  The  modern 
Jews  called  Germany  Ashkenaz  ; and  Knobel 
considers  this  to  be  the  true  interpretation  of 
the  name ; though  etymologically  he  finds  in 
it  the  race  of  Asa  or  the  Asiatics,  Ash-genos. 
These  Asa  or  Asiatics  he  thinks,  dwelt  in 
Asia  Minor  (comp.  Ascatiia)^  after  the 
Trojan  war  migrated  towards  Pannonia  and 
thence  towards  the  Rhine.  The  Scandi- 
navians traced  their  origin  to  Asia,  and  called 
the  home  of  their  gods  Asgard.  It  has  been 
conjectured  by  Bochart  and  others,  that  the 
Black  sea  was  called  the  sea  of  Ashkenaz, 
which  sounded  to  the  Greeks  like  Axenos, 
their  original  name  for  it,  and  which  by  an 
euphemism  they  changed  to  Euxeinos. 

Rip  hath]  Josephus  says  Paphlagonia,  in 
which  he  is  followed  by  Bochart,  Le  Glerc, 
&c.  Most  modern  commentators  compare 
the  Riph®an  mountains,  which  the  ancient 
geographers  (Strab.  vii.  3,  §1.  Plin.  ‘ H,  N.’ 
IV.  12.  Mela,  I.  19,  &c.)  place  in  the  remote 
North.  Mela  (11.  2)  places  them  East  of  the 


Tanais.  Knobel  conjectures  that  the  Celts 
or  Gauls  were  the  descendants  of  Riphath, 
and  that  they  first  lived  near  the  Carpa- 
thians, which  he  identifies  with  the  Montes 
Riph®i. 

Togarmah]  Mentioned  again  Ez.  xxvii. 
14,  xxxviii.  6.  Josephus  identifies  with  the 
Phrygians,  Bochart  with  the  Cappadocians. 
Michaelis,  and  after  him  most  moderns,  pre- 
fer the  Armenians ; so  Rosenm.,  Gesen., 
Winer,  Knobel,  &c.  The  Armenians  them- 
selves traced  their  origin  to  Haic  the  son  of 
Thogoreu  or  Thorgau  (Mos.  Choren.  i.  4, 
§ 9).  Ezekiel  (xxvii.  14)  attributes  to  To- 
garmah great  traffic  in  horses ; and  Strabo 
(xi.  13,  § 9)  speaks  of  the  Armenians  as 
famous  for  breeding  horses.  Modern  philo- 
logists consider  the  Armenian  as  an  Aryan 
or  Indo-European  language,  which  corre- 
sponds with  the  descent  from  Japheth. 

4.  And  the  sons  of  Javan;  Elishah]  Eze- 
kiel (xxvii.  7)  mentions  the  isles  of  Elishah 
as  those  whence  the  Tyrians  obtained  their 
purple  and  scarlet.  Some  of  the  Targums 
identify  with  Hellas,  in  which  they  are  fol- 
lowed by  Michaelis,  Rosenm.,  and  others.  Jo- 
sephus (‘  Ant.’  I.  6)  identifies  with  the  iEolians, 
which  is  the  view  adopted  by  Knobel.  Bo- 
chart preferred  the  Peloponnesus,  which  was 
famous  for  its  purple  dye,  and  of  which  the 
most  important  district  was  called  Elis. 
Whichever  view  he  adopted,  there  is  little 
doubt  that  the  descendants  of  Elishah  in  the 
time  of  Ezekiel  were  a maritime  people  of 
the  Grecian  stock. 

Tarshish]  By  Josephus  identified  with  Tar- 
sus in  Cilicia;  by  the  LXX.  (Is.  xxiii.  i, 
&c.),  Theodoret,  and  others,  with  Carthage; 
by  Eusebius,  who  is  followed  by  Bochart  and 
most  moderns,  with  Tartessus  in  Spain.  Tar- 
shish, fi'om  the  various  notices  of  it,  appears 
to  have  been  a seaport  town  towards  the 
West  (cp.  Ps.  Ixxii.;  Is.  lx.  9);  \\»hither  the 
Phoenicians  were  wont  to  traffic  in  large 
ships,  “ships  of  Tarshish”  (see  i K.  x.  22, 
xxii.  48;  Ps.  xlviii.  7;  Is.  ii.  16,  xxiii.  i,  14, 
lx.  9)  sailing  from  the  port  of  Joppa  (Jon.  i. 
3,  iv.  2).  It  was  a most  wealthy  and  flou- 
rishing mart,  whence  came  silver,  iron,  tin, 
and  lead  (Ps.  Ixxii.  10;  Is.  Ixvi.  19;  Jer.  x.  9; 
Ezek.  xxvii.  12,  25).  The  name  Tartessus  is 
identical  with  Tarshish,  the  t being  constantly 
substituted  by  the  Syriac  for  the  Hebrew 
.sibilant  (cp.  Bashan  = Batan®a,  Zor  = Tyre, 
&c.).  The  Spanish  were  among  the  most 
famous  of  the  Phoenician  colonies,  and  were 
specially  rich  in  metal  (Diod.  Sic.  v.  33^ — 38; 
Arrian,  ii.  16;  Plin.  ‘H.  N.’  iii.  3;  Mela,  ii. 
6,  &c.) ; of  which  colonies  Tartessus  was  the 
most  illustrious.  It  appears  to  have  been 
situated  at  the  mouth  of  the  Guadalqiiiver 
(Strabo,  iir.  p.  148).  Two  passages  in  Chro- 
nicles (2  Chron.  ix.  21,  xx.  36)  seem  irre- 


01 


86 


GENESIS.  X. 


[v.  5 -7- 


5 By  these  were  the  isles  of  the 
Gentiles  divided  in  their  lands; 
every  one  after  his  tongue,  after  their 
families,  in  their  nations. 


concilable  with  this,  and  induced  St  Jerome 
(‘in  Jerem.’  x.  9),  and  after  him  Bochart  and 
others,-  to  suppose  that  there  must  have  been 
another  Tarshish  in  the  Indian  Ocean,  which 
could  be  approached  by  the  Red  Sea,  an  opi- 
nion now  generally  rejected.  Knobel  supposes 
that  the  original  inhabitants  of  Tarshish  were 
the  Tusci,  Tyrsenians,  or  Tyrrhenians,  a Pe- 
lasgic,  though  not  Hellenic  race,  inhabiting 
great  part  of  Italy,  Corsica,  and  Sardinia,  and 
that  very  probably  Tartessus  in  Spain  was  a 
colony  or  offshoot  from  these  people. 

Kittim  (or  Chittimy]  Identified  by  Jose- 
phus with  Cyprus,  in  which  we  meet  with 
the  town  of  Cittium;  by  Eusebius,  and  after 
him  by  Bochart,  with  the  inhabitants  of  the 
part  of  Italy  contiguous  to  Rome.  In  i 
Maccab.  i.  i Alexander  is  said  to  come  from 
Chittim,  and  (i  Macc.viii.  5)  Perseus  is  called 
King  of  the  Kitia^ans,  which  induced  Michae- 
lis  and  others  to  suppose  the  Chittim  to  be 
the  Macedonians.  Most  modern  interpreters 
seem  to  acquiesce  in  the  opinion  of  Josephus, 
that  Cyprus  (see  Is.  xxiii  i,  12)  may  have 
been  a chief  seat  of  the  Chittim,  but  add 
that  probably  their  colonies  extended  to  the 
isles  of  the  Eastern  Mediterranean  (see  Jer. 
ii.  10;  Ezek.  xxvii.  6).  So  Gesen.,  Knobel, 
Delitz.,  Kalisch. 

Dodanim]  has  been  compared  with  Do- 
dona  in  Epirus.  By  Kalisch  it  is  identified 
with  the  Daunians.  Gesenius  suspects  Doda- 
nim to  be  equivalent  (perhaps  by  contraction) 
with  Dardanini  = Dardani  or  Trojans,  an 
opinion  which  he  confirms  by  the  authority 
of  the  Bereschit  Rabba  on  this  verse.  Knobel 
conjectures  that  we  have  traces  of  Dodanim 
Ix^th  in  Dodona  (a  name  which  he  says  pre- 
vailed through  Illyricum  and  Northern 
Greece)  and  also  in  Dardania  and  the  Dar- 
dans.  There  is  another  reading  in  i Chr. 
i.  7,  and  here  also  (Gen.  x.  4)  in  the  Gr.  and 
Samaritan,  viz.  Rodanim,  Rhodii,  the  people 
of  Rhodes. 

5.  isles  of  the  Gentiles']  The  word  here 
rendered  Isle  very  probably  meaning  originally 
“habitable  region”  (Is.  xlii.  15),  is  generally 
used  either  of  islands  or  of  places  on  the  sea 
coast.  On  the  whole  of  this  verse  see  Jos. 
Mede,  Bk.  i.  ‘Disc.'  XLix.  L.  By  the  phrase 
“ Isles  of  the  Gentiles”  were  understood  those 
countries  of  Europe  and  Asia  Minor  to 
which  the  inhabitants  of  Egypt  and  Palestine 
had  access  only  by  sea. 

6.  Ham]  It  is  generally  thought  that  the 
name  means  warm,  which  is  to  be  compared 
with  the  Greek  Aithiops  (Ethiopian),  which 
has  a similar  significance.  The  word  Keyn^ 


6 ^ And  the  sons  of  Ham ; Cush,  * i Chron. 
and  Mizraim,  and  Phut,  and  Canaan.  “ 

7 And  the  sons  of  Cush ; Seba,  and 
Haviiah,  and  Sabtah,  and  Raamah, 


the  Egyptian  name  for  Egypt,  probably  the 
same  word  as  Ham,  signifies  blackness^  with 
perhaps  some  notion  of  heat  (see  Plutarch, 
‘ De  Iside  et  Osiride,’  § 33).  The  blackness  is 
now  generally  admitted  to  refer  to  the  soil, 
denoting  its  colour  and  fertility.  (See  Ex- 
cursus.) In  Ps.  Ixxviii.  51,  cv.  23,  cvi.  22, 
Egypt  is  called  the  land  of  Ham,  which  seems 
to  confirm  the  belief  that  Kem  (in  Greek 
C hernia)  is  the  same  as  Ham.  The  descend- 
ants of  Ham  appear  to  have  colonized 
Babylonia,  Southern  Arabia,  Egypt,  Ethiopia, 
and  other  portions  of  Africa. 

Much  has  been  written  of  late  about  the 
Hamitic  languages.  The  frequent  mixture 
of  the  Hamites  with  the  descendants  of  Shem 
makes  it  very  difficult  to  discern  clearly  be- 
tween their  tongues.  Bunsen  considers  Cha- 
mitism  to  be  the  most  ancient  form  of  Semi- 
tism,  in  fact  Semitism,  before  the  Hamites 
and  Shemites  thoroughly  parted  off  from  each 
other  and  from  their  primeval  dwelling-place. 
The  ancient  Egyptian  has  a Semitic  base  with 
Turanian  (negro)  infusion,  but  the  Hamitic 
races  have  so  frequently  been  conquered, 
morally  and  physically,  by  the  descendants 
of  Shem  and  Japheth,  that  their  original 
languages  have  been  lost  or  corrupted  by  the 
prevalence  of  Semitism  or  Aryanism. 

Cush]  The  name  Cush  is  generally  trans- 
lated Ethiopia.  The  Ethiopians  at  the  time 
of  Josephus  were  called  Chusasi,  Cushites, 
and  that  is  still  the  Syriac  name  for  the 
Abyssinians.  There  is,  however,  good  reason 
to  believe,  with  Bochart,  and  others,  that 
the  first  home  of  the  Cushites  was  Chuzis- 
tan  and  the  adjoining  parts  of  Southern  Asia, 
from  whence  they  spread  in  different  direc- 
tions, a main  body  having  crossed  the  sea 
and  settled  in  Ethiopia. 

Certainly  some  of  those,  who  are  here 
mentioned  {e.g.  Raamah,  Sheba,  Dedan,  vv. 
7,  8)  as  the  descendants  of  Cush,  established 
colonics  in  Asia.  Some  passages  in  the  Old 
Testament  seem  to  require  that  we  should 
place  Cush  in  Asia,  as  Gen.  ii.  13;  so  also 
Exod.  ii.  16,  21,  compared  with  Num.  xii.  i; 
in  the  latter  of  which  Zipporah  is  called  a 
Cushite,  whilst  in  the  former  she  is  said  to  be 
a daughter  of  the  priest  of  Midian.  This 
connects  Cush  with  Midian,  which  was  in 
Arabia  Felix,  near  the  Red  Sea.  Again,  in 
Hab.  iii.  7 Cush  and  Midian  appear  to  be 
connected.  In  Job  xxviii.  19  we  read  of  “the 
topaz  of  Cush.”  Now,  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  Ethiopia  produced  topazes, 
but  Pliny  (xxxvii.  8)  speaks  of  an  island  of 
Arabia  in  the  Red  Sea  as  famous  for  this 


GENESIS.  X. 


87 


V.  8.] 


and  Sabtechah:  and  the  sons  of  Raa- 
mah ; Sheba,  and  Dedan. 


gem,  which  is  also  noted  by  Diodorus  (iii. 
39),  All  this  connects  Cush  with  Asia,  and 
seems  to  prove  that  the  first  settlement  of  the 
Cushites  was  in  Asia.  Their  subsequent 
emigration  into  Africa,  so  that  one  division 
was  on  the  East  and  the  other  on  the  West 
of  the  Gulf  of  Arabia,  may  account  for 
the  language  of  Homer,  who  speaks  of  the 
A^thiopians  as  divided  into  two  distinct  tribes 
(‘Od.’  I.  23),  a distinction  observed  by  Strabo 
(‘Geogr.’  I.  p.  21),  by  Pliny  (lib.  v.  c.  8),  and 
by  Pomponius  Mela  (lib.  i.  cap.  2). 

Mizrami]  is  undoubtedly  Egypt.  The  ori- 
gin and  meaning  of  the  word  has  been  much 
debated,  but  with  no  certain  conclusion.  If 
the  singular  be  the  Hebrew  Mazor,  it  should 
signify  a mound  or  fortified  place,  Gesenius 
and  others  prefer  the  Arabic  Meser,  a limit 
or  boundary.  The  dual  form  has  been  sup- 
posed to  indicate  Upper  and  Lower  Egypt. 
It  perhaps  may  be  the  rendering  or  transcrip- 
tion of  Mes-ra-n  “children  of  Ra,”  i.e.  of 
the  Sun.  The  Egyptians  claimed  to  be  sons 
of  Ra.  (See  Excursus.)  It  certainly  seems  as 
if  the  name  belonged  rather  to  a race  or  na- 
tion than  to  a man;  and,  therefore,  the  son 
of  Ham  here  named  is  probably  designated 
as  the  founder  or  ancestor  of  the  Egyptians 
or  people  of  Mizraim. 

Phut\  The  name  Phut  occurs  several  times 
in  the  Old  Testament,  and  generally  in  con- 
nection with  the  Egyptians  and  Ethiopians, 
sometimes  with  Persia  and  Lud.  See  Jer. 
xivi.9;  Ezek.  xxvii.  10,  xxx.  5,  xxxviii.  5;  Nah. 
iii.  9.  The  LXX.  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel 
always  render  Libyans.  So  Josephus  says 
(‘  Ant.’  I.  6),  that  Phut  colonized  Libya,  and 
that  the  people  were  from  him  called  Phut- 
ites.  The  Coptic  name  of  Libya  is  Phaiat 
St  Jerome  speaks  of  a river  of 
Mauritania,  and -the  region  round  it,  as  called 
Phut  to  his  time.  (‘Tradit.  Hebr.’) 

Canaan\  The  name  is  thought  by  some 
to  be  derived  from  the  nature  of  the  country 
in  which  the  descendants  of  Canaan  lived,  viz. 
a flat,  depressed  region,  from  the  Hebrew  root 
Cana  (hiph.)  to  depress.  The  fact,  that  the 
Canaanites  appear  to  have  spoken  a Semitic 
tongue  has  been  alleged  as  a reason  why  they 
should  not  have  been  of  Hamitic  descent. 
Knobel  has  well  observed,  however,  that  they 
are  said  by  the  ancients  to  have  removed  from 
the  Red  Sea  to  the  Mediterranean,  with 
which  agrees  the  mythology  which  brought 
into  relation  the  Phcenicians’  ancestors  Age- 
nor  and  Phoenix  sometimes  with  Belus  and 
Babylonia,  sometimes  with  ^Egyptus  and  Da- 
naus  (the  ./Ethiop),  Cepheus  and  Libya.  In 
the  earliest  days  the  Hamitcs  and  Shemites 


8 And  Cush  begat  Nimrod:  he  be- 
gan to  be  a mighty  one  in  the  earth. 


were  near  neighbours ; there  may  have  sprung 
from  them  a mixed  race,  which  spread  to- 
ward Tyre  and  Sidon  and  dispossessed,  part- 
ly also  intermiiigled  with,  a Semitic  race  ori- 
ginally inhabiting  the  region  of  Palestine  and 
Phoenicia.  As  Abraham  and  his  descendants 
appear  to  have  changed  their  native  Aramean 
for  the  Hebrew  of  Palestine,  so  very  probably 
the  Hamitic  Canaanites,  long  mingled  with 
Shemitic  races,  acquired  the  language  of  the 
children  of  Shem.  The  whole  character  of 
the  Canaanitish  civilization  and  worship  was 
Hamite,  not  Semitic.  Like  the  sons  of  Seth, 
the  sons  of  Shem  lived  a nomadic,  pastoral 
life;  whilst,  with  a like  resemblance  to  the  de- 
scendants of  Cain,  the  Hamites  were  builders 
of  cities  and  fortresses,  and  rapidly  grew  into 
prosperous,  mercantile  races,  with  an  ad- 
vanced, but  corrupt  civilization.  Compare 
Egypt,  Babylon,  Nineveh,  Tyre,  Sidon,  and 
contrast  with  them  the  Israelites,  Ishmaelites, 
Arabs,  &c. 

7.  the  sons  of  Cush ; Seba~\  Seba  appears 
to  be  the  name  of  a commercial  and  wealthy 
region  of  Ethiopia;  see  Ps.  Ixxii.  10;  Is.  xliii. 
3,  xlv.  14.  In  the  last  passage  the  Sabeans 
(Sebaim)  are  called  “men  of  stature;”  and 
Herodotus  says  that  the  M aerobian  Ethio- 
pians “were  reported  to  be  the  tallest  and 
comeliest  of  men”  (iii.  20).  According  to 
Josephus  (‘Ant.’ II.  10),  Meroe  was  anciently 
called  Seba,  until  Cambyses  gave  it  the  name 
of  his  sister  Meroe.  Meroe  is  described  as  a 
strong  fortress  situated  in  a most  ferti  le  coun- 
try at  the  confluence  of  the  rivers  Astophus 
and  Astaborus.  The  ruins  of  Meroe  still  re- 
main to  the  north-east  of  the  Nubian  town 
of  Shendy. 

HaTulah']  Havilah,  the  son  of  Joktan,  oc- 
curs, V.  29,  among  the  descendants  of  Shem. 
Some  identify  the  descendants  of  Havilah 
the  son  of  Cush  with  the  Avalitse  on  the 
coast  of  Africa;  whilst  others  place  them  in 
Chawlan  of  Arabia  Felix.  There  is  an  inevi- 
table confusion  from  the  name  of  a gi-andson 
of  Ham  being  the  same  as  that  of  a descend- 
ant of  Shem.  Niebuhr  and  others  have  as- 
serted that  there  were  two  Chawlans,  and 
have  ascribed  one  to  the  Shemite,  the  other  to 
the  Hamite.  It  seems  very  possible  that  the 
descendants  of  Havilah  the  son  of  Cush  in- 
termingled with  the  descendants  of  Havilah 
the  Joktanide,  and  so  ultimately  formed  but 
one  people,  whose  dwelling-place  was  Chaw- 
lan, the  well-known  fertile  region  of  Yemen. 

SabtalS]  By  Gesenius  and  others,  who  con- 
fine the  Cushites  to  Africa,  the  descendants 
of  Sabtah  are  placed  on  the  African  shore 
of  the  Gulf  of  Arabia.  More  commonly,  and 
more  probably,  tlieir  home  is  souglit  for  in 


88 


GENESIS.  X. 


[v.  9,  lo. 


9 He  was  a mighty  hunter  before 
the  Lord;  wherefore  it  is  said,  Even 
as  Nimrod  the  mighty  hunter  before 
the  Lord. 


10  And  the  beginning  of  his  king- 
dom was  ^ Babel,  and  Erech,  and  Ac- 
cad,  and  Calneh,  in  the  land  of 
Shinar. 


Hadramaut,  a province  of  Southern  Arabia, 
where  Pliny  (vi.  32)  places  the  city  of  Sab- 
batha  or  Sabotha.  It  is  said,  that  to  this  day 
in  Yemen  and  Hadramaut  there  is  a dark 
race  of  men  distinguished  from  the  fairer 
Arabs,  and  belonging  evidently  to  a different 
original  stock.  (Knobel.) 

Raaniah']  LXX.  Rhegma.  The  connec- 
tion of  Raamah  with  Sheba  and  Dedan,  of 
whom  he  is  here  said  to  be  the  father  (cp. 
Ezek,  xxvii.  22),  leaves  no  doubt,  even  with 
those  who  confine  the  other  Cushites  to  Ethi- 
opia, that  the  settlement  of  Raamah  must  be 
sought  for  in  Southern  Arabia,  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Sheba  and  Dedan.  Ptolemy 
(vi.  7)  places  Rhegma,  and  Steph.  Byzant. 
Rhegma  on  the  shore  of  the  Persian  Gulf. 

Sabteebah']  is  by  some  placed  in  Ethiopia. 
Bochart,  who  is  followed  by  Knobel,  places 
it  in  Caramania,  on  the  Eastern  shore  of  the 
Persian  Gulf,  where  the  ancients  (Ptolem. 
VI.  8;  Steph.  Byz.  2)  mention  Samidace  or 
Samydace. 

Sheba^  and  Dedan'\  Sheba  occurs  again 
in  V.  28  as  a son  of  Joktan,  and  Sheba  and 
Dedan  together,  Gen.  xxv.  3,  as  children  of 
Joktan,  the  son  of  Abraham  and  Keturah. 
This  is  evidently  another  example  of  the  in- 
termingling of  the  Cushites  with  the  Joktan- 
ides,  and  generally  of  the  early  descendants 
of  Shern  and  Ham.  In  Ezek.  xxvii.  15 — 20 
we  find  the  Cushite  Dedan  supplying  Tyre 
with  merchandise  brought  from  beyond  the 
sea,  while  the  Shemite  Dedan  supplies  the  pro- 
duce of  flocks.  Sheba  is  known  to  us  as 
an  important  and  opulent  region  of  Arabia 
Felix,  (i  K.  X.  i;  Ps.  Ixxii.  10.  15;  Job  i. 
15,  vi.  19;  Is.  lx.  6;  Jer.  vi.  20;  Ezek.  xxvii. 
22;  Joel  iii.  8.)  The  Sabeans  are  spoken  of 
by  Strabo  (xvi.  p.  777)  as  a most  opulent 
and  powerful  people,  famous  for  myrrh,  frank- 
incense, and  cinnamon,  their  chief  city  being 
.Mariaba,  (in  Arab.  Marib).  This  was  after- 
wards the  famous  kingdom  of  the  Himyaritic 
Arabs,  so  called  probably  from  the  ruling 
family  of  Himyar.  It  is  probable,  that  the 
Cushite  Sheba,  and  his  brother  Dedan,  were 
settled  on  the  shore  of  the  Persian  Gulf  (see 
Raamah  above);  but  afterwards  were  com- 
bined with  the  great  Joktanide  kingdom  of 
the  Sabeans. 

8.  Cush  begat  Nimrod^  Nimrod  is  here 
separated  from  the  other  sons  of  Cush,  per- 
haps because  of  his  great  fame  and  mighty 
prowess;  but  it  is  quite  possible,  that  the 
words  “ Cush  begat  Nimrod”  may  only  mean 
that  Nimrod  was  a descendant  of  Cush,  not 
immediately  his  son,  the  custom  of  the  He- 


brews being  to  call  any  ancestor  a father,  and 
any  descendant  a son.  The  name  Nimrod  is 
commonly  derived  from  the  Hebrew  marad^ 
to  rebel.  The  Eastern  traditions  make  him  a 
man  of  violent,  lawless  habits,  a rebel  against 
God,  and  an  usurper  of  boundless  authority 
over  his  fellow-men,  at  whose  instigation  men 
began  the  building  of  the  tower  of  Babel. 
(Jos.  ‘Ant.’  I.  4.)  He  has  accordingly  been 
identified  with  the  Orion  ot  the  Greeks,  and 
it  has  been  thought  that  the  constellation 
Orion,  called  by  the  Hebrew  Kesil  “the  fool, 
the  impious,”  and  by  the  Arabs  “the  giant,” 
was  connected  with  Nimrod,  who  is  said  in 
the  LXX.  to  have  been  a “giant  on  the 
earth.”  The  Scripture  narrative,  however, 
says  nothing  of  this  violence  and  lawlessness, 
and  the  later  tradition  is  very  doubtful  and 
vague.  The  LXX.  spell  the  name  Nebrod, 
so  also  Josephus,  which  some  have  referred 
to  a Persian  root  signifying  a warrior; 
but  this  etymology  is  altogether  uncertain, 
and  not  to  be  relied  on. 

be  began  to  be  a mighty  one  in  the  earth'] 
He  was  the  first  of  the  sons  of  Noah  distin- 
guished by  his  warlike  prowess.  The  word 
“ mighty  one”  (in  the  LXX.  “giant”)  is  con- 
stantly .used  for  a great  warrior,  a hero,  or  man 
of  renown.  Cp.  Gen.  vi.  4;  Judg.  vi.  12; 
xi.  I ; I S.  ix.  i;  2 K.  v.  i;  Ps.  xxxiii.  16, 
Ixxviii.  65  ; Is.  xiii.  3,  &c. 

9.  He  'was  a mighty  hunter]  LXX.  “a 
giant  hunter.”  Bochart  says  that  by  being  a 
famous  hunter,  he  gathered  to  himself  all  the 
enterprising  young  men  of  his  generation,  at- 
tached them  to  his  person,  and  so  became  a 
kind  of  king  among  them,  training  his  follow- 
ers first  in  the* chase,  and  then  leading  them 
to  war.  Compare  Hercules,  Theseus,  Mele- 
ager, &c.  among  the  Greeks.  The  Jerusalem 
Targum  renders  “He  was  mighty  in  hunting 
and  in  sin  before  the  Lord,  for  he  was  a 
hunter  of  the  sons  of  men  in  their  languages.” 
The  Syriac  also  renders  “ a warrior.”  Fol- 
lowing these,  many  have  understood,  that  he 
was  a hunter  of  men,  rather  than  a hunter  ot 
beasts. 

before  the  Lord]  Is  most  likely  added 
only  to  give  emphasis,  or  the  force  of  a su- 
perlative (cp.  Gen.  xiii.  10,  xxx.  8,  xxxv.  5 ; 
I S.  xi.  7,  xiv.  15,  xxvi.  12;  Ps.  civ.  16; 
Jonah  iii.  3 ; Acts  vii.  20)  : though  some  un- 
dei-stand  “against  the  Lord,”  as  i Chron. 
xiv.  8,  where  it  is  said  “ David  went  out 
against  them,”  literally  “before  them.” 

10.  And  the  beginning  of  his  kingdom  <xvas 
Babel]  The  later  Chaldaeans  and  Babylonians 


GENESIS.  X. 


V.  ir,  12.] 


89 


t "went  forth  12  And  Resen  between  Nineveh 

into  Assy-  Asshur,  aiid  builded  Nineveh,  and  and  Calah:  the  same  is  a great 
Tor,  iie  " the  city  Rchoboth,  and  Calah,  city. 


spoke  a Semitic  language,  but  the  most  ancient 
Babylonian  inscriptions  shew  that  the  earliest 
inhabitants  spoke  a Turanian  or  Cushite 
tongue,  and  were  therefore  of  the  same  race 
as  the  Ethiopians  and  Southern  Arabians. 
Moreover,  the  most  ancient  traditions  bring 
the  first  colonists  of  Babylon  from  the  South. 
Thus  Belus,  son  of  Poseidon  and  Libya,  is 
said  to  have  led  a colony  from  Egypt  into 
Babylonia,  and  there  fixing  his  seat  on  the 
Euphrates,  to  have  consecrated  the  priests 
called  in  Babylon  Chaldaeans  (Diod.  Sic.  lib, 
I.  c.  ii.) : and  the  fish-god  Cannes,  the  great 
civilizer  of  Babylon,  is  said  to  have  risen  out 
of  the  Red  Sea  (Syncell.  ‘Chron.’  p.  28).  Nim- 
rod is  probably  to  be  identified  with  Belus; 
but  the  word  Belus  itself  ( = Bel  = Baal)  is  not 
so  much  a name  as  a title,  meaning  lord  or 
master^  and  may  have  been  given  traditionally 
to  the  first  founder  of  empire  in  the  earth. 
The  words  “beginning  of  his  kingdom”  may 
signify  that  Babel  was  the  firsts  or  possibly 
that  it  was  the  chief  city  founded  by  Nimrod. 

Errcli^  The  Targums,  Ephraim  Syr.  and 
Jerome,  render  Edessa.  Bochart  says  Areca 
on  the  confines  of  Babylonia  and  Susiana: 
but  it  is  now  generally  agreed  to  be  Archoe, 

^ the  ruins  of  which,  called  Warka,  lie  about 

thirty  hours  to  the  south  east  of  Babylon. 
The  numerous  mounds  and  remains  of  bricks 
and  coffins  indicate  that  this  was  probably 
the  burying  place  of  the  kings  of  Assyria. 
(See  Rawlinson,  ‘Five  Monarchies,’  Vol.  i. 
P-  23-) 

Actad\  Spelt  Archad  by  the  LXX.  and 
Achar  by  the  Syr.,  has  been  compared  by 
Bochart  with  the  river  Argades  in  Sithacene, 
the  whole  region  having  perhaps  been  called 
Archada.  Le  Clerc,  who  is  followed  by  Ge- 
senius,  suggests  Sacada,  a town  lying  not  far 
below  Nineveh,  where  the  Lycus  falls  into 
the  Tigris.  Knobel  proposes  a tract  north  of 
Babylon  called  Accete.  The  only  ancient 
authorities  (the  Targums  of  Jerusalem  and 
Pseudo- Jonathan,  Ephraim  Syrus,  Jerome, 
Barhebrasus)  render  the  word  by  Nisibis^  a 
city  on  the  river  Khabour.  Michaelis  and 
many  moderns  adopt  this  as  the  probable  site 
of  Accad. 

CalneE]  (Calneh,  Amos  vi.  2.  Calno,  Is. 
X,  9,  perhaps  Canneh,  Ezek.  xxvii.  23,  where 
one  of  De  Rossi’s  MSS.  reads  Kalneh).  Targg. 
Jer.  and  Pseudo-Jon.,  Euseb,,  Jerorr^e,  Ephr. 
Syr.  give  Ctesiphon  on  the  east  bank  of  the 
Tigris,  opposite  Seleucia,  N.  E.  of  Babylon. 
The  name  Calneh  survived  in  Chalonitis,  a 
region  of  Assyria,  where  Pliny  places  Ctesi- 
phon. In  this  identification  of  Calneh  with 
. Ctesiphon  most  modern  interpreters  agree. 

i 


Shinar']  Unquestionably  the  country  round 
about  Babylon,  the  great  plain  or  alluvial 
country  watered  by  the  Tigris  and  Euphra- 
tes. The  name  seems  to  have  been  Jewish; 
though  there  was  a town  in  Mesopotamia 
known  to  the  ancients,  called  Singafa  (Arab. 
Sinjar);  and  Rawlinson  found  in  the  Assy- 
rian and  Babylonian  inscriptions  the  name 
Sinkareh  in  cuneiform  characters.  The  name 
too  is  found  in  Egyptian  monuments  of  the 
1 8th  dynasty,  from  Thothmes  I. 

11.  Out  of  that  land  ^ent  forth  Asshur'\ 
So  LXX.,  Syr.,  Vulg.,  Saad.,  Luth.,  Calv., 
J.  D.  Michael.,  Dathe,  Ros.,  V.  Bohlen.  But 
the  reading  of  the  margin,  “ From  this  land 
he  went  out  into  Assyria,”  is  the  rendering  of 
all  the  Targums,  of  Nachmanides,  and  after 
them,  of  Drusius,  Bochart,  Le  Clerc,  De 
Wette,  Baumg.,  Tuch,  Gesenius,  Knobel, 
Delitzsch,  Kalisch,  and  most  modern  inter- 
preters. The  syntax  fully  admits  of  this 
interpretation  ; and  the  general  sense  of  the 
passage  requires  it.  Nimrod  is  the  subject 
here  treated  of.  Asshur,  the  son  of  Shem, 
v.  22,  was  at  least  a generation  older  than 
Nimrod,  who  may  probably  have  first  colo- 
nized the  country  called  after  him,  Asshur 
(or  Assyria);  Nimrod,  or  one  of  his  descend- ♦ 
ants,  afterwards  invading  and  governing  that 
country.  Asshur  was  a region  through  which 
the  Tigris  flowed,  to  the  N.E.  of  Babylonia, 
including  a portion  of  Mesopotomia. 

and  builded  Ninenjeld]  According  to  Hero- 
dotus, Ninus  (the  mythic  founder  of  Nineveh) 
was  the  grandson  of  Belus,  the  mythic  founder 
of  Babylon  (Herod,  i.  7).  This,  the  most 
ancient  Greek  tradition,  well  corresponds  with 
the  account  of  Scripture,  for  the  words  “ he 
went  out  into  Asshur,”  might  be  rendered 
“ one  went  out  into  Asshur,”  not  distinctly 
defining  Nimrod  as  the  individual  who  built 
Nineveh. 

Nineveh,  the  ancient  metropolis  of  Assyria, 
on  the  East  branch  of  the  Tigris,  became  in 
after  ages  the  largest  and  most  flourishing 
city  of  the  old  world.  It  is  described  in  the 
book  of  Jonah  as  “an  exceeding  great  city 
of  three  days’  journey”  (Jon.  iii.  3),  with 
120,000  children  “who  knew  not  their  right 
hand  from  their  left”  (Jon.  iv.  ii),  which 
would  make  a population  of  about  2,000,000. 
According  to  Diodorus  Siculus,  it  was  no 
less  than  55  miles  in  circumference  (Diod. 
II.  3),  built,  no  doubt,  like  the  ancient  cities 
of  the  East,  with  pastures  and  pleasure  grounds 
interspersed  among  streets  and  houses.  Even 
in  Babylon,  which  was  of  less  extent  than 
Nineveh,  Diodorus  (ii.  9)  says,  that  there 
were  gardens  and  orchards,  and  land  sufficient 


L 


90 


GENESIS.  X. 


[v.  13,  14. 


13  And  Mizraim  begat  Ludim,  and  14  And  Pathrusim,  and  Casluhim, 
Anamim,  and  Lehabim,  and  Naph-  (out  of  whom  came  Philistim,)  and 
tuhim,  Caphtorim. 


to  provide  corn  for  all  the  people  in  case  of  a 
siege.  Nineveh  is  mentioned  among  the  cities 
or  fortresses  captured  by  Thothmes  III.  (see 
Excursus,  p.  i).  It  was  attacked  by  Phraortes 
the  Mede,  who  perished  in  the  attempt  to  take 
it  (Herod.  I.  102).  His  successor,  Cyaxares, 
having  laid  siege  to  it,  b. c.  625,  was  obliged 
to  raise  the  siege  by  an  incursion  of  Scythians 
(Herod.  I.  103);  but  finally  succeeded  in  re- 
ducing it,  B.c.  597  (Herod.  1. 106).  From  that 
time  it  lay  desolate,  though  Tacitus  (‘  Ann.’ 
XII.  13)  and  Ammianus  (xviii.  7)  mention  a 
fortress  of  the  name.  Its  site  has  been  identi- 
fied by  modern  travellers  with  the  ruins  of 
Nebbi  Yunus  and  Koyunjik,  nearly  opposite 
to  Mosul  on  the  East  banks  of  the  Tigris. 
(See  esp.  La  yard,  ‘ Ninev.’  Vol.  ii.  pp.  136  If.) 
The  language  of  the  inscriptions  discovered 
in  these  ruins  appears  to  be  an  ancient  Semi- 
tic dialect.  This  is  not  inconsistent  with  the 
foundation  of  the  city  by  a descendant  of 
Nimrod;  for  the  indigenous  race  was  no 
doubt  derived  from  the  colonization  by  As- 
shur,  the  son  of  Shem,  and  the  adoption  oi 
the  Semitic  language  has  parallels  in  the  cases 
of  Babylon  and  Canaan  (see  above  on  v.  6). 
Moreover,  it  is  thought  that  in  Assyria,  as 
well  as  in  Babylonia,  two  distinct  languages 
existed,  the  older  being  T uranian,  the  other 
Semitic;  accordingly,  at  Koyunjik,  vocabu- 
laries have  been  discovered  with  two  languages 
arranged  in  parallel  columns,  and  tablets  ap- 
parently in  a Turanian  dialect  have  been 
found  in  the  ruins. 

11.  and  the  city  Rehoboth'\  Lit.  “ the  streets 
of  the  city.” 

12.  the  same  is  a great  city']  It  is  ex- 
tremely difficult  to  identify  Rehoboth,  Rcsen 
and  Calah  with  any  known  sites.  Perhaps 
the  most  probable  conjecture  is,  that  the  four 
cities  here  named,  viz.  Nineveh,  Rehoboth-Ir, 
Resen,  and  Calah,  were  all  afterwards  com- 
bined under  the  one  name  of  Nineveh,  and 
that  the  words,  v.  12,  “the  same  is  a great 
city,”  applied  to  this  united  whole,  not  to  the 
single  state  of  Resen.  This  is  adopted  by 
Niebuhr,  Grote,  Knobel,  Rawlinson,  De- 
litzsch. 

13.  Ludim]  There  was  also  a son  of 
Shem  named  Lud,  v.  22;  but  these  Ludim 
were  an  African  tribe.  They  are  probably 
the  same  as  Retu,  the  Egyptian  name  for 
“man,”  especially  the  Egyptians.  The  name 
appears  to  have  belonged  to  the  old  popula- 
tion of  Central  Egypt.  In  Jerem.  xlvi.  9, 
Cush,  Phut,  and  Ludim  are  mentioned  toge- 
ther, the  Ludim  are  said  to  “ handle  and 
lx.*nd  the  bow,”  and  all  are  placed  in  the 
army  of  Pharaoh-Necho,  king  of  Egypt. 


Again,  in  Ezek.  xxx.  4,  5,  Cush,  Phut,  and 
Lud  are  connected  with  Mizraim.  In  Isaiah, 
on  the  contrary,  we  find  (Ixvi.  19)  Lud  “ that 
draw  the  bow”  connected  with  Asiatic  and 
European  tribes,  Tarshish,  Pul,  Tubal,  and 
Javan.  The  existence  of  the  two  tribes  both 
called  Lud,  the  one  Semite  and  the  other 
Hamite,  is  inevitably  a cause  of  confusion. 

Anamim]  Another  Mizraite  race,  concern- 
ing whom  no  certain  or  very  probable  conjec- 
ture can  be  made.  Knobel  identifies  them 
with  an  Egyptian  name  of  -the  Delta. 

Lehabim]  Generally  agreed  to  be  the  same 
as  the  Lubim,  2 Chr.  xii.  3,  xvi.  8,  reckoned 
among  the  Ethiopian  forces,  and  in  Nah.  iii.  9, 
Dan.  xi.  43,  named  with  the  Egyptians;  ac- 
cording to  Josephus,  the  Libyans.  The  ori- 
ginal home  of  this  people  appears  to  have 
been  to  tlie  west  of  the  Delta. 

Naphtuhim]  Mentioned  only  here  and 
I Chr.  i.  II.  Bochart,  followed  by  Michaelis, 
Jablonski,  Gesenius  and  others,  compares  the 
name  of  the  Egyptian  goddess  Nephthys,  the 
wife  of  Typhon,  to  whom  the  parts  of  Egypt 
bordering  on  the  Red  Sea  were  consecrated. 
Plutarch  (‘  De  Is.’  p.  355)  says,  “The  Egyp- 
tians call  the  extremities  of  the  land  border- 
ing on  the  sea  by  the  name  of  Nephthys.” 
If  this  be  so,  the  Naphtuchim  were  probably 
a people  dwelling  on  the  Red  Sea  on  the  con- 
fines of  Egypt.  Knobel  supposes  them  to 
have  been  the  midland  Egyptians,  who  in 
their  great  city  Memphis  worshipped  Phthah, 
and  were  called  in  Coptic  Phaphthah,  “the 
(people)  of  Phthah.” 

14.  Pathrusim]  The  people  of  Pathros, 
mentioned  often  in  the  prophets  (as  Is.  xi.  1 1 ; 
Jer.  xliv.  i;  Ezek.  xxix.  14,  xxx.  14).  The 
name  Pathros  occurs,  sometimes  as  if  it  were 
separate  from  Egypt,  sometimes  as  if  it  were 
part  of  Egypt;  whence  Bochart  concluded 
that  the  Thebaic!  was  intended,  which  at  times 
is  reckoned  as  in  Upper  Egypt,  at  times  as 
distinct  from  it.  Pliny  mentions  Phaturites 
as  a praefecture  of  the  Thebaid,  (‘Hist.  Nat.’ 

I.  V.  c.  9,  § 47).  The  words  of  Ezekiel  (xxix. 
14),  where  Pathros  is  called  the  land  of  the 
Egyptians’  birth,  is  compared  with  Herod. 
(11. 15),  who  says  Thebes  was  anciently  called 
Egypt.  Pa-t-res  in  Egyptian  means  “the 
land  of  the  south.” 

Casluhim]  Bochart  conjectured  the  Col- 
chians,  who  were  an  Egyptian  colony  (Herod. 

II.  104;  Diod.  Sic.  I.  28;  Strabo.  1.  3).  In 
this  he  is  followed  by  Gesenius  *nd  others, 
though  the  similarity  of  name  seems  the  chief 
reason  for  the  identification.  Forster  (‘  Ep. 
ad  Michael.’  p.  16  scjq.)  conjectured  Casiotis, 


GENESIS.  X. 


91 


V.  15,  16.] 

iHeb.  15  ^ And  Canaan  begat  ^Sidon  his  16  And  the  Jebusite,and  the  Amo- 
'iztdon.  Heth,  rite,  and  the  Girgasite, 


a region  between  Gaza  and  Pelusium,  so 
called  from  Mount  Casius.  He  is  followed 
in  this  by  Knobel,  who  says  the  name  in 
Coptic  signifies  burnings  hence  applicable  to 
a dry,  arid,  desert  region.  He  combines  Bo- 
chart’s  view  with  Forster’s,  supposing  that 
the  Colchians  were  a colony  from  Casiotis. 
This  view  is  adopted  and  ably  defended  by 
Ebers  (‘^Egypten,’  &c.  p.  120). 

Out  of  'whom  came  Ph‘ilistim\  In  Jer.  xlvii. 
4,  Amos  ix.  7,  the  Philistines  are  traced  to 
the  Caphtorim.  Hence  Michaelis  and  others 
think  that  there  has  been  a transposition 
in  this  verse,  and  that  it  ought  to  run  “ and 
Caphtorim,  out  of  whom  came  Philistim.” 
The  Samaritan  text,  however,  and  all  Ver- 
sions read  as  the  Hebrew.  Bochart  there- 
fore has  conjectured,  that  the  Casluchim  and 
Caphtorim  were  tribes  which  iiitormingled, 
the  Caphtorim  having  strengthened  the  Cas- 
luchian  colony  by  immigration,  and  that  hence 
the  Philistines  may  have  been  said  to  have 
come  from  either.  The  name  Philistine,  which 
probably  comes  from  an  iEthiopic  verb  falasa, 
to  emigrate,  is  often  rendered  by  the  LXX. 
(as  Judg.  xiv.  3,  xiv.  i)  by  allop hy lot,  aliens, 
foreigners. 

The  following  difficulties  are  urged  against 
the  Egyptian  origin  of  the  Philistines;  first, 
that  their  language  was  probably,  like  that  of 
the  other  inhabitants  of  Canaan,  Semitic; 
secondly,  that  they  were  uncircumcised  (i  S. 
xvii.  26),  whilst  Herodotus  tells  us  that  the 
Egyptians  were  circumcised.  The  linguistic 
difficulty  may  be  explained  by  the  very  pro- 
bable supposition,  that  the  invading  Philis- 
tines or  Caphtorim  adopted  the  language  of 
the  conquered  Avim  (Deut.  ii.  23),  or  other 
tribe  amongst  whom  they  settled.  The  other 
disappears,  if  we  consider,  that  everything  in 
dress,  customs,  and  religion  of  the  Philistines 
indicates  that  they  separated  off  from  the 
, other  Mizraic  tribes  at  a very  early  period, 

and  that  circumcision  was  probably  adopted 
by  the  Egyptians  at  a much  later  date. 

I Caphtorim']  It  is  plain  from  Jer.  xlvii.  4, 

I where  the  Philistines  are  called  “ the  remnant 

' of  the  isle  (or  maritime  country)  of  Caph- 

' tor,”  that  we  must  look  for  the  site  of  the 

j Caphtorim  near  the  sea.  The  Targums  and 

I ancient  Versions  render  Cappadocia,  followed 

j by  most  of  the  ancients,  and  by  Bochart. 

Others  (Swinton,  Michaelis,  RosenmUller,  &c.) 
have  conjectured  Cyprus,  the  original  name 
j of  which  has  been  thought  to  have  been 

j Cubdr  or  Cyptrus.  Calmet  and  others  pre- 

I fer  Crete,  comparing  the  statement  of  Taci- 

j tus  (‘  Hist.’  V.  2)  concerning  the  Cretan  origin 

I of  the  Jews,  and  supposing  that  he  may  have 

confounded  the  Jews  with  the  Philistines. 

I 


Gesenius  mentions  this  with  approval,  and  it 
is  advocated  by  Knobel.  Recent  investiga- 
tions in  Egyptian  identify  Caphtor  with 
Capht-ur,  i.  e.  the  Great  Capht.  This  is 
compared  with  the  Egyptian  name  Coptos. 
Again,  the  name  ^Egyptus  is  probably  identi- 
cal with  Ai-Capht,  i.  e.  the  coast  of  Capht, 
(compare  "IIDDD  I-Caphtor,  “the  isle  or 
coast  of  Caphtor,”  Jer.  xlvii.  4).  This  Capht, 
or  Capht-ur,  was  probably  the  Northern 
Delta,  from  which  the  Phoenicians  emigrated 
into  Asia.  Thus  Capht  became  the  Egyptian 
name  for  the  oldest  Phoenicians,  whether  in 
Asia  or  in  Africa.  (See  Ebers,  ‘^Egypt.’  &c. 
voc.  Caphtorim',  see  also  Excursus.) 

15.  Sidon  his  frst-born]  Sidon  was,  ac- 
cording to  Justin  (xviii.  3),  the  oldest  Phoe- 
nician state.  Of  all  the  Phoenicians  Homer 
knew  only  Sidon.  The  city  stood  on  the 
Eastern  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  about 
20  miles  North  of  Tyre,  which  latter  is  said 
by  Justin  to  have  been  a colony  of  Sidon. 
So  important  was  Sidon  in  most  ancient  times, 
that  all  the  Phoenicians  are  comprised  under 
the  name  of  Sidonians  (Josh.  xiii.  6 ; Judg. 
xviii.  7):  and  this  extension  of  the  name  was 
known  to  the  Greeks  and  Romans  (compare 
Urbs  Sidonia,  i.e.  Carthage,  which  was  a 
colony  of  Tyre,  Virg.  ‘tEu.’  i.  677;  and  Sido- 
nia Dido,  ‘iEn.’  I.  446,  613,  &c.).  The  name 
Sidon  is  supposed  to  be  derived  from  fishing; 
for  the  Phoenicians  called  fish  Sidon  (Gesen. 
‘Thesaur.’  p.  1153). 

Heth]  The  ancestors  of  the  Hittites,  who 
inhabited  the  hill  country  of  Judea,  es- 
specially  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron. 
These,  however,  were  but  one  portion  of  the 
race,  which  according  to  Josh.  i.  4 (cp.  Ezek. 
xvi.  3)  became  more  important.  In  the  time 
of  Solomon  and  Joram  there  were  independ- 
ent kings  of  the  Hittites,  i K.  x.  29  ; 2 K. 
vii.  6.  They  are  by  most  Egyptologers  iden- 
tified with  the  Kheta,  a very  powerful  tribe, 
and  masters  of  Syria. 

16.  the  Jebusite]  Inhabitants  of  Jebus, 
the  ancient  name  of  Jerusalem,  mentioned 
Judg.  xix.  10,  ii;  I Chr.  xi.  4,  5.  The  Je- 
busites,  a mountain  tribe  (Num.xiii.29;  Josh, 
xi.  3),  seem  never  to  have  been  conquered, 
or  to  have  recovered  possession  of  Jerusalem 
and  to  have  retained  it,  till  David  took  Jebus, 
I Chr.  xi.  4,  5 : and  even  after  the  conquest 
we  find  Araunah  the  Jebusite,  who  is  called 
“ Araunah  the  king”  (2  S.  xxiv.  23)  living  in 
peace  and  prosperity  in  the  land. 

the  Amorite]  Apparently  the  most  pow- 
erful and  widespread  of  all  the  Canaanitish 
tribes,  dwelling  chiefly  in  the  hill-country  of 
Judaea,  subject  to  five  kings  (Josh.  x.  5),  but 


92 


GENESIS.  X. 


[v.  17—21. 


( Heb. 
Azzdh. 


17  And  the  Hivite,  and  the  Arkite, 
and  the  Sinite, 

18  And  the  Arvadite,  and  the  Ze- 
marite,  and  the  Hamathite : and  after- 
v/ard  were  the  families  of  the  Canaan- 
ites  spread  abroad. 

19  And  the  border  of  the  Canaan- 
ites  was  from  Sidon,  as  thou  comest 
to  Gerar,  unto  ^Gaza;  as  thou  goest. 


unto  Sodom,  and  Gomorrah,  and  Ad- 
mah,  and  Zeboim,  even  unto  Lasha. 

20  These  are  the  sons  of  Ham, 
after  their  families,  after  their  tongues, 
in  their  countries,  and  in  their  nations. 

21  ^ Unto  Shem  also,  the  father 
of  all  the  children  of  Eber,  the  bro- 
ther of  Japheth  the  elder,  even  to 
him  were  children  born. 


also  spreading  to  the  other  side  of  Jordan,  to 
the  North  of  the  Arnon  (Numb.  xxi.  13), 
even  to  the  river  Jabbok  (Num.  xxi.  24). 
Simonis,  followed  by  Gesenius,  traces  the 
name  to  an  old  word  Amor  or  Emor,  eleva- 
tion^ mountain^  the  Amorites  being  moun- 
taineers or  highlanders. 

the  Girgasite'\  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  l.  6) 
says  we  have  the  name  and  nothing  else  of 
this  p' ople.  Eusebius  and  others  have  identi- 
fied them  with  the  Gergesenes  (Matt.  viii. 
28),  who  lived  to  the  East  of  the  Lake  of 
Gennesaret.  There  is  a difference  of  reading 
in  St  Matt.;  some  MSS.  having  Gerasenes, 
others  Gadarenes;  but  Gesenius  thinks,  that 
Gerasa  is  but  a corruption  by  the  omission  of 
g from  Girgasa. 

17.  the  Hivite']  A people  living  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Hermon  and  Lebanon  (Josh, 
xi.  3,  Judg.  vi.  3),  near  Sichem  also  (Gen. 
xxxiv.  2),  and  Gibeon  (Josh.  ix.  i,  7):  Gese- 
nius interprets  the  name  to  signify  pagani,  the 
inhabitants  of  villages. 

the  Arkite]  Inhabitants,  according  to  Jo- 
sephus, of  Area  a city  of  Phoenicia,  near  Liba- 
nus,  12  miles  to  the  north  of  Tripoli.  It  was 
afterwards  called  Cesarea  Libani,  a name 
found  on  coins  of  the  reign  of  Vespasian. 
Alexander  Severus  was  born  here.  Shaw  and 
burckhardt  describe  the  ruins  of  a fine  city 
as  still  to  be  found  there,  called  Tell  Arka. 

the  Sinite]  St  Jerome  (‘  Qiiaest.  in  Genes.’ 
ad  h.  1.)  says,  that  “ near  Area  was  another 
city  called  Sini,  which,  though  ruined,  still 
i-etained  its  ancient  name.”  Michaelis  (‘Spicil.’ 
Pt.  u.  p.  29)  quotes  Breidenbach  (‘Itiner.’  p. 
47)  as  mentioning  a city  of  the  name  of  Syn 
in  the  same  neighbourhood  in  the  fifteenth 
century. 

18.  the  Arvadite]  Inhabitants  probably 
of  the  city  of  Aradus,  on  an  island  of  the  same 
name,  about  three  miles  from  the  Phoenician 
coast.  The  LXX.  render  here  and  elsewhere 
the  Aradite,  and  Josephus  (‘ Ant’  i.  6)  says 
“the  Aradite  inhabited  the  island  of  Aradus.” 
Gesenius  derives  the  name  from  a root,  signi- 
fying “to  wander,”  and  quotes  Strabo  (xvi. 
2,  § 13)  as  saying  that  the  city  was  built  by 
fugitives  from  Sidon. 

the  Zemarite]  There  is  little  certainty  as 


to  the  habitation  of  this  race.  The  ancient 
interpreters,  Targg.,  Rashi,  Saad.,  and  proba- 
bly Jerome,  give  Emesa;  Michaelis,  led  by 
Bochart’s  conjecture  and  followed  by  Rosenm., 
Gesen.,  Knobel,  suggests  Samyra,  a city  of 
Phoenicia  on  the  sea  coast,  near  the  river 
Eleutherus,  the  ruins  of  which  are  still  called 
Samra. 

the  Hamathite]  Hamath  was  an  import- 
ant city,  called  by  Amos  (vi.  2)  “ Great 
Hamath,”  the  chief  city  of  Upper  Syria  on  the 
Orontes  at  the  foot  of  Libanus  (Judg.  iii.  3; 
Jer.  xlix.  23 ; Zech.  ix.  2),  the  metropolis  of 
a region  called  the  “ land  of  Hamath”  (2 
K.  xxiii.  33).  It  was  called  Epiphaneia  by 
the  Macedonians  (Jos.  ‘Ant.’  i.  6).  It  still 
however  in  tlie  East  retains  the  name  of  Ha- 
mah, and  has  been  visited  and  described  by 
Burckhardt  and  other  modern  travellers. 

and  aftervoard  vjere  the  families  of  the 
Canaanites  spread  abroad]  The  first  place  of 
habitation  of  the  Canaanites  was  probably  on 
the  Mediterranean,  in  Phoenicia,  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Tyre  and  Sidon;  but  by  degrees 
they  spread  abroad  through  the  whole  of 
Palestine,  from  Tyre  and  Sidon  on  the  North 
to  Gerar  and  Gaza  and  even  to  Lasha. 

19.  Lashd]  The  Targum  of  Jerusalem 
and  Jerome  (‘  Quaest.  ad  Genes.’)  identify 
Lasha  with  Callirrhoe,  which  Pliny  (‘N.  H.’ 
v.  c.  6)  and  Josephus  (‘B.,J.’  i.  33)  speak  of 
as  famous  for  its  warm  springs.  It  was  situ- 
ated on  the  East  of  the  Red  Sea. 

21.  Shem  also,  the  father  of  all  the  chil- 
dren of  Eber]  As  Ham  is  specially  called  the 
father  of  Canaan,  so  probably  Shem  is  desig- 
nated as  the  father  of  Eber.  The  Hebrews 
and  the  Canaanites  were  brought  into  con- 
stant conflict  and  exemplified  respectively  the 
characters  of  the  Hamites  and  the  Shemites, 
their  cuaracters  and  their  destinies. 

the  brother  of  Japheth  the  elder]  There 
is  a great  ambiguity  in  the  original  of  these 
words.  The  LXX.,  Symm.,  Targ.  of  Onke- 
los  render  as  in  the  English  text;  so  Rashi, 
Abenezra,  Luther,  Cleric.,  J.  D.  Michael., 
Dathe,  &c.  But  the  Syriac,  Arab.,  Vulg.  ren- 
der “the  elder  brother  of  Japheth,”  in  which 
they  are  followed  by  Rosenm.,  Gesenius, 
Knobel,  Delitzsch  and  most  modern  com- 


V.  22—25.] 


GENESIS.  X. 


93 


Chron.  22  The  ‘^children  of  Shem;  Elam, 
tHe^b.  Ar-  and  Asshur,  and  ^ Arphaxad,  and  Lud, 

pachshad. 

23  And  the  children  of  Aram ; Uz, 
and  Hul,  and  Gether,  and  Mash. 


mentators,  who  say,  that  if  “the  brother  of 
Japheth  the  Elder”  had  been  meant,  the  He- 
brew idiom  would  have  required  the  addition 
of  — “the  elder  son  of  Noah.”  This 

appears  to  be  true:  moreover,  Shem  is  gene- 
rally mentioned  first,  and  is  perhaps  put  last 
here,  because  the  writer  proceeds  almost  with- 
out interruption  from  this  point  with  the 
history  of  the  descendants  of  Shem.  In  Gen. 
ix.  24,  Ham  appears  to  be  called  the  youngest 
son  of  Noah;  but  see  note  on  that  verse.  On 
the  whole,  the  common  order  of  enumeration 
is  probably  the  order  of  age. 

22.  The  children  of  She The  Shemites 
dwelt  chiefly  in  Western  Asia,  South  of  the 
Asiatic  Japhethites. 

Elam]  Elymais,  a region  adjoining  Su- 
siana  and  Media,  called  by  the  Arabs  Chu- 
zistan.  Daniel  (viii.  2)  places  Shushan  (/.  e. 
Susa)  in  Elam,  which  immediately  connects 
Elam  with  Susiana. 

Asshur]  Without  doubt  the  ancestor  of 
the  Assyrians.  At  first,  perhaps,  the  name 
Asshur  or  Assyria  was  restricted  to  the  re- 
gion round  about  Nineveh,  known  to  the 
Greeks  as  Adiabene.  Afterwards  it  spread, 
especially  to  the  North-west,  and  embraced 
the  Syrians.  The  foundation  of  its  principal 
greatness  is  ascribed  to  the  Babylonians  in 
V.  II.  This  corresponds^ with  the  tradition  in 
Herodotus  (i.  7),  which  attributes  the  foun- 
dation of  Nineveh  to  Ninus,  the  son  of  Belus, 
the  founder  of  Babylon. 

Arphaxaif  Bochart  conjectured  that  the 
name  Arrapachites,  a province  in  Northern 
Assyria,  bordering  on  Armenia,  was  derived 
from  Arphaxad;  and  as  this  was  the  country 
of  the  Chaldees,  it  has  been  thought  that  in 
the  three  last  consonants  of  the  name  Ar- 
phaxad, viz.  ch-s-d,  are  contained  the  ele- 
ments of  the  name  Chasdim  (i.  e.  Chaldaeans). 
Josephus  certainly  tells  us  that  “ Arphaxad 
gave  the  name  Arphaxadaeans  to  those  after- 
wards called  Chaldasans”  (‘  Ant.’  i.  6). 

Ltid]  Josephus  says  the  Lydians  (‘Ant.’ 
I.  6).  He  is  followed  by  Euseb.,  Jerome,  and 
by  Bochart,  and  most  moderns.  The  re- 
semblance of  their  manners  and  of  their  more 
ancient  names  to  the  Semitic  confirms  this 
tradition.  It  is  probable,  that  their  first  home 
was  not  far  from  Armenia,  whence  they  mi- 
grated into  Asia  Minor. 

Aram]  The  country  called  Aram  in  Scrip- 
ture was  the  highland  region  lying  to  the 
north-east  of  the  Holy  Land,  extending 


24  And  Arphaxad  begat  ^SalahjtHeb. 
and  Salah  begat  Eber. 

25  ‘^And  unto  Eber  were  born  two  ^ ^ Chroa 
sons : the  name  of  one  zaas  Peleg ; 

for  in  his  days  was  the  earth  divid- 


from  the  Jordan  and  the  Sea  of  Galilee  to  the 
Euphrates.  The  name  Aram  has  been  sup- 
posed to  mean  hi^h  (from  Aram  ~ rum^  to  be 
high).  In  Genesis  we  read  of  Aram-Naha- 
raim,  i.e.  Aram  between  the  two  ri\ers  = Me- 
sopotamia, which,  or  part  of  which,  is  also 
called  Padan-Aram;  and  Laban  who  dwelt 
there  is  called  the  Aramean  (Gen.  xxv.  20, 
&c.).  Homer  (‘II.’ II.  783);  Hesiod  (‘Th.’ 
304) ; Pindar  (‘  Fr.’  v.  3),  &c.  speak  of  the  Sy- 
rians as  Arimi. 

23.  Uz]  From  him  no  doubt  was  named 
“the  land  of  Uz,”  in  which  Job  lived.  (Job 
i.  I.)  It  is  there  rendered  by  the  LXX,  Au- 
sitis.  Ptolemy  (v.  19)  mentions  the  Aisitae 
as  inhabiting  the  northern  part  of  Arabia  De- 
serta,  near  to  Babylon  and  the  Euphrates, 
which  Bochart,  Gesenius,  and  others,  identify 
with  the  inhabitants  of  Uz  or  Ausitis.  The 
name  U z occurs  also  among  the  descendants 
of  Abraham  (Gen.  xxii.  21),  and  again  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  28)  among  the  descendants  of  Seir  the 
Hivite;  and  it  has  been  conjectured,  with 
more  or  less  probability,  that  these  different 
Semitic  families  may  have  coalesced. 

Hid]  Josephus  places  in  Armenia,  accord- 
ing to  Bochart,  that  part  called  Cholobotene 
by  the  Greeks,  as  though  it  were  Beth-Chul, 
the  home  of  Hul.  Michaelis,  followed  by 
Knobel,  suggests  that  the  name  Cselesyria 
may  have  come  from  Hul  or  Chul.  Rosen- 
miiller  has  suggested  the  Ard  el  Hhuleh,  a 
district  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan. 

Gether]  No  probable  site  has  been  fixed 
on  for  the  descendants  of  Gether. 

Mash]  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  i.  6)  says,  “ Mash 
founded  the  Mesanasans,”  i.e.  the  inhabitants 
of  Mesene,  near  Bassora,  where  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates  fall  into  the  Persian  Gulf.  The 
opinion  of  Bochart  is  adopted  by  Gesenius, 
Winer,  Knobel,  and  others,  that  the  descend- 
ants of  Mash  were  the  inhabitants  of  Mons 
Masius,  a range  of  hills  to  the  North  of  Me- 
sopotamia. 

24.  Arphaxad  begat  Salah;  and  Salah 
begat  Eber]  The  name  Salah  appears  to  signify 
sending  forth.,  extension,,  as  Eber.,  the  name  of 
his  son,  signifies  passing  ouer.  Many  of  the 
names  in  these  genealogies  are  significant,  and 
were  probably  given  to  their  bearers  late  in 
life,  or  even  historically,  after  their  deaths. 
Salah  and  Eber  seem  to  point  to  this  fact, 
that  the  descendants  of  Arphaxad  were  now 
beginning  to  spread  forth  from  the  first  cradle 
of  the  Semitic  race,  and  to  cross  over  the 


94 


GENE 

ed ; and  his  brother’s  name  was  Jok- 
tan. 

26  And  Joktan  begat  Almodad, 
and  Sheleph,  and  Hazarmaveth,  and 
Jerah, 


great  rivers  on  their  vray  to  Mesopotamia, 
and  thence  to  Canaan. 

25.  Peleg;  for  in  his  days  fivas  the  earth 
di-vided"]  It  is  generally  supposed  from  this, 
that  Peleg  lived  contemporaneously  with  the 
dispersion  of  Babel.  It  is,  however,  quite 
possible,  that  the  reference  is  to  a more  par- 
tial division  of  regions  and  separation  of  races. 
The  genealogy  is  now  specially  concerned 
with  the  descendants  of  Shem  and  the  ances- 
try of  the  promised  race,  which  is  here  traced 
down  to  Peleg  to  be  continued  farther  in  ch. 
xi.  18  sqq?  The  two  races,  which  sprang 
from  Eber,  soon  separated  very  widely  from 
each  other,  the  one,  Eber  and  his  family, 
spreading  north-westward  towards  Mesopo- 
tamia and  Syria,  the  other,  the  Joktanides, 
southward  into  Arabia.  As  the  sacred  nar- 
rative in  vv.  31,  32,  speaks  expressly  of  the 
general  spreading  forth  of  the  sons  of  Noah, 
and  in  ch.  xi.  i — 9 relates  the  confusion  of 
their  languages,  it  is  very  probable  that  in 
this  verse  the  division  of  the  land  concerns 
only  the  separation  of  the  Shemites. 

Joktan]  There  is  a general  consent  in  fa- 
vour of  the  colonization  of  Southern  Arabia 
by  the  descendants  of  Joktan,  with  the  names 
of  whom  correspond  several  of  the  districts 
and  cities  of  that  country.  The  Arabs  iden- 
tify Joktan  with  Kahtan,  who  was  the  tra- 
ditional ancestor  of  the  Beni  Kahtan,  inha- 
bitants of  Yemen  or  Arabia  Felix.  In  Ara- 
bia the  Joktanides,  no  doubt,  found  some 
peoples  settled  there  already,  viz.  the  Cushite 
descendants  of  Ham  (ver.  7),  and  the  Ludite 
descendants  of  Shem  (ver.  22).  The  Arabic 
authors  are  silent  concerning  any  Cushites, 
Init  derive  the  ancient  Arabic  races  from  the 
Kabtanides  {i.e.  the  Joktanides). 

26.  Almodad\  The  names  Modad  and 
Morad  (r  being  often  a corruption  of  ^ by  a 
clerical  error)  occur  frequently  in  Arabic  ge- 
nealogies. The  syllable  Al  is  probably  the 
definite  article. 

Sheleph]  has  been  compared  by  Bochart 
with  the  Salopeni  of  Ptolemy  (vi.  7),  in- 
habiting the  interior  of  Arabia,  and  is  iden- 
tified with  a tribe  of  Sulaph  or  Seliph  in  Ye- 
men. The  Arabic  writers  speak  of  a large 
region  called  Sal  fie,  south-west  of  Sanaa. 

Haz.arma'vcth]  The  name  agrees  in  every 
letter  with  Hadramaut,  the  name  of  a pro- 
vince on  the  southern  coast  of  Arabia,  fa- 
mous for  its  fertility  in  myrrh  and  frankin- 
cense, and  for  the  unhealthiness  of  its  climate. 

Jerah]  The  name  in  flebrew  signifies  the 


;is.  X.  [v.  26-29. 

27  And  Hadoram,  and  Uzal,  and 
Diklah, 

28  And  Obal,  and  Abimael,  and 
Sheba, 

29  And  Ophir,  and  Havilah,  and 


moon.  Bochart  has  suggested  the  identifica- 
tion of  his  descendants  with  the  Alilaei 
(Agatharch.  c.  49;  Strabo,  xvi.  p.  2 7 7)  = the 
Beni  Hilal  (“the  sons  of  the  new  moon”), 
who  dwelt  south  of  Chaw  Ian. 

27.  Hadoram]  There  has  been  no  sa- 
tisfactory identification  of  the  descendants 
of  Hadoram  with  any  known  race,  though 
Bochart  compared  the  Adramitas  of  Ptolemy 
(vi.  7)  and  the  Atramitae  of  Pliny  (vi.  28) 
in  the  south  of  A rabia. 

UzaF]  This  name  is  identified  with  Aw- 
zal,  the  ancient  name  of  Sanaa,  the  capital 
city  of  Yemen. 

Diklah]  in  Syriac  signifies  Palm;  whence 
Bochart  and  Gesenius  identified  the  descend- 
ants of  Diklah  with  the  Minaei,  a people 
of  Yemen,  who  inhabited  a palm-growing 
country.  Michaelis  conjectured  a people  con- 
tiguous to  the  Tigris,  the  name  of  which  river 
in  Syriac  and  Arabic  was  Diklat. 

28.  Obal.,  and  Abimael]  Only  very  un- 
certain conjectures  have  been  made  as  to 
these  names. 

Sheba]  We  read  much  of  Sheba,  a coun- 
try in  Arabia  Felix,  abounding  in  gold,  pre- 
cious stones,  frankincense,  and  famous  for 
its  merchandise  (i  K.  x.  10;  Job  vi.  19;  Ps. 
Ixxii.  10,  15;  Is.  lx.  6;  Jer.  vi.  20;  Ezek. 
xxvii.  22;  Joel  hi.  8).  The  Arabic  and  Greek 
accounts  of  the  Sabasans,  a people,  whose 
capital  was  Saba  or  Mariaba,  three  or  four 
days’  journey  from  Senaa,  correspond  tho- 
roughly with  all  this.  See  on  ver.  7 above. 

29.  Ophir]  On  no  geographical  question 
has  a greater  diversity  of  opinion  existed  than 
on  the  site  of  Ophir.  The  position  of  Ophir, 
as  a son  of  Joktan,  and  the  settlement  of  the 
other  Joktanides  in  Arabia,  form  a strong 
argument  in  favour  of  placing  Ophir  in  Ara- 
bia also.  The  historical  notices,  however,  in 
the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  (i  K.  ix. 
26 — 28,  X.  II,  xxii.  48;  2 Chr.  viii.  18,  ix.  10) 
have  inclined  many  to  place  Ophir  either  in 
India  or  in  Africa:  whilst  others  have  thought, 
that  two  Ophirs  are  mentioned  in  Scripture, 
one  in  Arabia,  the  other  in  India  or  Ceylon. 
I'he  question  is  discussed  at  length  by  Gese- 
nius, ‘Thes.’  p.  142.  See  also  ‘Diet,  of  Bible,’ 
s.  V.  Ophir. 

Havilah]  It  is  generally  thought  that 
Chawlan,  in  Arabia  Felix,  was  the  home  of 
the  descendants  of  Havilah.  (On  the  Cushite 
Havilah,  see  note  on  v.  7.)  Whilst  some 
have  thought  that  there  were  two  Chaw- 


V.  4-] 


GENESIS.  X.  XL 


■9  o' 


Jobab : all  these  were  the  sons  of 
Joktan. 

30  And  their  dwelling  was  from 
Mesha,  as  thou  goest  unto  Sephar  a 
mount  of  the  east. 

31  These  are  \\\Q  sons  of  Shem, 
after  their  families,  after  their  tongues, 
in  their  lands,  after  their  nations. 

32  These  are  the  families  of  the 
sons  of  Noah,  after  their  generations, 
in  their  nations:  and  by  these  were 
the  nations  divided  in  the  earth  after 
the  flood. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

I One  language  in  the  world.  3 building 


of  Babel.  ^ The  confusion  of  tongues.  10  The 
generations  of  Shem.  27  The  generatio7is  of 
Terah  the  father  of  Abram.  31  Terah  goeth 
from  Ur  to  Haran. 


K 


ND  '^the  whole  earth  was  of  one  «wisd.  10. 
language,  and  of  one  ^speech,  f neb,  up. 

2 And  it  came  to  pass,  as  they 
journeyed  from  the  east,  that  they 
found  a plain  in  the  land  of  Shinarj 
and  they  dwelt  there. 

3 And  4hey  said  one  to  another,  t Heb. 

iti  amansaid 

Go  to,  let  us  make  brick,  and  ^ burn  to  hh 
them  throughly.  And  they  had  brick 
for  stone,  and  slime  had  they  for  hum' them 
morter.  in^:. 

4 And  they  said.  Go  to,  let  us 


Ians,  one  belonging  to  the  descendants  of  the 
Joktanide  and  the  other  to  the  sons  of  the 
Cushite  Havilah ; others  have  thought  that  the 
two  races  were  intermingled  and  confounded. 

Jobab']  Ptolemy  (vi.  7)  mentions  the  Jo- 
baritae  near  the  Indian  Sea,  which  Bochart 
conjectured  to  have  been  Jobabitae,  in  which 
he  is  followed  by  Gesenius.  Bochart  and  Ge- 
senius  think  the  name  to  be  = the  Arabic  Je- 
bab,  a desert. 

30.  And  their  duelling  <was  from  Mesha., 
as  thou  goest  unto  Sephar  a mount  of  the  East] 
Mesha  has  been  identified  by  Bochart  with 
the  seaport  of  Musa  or  Mu7.a,  mentioned  by 
Ptolemy  vi.  8;  Pliny  vi.  23,  &c.  Michaelis, 
followed  by  Rosenmuller,  Gesenius,  &c.  pre- 
fen-ed  Mesene,  a place  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Tigris  and  Euphrates,  not  far  from  Bassora. 

Sephar]  is  pretty  certainly  Zafar  or 
Dhafari,  a seaport  on  the  coast  of  Hadra- 
maut.  It  is  pronounced  in  modern  Arabic 
Isfor,  and  is  not  so  much  one  town  as  a series 
of  villages  near  the  shore  of  the  Indian  Ocean. 
(Fresnel,  quoted  by  Gesenius,  p.  968.) 

Chap.  XI.  1.  one  language]  The  general 
opinion  of  the  Jews  and  ancient  Christians 
was  that  this  language  was  Hebrew.  The 
names  of  the  most  ancient  places  and  persons 
mentioned  in  Scripture  being  Hebrew  seems 
to  countenance  this  belief.  But  it  is  impos- 
sible to  arrive  at  any  certainty  on  the  question, 
it  being  notorious  that  names  have  been  trans- 
lated from  one  language  into  another  in  many 
instances. 

2.  it  came  to  pass.,  as  they  journeyed  from 
the  east]  On  the  difficulty  in  these  words, 
and  on  the  first  home  of  the  descendants  of 
Noah,  see  note  on  viii.  4.  If  Armenia  was 
that  first  home,  we  must  suppose  either  that 
they  had  journeyed  in  a south-easterly  direc- 
tion before  they  turned  to\vards  Shinar,  and 
then  they  would  journey  from  the  east,  or  we 


must  render  “eastward,”  lit.  “on  the  sides 
of  the  east.” 

a plain]  The  word  more  naturally  means 
a deep  valley,  but  it  is  often  used  of  a wide 
vale  or  plain. 

Shinar]  Without  doubt  the  region  round 
about  Babylon,  to  which,  besides  Babylon, 
pertained  the  cities  of  Erech,  Kalneh  and 
Accad  (Gen.  x.  10,  where  see  note).  The 
fertility  of  this  country  for  the  production  of 
wheat  is  greatly  praised  by  Herodotus  (1. 

193)- 

3.  let  us  make  brick.,  and  burn  them 
throughly]  The  regions  of  Assyria  and  Baby- 
lonia consisting  of  rich  alluvial  plains  would 
provide  no  stone  and  w'ere  specially  abundant 
in  brick  earth.  Hence,  when  Nimrod  built 
Babel  and  other  towns  in  Shinar  (ch.  x.  10), 
he  and  those  with  him  must  have  learned  the 
art  of  brick-making.  The  building  of  villages 
in  the  earlier  settlements  of  the  Noachidae  had 
been  probably  of  wood  or  stone. 

they  had  brick  for  stone.,  and  slime  had  they for 
morter]  A 11  the  versions  give  asphalte  or  bitu- 
men for  the  word  chemer.,  “slime”.  Herod, 
(i.  179)  describes  the  building  of  the  walls  of 
Babylon  much  as  the  sacred  history  describes 
tliis  building  of  the  tower  of  Babel.  He  says 
a deep  foss  was  dug  all  round  the  city,  from 
which  the  mud  was  taken  in  large  bricks  and 
burnt  in  furnaces.  Then  for  mud  or  mortar, 
they  used  hot  bitumen,  and  so  built  the  walls 
of  the  city.  He  mentions  a town  called  Is, 
with  a river  of  the  same  name  near  it,  about 
eight  days’journey  from  Babylon,  where  much 
bitumen  was  obtained  and  carried  to  Babylon 
for  the  building  of  the  city.  See  also  Strabo 
(Lib.  XVI.  p.  74),  who  speaks  of  the  excel- 
lence of  the  Babylonian  bitumen  for  building. 
Justin  also  (Lib.  i.'a)  speaks  of  Semiramis  as 
having  built  Babylon  with  brick  and  liquid 
bitumen,  which  fiowed  in  great  abundance  in 
the  neighbourhood.  Diodor.  Sicul.  (ii.  12), 


96 


GENESIS.  XL 


[v.  5,  6. 


build  us  a city  and  a tower,  whose 
top  may  reach  unto  heaven ; and  let 
us  make  us  a name,  lest  we  be  scat- 
tered abroad  upon  the  face  of  the 
whole  earth. 


5 And  the  Lord  came  down  to 
see  the  city  and  the  tower,  which  the 
children  of  men  budded. 

6 And  the  Lord  said.  Behold,  the 
people  is  one,  and  they  have  all  one 


Pliny  (‘  H.  N.’  xxxi.  5),  Athenseus  (Lib.  ii. 
5),  and  other  ancient  writers,  mention  a lake 
close  to  Babylon  abounding  in  bitumen,  which 
floated  on  the  waters.  (See  Reland,  ‘ Palestin.’ 
Ji.  pp.  244,  245).  The  town  of  Is,  mentioned 
by  Herodotus  (as  above),  is  identified  by  mo- 
dern travellers  with  Meets,  where  bitumen 
pits  are  still  found  on  the  western  bank  of  the 
Euphrates.  Some  of  the  heaps  of  ruins,  which 
have  been  identified  with  the  ruins  of  Baby- 
lon, exhibit  specimens  of  sun-dried  bricks  laid 
in  bitumen,  producing  walls  of  great  strength 
and  solidity.  Mr  Layard  tells  us  that  at  Birs 
Nimrod,  “The  cement,  by  which  the  bricks 
were  united,  is  of  so  tenacious  a quality,  that 
it  is  almost  impossible  to  detach  one  from  the 
other,”  (‘  Nineveh  and  Babylon,’  p.  499). 

4.  a to^er^  ^ubose  top  may  reach  unto  hea- 
'ven'\  That  is  to  say  “ a very  high  tower,”  just 
as  the  cities  of  the  Canaanites  were  said  to  be 
“ great  and  walled  up  to  heaven”  (Deut.  i.  28, 
ix.  i),  or  as  Homer  (‘Od.’  v.  239),  speaks  of 
a pine  tree  “high  as  heaven.”  Many  have 
identified  this  tower  with  the  temple  of  Belus 
(Herod,  i.  181),  which  is  described  as  con- 
sisting of  eight  squares  one  upon  the  other, 
the  dimensions  of  the  lowest  or  base  being  a 
stadium  in  length  and  in  breadth.  The  mound 
called  Birs  Nimroud  is  generally  supposed  to 
be  the  ruin  of  the  temple  of  Belus. 

let  us  make  us  a name^  lest  octf  be  scattered 
abroad  upon  the  face  of  the  'whole  earth~\  Jose- 
phus gives  as  the  motive  for  building  the 
tower  of  Babel,  that  the  builders  feared 
another  deluge,  and  hoped  tliat  the  tower 
would  be  high  enough  to  save  them  from  its 
waters;  Nimrod,  the  leader  in  the  scheme, 
boasting  that  he  could  so  defy  the  vengeance 
of  God.  Again  some  have  thought,  that  Noah 
had  deliberately  marked  out  the  settlements  of 
his  posterity  (Usher,  ad  A.  M.  1757),  and  that 
Nimrod  and  his  followers  were  unwilling 
to  submit  to  this.  Then  some  Jewish  wri- 
ters have  interpreted  the  word  name  (Shem) 
to  mean  God,  “the  name  of  God”  being  often 
put  for  God  Himself;  and  so  have  imagined 
that  the  builders  of  the  tower  proposed  to 
make  an  idol  temple.  Others  have  supposed 
that  the  descendants  of  Ham  under  Nimrod 
made  hei'e  some  reference  to  Shem,  the  fa- 
voured son  of  Noah,  as  though  they  would 
have  said,  “ A blessing  has  been  promised  to 
Shem,  but  we  will  make  a Shem  for  our- 
selves.” Clericus  suggested  that  the  word 
Shem  meant  here  a monument  (cp.  2 S. 
viii.  13).  The  simplest  sense  of  the  pas- 


sage seems  the  true.  In  ch.  x.  10,  we  find 
that  Nimrod  founded  a kingdom  in.Shinar. 
He  and  his  followers  were  apparently  actu- 
ated by  an  ambitious  spirit,  not  satisfied  with 
the  simplicity  of  a patriarchal  life,  nor  willing 
to  be  scattered  abroad,  as  so  many  were,  by 
the  migratory  instinct  that  seems  to  have  led 
the  descendants  of  Noah  thus  early  to  form 
extensive  settlements,  but  desiring  to  found 
an  empire,  to  build  a city,  with  a strong 
citadel,  and  so  to  hold  togethar  in  a power- 
ful commonwealth,  and  to  establish  for  them- 
selves a name,  fame,  importance,  renown, 
thereby,  it  may  be,  attracting  others  to  join 
their  community.  Perhaps  there  was  an  al- 
lusion to  this  in  the  prophecy  (Is.  xiv.  22), 
“ I will . . . cut  off  from  Babylon  the  name 
and  remnant  and  son  and  nephew”  (i.  e.  grand- 
son or  posterity)  “saith  the  Lord.”  The 
tradition  which  assigns  the  lead  in  the  build- 
ing of  the  tower  of  Babel  to  Nimrod  was 
ancient  and  general.  (See  Joseph.  ‘ Ant,’  i. 
4,  Aug.  ‘De  Civit.  Dei,’  xvi.  4,  &c.)  It  may 
have  arisen  chiefly  from  what  is  said  of  him 
in  ch.  X.  9,  10,  II.  It  is  worthy  of  remark, 
that,  though  the  descendants  of  Shem  and 
Japheth  shared  in  the  judgment  which  -con- 
founded the  tongues,  yet  their  dialects  have 
to  this  day  a nearer  resemblance  between 
themselves  than  those  which  may  perhaps  be 
attributed  to  the  children  of  Ham.  As  the 
Shemites  and  Japhethites  have  had  a higher 
civilization,  so  they  have  retained  a purer 
language.  The  Semitic  dialects  all  have  a 
strong  family  likeness.  The  Aryan  or  Indo- 
European  {i.e.  probably  the  Japhetic)  dialects, 
though  more  diverse  than  the  Semitic,  are  yet 
all  easily  assignable  to  a common  origin  ; whilst 
the  Turanian  and  other  languages  branch  oft 
into  endless  varieties. 

5.  the  Lord  came  down  to  see~\  An  in- 
stance of  the  natural  anthropomorphic  lan- 
guage suited  to  the  teaching  of  man  in  a state 
of  simple  and  })artial  civilization. 

the  children  of  men  builded]  It  has  been 
thought,  though  perhaps  on  insufficient 
ground,  that  “children  of  men”  as  in  ch.  vi.  2, 
designates  the  impious  portion  of  the  human 
race,  bad  men,  as  opposed  to  “children  of 
God;”  and  possibly  the  rebellious  offspring 
of  flam. 

6.  this  they  begin  to  do^  Perhaps  rather 
“ this  is  the  beginning  of  their  deeds.”  This 
is  their  first  act  of  daring  and  impiety,  and 
unless  they  be  effectually  checked,  nothing 
win  restrain  them  from  going  farther  and 
farther. 


V.  7— 13-] 


GENESIS.  XI. 


97 


language ; and  this  they  begin  to  do : 
and  now  nothing  will  be  restrained 
from  them,  which  they  have  imagined 
to  do. 

7 Go  to,  let  us  go  down,  and  there 
confound  their  language,  that  they 
may  not  understand  one  another’s 
speech. 

8 So  the  Lord  scattered  them 
abroad  from  thence  upon  the  face  of 
all  the  earth : and  they  left  ofF  to 
build  the  city. 

9 Therefore  is  the  name  of  it  called 
Co7t/nllon.  "Babel;  because  the  Lord  did  there 


confound  the  language  of  all  the 
earth : and  from  thence  did  the  Lord 
scatter  them  abroad  upon  the  face  of 
all  the  earth. 

10  ^ These  are  the  generations  * i Chron. 
of  Shem : Shem  was  an  hundred  years 

old,  and  begat  Arphaxad  two  years 
after  the  flood : 

11  And  Shem  lived  after  he  begat 
Arphaxad  five  hundred  years,  and  be- 
gat sons  and  daughters. 

12  And  Arphaxad  lived  five  and 
thirty  years,  and  begat  Salah : 

13  And  Arphaxad  lived  after  he 


8.  they  left  off  to  build  the  city']  It 
seems,  therefore,  very  doubtful  ho-w  far  the 
builders  could  have  proceeded  in  building 
their  tower,  and  hardly  likely  that  the  famous 
temple  of  Belus  should  have  been  to  any  con- 
siderable extent  erected  by  them,  though  not 
improbably  that  great  structure  may  have  been 
raised  on  the  foundation  laid  at  this  time. 
The  tradition  that  God  overturned  it  with  a 
tempest  (Jos. ‘Ant.’ I.  6;  Euseb.  ‘Praep.  Evang.’ 
IX.  4),  though  probably  unfounded,  witnesses 

. to  its  not  having  been  completed. 

9.  BabeF]  from  Balal^  to  confound^  con- 
tracted from  Balbal^  confusion.  The  Greek 
tradition  was,  that  the  city  was  named  after 
Belus,  its  mythic  founder.  So  the  Etymo- 
logicum  Magnum  says  that  “Babylon  was 
named  after  Belus,  who  founded  it.”  Hence 
Eichhorn  suggested,  that  the  name  originally 
was  Bab  Bel,  “the  gate  or  court  of  Bel,” 
i.e,  Baal  or  Belus.  So  Rosenmuller,  Gese- 
nius  and  others  have  thought  it  might  be  Bab 
11,  the  “Gate  of  God.”  These  derivations  are 
really  much  less  likely  than  that  given  by 
Moses.  There  was  no  such  person  as  Belus, 
except  that  Nimrod,  whose  scriptural  name 
probably  signifies  rebel.,  may  by  his  own  people 
have  been  called  Baal,  Belus,  Lord. 


10.  These  are  the  generations  of  Shem] 
We  have  here  the  third  genealogical  table. 
The  I St  was  given  in  ch.  v.  from  Adam  to 
Noah ; the  2nd  in  ch.  x,  the  genealogy  of  the 
three  sons  of  Noah,  the  descendants  of  Shem 
being  traced  down  as  far  as  Peleg.  Now  we 
have  the  line  of  Shem  farther  carried  down  to 
Abraham,  the  father  of  the  faithful,  the  ancestor 
of  the  promised  seed.  In  ch.  x.  no  account  is 
given  of  the  length  of  the  generations  or  of  the 
duration  of  life ; but  here  in  ch.  xi.  as  before 
in  ch.  v.,  both  these  are  supplied.  Concerning 
the  chronological  question  and  the  ages  of  the 
patriarchs,  see  Introduction  and  on  ch.  v.  note 
A.  It  may  be  observed  here,  that  we  mark  at 
once  the  transition  from  the  antediluvian  to 
the  postdiluvian  duration  of  life.  Noah  lived 
950  years,  Shem  only  600,  Arphaxad,  the  first 
born  of  Shem  after  the  deluge,  only  438 ; when 
we  come  to  Peleg,  who  seems  to  have  been 
contemporary  with  the  dispersion,  life  is  still 
shorter,  Peleg  lived  239  years,  Reu  239,  Serug 
230,  Nahor  148. 

The  following  table  exhibits  the  different 
calculations  according  to  the  Hebrew,  the 
Samaritan,  and  the  Septuagint  texts  respect- 
ively. 


Hebrew  Text. 

Samaritan. 

Septuagint. 

Hebrew  Text. 

Years 

before 

Rest 

Whole 

Years 

before 

Rest 

Whole 

Years 

before 

Rest 

Whole 

Year 
of  birth 

Year  of 
death 

birth  of 

of  Life. 

Life. 

birth  of 

of  Life. 

of  Life. 

birth  of 

6t  Life. 

Life. 

Son. 

Son. 

Son. 

A.  ]VI» 

A.M. 

Shem 

100 

500 

600 

100 

500 

600 

100 

500 

600 

1558 

2138 

Arphaxad 

35 

403 

438 

135 

303 

438 

135 

400 

535 

1658 

2097 

Kainan 

. 130 

330 

460 

Salah 

30 

403 

433 

1.30 

303 

433 

130 

330 

460 

1693 

2X26 

Eber 

34 

430 

464 

134 

270 

404 

134 

270 

404 

1723 

2187 

Peleg 

30 

209 

^39 

130 

109 

^•39 

130 

209 

339 

1757 

1996 

2026 

j Reu 

32 

207 

239 

132 

107 

239 

132 

207 

339 

1787 

Serug 

30 

200 

230 

130 

roo 

230 

130 

200 

330 

1819 

1997 

1 Nahor 

29 

II9 

148 

79 

69 

148 

179 

125 

304 

T849 

1997 

Terah 

70 

^35 

205 

70 

75 

145 

70 

135 

209 

1878 

1948 

2083 

Abraham 

2123  1 

VoL.  I.  G 


98 


GENES 

begat  Salah  four  hundred  and  three 
years,  and  begat  sons  and  daugh- 
ters. 

14  And  Salah  lived  thirty  years, 
and  begat  Eber; 

15  And  Salah  lived  after  he  begat 
.Eber  four  hundred  and  three  years, 
and  begat  sons  and  daughters. 

fiChron.  16  ^And  Eber  lived  four  and  thir- 
^cSied,  ty  "^Peleg: 

17  And  Eber  lived  after  he  begat 
Peleg  four  hundred  and  thirty  years, 
and  begat  sons  and  daughters. 

18  And  Peleg  lived  thirty  years, 
and  begat  Reu: 

19  And  Peleg  lived  after  he  begat 
Reu  two  hundred  and  nine  years,  and 
begat  sons  and  daughters. 

20  And  Reu  lived  two  and  thirty 
'Lukes,  years,  and  begat  ^Serug: 

25, Hved  after  he  begat 
Serug  two  hundred  and  seven  years, 
and  begat  sons  and  daughters. 

2 7 . A^O'W  these  are  the  generations  of  Terah~\ 
Not  perhaps  a distinct  genealogy,  but  the  wind- 
ing up  of  the  genealogy  which  had  already 
been  traced  to  the  sons  of  Terah,  and  the  ex- 
panding it  into  a fuller  account  of  the  fami- 
lies of  these  sons  and  especially  of  Abra- 
ham. 

28.  Ur  of  the  Chaldees']  Mentioned  only 
here.  There  is  great  diversity  of  opinion  as 
to  the  site  of  this  city,  except  that  it  was  in 
Chaldaea,  i.e.  the  southern  part  of  Babylonia. 
Bochart,  followed  by  Michaelis,  Rosenmuller 
and  many  others,  identified  it  with  t/r,  which  is 
mentioned  by  Ammianus  Marcellinus  (xxv.  8. 
col.  26),  when  describing  the  return  of  the 
Roman  army  under  Jovian  after  the  death  of 
Julian,  as  lying  between  Nisibis  and  the  Tigris. 
Ancient  tradition  and  the  opinion  of  many 
moderns  connect  it  with  the  modern  Orfa, 
the  Edessa  of  the  Greeks,  well  known  in 
Christian  times  as  the  capital  of  Abgarus, 
its  first  Christian  King,  who  is  said  to  have 
written  a letter  to,  and  to  have  received  a 
letter  from  our  Saviour.  “The  traditions  of 
Abraham  still  live  in  the  mouths  of  the  Arab 
inhabitants  of  Orfa.  The  city  lies  on  the 
edge  of  one  of  the  bare  rugged  spurs  which 
descend  from  the  mountains  of  Armenia,  into 
the  Assyrian  plains  in  the  cultivated  land, 
which,  as  lying  under  the  mountains,  was 
called  Padan-Aram.  Two  physical  features 
must  have  secured  it  from  the  earliest  times 
as  a nucleus  for  the  civilization  of  those 
regions.  One  is  a high  crested  crag,  the 
natural  fortification  of  the  present  citadel. 


IS.  XI.  [V.  14-29. 

22  And  Serug  lived  thirty  years, 
and  begat  Nahor: 

23  And  Serug  lived  after  he  begat 
Nahor  two  hundred  years,  and  begat 
sons  and  daughters. 

24  And  Nahor  lived  * nine  and 

twenty  years,  and  begat -^Terah : ./Lukes. 

25  And  Nahor  lived  after  he  begat 
Terah  an  hundred  and  nineteen  years, 
and  begat  sons  and  daughters. 

26  And  Terah  lived  seventy  years, 
and^begat  Abram,  Nahor,  and  Haran.  ir  Joshua 

27  ^ Now  these  are  the  genera- ic£on.  i, 
tions  of  Terah:  Terah  begat  Abram, 

Nahor,  and  Haran;  and  Haran  begat 

Lot. 

28  And  Haran  died  before  his  fa- 
ther Terah  in  the  land  of  his  nativity, 
in  Ur  of  the  Chaldees. 

29  And  Abram  and  Nahor  took 
them  wives : the  name  of  Abram’s 
wife  was  Sarai ; and  the  name  of 
Nahor’s  wife,  Milcah,  the  daughter 

doubly  defended  by  a trench  of  immense 
depth,  cut  out  of  the  living  rock  behind  it. 

The  other  is  an  abundant  spring  (the  Callir- 
rhoe  of  the  Greek  writers)  issuing  in  a pool 
of  transparent  clearness  and  embosomed  in  a 
mass  of  luxuriant  verdure,  which,  amidst  the 
dull  brown  desert  all  around,  makes,  and 
must  always  have  made,  this  spot  an  oasis,  a 
Paradise  in  the  Chaldaean  wilderness.”  (Dean 
Stanley  ‘ On  the  Jewish  Church,’  i.  p.  7.) 
Eupolemus  as  quoted  by  Euseb.  ‘ Prasp.  Evang.’ 

IX.  17,  says  that  Abraham  was  born  in  the 
city  of  Babylonia  called  Camarine,  which 
some  say  is  the  city  Uria,  and  by  interpreta- 
tion city  of  the  Chaldees,  which  Gesenius  ex- 
plains by  .saying  that  Ur  in  Sanscrit  signifies 
r/Vj,  country,,  (cognate  perhaps  with  the  He- 
brew /r,  the  original  language  of  the 

Chaldees  having  been  cognate  with  the  Indian 
and  Persian.  This  city  is  supposed  to  be  now 
represented  by  the  ruins  Umgheir  on  the  right 
bank  of  the  Euphrates,  which  appears  by  its 
bricks  to  have  been  called  Hur  by  the  natives. 
(Professor  Rawlinson  in  ‘ Diet,  of  Bible.’) 

29.  Iscah'l  According  to  Josephus  (‘Ant.’ 

I.  6),  Targum  Pseudo- Jonathan  and  Jerome 
(‘  (^1.  in  Genes.’)  the  same  as  Sarai.  This, 
however,  hardly  seems  consistent  with  Gen.xx. 

12,  where  Abram  speaks  of  Sarai  as  daughter 
of  his  father  but  not  of  his  mother ; though 
it  is  very  difficult  to  say  with  what  exactnesis 
the  terms  father,  daughter,  brother,  &c.  are 
used.  Ewald  has  conjectured  that  Iscah  was 
Lot’s  wife  and  therefore  mentioned  here ; but 
there  is  no  evidence  for  this. 


V.  30—2.] 


GENESIS.  XI.  XII. 


99 


of  Haran,  the  father  of  Milcah,  and 
the  father  of  Iscah. 

30  But  Sarai  was  barren;  she  had 
no  child. 

31  And  Terah  took  Abram  his 
son,  and  Lot  the  son  of  Haran  his 
son’s  son,  and  Sarai  his  daughter  in 
law,  his  son  Abram’s  wife ; and  they 

ftNeh.  9.  went  forth  with  them  from  ^'Ur  of 
Judiths.;.  ^1^0  Chaldees,  to  go  into  the  land  of 
Acts  7.  4.  Canaan ; and  they  came  unto  Haran, 
and  dwelt  there. 

32  And  the  days  of  Terah  were 
two  hundred  and  five  years:  and  Te- 
rah died  in  Haran. 


CHAPTER  XH. 

I God  calleth  Abram,  and  blcsseth  him  with  a 
promise  of  Christ.  4 He  departeth  with  Lot 
from  Haran.  6 He  journey cth  through  Ca- 
naan, 7 which  is  promised  him  in  a vision. 

10  He  is  driven  by  a famine  into  Egypt.  1 1 
Fear  maketh  him  feign  his  wife  to  be  his  sis- 
ter. 14  Pharaoh,  having  taken  her  from  him, 
by  plagues  is  compelled  to  restore  her. 

OW  the ‘’’Lord  had  said  unto  « Actsr-s. 
Abram,  Get  thee  out  of  thy 
country,  and  from  thy  kindred,  and 
from  thy  father’s  house,  unto  a land 
that  I will  shew  thee: 

2 And  I will  make  of  thee  a great 
nation,  and  I will  bless  thee,  and 


31.  and  they  nvent  forth  ^ith  then{\  i.  e. 
Terah  and  Abram  went  forth  with  Lot  and 
Sarai.  The  Samaritan  (followed  by  LXX. 
and  Vulg.)  by  a slight  transposition  of  the  let- 
ters and  different  pointing  reads  “-He  brought 
them  forth.” 

Haran']  The  Carrhze  of  the  Greeks  and 
Romans,  where  Crassus  fell,  defeated  by  the 
Parthians  (Plutarch,  ‘ Vit.  Gras.’  25.  27.  28. 
Plin.  V.  24).  It  is  called  Charran  in  Acts 
vii.  4. 

32.  tivo  hundred  and  fiaoe  years]  The  . 
Samaritan  Pentateuch  has  here  one  loundred 
and  forty  finoe,  which  Bochart  and  others  con- 
sider the  right  number.  St  Stephen  (Acts 
vii.  4)  says  the  migration  of  Abram  into 
Canaan  was  after  his  father’s  death  : but  from 
V.  26  supra  it  .seems  as  if  Terah  was  only 
70  when  Abram  was  born,  and  by  xii.  4 
we  find  that  Abram  was  75  when  he  left 
Haran.  This,  according  to  the  Samaritan, 
would  appear  to  be  the  very  year  of  his 
father’s  death.  It  is  certain  that  the  Samari- 
tan text  cannot  have  been  tampered  with  by 
any  Christian  hand  to  bring  it  into  conformity 
with  St  Stephen’s  statement,  and  it  may  very 
likely  have  preserved  the  true  reading.  It  is 
possible,  however,  that  Terah  may  have 
been  really  130  years  old  when  Abram  was 
born : for  though  it  is  said  in  ver.  26  that 
Terah  lived  seventy  years  and  begat  Abram, 
Nahor  and  Haran,  yet  it  does  not  follow  that 
Abram  was  the  eldest  son,  having  been  named 
first  as  being  the  heir  of  the  promises  and  the 
subject  of  the  future  history.  Indeed  some 
of  the  rabbins  consider  Abram  to  have  been 
the  youngest  son,  in  which  case  he  may  have 
been  born  when  his  father  was  130  years  old 
(see  Wordsworth  on  Acts  vii.  4). 

Chap.  XII.  1.  No<vj  the  Lord  had  said] 
Now  the  LORD  said.  The  former  chap- 
ter had  carried  the  history  down  to  the 
death  of  Terah.  The  present  chapter  returns 
to  the  date  of  the  call  of  Abram.  In  Acts 


vii.  2 St  Stephen  tells  us,  what  also  appears 
most  likely  from  the  history  in  Gen.,  that 
God  appeared  to  Abram  “ when  he  was  in 
Mesopotamia,  before  he  dwelt  in  Charran.” 
This  led  our  translators  to  render  “ had  said." 
The  Hebrew  lacks  the  pluperfect  tense ; but 
the  continuous  character  of  the  narrative  fi-om 
this  point  marks  the  propriety  of  adopting  a 
simple  perfect,  which  is  also  the  rendering  of 
the  ancient  versions.  The  recounting  briefly 
of  events  up  to  the  death  of  Terah  in  the  last 
chapter  was  by  a prolepsis.  We  have  here 
the  beginning  of  a new  Chapter  in  the  history, 
of  a new  dispensation  and  a new  covenant. 
Henceforth  the  narrative  ‘concerns  only  the 
chosen  people  of  God  and  those  who  affect 
them  and  their  fortunes. 

Get  thee  out  of  thy  country]  Lit.  Go  thee, 
a pleonasm  of  the  pronoun,  common  in  many 
languages.  The  call  was  evidently  from  the 
birthplace  of  Abram,  Ur  of  the  Chaldees; 
and  not  only  Abram,  but  his  father  and 
other  of  his  family  seem  at  first  to  have 
obeyed  the  call : for  Terah  took  Abram  and 
Lot  and  Sarai,  and  “ they  went  forth  fi'om  Ur 
of  the  Chaldees  to  go  into  the  land  of  Canaan  ” 
(ch.  xi.  31).  The  land  is  here  called  by  the 
Almighty  “the  land  that  I will  shew  thee,” 
but  Moses,  in  ch.  xi.  31,  calls  it  the  land  of 
Canaan,  the  destination  of  Abram  being 
known  to  Moses,  though  it  was  not  at  the 
time  of  his  call  known  to  Abram  himself. 

2.  1 ‘will  make  of  thee  a great  nation] 

Literally  fulfilled  in  the  glories  of  Israel, 
spiritually  and  more  largely  in  the  spiritual 
sons  of  Abraham,  “ Abraham’s  seed  and  heirs 
according  to  the  promise,”  Gal.  iii.  29. 

and  thou  shalt  be  a blessing]  Kimchi  on 
Zech.  viii.  12,  followed  by  Clericus  and 
Knobel,  interprets  “shalt  be  an  example  or 
type  of  blessing,”  so  that  men  shall  say 
“ Blessed  be  thou,  as  Abraham  was  blessed.” 
Others,  as  Rosenmuller,  Gesenius,  &c.  con- 
sider the  substantive  to  be  put  for  the  parti- 

G 2 


I GO 


GENESIS.  XII. 


make  thy  name  great ; and  thou  shalt 
be  a blessing: 

3 And  I will  bless  them  that  bless  • 
thee,  and  curse  him  that  curseth  thee : 
-^chap.  i8.  “^and  in  thee  shall  all  families  of  the 
& 22.  i8.  earth  be  blessed. 

Gai%^'8^^'  4 Abram  departed,  as  the  Lord 

had  spoken  unto  him;  and  Lot  went 
with  him : and  Abram  was  seventy 
and  five  years  old  when  he  departed 
out  of  Haran. 


[v.  3—6. 

5 And  Abram  took  Sarai  his  wife, 
and  Lot  his  brother’s  son,  and  all 
their  substance  that  they  had  gather- 
ed, and  the  souls  that  they  had  gotten 
in  Haran ; and  they  went  forth  to  go 
into  the  land  of  Canaan ; and  into  the 
land  of  Canaan  they  came. 

6 ^ And  Abram  passed  through 
the  land  unto  the  place  of  Sichem, 
unto  the  plain  of  Moreh.  And  the 
Canaanite  was  then  in  the  land. 


ciple,  a blessing  for  blessed^  comp.  Zech.  viii. 
12.  More  probable,  as  well  as  more  natural, 
is  the  interpretation  adopted  by  Tuch,  De- 
lit/sch,  Keil,  and  others,  and  commended  by 
the  last  words  of  v.  3,  “Thou  shalt  be  a 
blessing  or  cause  of  blessing  to  others  besides 
til  y self.” 

3.  1 'will  bless  them  that  bless  thee^  and 

curse  him  that  curseth  thee~\  God’s  blessing 
was  to  extend  to  Abram’s  friends  and  fol- 
lowers, and  the  enemies  of  Abram  were  to  be 
subject  to  God’s  curse.  Two  different  He- 
brew words  are  here  translated  by  the  one 
English  word  curse.  Some  think  that  the 
one  expresses  more  properly  the  reviling  and 
malediction  of  man,  the  other  the  withering 
curse  of  God.  Both,  however,  are  used  of 
God  and  of  man,  cp.  Job  iii.  8;  Deut.  xxi. 
23.  The  first  in  the  English  Version,  that 
used  of  God,  is  undoubtedly  the  stronger  of 
the  two. 

in  thee  shall  all  families  of  the  earth  be 
blessed]  Here  again  Rashi,  Cleric.,  Knobel, 
and  some  others  interpret  the  words  to  mean 
that  Abram  should  be  so  blessed  in  his  family 
that  all  families  of  the  earth  should  wish  for 
like  blessings  (comp.  Gen.  xlviiii.  20,  “In  thee 
shall  Israel  bless,  saying,  God  make  thee  as 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh”).  The  words,  how- 
ever, can  with  no  shew  of  reason  be  rendered 
otherwise  than  as  rendered  in  the  Authorized 
Version,  following  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  Nor 
can  it  be  understood  otherwise  than  that  all 
families  of  men  should  in  some  manner  de- 
rive blessing  through  Abram.  The  Targum  of 
Onkelos  has  for  thy  sake.,  and  so  the  Jerusa- 
lem d'argum;  but  this  is  an  unauthorized 
exposition. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  assert  that  the  pre- 
diction here  given  was  such  as  to  enlighten 
Abram  with  any  full  clearness  as  to  the  way 
in  which  his  seed  should  bless  all  nations. 
Indeed  the  promise  is  twofold,  general  and 
particular.  Generally  it  is  true,  that  Abram’s 
seed  was  for  centuries  the  sole  depositary 
of  God's  objective  revelations,  and  that  that 
knowledge  of  God  which  was  confided  to 
them  has  by  them  been  spread  to  all  na- 
tions. “Out  of  Zion  went  forth  the  law, 


and  the  word  of  the  Lord  from  Jerusalem” 
(Is.  ii.  3).  It  has  indeed  been  said  with  truth, 
that  the  Semitic  nations,  and  especially  the 
descendants  of  Abram,  were  from  the  tim.e 
of  Abram  to  Christ  the  only  believers  in  the 
unity  of  the  Godhead,  and  that  ever  since  the 
Christian  era  they  only  have  taught  mono- 
theism to  mankind.  But  that  which  was  the 
special  blessing  to  Abram’s  race,  has  also, 
springing  from  that  race,  become  the  universal 
blessing  to  mankind.  Of  him  “ as  concerning 
the  flesh  Christ  came.” 

4.  se'venty  and  fnje  years  old]  See  on  ch. 
xi.  32. 

5.  the  souls  that  they  had  gotten]  that 
is,  the  slaves  or  dependants  whom  they  had 
attached  to  them.  So  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  13, 
slaves  are  spoken  of  as  “ souls  of  men.”  On- 
kelos renders,  “The  souls  which  they  had 
converted  to  the  law  in  Charran.”  So  the 
Pseudo- Jonathan  and  Jerusalem  Targums 
render,  “ the*  souls  whom  they  had  prose- 
lyted.” And  following  this  tradition,  Rashi 
says  that  Abram  made  proselytes  of  the  men 
and  Sarai  of  the  women. 

into  the  land  of  Canaan  they  came]  Leav- 
ing Haran  they  must  have  crossed  the  river 
Euphrates,  from  which  crossing  it  is  very 
commonly  supposed  the  name  Hebrew  was 
derived  (rendered  by  the  LXX.  in  Gen.  xiv. 
13,  oTreparrjs^  the  crosser  o-ver).  Thence  their 
course  must  have  been  southward  over  the 
desert,  probably  near  to  Mount  Lebanon,  and 
thence  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Damascus. 
Josephus  (‘Ant.’  i.  7)  quotes  from  Nicolaus 
of  Damascus  (‘  Hist.’  bk.  iv.),  “ Abraham 
reigned  in  Damascus,  being  come  with  an 
army  from  the  country  beyond  Babylon  called 
the  land  of  the  Chaldaeans.  But  not  long 
after,  leaving  this  country  with  his  people  he 
migrated  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  which  is 
now  called  Judaea.”  Josephus  adds,  that  the 
name  of  Abraham  was  even  in  his  days  famous 
in  the  country  of  the  Damascenes,  and  a vil- 
lage was  pointed  out  there,  which  was  called 
Abraham’s  habitation. 

6.  the  place  of  Sichem]  So  named  by 
anticipation.  The  word  place  may  perhaps 
indicate  that  the  town  did  not  yet  exist. 


GENESIS.  XII. 


lOI 


V.  7,  8.] 

7 And  the  Lord  appeared  unto 
«chap.  13.  Abram,  and  said,  ‘^Unto  thy  seed  will 
I give  this  land : and  there  budded  he 

It  is  generally  supposed  that  Sychar  (Joh.  iv. 
5)  is  the  name  by  which  it  was  known 
among  the  later  Samaritans,  though  the  iden- 
tity of  Sychar  with  Shechem  is  not  ^quite 
certain  (see  Smith’s  ‘Diet,  of  the  Bible,’  Art. 
‘ Sychar’).  The  word  Shechem  signifies  a 
shoulder^  and,  unless  the  town  derived  its 
name  from  Shechem  the  son  of  Hamor,  it 
probably  was  situated  on  a shoulder  or  ridge 
of  land  connected  with  the  hills  of  Ebal  and 
Gerizim.  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  iv.  8)  describes 
the  city  of  Shechem  or  Sicima  as  lying  be- 
tween Gerizim  on  the  right  and  Ebal  on  the 
left.  The  name  Neapolis  was  given  to  it  by 
Vespasian;  and  the  ancients  clearly  identify 
the  later  Neapolis  with  the  ancient  Shechem; 
e.g.  Epiphanius  (‘ Haer.’ ill.  1055),  Si- 
chem,  that  is  in  the  present  Neapolis.”  The 
modern  name  is  Nabulils.  The  situation  of 
the  town  is  described  by  modern  travellers 
as  one  of  exceeding  beauty.  Dr  Robinson 
writes,  “All  at  once  the  ground. sinks  down 
to  a valley  running  toward  the  West,  with  a 
soil  of  rich  black  vegetable  mould.  Here  a 
scene  of  luxuriant  and  almost  unparalleled 
verdure  burst  upon  our  view.  The  whole 
valley  was  filled  with  gardens  of  vegetables 
and  orchards  of  all  kinds  of  fruits,  watered 
by  several  fountains  which  burst  forth  in 
various  parts  and  flow  westward  in  refreshing 
streams.  It  came  suddenly  upon  us  like  a 
scene  of  fairy  enchantment,  we  saw  nothing 
to  compare  to  it  in  all  Palestine”  (Vol.  ii. 
p.  275.  See  also  Stanley’s  ‘Sinai  and  Pales- 
dne,’  p.  234.)  This  spot,  probably  not  yet 
so  cultivated,  but  even  then  verdant  and 
beautiful,  was  the  first  dwellingplace  of  the 
Patriarch  in  the  land  of  promise. 

the  plain  of  Moreh'\  The  oak  (or  tere- 
binth) of  Moreh.  There  is  considerable 
variety  of  opinion  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
tree  here  mentioned,  called  Elon  in  He- 
brew. Celsius  (‘  Hierob.’  i.  p.  34)  has  ar- 
gued that  all  the  cognate  words,  £/,  Elon^ 
Elah^  &c.  signify  the  terebinth  tree,  the  word 
allon  only  being  the  oak.  So  Michaelis 
(‘Supplem.’  p.  72),  Rosenm.,  Delitzsch, 
Keil,  &c.  The  question  is  discussed  at  great 
length  by  Gesen.  (‘Thes.’  p.  jo),.who  doubts 
the  distinction  between  Allon  and  Elon  (a  dis- 
tinction merely  of  vowel  points),  and  inter- 
prets both  by  oak^  or  perhaps  generally  a large 
forest  tree.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  render  oak. 
The  Targums  (followed  by  the  English  Ver- 
sion) render  plain  (see  also  Stanley,  ‘ Sinai 
and  Palestine,’  p.  141).  It  may  be  a ques- 
tion also  whether  the  oak  of  Moreh  was  a 
single  tree,  or  whether  the  word  used  may  be 
a noun  of  multitude,  dgnifying  the  oak  gro^e. 
A single  tree  of  large  size  and  spreading 


a i ^altar  unto  the  Lord,  who  ap- ^ ^3- 
peared  unto  him. 

8 And  he  removed  from  thence 


foliage  would,  no  doubt,  be  a natural  resting 
place  for  a caravan  or  Arab  encampment  in 
the  desert;  but  the  great  fertility  of  the  val- 
ley of  Shechem  favours  the  belief  that  there 
may  have  been  a grove  rather  than  a single 
tree.  Nothing  is  known  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  word  Moreh:  it  may  have  probably  been 
the  name  of  a man,  a prince  of  the  land,  or 
owmer  of  the  property. 

the  Canaanite  nuas  then  in  the  lancf  The 
original  settlement  of  the  sons  of  Canaan 
seems  to  have  been  in  the  South  near  the  Red 
Sea;  a Semitic  race  probably  occupied  the 
regions  of  Palestine  and  Phoenicia;  a colony 
of  the  Canaanites  afterwards  spreading  north- 
wards, partly  dispossessed  and  partly  mingled 
with  the  ancient  Shemite  inhabitants,  and 
adopted  their  language  (see  note  on  ch.  x.  6, 
see  also  Epiphan.  ‘ Hasres.’  Lxvi.  n.  84).  The 
historian  therefore  most  appropriately  relates 
that,  at  the  time  of  the  emigration  of  Abram 
and  his  followei'S,  the  Canaanite  was  already 
in  possession  of  the  land.  The  conjecture, 
therefore,  that  these  words  were  written  by 
a later  hand  than  that  of  Moses,  after  the 
ancient  Canaanite  inhabitants  had  been  ex- 
pelled, is  altogether  beside  the  mark. 

7,  And  the  Lord  appeared  unto  Abrani] 
This  is  the  first  mention  of  a distinct  appear- 
ance of  the  Lord  to  man.  His  voice  is  heard 
by  Adam,  and  He  is  said  to  have  spoken  to 
Noah  and  to  Abram:  but  here  is  a visible 
manifestation.  The  following  questions  na- 
turally arise,  i.  Was  this  a direct  vision 
of  JEHOVAEI  in  Bodily  shape?  2.  Was 
it  an  impression  produced  on  the  mind  of 
the  seer,  but  not  a true  vision  of  God? 

3.  Was  it  an  angel  personating  God? 

4.  Was  it  a manifestation  of  the  Son  of 

God,  a Theophania,  in  some  measure  anti-  ’ . 
cipating  the  Incarnation  ? (i)  The  first 

question  seems  answered  by  St  John  (Joh. 

i.  18),  “No  man  hath  seen  God  (the 
Father)  at  any  time.”  (2)  The  second  to 
a certain  extent  follows  the  first.  Whether 
there  was  a manifestation  of  an*  objective 
reality,  or  merely  an  impression  on  the 
senses,  we  cannot  possibly  judge ; but  the 
vision,  whether  seen  in  sleep  or  waking, 
cannot  have  been  a vision  of  God  the  Father. 

(3)  The  third  question  has  been  answered 
by  many  in  the  affirmative,  it  being  con- 
cluded that  “the  Angel  of  the  Lord,”  a 
created  Angel,  was  always  the  means  of  com- 
munication between  God  and  man  in  the  Old 
Testament.  The  great  supporter  of  this  opi- 
nion in  early  times  was  St  Augustine  (‘  De 
Trin.’  iii.  c.  xi.  Tom.  viii.  pp.  805 — 810), 
the  chief  arguments  in  its  favour  being  the 
statements  of  the  New  Testament  that  the 


102 


GENESIS.  XII. 


[v.  9-12. 


r Heb. 
in  going 
and  jour- 
neying. 


unto  a mountain  on  the  east  of  Beth- 
el, and  pitched  his  \.Qnt^  having  Bethel 
on  the  west,  and  Hai  on  the  east : 
and  there  he  budded  an  altar  unto  the 
Lord,  and  called  upon  the  name  of 
the  Lord. 

9 And  Abram  journeyed,  Agoing  on 
still  toward  the  south. 

10  ^ And  there  was  a famine  in 


the  land : and  Abram  went  down 
into  Egypt  to  sojourn  there;  for  the 
famine  was  grievous  in  the  land. 

11  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  he 
was  come  near  to  enter  into  Egypt, 
that  he  said  unto  Sarai  his  wife.  Be- 
hold now,  I know  that  thou  art  a fair 
woman  to  look  upon : 

12  Therefore  it  shall  come  to  pass. 


law  was  given  “ by  disposition  of  angels,” 
“ spoken  by  angels,”  &c.  (Acts  vii.  53  ; Gal. 
iii.  19;  fleb.  ii.  22).  It  is  further  argued  by 
the  supporters  of  this  view,  that  “the  angel 
of  the  Lord”  is  in  some  passages  in  the  Old 
Testament,  and  always  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, clearly  a created  angel  (e.g.  Zech.  i.  ii, 
12,  &c. ; Luke  i.  ii;  Acts  xii.  23);  and  that 
therefore  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  any  of 
these  manifestations  of  the  Angel  of  God  or 
Angel  of  the  Lord,  which  seem  so  markedly 
Divine,  should  have  been  anything  more  than 
the  appearance  of  a created  Angel  personating 
the  Most  High.  (4)  The  affirmative  of  the 
fourth  opinion  was  held  by  the  great  majority 
of  the  fathers  from  the  very  first  (see,  for  in- 
stance, Justin.  ‘Dial.’  pp.  280—284;  Tertull. 
‘ adv.  Prax.’  c.  16;  Athanas.  ‘ Cont.  Arian.’ 
IV.  pp.  464,  465  (Ed.  Col.);  Basil,  ‘adv. 
Eunom.’  ii.  18 ; Theodoret,  ‘ (^.  V.  in  Exod.’ 
The  teaching  of  the  fathers  on  this  head  is 
investigated  by  Bp.  Bull,  ‘ F.  N.  D.’  iv.  iii. 
In  like  manner  the  ancient  Jews  had  referred 
the  manifestation  of  God  in  visible  form  to  the 
Shcchhiah^  the  Metatron^  or  the  Memra  de 
Jah^  apparently  an  emanation  from  God,  hav- 
ing a semblance  of  diversity,  yet  really  one 
with  Him,  coming  forth  to  reveal  Him,  but 
not  truly  distinct  from  Him.  The  fact,  that 
the  name  Angel  of  the  Lord  is  sometimes  used 
of  a created  Angel,  is  not  proof  enough  that 
it  may  not  be  also  used  of  Him  who  is  called 
“the  Angel  of  mighty  counsel”  (fxeydXrjs 
fiov\r}s''2\yy€\os,  Is.  ix.  6,  Sept.  Trans.),  and 
“the  Angel  of  the  covenant”  (Mai.  iii.  i). 
and  the  apparent  identification  of  the  Angel 
of  God  with  God  Himself  in  very  many  pas- 
sages (e.g,  Gen.  xxxii.  24,  comp.  vv.  28,  30, 
Hos.  xii.  3,  4;  Gen.  xvi.  10,  13,  xlviii.  15,  16; 
Josh.v.  14,  vi.  2;  Judg.  ii.  i,  xiii.  22;  Isa.  vi.  i ; 
cp.  Joh.  xii.  41;  Is.  Ixiii.  9)  leads  markedly  to 
the  conclusion,  that  God  spake  to  man  by  an 
Angel  or  Messenger,  and  yet  that  that  Angel 
or  Messenger  was  Himself  God.  No  man  s;iw 
God  at  any  time,  but  the  only  begotten  Son, 
who  was  in  the  Bosom  of  the  Father,  declared 
Him.  He,  who  was  the  Word  of  God,  the 
Voice  of  God  to  His  creatures,  was  yet  in 
the  beginning  with  God,  and  He  was  God. 

Unto  thy  seed  (ivill  I gii'e  this  land:  and  there 
huildcd  he  an  altar']  This  is  the  first  definite 
promise  Uy  Abram,  that  the  land  of  Canaan 


should  be  the  inheritance  of  his  children.  Ac- 
cordingly, he  built  an  altar  there,  as  conse- 
crating the  soil  and  dedicating  it  to  God.  It 
is  not  mentioned  that  he  offered  sacrifice,  but 
as  the  ficbrew  word  for  altar  means  the  place 
of  slaughter  or  of  sacrifice^  there  can  be  no 
doubt,  that  it  was  an  altar  of  burnt  offering, 
which  he  built,  as  was  Noah’s  altar  (ch.  viii. 
20),  the  only  altar  spoken  of  prior  to  this 
time. 

8.  he  remo'ved]  lit.  he  plucked  up  his 
tent  pegs.  The  journeying  was  by  repeated 
encampments,  after  the  manner  of  the  Be- 
douins. 

Beth-eh]  i.  e.  the  House  of  God.  This  is 
by  anticipation.  It  was  called  Luz  at  this 
time  (see  ch.  xx.viii.  19;  Judg.  i.  23).  The 
present  name  is  Beitan. 

Hai]  was  about  five  miles  to  the  East  of 
Beth-el,  the  ruins  of  which  bear  the  name  of 
Medinet  Gai. 

called  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord.]  See  ch. 
iv.  26. 

9.  going  on  still  toward  the  south]  The 
words  express  a gradual  change  of  place, 
after  the  nomadic  fashion.  As  food  offered 
itself  he  pitched  his  tent  and  fed  his  cattle, 
and  when  food  failed  he  went  onwards  to 
fresh  pastures. 

10.  a famine]  A country  like  Canaan, 
imperfectly  cultivated,  would  be  very  subject 
to  droughts  and  famine.  The  part  of  Egypt, 
which  lay  immediately  South  of  Canaan,  ap- 
pears to  have  been  especially  fertile.  It  was 
at  that  time  inhabited  by  a people  skilled  in 
agriculture,  and  flooded  periodically  by  the 
Nile.  Egypt  is  still  the  refuge  for  neighbour- 
ing nations  when  afflicted  with  drought.  It 
is  said  that  Abram  went  down  to  Egypt  “to 
sojourn,”  not  to  live  there ; for  he  had  re- 
ceived the  promise  of  inheritance  in  Canaan, 
and,  though  this  famine  may  have  tried,  it  did 
not  shake  his  faith. 

11.  Behold... thou  art  a fair  woman]  Sarai 
was  now  more  than  sixty  years  old:  but 
her  life  extended  to  1 2 7 years,  so  that  she  was 
only  then  in  middle  life;  she  had  borne  no 
children,  and  at  the  age  of  ninety,  though  not 
naturally  young  enough  to  have  a son,  was 
yet  preserved  in  a condition  of  unusual  and- 


V.  13— 1 9-] 


GENESIS.  XII. 


103 


when  the  Egyptians  shall  see  thee, 
that  they  shall  say,  This  is  his  wife: 
and  they  will  kill  me,  but  they  will 
save  thee  alive. 

13  Say,  I pray  thee,  thou  art  my 
sister:  that  it  may  be  well  w’th  me 
for  thy  sake;  and  my  soul  shall  live 
because  of  thee. 

14  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  that, 
when  Abram  was  come  into  Egypt, 
the  Egyptians  beheld  the  woman  that 
she  was  very  fair. 

15  The  princes  also  of  Pharaoh 
saw  her,  and  commended  her  before 
Pharaoh:  and  the  woman  was  t'aken 
into  Pharaoh’s  house. 


16  And  he  entreated  Abram  well 
for  her  sake:. and  he  had  sheep,  and 
oxen,  and  he  asses,  and  menservants, 
and  maidservants,  and  she  asses,  and 
camels. 

17  And  the  Lord  plagued  Pharaoh 
and  his  house  with  great  plagues  be- 
cause of  Sarai  Abram’s  wife. 

18  And  Pharaoh  called  Abram, 
and  said,  What  is  this  that  thou  hast 
done  unto  me?  why  didst  thou  not 
tell  me  that  she  was  thy  wife  ? 

19  Why  saidst  thou.  She  is  my 
sister?  so  1 might  have  taken  her  to 
me  to  wife : now  therefore  behold 
thv  wife,  take  her^  and  go  thy  way. 


preternatural  youth,  so  that  she  bore  Isaac; 
her  fair  complexion  would  contrast  favourably 
with  the  swarthy  complexion  of  the  Egyptians. 
The  Arab  life  of  Abram  naturally  made  him 
wary  of  danger.  He  was  about  to  sojourn 
in  a country  with  a despotic  government, 
and  among  a licentious  people.  We  see  in 
the  conduct  of  Abram  an  instance  of  one 
under  the  influence  of  deep  religious  feeling 
and  true  faith  in  God,  but  yet  with  a con- 
science imperfectly  enlightened  as  to  many 
moral  duties,  and  when  leaning  to  his  own 
understanding  suffered  to  fall  into  great  error 
and  sin.  The  candour  of  the  historian  is 
shewn  by  his  exhibiting  in  such  strong  relief 
the  dissimulation  of  Abram  as  contrasted 
with  the  straightforward  integrity  of  Pharaoh. 

15.  Pharaohl  The  name  or  title,  by 
which  the  kings  of  Egypt  are  called  in  the 
Old  Testament.  Josephus  tells  us  that  “Pha- 
raoh among  the  Egyptians  signifies  kingP 
It  used  to  be  thought  that  it  was  the  Coptic 
word  Ouro  with  the  article  Pi  or  Ph.  ( Ja- 
blonski,  Diss.  iv.  section  3,  ‘ De  Terra  Gosen.’) 
Later  the  opinion  of  Rosellini,  Lepsius,  Raw- 
linson,  Poole  and  others  has  been  that  it  cor- 
responded with  the  title  of  the  Sun- God 
RA,  with  the  article,  PH — RA,  a name  which 
was  given  to  some  of  the  kings  of  Egypt. 
Gesenius  objects  to  this  from  its  lacking  the 
final  o/6(‘Thes,’  p.  1129);  and  there  is  insuffi- 
cient evidence  that  the  title  was  really  a 
common  title  of  the  kings.  Very  recently  M. 
De  Rouge  has  shewn  that  the  hieroglyphic, 
which  is  the  regular  title  of  the  Egyptian 
kings,  and  which  signifies  “the  great  house” 
or  “the  double  house,”  must  be  read  Peraa 
or  Perao.  This  singularly  corresponds  with 
the  statement  of  Horapollo  (i,  61),  that  the 
king  was  called  oIkos  ju-eyas,  “the  great  house.” 
The  identity  of  this  with  the  name  Pharaoh 
is  admitted  by  Brugsch,  Ebers  (‘^gypten, 
&c.’  p.  26),  and  is  argued  at  length  in  the 


“Excursus  on  Egyptian  Words”  (by  the  Rev. 
F.  C.  Cook)  at  the  end  of  this  volume.  It 
may  be  compared  with  the  title  “Sublime 
Porte.” 

It  is  difficult  to  fix  the  particular  Pharaoh 
or  dynasty  under  which  Abram  came  into 
Egypt.  Generally  the  characteristics  of  the 
Court,  as  briefly  described  in  Genesis,  point 
to  a native  dynasty  of  very  remote  date.  Some 
circumstances,  the  friendly  reception  of  a 
Semitic  npmade  and  the  use  of  camels  (v.  16) 
among  the  Egyptians,  have  suggested  the 
belief  that  Abram’s  Pharaoh  must  have 
been  a shepherd  king  (see  Smith’s  Diet,  of  the 
Bible,  Artt.  Pharaoh  and  Zoan)\  and  Sir 
Gardiner  Wilkinson  (‘  Ancient  Egyptians,’ 
Vol.  I.  chap.  ii.  p.  42)  has  identified  him  with 
Apophis  or  Apepi,  the  sixth  monarch  of 
Manetho’s  15th  dynasty.  It  is,  however, 
impossible  to  admit  so  late  a date.  The 
Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was  almost  certainly  a 
king  of  the  12th  dynasty.  Abram’s  Pha- 
raoh must  therefore  at  latest  have  been  one  of 
the  first  kings  of  that  same  dynasty,  if  not 
belonging  to  a dynasty  earlier  still.  The  ob- 
jections, derived  from  the  camels,  and  other 
apparent  indications  of  a shepherd  reign,  are 
fully  considered  in  Excursus  i.  “On  the 
Bearings  of  Egyptian  History  on  the  Penta- 
teuch,” at  the  end  of  this  volume,  by  Rev.  F. 
C.  Cook:  and  the  period  of  Abram’s  sojourn 
in  Egypt  is  shewn  to  be  most  probably  under 
one  of  the  earlier  sovereigns  of  the  12th 
dynasty. 

the  <rdooman  <ivas  taken  into  Pharaoh's  house'\ 
Probably  even  at  that  early  period  Egypt  had 
reached  such  a pitch  of  corrupt  civilization 
that  the  sovereign  had  a hareem,  and  Sarai 
was  chosen  to  be  one  of  his  wives. 

18.  Pharaoh  called  Abram]  J osephus  says, 
that  the  priests  told  Pharaoh  for  what  cause 
that  plague  had  fallen  on  him  (‘  Ant.’  i.  8). 
It  is  more  likely  that  Sarai  herself,  being 


104 


GENESIS.  XIL  XIII 


[v.  20 7. 


20  And  Pharaoh  commanded  his 
men  concerning  him : ^nd  they  sent 
him  away,  and  his  wife,  and  all  that 
he  had. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

I Abrai}i  and  Lot  return  out  of  Egypt.  7 By 
disagreement  they  part  asunder.  10  Lot  goeth 
to  wicked  Sodom,  14  God  re7teweth  the  pro- 
mise to  Abram.  18  He  removeth  to  Hebron., 
and  tJm-e  buildeth  an  altar. 


AND  Abram  went  up  out  of  E- 
±\_  gypt,  he,  and  his  wife,  and  all 
that  he  had,  and  Lot  with  him,  into 
the  south. 

2 And  Abram  was  very  rich  in 
cattle,  in  silver,  and  in  gold. 

3 And  he  went  on  his  journeys 
from  the  south  even  to  Beth-el,  unto 


the  place  where  his  tent  had  been  at 
the  beginning,  between  Beth-el  and 


Hai; 


4 Unto  the  **  place  of  the  altar,  « chap.  12 
which  he  had  made  there  at  the  first : 

and  there  Abram  called  on  the  name 
of  the  Lord. 

5 ^ And  Lot  also,  which  went 
with  Abram,  had  flocks,  and  herds, 
and  tents. 

6 And  the  land  was  not  able  to 
bear  them,  that  they  might  dwell  to- 
gether : for  their  substance  was  great, 
so  that  they  could  not  dwell  toge- 
ther. . 


7 And  there  was  a strife  between 
the  herdmen  of  Abram’s  cattle  and 
the  herdmen  of  Lot’s  cattle:  and  the 


interrogated  about  it,  confessed  the  truth 
(Patrick), 

19,  so  I might  have  taken  her'\  Heb,  So 
I took  her,  LXX,  Syr,  Onk,  Though  the 
Vulgate  followed  by  the  Arabic  has,  “so  that 
I might  have  taken  her,”  The  meaning  is. 
Deceived  by  Abram’s  words.  Pharaoh  took 
her  with  the  intention  of  making  her  his  wife, 
but  was  hindered  from  doing  so  by  the  afflic- 
tions with  which  God  visited  him  (see  Theo- 
doret,  ‘Qu.  LXXII,  in  Gen,’  Op,  xii,  Au- 
gustin, ‘De  Civit,  Dei,’  xvi,  18),  St  Jerome 
(‘Trad,  Heb,  in  Genes,’)  refers  to  Esth,  ii,  12, 
where  we  learn  that  the  custom  of  Eastern 
monarchs  was,  that  a maiden  should  undergo 
twelvemonths  of  purification  before  she  was 
actually  taken  to  wife.  It  was,  he  thinks, 
during  some  such  period  that  Pharaoh  was 
plagued  and  prohibited  from  marrying  Sarai, 
It  deserves  to  be  noticed,  that  throughout  the 
history  of  the  chosen  race,  Egypt  was  to  them 
the  scene  of  spiritual  danger,  of  covetousness 
and  love  of  riches,  of  worldly  security,  of 
temptation  to  rest  on  an  arm  of  fiesh,  on 
man’s  own  understanding,  arid  not  on  God 
only.  All  this  appears  from  the  very  first,  in 
Abraham’s  sojourn  there,  Sarai's  danger,  their 
departure  full  of  wealth  and  prosperity. 

Chap.  XIII.  1.  and  Lot  voith  him~\ 
Lot  is  not  mentioned  in  the  descent  into 
Egypt,  because  no  part  of  the  narrative  there 
concerns  him.  On  the  return  to  Canaan  he 
becomes  a principal  actor. 

into  the  south']  That  southern  part  of  Ca- 
naan, whence  he  had  gone  down  into  Egypt, 
The  south,  or  Negeb,  is  almost  a proper  name. 

2,  very  rich]  He  had  grown  rich  in 
Egypt.  He  has  now  to  experience  some  of 
the  dangers  and  evils  of  prosperity. 


3.  on  his  journeys]  By  his  stations,  or 
according  to  his  encampments,  i.e.  either  sta- 
tion by  station,  as  before,  pitching  his  tent  for 
a time  at  one  station  and  then  removing  it  to 
another;  or  perhaps,  returning  by  his  former 
stations,  according  to  his  original  encamp- 
ments when  he  was  journeying  southwards. 

unto  the  place  vohere  his  tent  had  been  at  the 
beginning]  Shechem  was  the  first  place  at 
which  he  rested  and  built  an  altar;  but  he 
probably  remained  there  a comparatively  short 
time.  The  Canaanites  then  in  the  land  (ch. 
xii.  6)  would  doubtless  have  occupied  all  the 
most  fertile  country  about  Shechem.  His 
second  place  of  sojourn  was  the  mountain 
near  Bethel,  where  he  is  said  to  have  built  an 
altar  and  called  on  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and 
where  very  probably  he  had  continued  until 
the  famine  began  to  prevail.  (See  ch.  xii.  vv. 
7,  8,  9,  10.) 

6.  the  land  vuas  not  able  to  bear  them] 
Lot  was  the  sharer  of  Abram’s  prosperity. 
They  came  up  out  of  Egypt  with  much  larger 
possessions  than  before,  more  “flocks  and  herds 
and  tents”  for  their  now  more  numerous  re- 
tainers. The  land  too  had  but  just  recovered 
from  a state  of  drought  and  dearth:  “and  the 
Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite  dwelt  then  in  the 
land”  (v.  7),  and  probably  by  their  occupa- 
tion contributed  to  the  scarcity  of  pasture. 

7.  Perizzite]  But  little  is  known  of 
this  people.  They  are  not  mentioned  in  the 
catalogue  of  nations  in  Gen.  x.  They  are 
mostly  coupled,  as  here,  with  the  Canaanites. 
They  appear  from  Josh.  xi.  3,  xvii.  15,  to  have 
dwelt  in  the  woods  and  mountains.  Bochart 
describes  them  (‘Phaleg,’  iv.  36)  as  a rustic, 
agrarian  race,  living  without  cities  and  in 
villages  only,  the  name  itself  signifying  pagani^ 
villagers,  rustics. 


V.  8—15.] 


GENESIS.  XIII. 


t Heb. 
men  bre- 
thren. 


105 


Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite  dwelled 
then  in  the  land. 

8 And  Abram  said  unto  Lot, 
Let  there  be  no  strife,  I pray  thee, 
between  me  and  thee,  and  between 
my  herdmen  and  thy  herdmen;  for 
we  be  ^brethren. 

9 Is  not  the  whole  land  before 
thee  ? separate  thyself,  I pray  thee, 
from  me  ; if  thou  wilt  take  the  left 
hand,  then  I will  go  to  the  right ; or 
if  thou  depart  to  the  right  hand,  then 
I will  go  to  the  left. 

10  And  Lot  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and 
beheld  all  the  plain  of  Jordan,  that  it 
was  well  watered  every  where,  before 
the  Lord  destroyed  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah, even  as  the  garden  of  the 
Lord,  like  the  land  of  Egypt,  as  thou 
comest  unto  Zoar. 


11  Then  Lot  chose  him  all  the 
plain  of  Jordan;  and  Lot  journeyed 
east : and  they  separated  themselves 
the  one  from  the  other. 

12  Abram  dwelled  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,  and  Lot  dwelled  in  the  cities 
of  the  plain,  and  pitched  his  tent  to- 
ward. Sodom. 

13  But  the  men  of  Sodom  were 
wicked  and  sinners  before  the  Lord 
exceedingly. 

14  And  the  Lord  said  unto  A- 
bram,  after  that  Lot  was  separated 
from  him,  Lift  up  now  thine  eyes, 
and  look  from  the  place  where  thou 
art  northvv^ard,  and  southward,  and 
eastward,  and  westward : 

15  For  all  the  land  which  thou 

seest,  ^to  thee  will  I give  it,  and  to  & 26.4. 
thy  seed  ror  ever.  4- 


d-ivellcd  then  in  the  land]  See  on  xii.  6. 

8,  Let  there  be  no  strife]  A noble  ex- 
ample of  disinterestedness  and  love  of  peace 
exhibited  by  the  father  of  the  faithful 

10.  Lot  lifted  up  his  ejes]  They  were 
probably  encamped  on  that  mountain  on  the 
east  of  Bethel,  having  Bethel  on  the  west  and 
Hai  on  the  east,  where  Abram  had  built 
the  altar  and  called  on  the  name  of  the  Lord 
(ch,  xii.  8).  The  very  spot  can  be  traced 
from  the  indications  of  the  sacred  text  (Stan- 
ley’s ‘ Jewish  Church,’  Vol.  i.  p.  3a).  From 
this  spot  Lot  and  Abram  chose  their  re- 
spective possessions.  Lot  saw  the  plains  of 
Jordan,  watered  by  fertilizing  rivers,  not  yet 
broken  up  by  the  overflowing  or  outbursting 
of  the  great  salt  lake,  very  probably  irrigated 
like  the  land  of  Egypt  which  he  had  lately 
left,  where  the  Nile  refreshed  the  soil,  and  the 
plague  of  famine  never  came.  Taking  no 
warning  by  the  dangers,  bodily  and  spiritual, 
which  had  beset  them  in  Egypt,  he  feared  not 
the  proximity  of  the  wealthy  and  luxurious 
.nhabitants  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  but 
thought  their  land  pleasant  even  as  the  garden 
of  the  Lord.  He  chose  the  rich  pastures  of 
the  plain,  and  left  Abram  the  less  promis- 
ing, but,  as  it  proved,  the  safer  inheritance  of 
the  hill  country  of  Judaea.  It  was  a selfish 
choice,  and  it  proved  a sad  one. 

as  thou  comest  unto  Zoar]  See  on  ch  xiv.  3. 

12,  land  of  Canaan]  That  is,  Canaan 
strictly  so  called. 

the  plain]  Lit.  “the  circuit  or  neighbour- 
hood,” the  country  round  about  Jordan.  So 
the  LXX.  (Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  717.  Stanley, 
‘Sinai  and  Palestine,’  p.  287.)  The  low  tract 


or  plain  along  the  river — through  which  it 
flows,  perhaps  as  comprehensive  as  the  Ghor 
itself.  (Robinson,  ‘ Phys.  Geog.’  p.  73.) 

13.  sinners  before  the  Lord]  Sodom, 
Gomorrah,  Admah  and  Zeboim  are  men- 
tioned, Gen.  X.  19,  as  among  the  first  settle- 
ments of  the  Canaanites.  The  fertility  of  the 
soil  in  this  Valley  of  the  Jordan,  with  the 
luxurious  and  enervating  character  of  the 
climate,  rapidly  developed  the  sensual  vices 
of  this  early  civilized  but  depraved  race.  Their 
wickedness  is  mentioned  here  perhaps  in  anti- 
cipation of  the  history  in  ch.  xix.,  but  partly 
also  in  order  to  exhibit  more  clearly  the 
thoughtlessness  and  worldliness  of  Lot  in 
choosing  their  neighbourhood  for  his  resi- 
dence, as  distinguished  from  the  humility  and 
unselfish  spirit  of  Abram. 

14.  Lift  up  now  thine  eyes,  &c.]  He  was 
probably  still  on  the  hill  east  of  Bethel.  Here 
once  again,  on  his  return  from  Egypt  to  the 
land  of  his  inheritance,  God  renews  his  pro- 
mise to  Abram.  The  world,  with  its  dan- 
gers and  its  honours,  may  have  tempted 
Abram,  but  it  had  not  corrupted  him.  He 
came  back  from  Egypt  with  larger  knowledge, 
probably  all  the  more  armed  against  sin  by 
having  had  some  experience  of  its  seductions. 
He  is  still  the  chosen  of  God ; and  he  is  com- 
forted under  separation  from  his  kinsman,  and 
the  discovery  of  that  kinsman’s  lower  motives 
and  less  disinterestedness,  by  the  assurance 
that  God  was  still  ever  with  him  and  pledged 
to  preseiwe  and  provide  for  him. 

15.  to  thee]  The  land  even  in  present 
possession  was  his,  so  far  as  was  needed  by 
him  as  a nomade  chief,  though  its  permanent 
occupation  was  to  him  and  his  seed  after  him. 


io6 


GENESIS.  XIII.  XIV. 


[v.  1 6 2. 


t Heb. 
plains. 


1 6 And  I will  make  thy  seed  as 
the  dust  of  the  earth  : so  that  if  a man 
can  number  the  dust  of  the  earth,  then 
shall  thy  seed  also  be  numbered. 

17  Arise,  walk  through  the  land  in 
the  length  of  it  and  in  the  breadth 
of  it ; for  I will  give  it  unto  thee. 

18  Then  Abram  removed  /?/j.tent, 
and  came  and  dwelt  in  the  ^ plain 
of  Mamre,  which  is  in  Hebron,  and 
built  there  an  altar  unto  the  Lord. 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

\ The  battle  of  four  kings  agamst  five.  12  Lot 
is  taken  prisoner.  14  Abraffi  rescueth  him. 


18  Melchizedek  blesseth  Abram.  20  Abram 
giveth  him  tithe.  22  The  rest  of  the  spoil y his 
partners  having  had  their  portions,  he  re~ 
storeth  to  the  king  of  Sodo7n. 

AND  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days 
of  Amraphel  king  of  Shinar, 
Arioch  king  of  Ellasar,  Chedorlao- 
mer  king  of  Elam,  and  Tidal  king 
of  nations; 

2 That  these  made  war  v/ith  Bera 
king  of  Sodom,  and  with  Birsha  king 
of  Gomorrah,  Shinab  king  of  Ad- 
mah,  and  Shemeber  king  of  Zeboiim, 
and  the  king  of  Bela,  which  is 
Zoar. 


for  e'ver']  i.  e.  in  perpetuity.  But,  when  we 
consider  that  the  promises  to  Abram  have 
their  full  completion  in  Christ,  to  whom  are 
given  “the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  a 
possession,”  there  need  be  no  limit  to  the  sense 
of  the  words  “ for  ever.” 

18.  the  plain  of  Mamre']  The  Oaks  (or 
‘ terebinths)  of  Mamre,  see  on  ch.  xii.  6.  Pro- 
bably it  means  “the  oak  grove”  or  “wood 
of  Mamre,”  called  after  Mamre  the  Amorite, 
the  friend  and  ally  of  Abram  (ch. xrv.  13, 24). 

Hebron]  Called  Arba  or  Kirjath-arba  (see 
ch.  xxiii.  2,  XXXV.  4.  Judg.  i.  10)  till  after  the 
death  of  Moses,  when  Caleb  took  the  city 
and  changed  its  name  to  Hebron.  It  has  been 
thought  therefore  that  the  words  here  “which 
• is  Hebron,”  must  have  been  inserted  by  a 
later  hand  than  that  of  Moses.  It  is  more 
probable  that  Hebron  was  the  original  name, 
changed  to  Kirjath-arba  during  the  sojourn 
of  the  descendants  of  Jacob  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  restored  by  Caleb  at  the  conquest 
of  Palestine.  So  Karme  (cited  by  Rosen- 
muller),  Hengstenberg,  Keil,  &c.;  see  also  on 
ch.  xxiii.  2.  This  was  the  third  resting  place 
of  Abram  : i.  Shechem,  2.  Bethel,  3.  He- 
bron. Near  it  was  the  cave  of  Machpelah, 
where  he  and  Sarah  were  buried.  It  is  now 
called  El  Khalil,  “ the  friend,”  i.e.  the  house 
of  the  friend  of  God.  Near  to  it  stands  an 
ancient  Terebinth,  once  a place  of  heathen 
worship  (Delitzsch).  The  cave  of  Machpe- 
lah still  is  there,  surrounded  by  a mosque,  in 
which  lie  probably  the  dust  of  Abraham  and 
Isaac,  and  perhaps  the  embalmed  body,  the 
mummy,  of  Jacob,  brought  up  in  solemn 
state  from  Egypt,  ch.  1.  13  (Stanley,  ‘Sinai 
and  Palestine,’  p.  102). 

Chap.  XIV.  1.  And  it  came  to  pass]  We 
come  now  upon  a new  scene  in  the  life 
of  Abram.  The  choice  of  Lot  was  soon 
seen  not  to  be  a wise  choice,  even  for  earthly 
happiness.  The  rich  plains  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah  were  likely  to  be  scenes  of  strife. 


as  in  early  times  was  the  case  with  all  fertile 
countries  (Thucyd.  i.  2).  The  history  of  this 
war  is  a remarkable  episode,  and  is  thought 
by  many  to  be  a very  ancient  document  in- 
corporated by  Moses  in  his  great  work.  So 
Tuch,  Ewald,  Kurtz,  &c.  who  all  bear  tes- 
timony to  its  internal  proofs  of  historical  ac- 
curacy. The  occurrence  of  the  name  JEHO- 
VAH in  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  theory, 
which  assigns  the  use  of  that  name  only  to 
the  later  portions  of  the  book  of  Genesis. 

in  the  days  of  Amraphel  king  of  Shinar] 
The  king  of  Shinar,  {Babel,  Onkel.,  Bagdad, 
Arab.  Erpen.,  Pontus,  Jonathan,)  as  being  the 
representative  of  Nimrod,  founder  of  the 
great  Babylonian  Empire,  is  mentioned  first. 
The  name  Amraphel  is  probably  Assyrian,  its 
derivation  unknown. 

Arioch]  If,  as  it  is  supposed,  the  root  of 
this  word  be  ari,  a lion,  the  bearer  of  it  would 
appear  to  have  been  Semitic. 

Ellasar]  Jonathan  Telassar  (see  2 K.  xix. 
12;  Isa.  xxxvii.  12),  a place  not  far  off.  It  is 
more  probably  identified  with  Larsa  or  La- 
rancha,  the  Larissa  of  the  Greeks,  a town  in 
Lower  Babylonia,  or  Chaldaea,  between  Ur 
and  Erech,  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Euphrates 
(Rawlinson,  Kalisch,  &c.). 

Chedorlaomer  king  of  Elam]  It  seems 
from  the  narrative  that  at  this  time  the  king 
of  Elam  was  the  most  powerful  of  the  Asiatic 
princes  (Le  Cle.rc).  The  Elamites  appear  to 
have  been  originally  a Semitic  people  (ch.  x. 
22J.  If  then  they  had  now  gained  a superi- 
ority over  the  Hamitic  races,  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  the  Canaanites  of  the  plain  of  Jor- 
dan, having  been  originally  subject  to  the 
kings  of  Shinar,  or  Babylon,  bore  unwillingly 
the  transference  of  their  fealty  to  the  Shemite 
king  of  Elam,  and  took  the  first  opportunity 
of  throwing  off  their  allegiance,  whereupon 
the  king  of  Elam,  now  the  head  of  the  four 
kingdoms  named  in  this  verse,  gathered  his 
subjects  or  tributary  allies,  and  strove  to  re- 
duce the  Canaanites  again  to  subjection.  Re- 


V.  3—5-] 


GENESIS.  XIV. 


107 


3 All  these  were  joined  together 
in  the  vale  of  Siddim,  which  is  the 
salt  sea. 

4 Twelve  years  they  served  Che- 
dorlaomer,  and  in  the  thirteenth  year 
they  rebelled. 


5  And  in  the  fourteenth  year  came 
Chedorlaomer,  and  the  kings  that 
with  him,  and  smote  the  Re- 
phaims  in  Ashteroth  Karnaim,  andnQ^.^^^ 
the  Zuzims  in  Ham,  and  the  Emims/{"4^ 
in  I’Shaveh  Kiriathaim,  thaim. 


cent  discoveries  shew  that  Susa  (the  capital 
of  Elymais)  must  have  been  one  of  the  most 
ancient  cities  of  the  East.  Sir  Henry  Rawlin- 
son  thought  he  discovered  a name  corespond- 
ing with  Chedorlaomer  on  Chaldsean  bricks, 
viz.  Kadur-Mapula,  the  second  portion  of  the 
word  being  of  course  distinct.  Another  title 
by  which  Kadur-Mapula  was  known  was 
“ Ravager  of  the  West,”  which  corresponds 
with  the  account  here  given  of  Chedorlaomer. 
Rawlinson  and  others  consider  the  dynasty 
of  Chedorlaomer  not  to  have  been  Semitic, 
but  belonging  to  a race  of  Hamites,  who  had 
subdued  the  original  Elymasans. 

Tidal  king  of  nations']  Symmachus  renders 
“ King  of  the  Scythians,”  which  is  approved 
by  some  commentators,  because  Scythia  was 
inhabited  by  many  different  tribes  (Fuller, 

‘ Miscell.  SS.’  Lib.  ii.  c.  4,  quoted  by  Rosenm.). 
Le  Clerc,  followed  by  Rosenmliller,  prefers 
Galilee,  called  “ Galilee  of  the  Gentiles”  or 
“nations”  (Is.  ix.  i;  Matt.  iv.  15.  See 
also  Strabo,  Lib.  xvi.  § 34,  who  says  that 
these  northern  parts  of  Judaea  were  inhabited 
by  various  mixed  tribes,  Egyptians,  Arabs, 
Phoenicians).  But  all  this  was  probably  later 
in  history,  and  the  name  Galilee  of  the  na- 
tions was  given  to  Galilee,  because  it  was  still 
inhabited  by  other  tribes,  whilst  Judxa  was 
inhabited  by  none  but  Israelites  (Gesenius, 
‘Thes.’  p.  272).  We  may  most  probably 
conjecture  that  Tidal  was  owned  as  the  chief 
of  several  nomade  tribes,  who,  like  Abram, 
had  no  stationary  home.  For  Tidal,  the  LXX, 
has  Thargal^  which  is  preferred  by  some,  as 
having  the  meaning  of  “ Great  chief”  in  the 
early  Hamitic  dialect  of  the  lower  Tigris  and 
Euphrates  country  (Rawlinson,  in  Smith’s 
‘ Diet,  of  Bible’). 

3.  vale  of  Siddim]  The  meaning  of 
this  name  has  been  a great  puzzle  to  inter- 
preters. The  LXX.  render  it  “the  salt  val- 
ley.” Onkelos  evidently  refers  the  derivation 
to  Sadeb,  a plain  (as  though  onb  was  plural 
of  nib).*  So  Aquila  and  Rashi.  They 
are  followed  by  Stanley  (‘  Sinai  and  Palestine,’ 
p.  .491).  Aben  Ezra  derives  it  from  Sid 
(T'b),  lime,  because  of  the  abundance  of 
bitumen,  which  was  used  as  lime  (see  ch.  xi. 
3).  Gesenius  suggests  an  Arabic  root  signi- 
fying an  obstacle,  and  so  concludes  that  the 
valley  of  Siddim  was  a plain  full  of  rocky 
valleys  and  irregularities.  In  v.  10  it  is  said 
to  be  full  of  bitumen  pits,  which  was  perhaps 


the  reason  why  the  five  kings  chose  it  for  the 
field  of  battle,  as  being  more  favourable  to 
the  weaker  party. 

vohich  is  the  salt  sed]  The  extreme  de- 
pression of  the  Dead  Sea,  1316  feet  (Robinson, 
‘Phys.  Geog.’  p.  190),  and  other  geological 
phenomena,  are  thought  to  favour  the  belief, 
that  there  must  have  been  originally  some 
lake  at  the  extremity  of  the  valley  of  the  Jor- 
dan; but  perhaps  after  the  destruction  of 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah  the  lake  greatly  ex- 
tended itself,  so  as  to  cover  much  which  be- 
fore may  have  been  low  valley  land.  The 
vale  of  Siddim  is  generally  thought  to  have 
been  at  the  southern  extremity  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  where  are  now  to  be  seen  the  principal 
deposits  of  salt  and  bitumen,  the  site  being 
occupied  by  the  shallow  southern  portion  of 
that  sea  (see  Robinson,  ‘ Physical  Geography 
of  the  Holy  Land,’  pp.  73,  213). 

4.  Twelve  years,  &c.]  See  on  v.  i. 

5.  Rephaims]  The  LXX.  renders  “ Gi- 
ants,” so  virtually  do  Onk.  and  Syr.  It  is, 
no  doubt,  the  name  of  an  ancient  people; 
very  probably  a tribe  resident  in  the  Holy 
Land  before  the  immigration  of  the  Canaan- 
ites.  They  appear  to  have  been  a people  of 
large  stature.  Og,  the  king  of  Bashan,  at  the 
time  of  the  Exodus,  is  mentioned  as  the  last 
remaining  of  their  race  (Deut.  iii.  ii).  Their 
habitation  was  to  the  north-east  of  the  valley 
of  the  Jordan,  the  country  afterwards  called 
Peraea.  They  must  also  have  extended  to  the 
south-west ; for  the  valley  of  Rephaim,  named 
after  them,  appears  to  have  been  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  valley  of  Hinnom  and  Beth- 
lehem, to  the  south  of  Jerusalem  (see  Josh. 
XV.  8,  xviii.  16;  2 S.  v.  18,  22,  xxiii.  13). 
The  name  “ Rephaim,”  in  later  times,  is  con- 
stantly used  for  “ the  dead,”  or  rather  for  the 
“ghosts  or  manes  of  the  dead”  (Job  xxvi.  5; 
Ps.  Ixxxviii.  II ; Prov.  ii.  18;  Is.  xiv.  9,  xxvi. 
14).  Whether  there  is  a connection  between 
the  name  of  this  ancient  and  afterwards 
extinct  people,  and  this  word  thus  used  for 
“ the  dead,!’  is  very  doubtful  (Gesen.  ‘ Thes.’ 
p.  1302). 

Ashteroth  Karnaim]  “ Ashteroth  of  the 
two  horns.”  It  is  most  probable  that  this 
was  the  same  as  the  Ashtaroth,  where  Og  the 
king  of  Bashan  dwelt  (Deut.  i.  4 ; Josh.  ix. 
10),  in  the  east  of  the  inheritance  of  the  tribe 
of  Manasseh;  and  that  it  was  named  from  the 
worship  of  Astarte  (Ashtoreth),  whose  image 


io8 


GENESIS.  XIV. 


[v.  6,  7. 


6 And  the  Horites  in  their  mount 
Seir,  unto  'lEl-paran,  which  is  by  the 

the  plain  r ? 

o/Parrjn.  wiidemess. 

7 And  they  returned,  and  came  to 


En-mishpat,  which  is  Kadesh,  and 
smote  all  the  country  of  the  Ama- 
lekites,  and  also  the  Amorites,  that 
dwelt  in  Hazezon-tamar. 


was  such  as  to  suggest  the  idea  of  a horned 
figure  (see  Gesen.  ‘Thes.’  p.  io8a).  In  like 
manner  Athor  (the  Egyptian  Venus,  as  As- 
tarte  was  the  Phoenician)  was  depicted  with 
horns  like  a cow  (see  Rawlinson’s  ‘ Herod.’ 
Vol.  II.  pp.  61,  6z).  Some,  however,  think 
the  two  horns  tc  refer  to  two  hills,  between 
which  the  city  lay,  and  the  name  “horned” 
was  intended  to  distinguish  this  town  from 
the  city  commonly  called  Ashtaroth  only  (see 
Rosenm.  in  loc.  and  Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of  Bible,’ 
s.  V.  Ashtaroth). 

Zuzims~\  Little  is  known  concerning  the 
name  or  place  of  this  people.  The  LXX.  and 
Onk.  render  “the  strong  or  mighty  ones.” 
Le  Clerc  thinks  the  name  means  “ wanderer,” 
from  the  root  Zuz  T-1T,  “to  move  oneself.” 
Michaelis  understands  “dwarfs.”  Both  deri- 
vations are  rejected  by  Gesen.  (‘  Thes.’  p.  410). 
They  are  very  generally  thought  to  be  the 
same  with  the  Zamzummims  (Deut.  ii.  20), 
who  are  spoken  of  as  a race  of  great  stature, 
and  connected  with  the  Horim,  as  are  the 
Zuzims  here. 

in  Ham']  If  the  Zuzim  be  the  same  as  the 
Zamzummim,  they  must  have  dwelt  in  the 
territory  of  the  Ammonites,  and  Tuch,  fol- 
lowed by  Knobel,  considers  that  Ham  here  is 
the  same  as  Rabbath-Ammon.  There  is  an- 
other reading  in  seven  Samaritan  MSS.  fol- 
lowed by  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  viz.  (QD? 
avTOLs,  cum  illis)  “ with  them;”  but  the  point- 
ing of  the  Masorites  seems  more  likely  to  be 
the  true. 

the  Emims]  The  name  is  supposed  to  be 
the  Hebrew  for  “terrible  ones.”  The  Rev. 
F.  C.  Cook  identifies  the  name  with  Amu, 
the  Egyptian  word  for  nomad  Semites.  In 
Deut.  ii.  10,  II,  where  they  are  mentioned  in 
the  same  connection  as  here,  they  are  spoken 
of  as  “ a people  great  and  many  and  tall.” 
They  dwelt  in  the  country  afterwards  occu- 
pied by  the  Moabites. 

Sha'veh  Kiriathaim]  or  “ the  plain  of  Kiria- 
thaim,”  or  “the  plain  of  the  two  cities.”  Kiri- 
athaim is  mentioned,  Num.  xxxii.  37,  Josh, 
xiii.  19,  as  in  the  possession  of  the  sons  of 
Reuben.  Eusebius  says  it  was  well  known  in 
his  day,  a village  inhabited  by  Christians, 
close  to  the  Baris,  about  10  miles  west  of 
Medeba  (‘Onom.’  Kipiadidfx). 

6.  the  Horites  in  their  mount  Seir]  The 
name  “ Horites”  means  “inhabitants  of  caves.” 
These  people  dwelt  in  the  mountain  region 
called  Seir  (lit.  “the  hirsute,”  probably  from 
its  thick  forests  and  brushwood),  extending 


from  the  Dead  Sea  southward  to  the  Elamitic 
Gulf.  Mount  Seir  is  called  in  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  and  the  Jerusalem  Targum  “Ga-  * 
bla,”  and  the  northern  part  of  the  range  is 
still  called  “ Jebal,”  or  “ the  mountain,”  by 
the  Arabs.  The  wonderful  excavations  in  the 
rocks  near  Petra  may  very  possibly  be  due  to 
these  “ Horim,”  or  cave-dwellers.  They  were 
driven  out  by  the  Edomites  (Deut.  ii.  12), 
who  also  after  the  manner  of  their  predeces- 
sors “ made  their  nest  high  like  the  eagle.” 

El-paran]  i.e.  “the  oak  or  terebinth  wood 
of  Paran.”  The  great  wilderness,  extending 
to  the  south  of  Palestine,  the  south-west  of 
Idumgea,  and  thence  to  the  Sinaitic  range, 
appears  to  have  been  called  the  wilderness  of 
Paran.  It  probably  lay  to  the  west  of  the 
wilderness  of  Sin,  but  at  times  is  to  be  taken 
in  a wider  sense,  as  comprehending  the  desert 
of  Sin  (see  Gesen.  ‘Thes.’  pp.  47,  1090).  El- 
paran  is  here  said  to  be  by  the  wilderness,  /.  e. 
on  the  eastern  side  of  the  great  desert,  mark- 
ing the  farthest  point  to  which  the  expedition 
of  Chedorlaomer  reached.  The  wilderness  of 
Paran  is  identified  with  the  modern  desert  of 
El-Tih,  the  wilderness  of  Zin  or  Sin  being  the 
Wady-el- A rabah  (Stanley,  ‘ Sinai  and  Pales- 
tine,’ p.  92). 

7.  to  En-mishpat.,  <which  is  Kadesh]  The 
LXX.  renders  “ to  the  well  of  judgment,” 
the  Vulg.  “to  the  well  of  Mishpat.”  Some 
suppose  it  to  have  derived  its  name  from 
the  judgment  pronounced  on  Moses  and  Aaron 
(Num.  XX.  12),  and  that  the  name  is  here 
given  proleptically ; but  it  is  evidently  here 
given  as  the  ancient  name  to  which  the  more 
modern  Kadesh  corresponded.  Syr.,  Onk., 
Jerus.  render  Kadesh  by  Rekam.  Josephus 
calls  it  Arekem,  which  he  says  now  bears  the 
name  of  Petra  (‘  A.  J.’  iv.  4).  This  identity 
of  Kadesh  with  Petra  is  ably  defended  by 
Dean  Stanley  (‘S.  and  P.’  pp.  94,  95).  An- 
other site  for  the  ancient  Kades,  or  Ain-Mish- 
pat,  is  vindicated  for  Kudes  or  Kades,  lying 
to  the  east  of  the  highest  part  of  Djebel- 
Halal,  about  12  miles  to  the  E.S.E.  of  Mor- 
lakhi  (see  Williams,  ‘Holy  City,’  Vol.  i.  p. 
467  ; Kalisch,  Delitzsch,  Keil,  in  loc.)  Strong 
objections  to  both  these  sites  are  urged  in  the 
art.  Kades  in  Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of  the  Bible.’ 

Ainalekites]  See  note  on  ch.  xxxvi.  1 2. 

Hazeoson-tamar]  i.e.  “The  pruning  of  the 
palm,”  the  same  place  which  was  afterwards 
called  Engcdi,  “the  fountain  of  the  wild-goat” 
(2  Chr.  XX.  2).  The  palm-groves,  which  gave 
the  original  name,  and  for  which  Pliny  says 
Engcdi  was  famous  (‘  Nat.  Hist.’  v.  17),  have 


V.  8—15.] 


GENESIS.  XIV. 


109 


8 And  there  went  out  the  king  of 
Sodom,  and  the  king  of  Gomorrah, 
and  the  king  of  Admah,  and  the  king 
of  Zeboiim,  and  the  king  of  Bela 
(the  same  is  Zoar-,)  and  they  joined 
battle  with  them  in  the  vale  of  Sid- 
dim  ; 

9 With  Chedorlaomer  the  king  of 
Elam,  and  with  Tidal  king  of  nations, 
and  Amraphel  king  of  Shinar,  and 
Arioch  king  of  Ellasar ; four  kings 
with  five. 

10  And  the  vale  of  Siddim  was  full 
of  slimepits  ; and  the  kings  of  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah  fled,  and  fell  there; 
and  they  that  remained  fled  to  the 
mountain. 

1 1 And  they  took  all  the  goods  of 


disappeared,  but  the  ibex,  or  Syrian  chamois, 
still  inhabits  the  cliffs  in  the  neighbourhood 
(Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’  p.  295).  The  place  was 
situated  in  the  wilderness  of  Judiea,  to  the 
west  of  the  Dead  Sea,  according  to  Josephus 
300  stadia  from  Jerusalem  (‘  Ant.’  ix.  c.  i). 
The  ruins  found  at  a place  called  Ain  Jiddi, 
with  a fountain  in  the  midst  of  a mountain 
country,  to  the  west  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  of 
about  the  latitude  of  Hebron,  are  supposed  to 
mark  the  original  site  of  Engedi  or  Hazezon- 
tamar. 

10.  slimepits^  Bitumen-pits:  of  asphalt 
or  bitumen,  from  which  the  Dead  Sea  was 
afterwards  called  Lacus  Asphaltites,  or  Sea  of 
Asphalt. 

fell  there']  i.e.  were  overthrown  there;  for 
the  king  of  Sodom  seems  to  have  been  one  of 
those  who  fled  to  the  mountains  and  escaped, 
see  V.  17. 

13.  one  that  had  escaped^  Rather  those 
that  escaped  (Ew.  277;  Ges.  ‘Thes.’ 
p.  1105). 

the  Hebre^ju]  i.e.  either  “the  descendant  of 
Eber,”  which  seems  most  accordant  with  the 
words  in  ch.  x.  2 1 , where  Eber  seems  to  have 
given  a general  name  to  his  descendants,  or 
(as  the  LXX.,  Aq.,  Vulg.,  and  most  ancient 
interpreters),  “ the  stranger  from  beyond  the 
Euphrates,”  an  appellative  from  the  Hebrew 
noun  or  preposition  Eber.,  signifying  the 
“ opposite  side,  beyond.”  The  mention  of 
Abram  as  the  Hebrew  is  due  to  the  fact, 
that  the  messenger,  who  came  and  told  him 
what  had  happened,  was  an  inhabitant  of  the 
land,  and  Abram  was  to  him  one  of  a strange 
country  and  strange  race. 

the  plain]  The  oaks  or  oak  groves. 

14.  He  armed  his  trained  sern'ants]  He  led 
out  his  trained  servants.  The  verb 


Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  all  their 
victuals,  and  went  their  way. 

12  And  they  took  Lot,  Abram’s 
brother’s  son,  who  dwelt  in  Sodom, 
and  his  goods,  and  departed. 

13  ^ And  there  came  one  that  had 
escaped,  and  told  Abram  the  Hebrev/ ; 
for  he  dwelt  in  the  plain  of  Mamre 
the  Amorite,  brother  of  Eshcol,  and 
brother  of  Aner : and  these  were  con- 
federate with  Abram. 

14  And  when  Abram  heard  that 
his  brother  was  taken  captive,  he 

" armed  his  i'trained  servants.,  born  in  his  n Or, 
own  house,  three  hundred  and  eigh-  \ 
teen,  and  pursued  them  unto  Dan.  instrudei 

15  And  he  divided  himself  against 
them,  he  and  his  servants,  by  night. 


here  used  means  “ to  draw  out,”  as  a sword 
from  its  sheath : and  the  word  trained  is  ap- 
plied to  the  teaching  of  children  (Prov.  xxii.  6), 
and  to  initiation  or  consecration,  as  of  a house 
(Deut.  XX.  5),  or  a temple  (i  K.  viii.  63). 

born  in  his  o^un  house]  Of  his  own  patriarch- 
al family,  not  bought,  hired,  or  taken  in  war. 

unto  Dan]  Some  taking  this  Dan  to  be  the 
same  as  Laish,  which  was  not  called  Dan  till 
after  the  country  was  conquered  by  the 
Danites  (Josh.  xix.  47;  Judg.  xviii.  29),  have 
thought  that  this  passage  was  not  from  the 
hand  of  Moses.  So  Ewald  (‘Gesch.’i.  53),  who 
supposes  Dan  to  have ‘been  substituted  by  a 
later  hand  for  Laish  in  the  original  MS.  Others 
have  thought  that  another  place  was  meant 
here  (so  Deyling,  Havernick,  Kalisch,  Keil). 
Keil  contends  that  the  Dan,  formerly  called 
Laish,  which  was  on  the  central  source  of  the 
Jordan  (see  Joseph.  ‘Ant.’  i.  10;  Stanley,  ‘S. 
and  P.’  p.  395),  could  not  have  been  the  Dan 
here  mentioned,  as  it  did  not  lie  in  either  of 
the  two  roads  leading  from  the  vale  of  Siddim 
to  Damascus.  Both  he  and  Kalisch  think 
this  Dan  to  be  the  same  as  Dan-jaan  (2  S. 
xxiv.  6),  apparently  belonging  to  Gilead,  and 
to  be  sought  for  in  northern  Peraea,  to  the 
south-west  of  Damascus.  The  chief  objec- 
tion to  this  is,  that  Josephus  (as above,  ‘Ant.’ 
1. 10)  and  Jerome  (‘  Qu.  Hebr.  in  Gen.’  ad  h.l.) 
distinctly  speak  of  the  Dan  here  mentioned,  as 
situated  at  the  source  of  the  Jordan.  The  con- 
jecture of  Le  Clerc  (Cleric,  in  loc.')  is  not 
contemptible,  viz.  that  the  original  name  of 
the  fountain  was  “Dan,”  i.e.  “judge,”  (cp. 
Ain-mishpat,  the  fountain  of  justice),  the 
neighbouring  town  being  called  Laish;  but 
that  the  Danites  gave  the  name  of  the  well, 
which  corresponded  with  that  of  their  own 
tribe,  to  the  city  as  well  as  the  fountain. 

15.  he  divided  himself  against  them,  he 


1 lO 


GENESIS.  XIV. 


[v.  lb — 1 8. 


and  smote  them,  and  pursued  them 
unto  Hobah,  which  is  on  the  left  hand 
of  Damascus. 

1 6 And  he  brought  back  all  the 
goods,  and  also  brought  again  his 
brother  Lot,  and  his  goods,  and  the 
women  also,  and  the  people. 


17  H And  the  king  of  Sodom  went 
out  to  meet  him  after  his  return  from 
the  slaughter  of  Chedorlaomer,  and 
of  the  kings  that  were  with  him,  at 

the  valley  of  Shaveh,  which  is  the  <,oSam.i8. 
"king’s  dale. 

18  And  ‘^Melchizedek  king  of  Sa-  i.  ^ 


and  bis  servants,  by  night]  From  v.  14  it  ap- 
pears that  besides  Abram’s  own  servants 
there  went  out  with  him  Aner,  Eshcol  and 
Mamre,  with  their  followers.  These  divided 
their  forces,  surprised  the  invaders  at  differ- 
ent points  of  attack  during  the  darkness,  and 
so  routed  them. 

Hobah,  vohich  is  on  the  left  hand  of  Damas^ 
cus]  i.e.  to  the  north  of  Damascus,  the  north 
being  to  the  left  of  a man,  who  looks  toward 
the  sunrising.  A place  called  Ghoba  is  men- 
tioned, Judith  XV.  6;  Eusebius  (‘ Onom.’  v. 
X(o(3d)  says  that  in  his  day  a village  existed  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Damascus  called  by 
this  name,  which  was  inhabited  by  Ebionites. 
About  two  miles  from  Damascus  is  now  a 
village  called  Hobah,  said  to  be  the  place 
to  which  Abram  pursued  the  kings  (Stanley, 

‘ S.  and  P.’  p.  414  k). 

17.  the  'Valley  of  Shaveh,  vohich  is  the 
kmg's  dale]  In  2 S.  xviii.  18,  we  read  that 
Absalom  in  his  lifetime  “ took  and  reared  up 
for  himself  a pillar,  which  is  in  the  king’s  dale; 
for  he  said,  I have  no  son  to  keep  my  name  in 
remembrance : and  he  called  the  pillar  after 
his  own  name,  and  it  is  called  unto  this  day, 
Absalom’s  place.”  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  vii.  10) 
says,  that  the  monument  was  two  stadia  from 
Jerusalem.  This  would  correspond  well  with 
the  valley  of  the  Upper  Kidron,  where  are  the 
tombs  of  the  judges  and  other  ancient  sepul- 
chres, a very  likely  place  tor  Absalom  to  have 
erected  what  was  evidently  intended  as  a 
sepulchral  monument.  The  tomb  now  known 
as  Absalom’s  is  probably  not  his,  as  it  appears 
to  be  of  later  date,  corresponding  with  the 
rock-tombs  of  Petra  belonging  to  a period 
later  than  the  Christian  era  (Robinson,  ‘Phys. 
Geog.’  p.  92).  It  is  not,  however,  possible  to 
determine  the  situation  of  the  valley  of  Shaveh, 
and  its  identity  with  the  later  King’s  Dale  of 
2 S.  xviii.  18,  without  first  fixing  the  site  of 
Salem,  of  which  Melchizcdek  was  king.  If 
Salem  be  Jerusalem,  then  Shaveh  may  well 
have  been  the  valley  of  the  Kidron,  close  to 
Jerusalem:  but  if  Salem  were  some  more 
northern  city,  we  must  leave  the  position  of 
Shaveh  undetermined.  See  on  v.  18. 

18.  MelcBizedek]  Various  have  been  the 
conjectures  in  all  ages  as  to  the  person  of  Mel- 
chi/edek.  Some  have  supposed  the  name  to 
be  a title,  like  Augustus  or  Pharaoh,  rather 
than  a proper  name,  comparing  Malek-ol- 


Adel  and  Adel-Chan,  i.e.  “the  just  king,”  a 
title  common  to  some  Mahommedan  kings, 
as  the  princes  of  the  Deccan  and  Golconda  : 
but  the  Hebrew  form  of  the  word  seems  to 
point  to  a proper  name  rather  than  to  a title. 
Cp.  Abi-melech,  Gen.  xx.  2,  Adoni-zedek, 
Josh.  X.  3.  The  Targums  of  Jerusalem  and 
Pseudo- Jonathan  say,  that  Melchizedek  was 
Shem,  and  St  Jerome  (‘Qu.  ad  Genes.’  in  loc.) 
tells  us  that  the  Jews  of  his  day  said  he  was 
Shem  the  son  of  Noah,  and  calculating  the 
days  of  his  life,  shewed  that  he  must  have 
lived  to  the  time  of  Isaac.  (See  also  Epist. 
Lxxiii.  ‘ad  Evang.’  Opp.  i.  p.  438).  This 
opinion  has  been  adopted  by  many  moderns, 
and  is  defended  at  length  by  Jackson  ‘On  the 
Creed,’  Bk.  ix.  It  probably  arose  from  con- 
siderations of  the  great  dignity  of  the  king 
and  priest,  who  blessed  Abraham  and  took 
tithes  of  him,  and  from  the  readiness  of  the 
Jews  to  ascribe  such  dignity  only  to  an  an- 
cestor of  their  own.  The  Jews  very  anciently 
considered  him  at  least  to  be  a type  of  Mes- 
siah (Schoettgen.  ‘Hor.  Hebr.’ T.  ii.  p.  645); 
but  they  generally  seem  to  have  believed  that 
he  was  a prince  of  the  country,  as  the  Targum 
of  Onkelos  and  Josephus,  which  both  describe 
him  simply  as  king  of  Jerusalem,  in  which 
they  are  followed  by  most  commentators  of 
modern  times.  It  is  a question  of  interest, 
but  impossible  to  solve,  Was  he  of  the  Canaan- 
itish  race  or  Semitic?  On  ch.  x.  6,  some 
explanation  is  given  of  the  fact  that  the 
Canaanites  spoke  a Semitic  tongue.  The 
name  and  titles  of  Melchizedek  are  Semitic, 
but  this  proves  nothing.  He  dwelt  among 
Canaanites;  but  there  had  probably  been 
Semitic  inhabitants  of  the  land  before  the 
immigration  of  the  Canaanites  (see  on  ch.  xii. 
6)  ; and  so  Melchizedek,  who  was  a worship- 
per of  the  true  God,  may  have  been  one  of 
the  original  Shemite  stock.  There  were,  how- 
ever, worshippers  of  the  true  God,  besides  the 
Israelites,  retaining  patriarchal  truth,  as  Job, 
and  Balaam,  and  so  it  is  not  certain  that  Mel- 
chizedek was  a descendant  of  Shem.  He 
is,  in  fact,  as  the  Apostle  tells  us,  introduced 
“without  father,  without  mother,  without 
descent,”  with  no  mention  of  the  beginning 
of  his  priesthood  or  the  ending  of  it,  and  so 
specially  suited  to  be  a type  of  the  Son  of 
God.  He  is  mentioned  once  besides  in  the 
Old  Testament,  viz.  in  Ps.  cx.  4,  where  the 
priesthood  of  Messiah  is  said  to  be  after  the 


V.  19.1 


GENESIS.  XIV. 


Ill 


lem  brought  forth  bread  and  wine:  19  And  he  blessed  him,  and  said, 

and  he  was  the  priest  of  the  most  Blessed  be  Abram  of  the  most  high 
high  God.  God,  possessor  of  heaven  and  earth : 


order  of  Melchizedek;  and  again  in  the  New 
Testament,  Heb.  v.  vi.  vii.,  where  the  com- 
parison between  the  royal  priesthood  of  Mel- 
chizedek and  that  of  Jesus  is  drawn  out  at 
length.  The  special  points  of  resemblance  of 
Melchizedek  to  Christ  are:  i.  that  he  was  not 
of  the  Levitical  order,  local,  national,  but  pre- 
vious to  the  giving  of  the  Law,  catholic,  uni- 
versal ; %,  that  he  was  superior  to  Abraham, 
blessed  and  took  tithes  of  him;  3.  that  (as 
often  in  old  times,  Virg.  ‘Ain.’  iii.  80;  Arist. 
‘Pol.’  III.  T4,  &c.),  he  was  both  king  and 
priest;  4.  that  no  beginning  and  no  end  are 
assigned  either  to  his  priesthood  or  his  life; 
5.  his  name  too  “ king  of  righteousness  and 
king  of  peace,”  are  eminently  suited  to  a type 
of  the  Son  of  God  (Heb.  vii.  a,  3).  The 
bringing  forth  bread  and  wine  is  not  referred 
to  by  the  Apostle;  but  the  ancient  Church 
loved  to  dwell  on  this  as  typical  of  the  insti- 
tution by  the  Saviour  of  the  Qvcria  dvalixaKTos, 
the  incruentum  sacrijiclum^  as  they  were  wont 
to  call  the  Holy  Eucharist;  and  later  ages 
may  have  made  more  of  it  than  Scripture  will 
warrant.  (See  Jackson,  as  above,  Bk.  ix. 
sect.  ii.  ch.  x.) 

king  of  Sale7n']  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  i.  10), 
Onkelos  and  all  the  Targg.  understand  Jeru- 
salem, which  is  called  Salem  in  Ps.  Ixxvi.  2, 
and  this  is  pretty  certainly  the  true  interpreta- 
tion. Jerome  however  (‘Epist.  lxxiii.  ad 
Evang.’Tom.  i.  p.  446,  edit.  Vallars.),  says  it 
was  not  Jerusalem,  but  a city  near  Scy- 
thopolis,  called  Salem  up  to  his  time,  where 
the  ruins  of  Melchizedek’s  palace  were  shewn, 
and  of  which  it  is  written  (Gen.  xxxiii.  18), 
“Jacob  came  to  Shalem.”  Yet  Shalem,  in 
Gen.  xxxiii.  is  rendered  by  Onkelos  and  a 
majority  of  modern  commentators,  not  as  a 
proper  name,  but  rather  “ in  peace”  (see  note 
on  ch.  xxxiii.  19).  Moreover,  Jerome  else- 
where (‘  Qu.  in  Gen,,’)  speaks  of  Melchizedek 
as  “king  of  Salem,  which  was  the  former 
name  of  Jerusalem.”  Probably  Salem  was  the 
oldest,  Jebus  the  next,  and  Jerusalem  the 
more  modern  name  of  the  same  city,  though 
some  think  that  the  Salem  here  was  the  same 
as  Salim  near  Alnon,  where  John  baptized 
(Joh.  iii.  23).  If,  as  is  most  probable,  Siddim, 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  lay  to  the  south  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  there  is  no  reason  why  Salem  should 
not  have  been  Jerusalem,  or  that  the  valley  of 
Shaveh,  which  is  the  “king’s  dale,”  should  not 
have  been  the  valley  of  the  Kidron.  If  the  view 
advocated  by  Mr  Grove  (‘  Diet,  of  Bible,’ 
art.  Sha^eh^  Siddim^  Sodom ^ Zoar)^  and  de- 
fended by  Dean  Stanley  (‘  S.  and  P.’  pp.  249, 
&c.),  viz.  that  the  valley  of  Siddim  was  north 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  be  correct,  then  no  doubt, 
Salem  must  have  been  a place  far  north  of  Je- 


rusalem ; but  the  more  ancient  opinion,  viz. 
that  the  cities  of  the  plain  lay  south  of  the 
Dead  Sea  is  ably  defended  by  Kuinoel  (‘  Ep.  ad 
Hebr.’  vii.  i),  Robinson  (‘ B.  R.’  ii.  188, 

‘ Phys.  Geog.’2i3),  Kurtz,  Knobel,  Delitzsch, 
Kalisch,  Keil,  &c.,  and  is  most  probably  the 
true.  See  also  note  on  the  Dead  Sea  at  the 
end  of  ch.  xix. 

the  priest]  This  is  the  first  time  that  the 
yvord  priest^  Cohen,  Upevs,  sacerdos,  occurs  in 
the  Bible,  and  it  is  in  connection  with  the 
worship  of  an  ancient  people,  perhaps  not 
related  by  blood  to  the  chosen  race.  The 
etymological  meaning  of  the  word  is  unknown. 
The  word  itself  is  applied  afterwards  both  to 
the  Levitical  priesthood  and  to  the  priesthood 
of  false  religions.  The  patriarchs  seem  to  have 
had  no  other  priesthood  than  that  of  the  head 
of  the  family  (Gen.  viii.  20,  xii.  8,  xxii.,  xxvi. 
25,  xxxiii.  20;  Job  i.  5);  but  here  we  find 
Melchizedek  designated  as  a priest  and  as  per- 
forming many  priestly  acts,  solemnly  blessing, 
taking  tithes,  &c.  There  is  no  distinct  men- 
tion of  sacrifice,  which  was  afterwards  the 
most  special  function  of  the  priesthood.  As, 
however,  sacrifice  was  a rite  of  common  use 
among  the  patriarchs,  and,  later  at  least,  among 
all  surrounding  nations,  there  is  no  reasonable 
doubt  but  that  Melchizedek  was  a sacrificing 
priest,  and  so  more  fitly  a type  of  Christ,  who 
offered  Himself  a sacrifice  without  spot  to 
God  (see  Kuinoel  on  Heb.  vii.  i).  Philo  indeed 
asserts  that  Melchizedek  offered  the  first  fruits 
of  the  spoil  in  sacrifice,  imviKta  edve  (‘  De 
Abrah.’  p.  381),  a thing  by  no  means  impro- 
bable; and  connected  with  such  a sacrifice 
may  have  been  the  bread  and  wine,  corre- 
sponding with  the  mola  and  libations  of  later 
days. 

the  most  high  God]  This  is  the  first  time 
we  meet  with  this  title,  Elion.  It  occurs 
frequently  afterwards,  as  Num.xxiv.  16  (where 
it  is  used  by  Balaam,  also  an  alien  from  the 
family  of  Abraham),  Deut.  xxxii.  18,  Ps.  vii. 
18,  ix.  2,  xviii.  13,  xlvii.  2,  Ixxviii.  35,  &c., 
where  sometimes  we  have  Elion  alone,  some- 
times joined  with  El,  sometimes  with  Jeho- 
vah. It  is  observed  that  Sanchoniathon  (ap. 
Euseb.  ‘Prsep.  Evang.’  i.  10)  mentions  as 
the  name  of  the  Phoenician  Deity.  So  the 
words  alonim  nvalonuth,  which  occur  in  the 
well-known  Punic  passage  in  the  Poenulus  of 
Plautus,  are  supposed  to  correspond  with  the 
Hebrew  Elionim  ‘velionoth,  “gods  and  god- 
desses.” This  may  be  true;  the  worship  of 
the  Phoenicians,  as  of  other  heathen  nations, 
was,  no  doubt,  a corruption  of  the  ancient 
patriarchal  faith : but  it  is  plain,  that  A- 
bram  here  acknowledges  Melchizedek  as  a 
worshipper  of  the  true  God:  and  in  v.  22, 


I 12 


GENESIS.  XIV.  XV. 


[v.  20 1. 


f Heb. 
4- 

f Heb. 

SOTils. 


20  And  blessed  be  the  most  high 
God,  which  hath  delivered  thine  ene- 
mies into  thy  hand.  And  he  gave 
him  ‘^tithes  of  all. 

21  And  the  king  of  Sodom  said 
unto  Abram,  Give  me  the  ^persons, 
and  take  the  goods  to  thyself. 

22  And  Abram  said  to  the  king  of 
Sodom,  I have  lift  up  mine  hand  unto 
the  Lord,  the  most  high  God,  the 
possessor  of  heaven  and  earth, 

23  That  I will  not  take  from  a 
thread  even  to  a shoelatchet,  and 
that  I will  not  take  anything  that  is 
thine,  lest  thou  shouldest  say,  I have 
made  Abram  rich: 


Abram  uses  the  very  titles  of  God,  which 
had  been  used  by  Melchizedek  before,  coup- 
ling with  them  the  most  sacred  name  Jeho- 
vah, the  name  of  the  Covenant  God,  under 
which  He  was  ever  adored  by  the  chosen  seed 
as  specially  their  God. 

19.  possessor  of  heaven  and  earth']  The 
LXX.  and  Vulg,  have  “Maker  of  heaven 
and  earth.”  This  is  probably  the  true  mean- 
ing, but  the  word  may  have  either  signifcance 
(Ges.  ‘Th,’  p.  1221.  So  Delitzsch  and  Keil). 

20.  he  gave  him  tithes  of  all]  The  sen- 
tence, as  it  stands,  is  ambiguous,  but  the 
sense  is  obviously  (as  LXX.,  Joseph,,  Jona- 
than, and  Heb.  vii.  6)  “ Abram  gave  Melchi- 
zedek tithes  of  all,”  /,  e.  the  spoUa  opima^  the 
tenth  part  of  the  spoil  which  he  had  taken 
from  the  enemy  (Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  i.  10). 

21.  Give  me  the  persons^  and  take  the  goods 
to  thyself]  i.  e.  restore  those  of  my  people, 
whom  you  have  rescued,  but  keep  what- 
ever other  property  of  mine  you  may  have 
lighted  on. 

22.  I have  lift  up  mine  hand  unto  the 
Lord]  A common  form  of  solemn  attestation 
in  all  nations,  (See  Dan,  xii.  7,  Virg,  ‘ 7En.’ 
XII.  195.)  On  the  identification  of  the  name 
El-elion  with  Jehovah,  and  on  the  use  of 
the  latter  name,  see  notes  on  vv.  i,  18. 

23.  That  I (will  not  take]  Lit.  “If  I 
will  take.”  The  particle  if  was  constantly 
used  in  swearing,  there  being  an  ellipsis  of 
some  such  expression  as  “ God  do  so  to  me 
and  more  also  if,”  (i  S.  iii.  17).  The  particle 
is  literally  rendered  in  Heb.  iii.  ii.  There  is 
a marked  difference  between  Abram’s  con- 
duct to  Melchizedek,  and  his  conduct  to  the 
king  of  Sodom.  From  Melchizedek  he  re- 
ceives refreshment  and  treats  him  with  honour 
and  respect.  Towards  the  king  of.  Sodom  he 
is  distant  and  reserved.  Probably  the  vicious 
lives  of  the  inaabitants  of  Sodom  made  him 


24  Save  only  that  which  the  young 
men  have  eaten,  and  the  portion  of 
the  men  which  went  with  me,  Aner, 
Eshcol,  and  Mamre;  let  them  take 
their  portion. 

CHAPTER  XV. 

I God  encourageth  Abra77i.  2 Abram  com- 
plameth  for  want  of  a7i  heir.  4 God  p7'o- 
miseth  him  a so7t,  a7id  a 77iultiplymg  of  his 
seed.  6 Ab7'a77i  is  jtestified  by  faith.  7 Ca- 
7iaa7i  is  p7'077iised  agam,  and  cofifirmed  by  a 
sign,  12  and  a vision. 

After  these  things  the  word  of 
the  Lord  came  unto  Abram  in 
a vision,  saying.  Fear  not,  Abram:  I 
am  thy  shield,  and  thy  exceeding 
great  reward. 


careful  not  to  lay  himself  under  any  obliga- 
tion to  their  king,  lest  he  should  become  too 
much  associated  with  him  and  them. 

24.  the  youjig  men]  Abram’s  trained 
servants,  whom  he  had  led  to  the  fight  (Cp. 
2 S.  ii.  14,  I K.  XX.  14). 

Chap.  XV.  1.  After  these  things  the  nvord 
of  the  Lord  came  unto  Abram  in  a visioTi] 
We  have  in  this  chapter  a repetition  of  the 
promises  to  Abram,  given  when  he  was  first 
called  (ch.  xii.  i),  and  when  he  first  entered 
into  the  land  of  Canaan  (ch.  xii.  7),  with  the 
farther  assurance  that  his  own  son  should  be 
his  heir.  This  is  the  first  time  that  the  ex- 
pression so  frequent  afterwards  “ the  word  of 
the  Lord”  occurs  in  the  Bible.  It  has  been 
questioned  whether  the  “ vision”  was  a dream 
or  waking  vision.  The  same  word  is  used  of 
Balaam,  “which  saw  the  vision  of  the  Al- 
mighty, falling,  but  having  his  eyes  open” 
(Num.  xxiv.  4,  16).  The  way  in  which  Abram 
was  led  out  and  saw  the  stars,  and  the  subse- 
quent reality  of  the  sacrifice,  look  like  a waking 
vision,  and  it  is  not  till  v.  12,  that  he  falls  into 
a deep  sleep. 

Fear  not]  Abram  had  now  become  a 
great  man,  with  wealth  and  a comparatively 
settled  home : but  he  was  in  a land  of  stran- 
gers, and  many  of  them  of  godless  life.  He 
had  been  engaged  in  a war,  and  his  very 
victory  might  bring  reprisals.  In  his  old  age 
he  had  no  children  to  support  and  defend 
him.  Accordingly  he  now  is  assured  of  God's 
farther  protection,  and  secured  against  those 
feelings  of  despondency  natural  to  one  who 
was  lonely,  childless,  and  in  danger.  It  is 
observed  that  the  words  “ fear  not”  have  in- 
troduced many  announcements  of  Messiah,  as 
Joh.  xii.  15;  Luke  i.  13,  30,  ii.  10  (Words- 
worth). 

thy  exceeding  great  revoard]  The  word 
great  is  here  an  infinitive  absolute  used  ad- 


V.  2 — 6.] 


GENESIS.  XV. 


113 


'i  And  Abram  said,  Lord  God, 
what  wilt  chou  give  me,  seeing  I go 
childless,  and  the  steward  of  my  house 
is  this  Eliezer  of  Damascus? 

3 And  Abram  said.  Behold,  to  me 
thou  hast  given  no  seed ; and,  lo,  one 
born  in  my  house  is  mine  heir. 

4 And,  behold,  the  word  of  the 
Lord  came  unto  him,  saying.  This 
shall  not  be  thine  heir;  but  he  that 


shall  come  forth  out  of  thine  own 
bowels  shall  be  thine  heir. 

5 And  he  brought  him  forth  a- 
broad,  and  said.  Look  now  toward 
heaven,  and  tell  the  stars,  if  thou  be 
able  to  number  them:  and  he  said 

unto  him,  '^So  shall  thy  seed  be.  * Rom.  4. 

6 And  he  ^believed  in  the  Lord;'^^^^^^ 
and  he  counted  it  to  him  for  right-  y.  , 

^ Gal.  3.  6. 

eousness.  jam  2. 23. 


verbially,  so  that  the  more  exact  rendering 
may  be,  “Thy  reward  exceeding  abundantly.” 
The  LXX.  render  “Thy  reward  shall  be 
exceeding  great,”  which  is  approved  by 
Rcrdiger  (in  Ges,  ‘Thes.’  p.  1257),  Rosenm., 
Delitzsch. 

2.  Lord  God]  Adonai  Jeiiovah.  This 
is  the  first  use  of  these  two  words  together. 
When  separate,  both  are  rendered  by  versions, 
ancient  and  modern,  by  the  same  word  Lord. 
Except  in  v.  8,  the  same  combination  occurs 
again  in  the  Pentateuch,  only  in  Dent.  iii.  24, 
ix.  26.  In  all  these  passages  it  is  in  the  voca- 
tive case,  and  Jehovah  alone  does  not  occur 
in  Genesis  as  a vocative  (Quarry,  ‘Genesis,’ 
P.  234). 

seeing  I go  childless]  Abram,  though  blessed 
personally,  feels  that  the  promises  of  God  seem 
to  extend  into  the  future,  and  does  not  un- 
derstand that  they  can  be  fulfilled  in  him 
alone. 

the  stenuard  of  my  house  is  this  Eliezer  of 
Damascus]  The  literal  rendering  is  The  son 
of  the  business”  (or  perhaps  “of  the  posses- 
sion”) “of  my  house,  he  is  Damascus  Eliezer.” 
It  is  most  probable  that  “ Damascus”  is  put 
for  “ a man  of  Damascus,”  as  the  Authorized 
Version.  The  words  rendered  “steward  of 
my  house”  are  very  obscure,  so  that  some 
ancient  versions  leave  them  untranslated.  The 
older  critics  generally  render  “son  of  the 
business,”  i.e.  “steward;”  the  majority  of 
modern  commentators,  after  the  Syriac,  pre- 
ferring “ son  of  possession,”  i.e.  “heir.”  The 
passage,  therefore,  must  be  read  either  “the 
steward,”  or  “ the  heir  of  my  house  is  Eliezer 
of  Damascus.”  The  tradition  of  Abram’s 
connection  with  Damascus  has  already  been 
referred  to  (see  Nicol.  Damasc.  Ap.  Joseph. 
‘Ant.’  1.  7;  Justin,  xxxvi.  2).  If  Abram 
came  into  Palestine  by  the  way  of  Damascus, 
it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  should  have  taken 
his  principal  retainer  from  that  place. 

3.  one  born  in  my  house]  Lit.  “son  of 
my  house.”  The  expression  is  like,  but  not 
necessarily  equivalent  to  that  in  ch.  xvii.  12,27 

he  that  is  born  in  the  house.^  as  op- 
posed to  bought  ^ith  money  of  any  stran- 

VOL.  1. 


ger.  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  title  “son 
of  my  house,’’  was  applied  to  inmates  of  the 
house,  especially  those  in  honourable  office  in 
the  household,  whether  born  in  the  family,  or 
afterwards  adopted  into  it.  The  relation  of 
the  head  of  a family  to  his  retainers  was,  in 
the  case  of  Abram  at  least,  truly  paternal. 
It  evidently  more  lesembled  the  connection 
between  a feudal  chief  and  his  vassals  than 
that  between  a master  and  his  slaves.  That 
some  of  them  were  “ bought  with  money,” 
appears  indeed  from  the  passages  above  re- 
ferred to;  but  they  were  evidently  not  in  the 
abject  condition  which  attached  to  slavery  in 
later  days,  and  the  principal  among  them  was 
marked  out  in  default  of  his  own  offspring  as 
heir  to  his  master,  though  Abram  had  near 
relations,  and  some  of  them  at  no  greater 
distance  from  him  than  Lot  and  his  family, 
then  living  in  the  plains  of  Jordan. 

5.  tell  the  stars]  In  the  promise  to  Noah 
the  rainbow  had  been  the  sign  given  from 
on  high,  a sacramental  promise  of  mercy 
to  mankind.  Now  to  Abram  the  still  brighter 
and  more  enduring  token  is  the  starry  firma- 
ment. His  seed  should  abide  as  “ the  faithful 
witness  in  heaven.”  There  is  the  pledge  of  a 
brilliant  future  for  his  house,  even  as  regards 
material  prosperity ; the  pledge  of  still  greater 
blessings  to  that  spiritual  family,  which  by 
baptism  into  Christ  became  “ Abraham’s  seed, 
and  heirs  according  to  the  promise”  (Gal.  iii. 
27,  29). 

6.  And  he  belieuied  in  the  Lord;  and  he 
counted  it  to  him  for  righteousness]  The  root 
of  the  word  rendered  belieneed  has  the  sense  of 
supporting,  sustaining,  strengthening.  Hence 
in  the  Hiphil  conjugation  (as  here),  it  signi- 
fies to  hold  as  firm,  to  rest  upon  as  firm,  hence 
to  believe  and  rely  upon  as  true  and  stable 
(Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1 14).  The  promise  here  made 
by  the  Lord  to  Abram  was  given  to  him 
before  circumcision,  whilst  there  was  yet  not 
even  the  germ  of  Levitical  Law.  It  contained 
in  it  the  promise  of  Christ.  It  elicited  from 
Abram  the  great  evangelical  principle  of  faith. 
God  promised  that  which  was  opposed  to  all 
appearance  and  likelihood.  Abram  relied  on 
that  promise.  He  surrendered  his  own  wisdom 

H 


% 


GENESIS.  XV. 


[v.  7— II. 


II4 


7 And  he  said  unto  him,  I am  the 
Lord  that  brought  thee  out  of  Ur  of 
the  Chaldees,  to  give  thee  this  land 
to  inherit  it. 

8 And  he  said.  Lord  God,  where- 
by shall  I know  that  I shall  inherit  it  ? 

9 And  he  said  unto  him.  Take  me 
an  heifer  of  three  years  old,  and  a she 
goat  of  three  years  old,  and  a ram  of 


three  years  old,  and  a turtledove,  and 
a young  pigeon. 

10  And  he  took  unto  him  all  these, 
and  divided  them  in  the  midst,  and 
laid  each  piece  one  against  another: 
but  the  birds  divided  he  not. 

1 1 And  when  the  fowls  came  down 
upon  the  carcases,  Abram  drove  them 
away. 


to  the  wisdom  of  God,  and  so  gave  up  his 
own  will  to  the  will  of  God.  So  he  became 
the  heir  of  the  promises;  and  the  internal 
principle  of  faith  became  to  him  the  true 
principle  of  righteousness.  It  was  the  only 
righteousness  possible  for  the  feeble  and  the 
sinful ; for  it  was  a reposing  on  the  power 
and  the  love  of  the  Almighty  and  the  Holy 
One.  It  was  therefore  reckoned  to  him  as 
what  may  be  called  a passive  righteousness, 
and  at  the  same  time  it  was  productive  in  him 
of  an  active  righteousness:  for  the  soul  which 
relies  on  the  truth,  power,  and  goodness  of 
another,  in  the  strength  of  that  truth,  power, 
and  goodness,  can  itself  be  active  in  them  all: 
taking  advantage  of  the  power  and  goodness 
relied  upon,  it  becomes  itself  powerful  and 
good  and  true.  The  Apostles  naturally  dwell 
upon  this  first  recorded  instance  of  faith,  faith 
in  God,  implied  faith  in  Christ,  and  consecjuent 
accounting  of  righteousness,  recorded  before 
all  legal  enactments,  as  illustrative  of  the  great 
evangelical  grace  of  faith,  its  power  as  resting 
on  One  who  is  all  powerful,  and  its  sancti- 
fying energy,  as  containing  in  itself  the  prin- 
ciple of  holiness  and  the  germ  of  every  right- 
eous act.  (Rom.  iv.  v. ; Gal.  iii. ; Heb.  xi. ; 
Jas.  ii.,  &c.  See.) 

7.  I am  the  Lord  that  brought  thee  out 
of  Ur  of  the  Chaldees']  In  ch.  xi.  31,  Terah  is 
represented  as  having  left  Ur  of  the  Chaldees 
and  settled  in  Haran  with  Abram,  Sarai  and 
Lot;  whilst  in  ch,  xii.  i,  Abram  is  represented 
as  having  been  called  by  the  Lord  to  go  out  of 
Haran,  cp,  v.  4.  These  different  statements 
are  thought  to  be  inconsistent  with  each  other 
and  referable  to  three  different  hands.  W'he- 
ther  there  was  a distinct  command  to  Abram 
to  leave  Ur  docs  not  appear.  The  Lord  by 
His  Providence  may  have  led  him  and  his 
father  out  of  Ur  to  Hai-an,  with  the  design  of 
leading  him  further  onward,  and  afterwards 
by  special  revelation  have  called  him  to  leave 
liaran  and  to  go  to  Canaan  (see 'Quarry, 
P.  430). 

8.  (whereby  soall  I kno(w]  Abram  be- 
lieved God;  but  there  may  have  been  some 
misgiving  as  to  the  reality  of  what  he  saw  and 
heard;  like  St  Peter,  who  “wist  not  that  it 
was  true  which  was  done  by  the  angel,  but 


thought  he  saw  a vision”  (Acts  xii.  9):  and 
even  where  there  is  much  faith,  a man  may 
distrust  himself,  may  feel  that  though  now 
the  belief  is  strong,  yet  ere  long  the  first  im- 
pression and  so  the  firm  conviction  may  fade 
away.  Thus  Gideon  (Jud,  vi.  17),  Hezekiah 
(2  K.  XX.  8),  the  Blessed  Virgin  (Luk.  i.  34) 
asked  a sign  in  confirmation  of  their  faith, 
and,  as  here  to  Abram,  it  was  graciously 
given  them. 

9.  Take  me  an  heifer  of  three  years  old] 
The  age  chosen  was  probably  because  then 
the  animals  were  in  full  age  and  vigour 
(Chrysost.  ‘in  Gen.  Horn.  xxvi.’).  The 
animals  were  those  which  specially  formed 
the  staple  of  Abram’s  wealth:  they  were  also 
those,  which  in  after  times  were  specially 
ordained  for  sacrificial  offerings.  It  has  been 
said,  that  the  transaction  was  not  a real 
sacrifice,  as  there  was  no  sprinkling  of  blood, 
nor  offering  on  an  altar:  but  the  essence  of 
the  true  Hebrew  sacrifice  was  in  the  slaying 
of  the  victim,  for  the  very  word  riDT  {Ze- 
bach.,  sacrifice)  signifies  slaying:  and  it  was 
rather  with  the  shedding  of  blood  than  with 
its  sprinkling  that  atonement  was  made  (Heb. 
ix.  22).  I'he  covenant  was  made  according 
to  the  custom  of  ancient  nations.  The  sacri- 
ficed victims  were  cut  into  two  pieces,  and 
the  covenanting  parties  passed  between  them 
(see  Jerem.  xxxiv.  18,  19).  The  very  word 
covenant  in  Hebrew,  Berith.^  is  supposed  by 
Gesenius  to  be  from  a root  signifying  to  cut 
(‘ Thes.’  p.  238);  and  the  common  formula 
for  “to  make  a covenant”  \s  carath  berith., 
“ to  cut  a covenant”  (so  v.  18),  comp,  the 
Greek  opKia  T(fxv(Lv  (Horn.  ‘ II.’  v.  124)  and 
the  L:it.fedus  ferire  (see  Bochart,  ‘ Hieroz.’  I. 
332).  The  division  into  two  is  supposed  to 
represent  the  two  parties  to  the  covenant; 
and  their  passing  between  the  divided  pieces 
to  signify  their  union  into  one.  In  this  case 
Abram  was  there  in  pei'son  to  pass  between 
the  pieces,  and  the  manifested  presence  of  God 
passed  between  them  under  the  semblance  of 
fire  (v.  17). 

10.  the  birds  divided  he  not]  So  under 
the  Law  the  doves  offered  as  burnt  offerings 
were  not  cleft  in  two  (Lev.  i.  17). 

11.  the  fowls]  The  birds  of  prey.'  The 


V.  12 iS.] 


GENESIS.  XV. 


12  And  when  the  sun  was  going 
down,  a deep  sleep  fell  upon  Ahram ; 
and,  lo,  an  horror  of  great  darkness 
fell  upon  him. 

13  And  he  said  unto  Abram,  Know 
Acts;. 6.  of  a surety  ^that  thy  seed  shall  be  a 

stranger  in  a land  that  is  not  theirs, 
and  shall  serve  them;  and  they  shall 
afflict  them  four  hundred  years ; 

14  And  also  that  nation,  whom 
they  shall  serve,  will  I judge:  and 
afterward  shall  they  come  out  with 
great  substance. 

15  And  thou  shalt  go  to  thy  fathers 


in  peace ; thou  shalt  be  buried  in  a 
good  old  age. 

16  But  in  the  fourth  generation 
they  shall  come  hither  again : for  the 
iniquity  of  the  Amorites  is  not  yet 
full. 

17  And  it  came  to  pass,  that,  when 

the  sun  went  down,  and  it  was  dark, 
behold  a smoking  furnace,  and  ^ a burn-  t Heb. 
ing  lamp  that  passed  between  those 
pieces,  ^chap.  12 

18  In  the  same  day  the  Lord  g 
made  a covenant  with  Abram,  say-  & =6.  4. 
ing,  ^Unto  thy  seed  have  I given  this  4.^"^  ’ 


word  used  (ait)  means  any  rapacious  animal, 
especially  vultures  or  other  birds  of  prey.  It 
is  probably  of  the  same  root  as  the  Greek 
deros,  eagle. 

Abram  drove  them  a^uaf\  It  is  generally 
thought,  that  the  vultures  seeking  to  devour 
the  sacrifice  before  the  covenant  was  ratified 
typified  the  enemies  of  Israel,  especiall5"  the 
Egyptians;  and  in  a spiritual  sense  they  repre- 
sent the  spiritual  enemies,  which  seek  to 
destroy  the  soul,  keeping  it  from  union  with 
God  through  the  accepted  sacrifice  of  His 
Son  (see  Knobel  in  loc.). 

12.  vohen  tJoe  sun  voas  going  donvn\  The 
evening  came  on  before  all  the  prepara- 
tions were  made,  a solemn  time  for  conclud- 
ing the  covenant  between  God  and  the  seed, 
of  Abram;  but  it  may  have  been  said  that  it 
was  evening,  not  night,  in  order  to  shew  that 
the  great  darkness  was  preternatural  (V.  Ger- 
lach). 

a deep  sleep\  The  same  word  as  that  used 
Gen.  ii.  21,  when  Eve  was  taken  from  Adam’s 
side.  The  constant  translation,  eKo-raais  (ec- 
stasy), by  the  LXX.  shews  the  belief  that  the 
sleep  was  sent  by  God  for  purposes  of  Divine 
revelation. 

an  horror  of  great  darkness'\  Lit.  a horror, 
a great  darkness.  The  prophets  were  fre- 
quently appalled  when  admitted  to  the  special 
presence  of  God:  but  here  perhaps  the  horror 
was  connected  also  with  the  announcement 
about  to  be  made  to  Abram  of  the  sufferings 
of  his  posterity. 

13,  four  hundred  years']^  In  Ex.  xii.  40  it 
is  called  430.  Possibly  here  the  reckoning  is 
in  round  numbers ; also  the  Hebrews  were  not 
ill-treated  during  the  whole  430  years. 

15.  And  thou  shalt  go  to  thy  fathers  in 
peace']  A similar  expression  occurs  ch.  xxv. 
8,  XXXV,  29,  xlix.  33.  It  is  interpreted  to 


mean  either  going  to  the  grave,  in  which  his 
father  or  his  people  had  been  buried,  or,  (as 
by  Knobel  and  others)  going  to  that  place, 
where  the  souls  of  his  ancestors  are  in  the 
state  of  separate  spirits.  That  it  cannot  mean 
the  former  here  seems  to  follow  from  the  fact, 
that  Abram  was  not  to  be  buried  in  his 
father’s  burying-place,  but  in  a grave  which 
he  himself  purchased  in  the  land  of  his  adop- 
tion. 

16.  in  the  fourth  generation]  On  the 
chronology  from  the  Descent  into  Egypt 
to  the  Exodus,  see  note  on  Exod. 

the  iniquity  of  the  Amorites  is  not  yet  full] 
The  Amorites,  the  most  powerful  people  in 
Canaan,  are  here  put  for  the  Canaanites  in 
general.  Their  state  of  moral  corruption  is 
abundantly  manifest  in  the  early  chapters  of 
Genesis ; and  in  the  Divine  foreknowledge 
it  was  seen  that  they  would  add  sin  to  sin, 
and  so  at  length  be  destroyed  by  the  Divine 
vengeance.  Still  the  long-suffering  of  God 
waited  for  them,  giving  time  for  repentance, 
if  they  would  be  converted  and  live. 

17.  nvhen  the  sun  went  down^  and  it  was 
dark]  Or,  “when  the  sun  had  gone  down, 
that  there  was  a thick  darkness.”  So  the  Vul- 
gate. 

a smoking  furnace^  and  a lamp  of fire]  This 
was  the  token  of  the  presence  of  God,  as 
when  He  appeared  to  Moses  in  the  burning 
bush,  and  .to  the  Israelites  in  a pillar  of  fire, 
The  word  lamp  may  very  probably  here 
signify  a flame  or  tongue  of  fire.  The 
Hebrew  word  which  is  cognate  with  lamp^ 
and  the  other  Aryan  words  of  like  sound 
(Xa/iTTO),  Xa/x7rny,  &c.)  has  probably  its  radical 
significance  a lambendo^  a lambent  flame. 
Compare  labium^  lip^  &c.  (see  Ges.  ‘ Th.’ 
P-  739) 

18.  made  a covenant]  Lit.  “cut  a cove- 
nant.” See  above  on  v 9. 

H 2 


ii6 


GENESIS.  XV.  XVI.  [v.  19-2. 


land,  from  the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the 
great  river,  the  river  Euphrates: 

19  The  Kenites,  and  the  Keniz- 
zites,  and  the  Kadmonites, 

20  And  the  Hittites,  and  the  Pe- 
rizzites,  and  the  Rephaims, 

21  And  the  Amorites,  and  the  Ca- 
naanites,  and  the  Girgashites,  and  the 
Jebusites. 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

I Sarai,  being  barren,  gheth  Hagar  to  Abram. 
4 Ilagar,  being  afflicted for  despising  her  fnis~ 
tress,  rnnnetJi  a'lnay.  ’]  An  angel  sendetli  her 


back  to  submit  herself,  t i aitd  telleth  her  of 
her  child.  15  Ishmael  is  born. 

NOW  Sarai  Abram’s  wife  bare 
him  no  children : and  she  had 
an  handmaid,  an  Egyptian,  whose 
name  was  Hagar. 

2 And  Sarai  said  unto  Abram,  Be- 
hold now,  the  Lord  hath  restrained 
me  from  bearing:  I pray  thee,  go  in 
unto  my  maid;  it  may  be  that  I 
may  Tbtain  children  by  her.  And^^eb. 
Abram  hearkened  to  the  voice  oibyher.^ 
Sarai. 


the  rinjer  of  Egypt]  Many  understand  not 
the  Nile  but  XhQ  Wady-El- Arisch\\\nc\\,  how- 
ever, is  called  “ the  brook  or  stream  of 
Egypt”  as  in  Is.  xxvii.  12,  not  “the  river  of 
Egypt.”  The  boundaries  of  the  future  pos- 
session are  not  described  with  minute  accu- 
racy, but  they  are  marked  as  reaching  from 
the  valley  of  the  Euphrates  to  the  valley  of 
the  Nile.  And  in  2 Ghron.  ix.  26,  it  is  dis- 
tinctly stated  that  “all  the  Kings  from  the  river 
(i.e.  Euphrates)  even  unto  the  land  of  the 
Philistines  and  to  the  border  of  Egypt”  were 
tributary  to  Solomon.  Cp.  2 S.  viii.  3. 

19.  The  Kenites]  An  ancient  people  in- 
habiting rocky  and  mountainous  regions  to 
the  south  of  Canaan,  near  the  Amalekites 
(Num.  xxiv.  21  seq. ; i S.  xv.  6,  xxvii.  10, 
XXX.  29),  a portion  of  which  afterwards  mi- 
grated to  Canaan  (Judg.  i.  16,  iv.  ii,  17). 

the  Kenizzites]  Mentioned  only  here.  Bo- 
chart  (‘  Phaleg,’  IV.  36)  conjectures  that  they 
had  become  extinct  in  the  period  between 
Abraham  and  Moses. 

the  Kadmonites]  i.e.  “the  Eastern  people.” 
I'hey  are  not  elsewhere  named.  Hochart 
thought  they  might  be  the  Hivites,  elsewhere 
enumerated  among  the  Canaanites,  and  sjxiken 
of  as  inhabiting  the  neighbourhood  of  Mount 
Hermon  (Josh.  xiii.  3;  Judg.  iii.  3),  which 
was  to  the  east  of  Canaan. 

20.  the  Hittites,  and  the  Perizzites,  and 
the  Rephaims]  See  on  ch.  x.  15,  xiii.  7,  xiv.  5. 

21.  the  Amorites,  the  Girgashites,  and  , 
the  febusites.]  See  on  ch.  x.  15,  16. 

the  Canaanites]  here  distinguished  from 
the  kiinlred  tribes,  are  described  as  inhabiting 
the  low  country  “from  Sodom  to  Gerar,  unto 
Gaza ; as  thou  goest,  unto  Sodom,  and  Go- 
morrha,  and  Admah,  and  Zeboim,  even  unto 
Lasha”  (Gen.  x.  19). 

CiiAi’.  XVI.  1.  No^ju  Sarai,  &c.]  The  re- 
capitulatory character  of  this  verse  is  con- 
sistent with  the  general  style  of  the  book  of 


Genesis,  and  the  connection  of  the  first  four 
verses  perfectly  natural.  The  promise  of  off- 
spring had  been  made  to  Abram,  and  he  be- 
lieved the  promise.  It  had  not,  however, 
been  distinctly  assured  to  him  that  Sarai 
should  be  the  mother  of  the  promised  seed. 
The  expedient  devised  by  Sarai  was  according 
to  a custom  still  prevalent  in  the  east.  Laws 
concerning  marriage  had  not  been  so  expressly 
givemto  the  patriarchs  as  they  afterwards  were. 
Yet  the  compliance  of  Abram  with  Sarai's 
suggestion  may  be  considered  as  a proof  of  the 
imperfection  of  his  faith;  and  it  is  justly 
observed,  that  this  departure  fi'om  the  pri- 
meval principle  of  monogamy  by  Abraham 
has  been  an  example  followed  by  his  descend- 
ents  in  the  line  of  Ishmael,  ^nd  has  proved, 
morally  and  physically,  a curse  to  their  race. 

an  handmaid,  an  Egyptian,  ^hose  name  'was 
Hagar]  Hagar,  no  doubt,  followed  Sarai  from 
Egypt  after  the  sojourn  there  recorded  in  ch. 
xii.,  when  it  is  said  that  Abraham  obtained 
great  possessions,  among  other  things,  in  “men- 
servants  and  maidservants,”  v.  16.  It  is  gen- 
erally thought  that  the  name  Hagar  signifies 
flight,  a name  which  may  have  been  given  her 
after  her  flight  from  her  mistress,  recorded 
in  this  chapter,  in  which  case  the  name  is  here 
given  her  proleptically,  a thing  not  uncommon 
in  Scripture  history.  Others  suppose  that  she 
derived  her  name  from  having  fled  with 
her  mistress  out  of  Egypt.  As  she  was  an 
Egyptian,  it  is  not  likely  that  the  Hebrew  or 
Arabic  name  of  Hagar  should  have  been  given 
her  by  her  own  parents. 

2.  it  may  be  that  I may  obtain  children  by  her] 
Lit.  “ 1 may  be  built  up  by  her.”  The  words 
“'house”  and  “family”  are  in  most  languages 
used  figuratively  the  one  of  the  other.  The 
house,  considered  as  representing  the  family, 
is  built  up  by  the  addition  of  children  to  it, 
and  so  the  very  word  for  son,  in  Hebrew,  Ben, 
is  most  probably  connected  with  the  root 
banah,  “to  build”  (see  Ges.  ‘Th.’ p.  215). 
Comp.  ch.  XXX.  3,  where  also  it  appears  that 
the  w'ife,  when  she  gave  her  handmaid  to  her 


V.  3— 1 2-] 


GENESIS.  XVI. 


ir; 


3 And  Sarai  Abram’s  wife  took 
Hagar  her  maid  the  Egyptian,  after 
Ahram  had  dwelt  ten  years  in  the 
land  of  Canaan,  and  gave  her  to  her 
husband  Abram  to  be  his  wife. 

4 ^ And  he  went  in  unto  Hagar, 
and  she  conceived : and  when  she  saw 
that  she  had  conceived,  her  mistress 
was  despised  in  her  eyes. 

5 And  Sarai  said  unto  Ahram,  My 
wrong  be  upon  thee:  I have  given 
my  maid  into  thy  bosom ; and  when 
she  saw  that  she  had  conceived,  I was 
despised  in  her  eyes:  the  Lord  judge 
between  me  and  thee. 

6 But  Abram  said  unto  Sarai,  Be- 
hold, thy  maid  is  in  thy  hand ; do  to 

i/S/ her  ^as  it  pleaseth  thee.  And  when 
is  pod  in  hardlv  with  her,  she  fled 

^ V Eom  her  face. 

7 11  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord 


found  her  by  a fountain  of  water  in 
the  wilderness,  by  the  fountain  in  the 
way  to  Shur. 

8 And  he  said,  Hagar,  Sarai ’s  maid, 
whence  earnest  thou  ? and  whither 
wilt  thou  go  ? And  she  said,  I flee 
from  the  face  of  my  mistress  Sarai. 

9 And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  said 
unto  her.  Return  to  thy  mistress,  and 
submit  thyself  under  her  hands. 

10  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  said 
unto  her,  I will  multiply  thy  seed 
exceedingly,  that  it  shall  not  be  num- 
bered for  multitude. 

1 1 And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  said 
unto  her,  Behold,  thou  art  with  child, 
and  shalt  bear  a son,  and  shalt  call 

his  name  Hshmael;  because  the  Lord  « That  is, 
hath  heard  thy  affliction. 

12  And  he  will  be  a wild  man;  his 
hand  will  be  against  every  man,  and 


husband,  esteemed  the  handmaid’s  children  as 
her  own. 

3.  after  Abram  had  dwelt  ten  years  in 
the  land  of  Canaan^  Abram  was  now  85  and 
Sarai  75  years  old  (cp,  xii.  4,  xvi.  16,  xvii.  17). 
These  words  are  doubtless  intended  to  account 
for  the  impatience  produced  in  them  by  the 
delay  of  the  Divine  promise, 

4.  her  mistress  was  despised  in  her  eyes'\ 
Among  the  Hebrews  barrenness  was  esteemed 
a reproach  (see  ch.  xix.  31,  xxx.  i,  23;  Lev. 
XX.  20,  &c.):  and  fecundity  a special  honour 
and  blessing  of  God  (ch.  xxi.  6,  xxiv.  60;  Ex. 
xxiii,  26;  Deut,  vii,  14)  : and  such  is  still  the 
feeling  in  the  east.  But,  moreover,  very  pro- 
bably Hagar  may  have  thought  that  now 
Abram  would  love  and  honour  her  more 
than  her  mistress  (cp.  ch.  xxix.  33). 

5.  My  wrong  be  upon  thee~\  i.e.  “ my 
wrong,  the  injury  done  to  me  is  due  to  thee, 
must  be  imputed  to  thee,  thou  art  to  be 
blamed  for  it,  inasmuch  as  thou  sulferest  it 
and  dost  not  punish  .the  aggressor.”  So  in 
effect  all  the  versions,  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Targg,, 
See. 

7.  the  angel  of  the  Lord]  In  v.  13  dis- 
tinctly called  the  Lord.  See  on  ch.  xii.  7.. 

Shur]  according  to  Joseph.  (‘Ant.’  Vi.  7)  is 
Pelusium,  near  the  mouth  of  the  Nile,  which, 
however,  seems  more  probably  to  be  the  equi- 
valent for  Sin  (see  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  947).  On- 
kelos  renders  here  “Hagra.”  The  desert  of 
Shur  is  generally  thought  to  be  the  north 
eastern  part  of  the  wilderness  of  Paran,  called 
at  present  Al-jifaf'.  Hagar,  no  doubt,  in  her 


flight  from  Sarai,  took  the  route  most  likely 
to  lead  her  back  to  her  native  land  of  Egypt ; 
and  Gesenius  supposes  that  Shur  very  proba- 
bly corresponded  with  the  modern  Suez. 

8.  Hagar ^ Sarai' s maid]  The  words  of 
the  angel  recal  to  H agar's  mind  that  she  was 
the  servant  of  Sarai,  and  therefore  owed  her 
obedience. 

11,  Ishmael;  because  the  Lord  hath  heareT] 
i.e.  “God  heareth,  because  Jehovah  hath 
heard.”  The  name  of  God,  by  which  all 
nations  might  acknowledge  Him,  is  expressed 
in  the  name  Ishmael,  but  the  name  Jehovah, 
the  covenant  God  of  Abraham,  is  specially 
mentioned,  that  she  may  understand  the  pro- 
mise to  come  to  her  from  Him,  who  had 
already  assured  Abraham  of  the  blessing  to 
be  poured  upon  his  race, 

12,  a wild  man]  Lit.  “ a wild  ass  of, 
or  among  men;”  i.e.  wild  and  fierce  as  a wild 
ass  of  the  desert.  A rendering  has  been  sug- 
gested, “a  wild  ass,  a man,  whose  hand  is 
against  every  man.”  The  suggestion  is  very 
ingenious;  but  for  such  a rendering  we  should 
have  expected  to  find  the  word  Ish  {wr)  not, 
as  it  is  in  the  original,  Adam  {homo).  The 
word  pere,  wild  ass,  is  probably  from  the 
root  para,  signifying  “to  run  swiftly.”  This 
animal  is  frequently  mentioned  in  Scripture, 
and  often  as  a type  of  lawless,  restless,  un- 
bridled dispositions  in  human  beings  (see  Job 
xi.  12,  xxiv.  5;  Ps.  civ.  ii;  Is.  xxxii.  14; 
Jer.  ii.  24;  Dan.  v.  21;  Hos.  viii.  9).  In 
Job  xxxix.  5,  another  Hebrew  word  is  used, 
but  most  commentators  consider  that  the  same 
animal  is  meant.  The  description  of  their 


[v.  13— I. 


118  GENESIS.  XVI.  XVII. 


<3:  chap.  25.  every  man’s  hand  against  him;  ^and 
he  shall  dwell  in  the  presence  of  all 
his  brethren. 

13  And  she  called  the  name  of  the 
Lord  that  spake  unto  her,  Thou 
God  seest  me ; for  she  said,  Have 
I also  here  looked  after  him  that 
seeth  me  ? 

14.  Wherefore  the  well  was  called 
gghap-  24.  ^li  Beer-lahai-roi ; behold,  it  is  between 
"^rhatis  Kadesh  and  Bered. 

^hbn  that  15  ^ And  Hagar  bare  AbrarPi  a son  : 
^seethml^  and  Abram  called  his  son’s  name, 
which  Hagar, bare,  Ishmael. 


16  And  Abram  was  fourscore  and 
six  years  old,  when  Hagar  bare  Ish- 
mael to  Abram. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

1 God  reneiueth  the  cove^iant.  5 Abram  his 
name  is  changed  in  token  of  a greater  bless- 
ing. 1 o Circnmcisio7t  is  instituted.  1 5 Sarai 
her  name  is  changed,  and  she  blessed.  17 
Isaac  is  proffiised.  23  AbrahaiJi  and  Ishmael 
are  circumcised. 


AND  when  Abram  was  ninety 
±\..  years  old  and  nine,  the  Lord 
appeared  to  Abram,  and  said  unto  chap.  5. 
him,  I am  the  Almighty  God;  ^walk  11  Or. 
before  me,  and  be  thou  "perfect. 


great  speed  in  Xen.  ‘ Anab.’  Lib.  1.  is  well 
known.  Geseniiis  refers  to  a picture  of  the 
wild  ass  of  Persia  in  Ker  Porter’s  ‘Travels 
in  Georgia  and  Persia,’  Vol.  1.  p.  459,  and 
says,  that  a living  specimen  which  he  saw 
in  the  London  Zoological  Gardens  in  1835 
exactly  corresponded  with  this  picture  (‘Thes.’ 
P.  1123). 

his  hni'.d  r^tll  be  against  e^very  man,  &c.] 
or  “ upon  every  man,”  a.  common  phrase  for 
violence  and  injury  (cp.  Gen.  xxxvii.  27;  Exod. 
ix.  3 ; Dent.  ii.  16;  Josh.  ii.  19;  i S.  xviii.  17,21, 
xxiv.  13,  14).  The  violent  character  and  law- 
less life  of  the  Bedouin  descendants  of  Ishmael 
from  the  first  till  this  day  is  exactly  described 
in  these  words. 

in  the  presence  of  all  his  brethren']  Lit.  “in 
front”  or  “before  the  face  of  all  his  brethren.” 
This  may  point  to  that  constant  attitude  of 
the  Bedouin  Arabs,  living  every  where  in 
close  proximity  to  their  kindred  races,  hover- 
ing round  them,  but  never  mingling  with 
them:  or,  we  may  render  “ to  the  east  of  all 
his  bretIiren,”atranslation  adopted  by  Rosenm., 
Gesen.,  Tuch,  Knobel,  Delitzsch,  &c.  The 
Arabs  are  called  in  Job  i.  3,  “the  children  of 
the  east,”  and  in  some  passages  of  Scripture 
the  phrase  “in  the  presence  of,”  is  explained 
to  mean  “ eastward  of ” (see  Numb.  xxi.  ii; 
Josh.  XV.  8 ; Zech.  xiv.  4);  the  rationale  of 
this  being,  that  when  a man  looked  toward 
the  sunrise,  the  cast  was  before  him. 

13,  Thou  God  seest  me:  for  she  said,  Hat'e 
I also  here  looked  after  him  that  seeth  meT] 
Thou  art  a God  of  seeing,  for  have 
I also  seen  here  after  seeing?  The 
Autliori/.cd  VTrsion  has  nearly  followeil  the 
rendering  of  the  LXX.  and  Vbilg.,  which  is 
inadmissible.  'Lhe  meaning  of  the  words  is  pro- 
bably, “Thou  art  a God  that  seest  all  things,” 
(or  perhaps  “that  revealest  Thyself  in  vi- 
sions”); “and  am  I yet  living  and  seeing,  after 
seeing  God?”  (cp.  JiuLp  xiii.  21).  So  ap- 
parently Onkelos;  and  this  rendering  is  adopt- 
ed by  Rosenm.,  Gesen.,  Tuch,  Kalisch,  De- 


litzsch, and  most  modems.  The  name  of  God 
throughout  this  chapter  is  Jehovah,  except 
when  Hagar  the  Egyptian  speaks;  yet  the  God 
of  vision  who  reveals  Himself  to  her  is  carefully 
identified  with  the  Jehovah  of  Abraham. 

14.  Beer-lahai-roi]  “ The  well  of  life 
of  vision,”  i.e.  where  life  remained  after  vision 
of  God.  (See  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  175.)  This 
seems  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  name  accord- 
ing to  the  etymology  derived  from  the  last 
verse,  though  others  render  it  “the  well  of 
the  living  One  (i.e.  the  living  God)  of  vision.” 

between  Kadesh  and  Bered]  On  the  site  of 
Kadesh  and  its  uncertainty  see  on  ch.  xiv.  7. 
The  uncertainty  of  the  site  of  Bered  is  still 
greater,  and  therefore  the  difficulty  of  arriving 
at  the  exact  position  of  Beer-lahai-roi  is  al- 
most insuperable.  Mr  Rowlands  (in  Williams’ 
‘Holy  City,’  i.  465)  thinks  that  he  has  dis- 
covered its  site  at  a place  called  Moilahhi, 
about  10  hours  south  of  Ruheibeh,  in  the 
road  from  Beersheba  to  Shur,  or  Jebel-es-sur, 
a mountain  range  running  north  and  south  in 
the  longitude  of  Suez. 

Chap.  XVII.  1.  And  <ivhen  Abram  ^as 
ninety  years  old  and  nine]  i.e.  j ust  thirteen  years 
after  the  events  related  in  the  last  chapter, 
compare  v.  25,  where  Ishmael  is  said  to  be 
now  thirteen  years  old. 

the  Almighty  God]  El-Shaddai.  The  word 
Shaddai,  translated  by  most  versions  “ mighty,” 
or  “Almighty,’’ is  generally  thought  (by  Gesen., 
Rosenm.,  Lee,  See.  See.)  to  be  a plural  of  ex- 
cellence (in  this  respect  like  Elohim),  derived 
from  the  root  Shadad,  the  primary  meaning 
of  which  appears  to  have  been  “to  be  strong,” 
“to  act  strongly,”  though  more  commonly 
used  in  the  sense  of  “to  destroy,  to  devastate.” 
The  later  Greek  versions  Aq.,  Sym.,  Theod., 
render  t/cui/o?,  “sufficient,”  “all-sufficient.” 
So  Theodoret,  Hesych.,  Saad.  Accordingly, 
Rashi  and  some  of  the  Jewish  writers  con- 
sider it  to  be  compounded  of  two  words,  sig- 
nifying “ who  is  sufficient?”  •the  improbability 


GENESIS.  XVIL 


V.  2—12.] 

2 And  I will  make  my  covenant 
between  me  and  thee,  and  will  mul- 
tiply thee  exceedingly. 

3 And  Abram  fell  on  his  face : and 
God  talked  with  him,  saying, 

4 As  for  me,  behold,  my  covenant 
is  with  thee,  and  thou  shalt  be  a 

Mieb.  father  of  'many  nations. 

7„:iitiiude  £.  Neither  shall  thy  name  any  more 

of  nati07is,  J J ^ \ 

be  called  Abram^  but  thy  name  shall 

^Rom.  4.  be  Abraham;  ^for  a father  of  many 

‘7-  nations  have' I made  thee. 

6 And  I will  make  thee  exceeding 
fruitful,  and  I will  make  nations  of 
thee,  and  kings  shall  come  out  of  thee. 

7 And  I will  establish  my  cove- 
nant between  me  and  thee  and  thy 
seed  after  thee  in  their  generations 
for  an  everlasting  covenant,  to  be  a 
God  unto  thee,  and  to  thy  seed  after 
thee. 

8 And  I will  give  unto  thee,  and  to 


II9 

thy  seed  after  thee,  the  land  ^wherein  tHeb. 
thou  art  a stranger,  all  the  land 
Canaan,  for  an  everlasting  possession ; 
and  I will  be  their  God. 

9 ^ And  God  said  unto  Abraham, 

Thou  shalt  keep  my  covenant  there- 
fore, thou,  and  thy  seed  after  thee  in 
their  generations, 

10  This  is  my  covenant,  which  ye 
shall  keep,  between  me  and  you  and 

thy  seed  after  thee;  Every  man  child  ‘'Acts 7- 8. 
among  you  shall  be  circumcised. 

1 1 And  ye  shall  circumcise  the  flesh 
of  your  foreskin  ; and  it  shall  be  a 
‘^token  of  the  covenant  betwixt  me Acts  7.8. 

1 Rom.  4.  II. 

and  you. 

12  And  he  that  is  'eight  days 

^shall  be  circumcised  amono;  you,  every  eight  days. 

u-ij  • I ..u  i-ev- 12- 

man  child  in  your  generations,  he  that  3. 

is  born  in  the  house,  or  bought  with 
money  of  any  stranger,  which  is  not 
of  thy  seed. 


of  which  derivation  is  very  great.  The  title, 
or  character,  El-Shaddai.  is  said,  Exod.  vi.  2, 3, 
to  have  been  that  by  which  God  was  revealed 
to  the  patriarclis,  not  tiien,  at  least  in  its  full 
meaning,  by  the  name  Jehovah;  and  it  is 
noted  as  occurring  in  those  passages  which 
the  German  critics  call  Elohistic.  In  this 
very  verse,  however,  we  read  it  in  immediate 
juxtaposition  with  the  name  Jehovah,  and 
in  Ruth  i.  20,  21,  we  find  the  identification  of 
Jehovah  with  Shaddai.  Probably,  like  Elo- 
him,  and  Adonai,  we  may  consider  El-Shad- 
dai (a  title  known  to  Balaam,  Num.  xxiv.  4, 
16,  and  constantly  used  in  Job),  to  have  been 
one  of  the  more  general  world-wide  titles  of 
the  Most  High,  whilst  Jehovah  was  rather 
the  name  by  which  His  own  chosen  people 
knew  and  acknowledged  Him.  The  title, 
which  especially  points  to  power,  seems  most 
appropriate  when  a promise  is  made,  which 
seems  even  to  Abram  and  Sarai  to  be  well- 
nigh  impossible  of  fulfilment. 

2.  1 will  yriake  my  co’venanf^  The  word 

for  “make”  is  different  from  that  used  in 
XV.  18.  There  God  is  said  to  have  “cut”  a 
covenant  with  Abram  by  sacrifice,  which 
phrase  has  probably  special  reference  to  the 
sacrifice  and  also  to  the  two  parties  who  made 
the  covenant  by  sacrifice  (see  on  xv.  9).  Here 
He  says,  “ I will  give  my  covenant  between 
Me. and  thee.”  The  freedom  of  the  covenant 
of  promise  is  expressed  in  this  latter  phrase. 
It  was  a gift  from  a superior,  rather  than  a 
bargain  between  equals;  and  as  it  was  ac- 
companied by  the  rite  of  circumcision,  it  was 
typical  of  the  freedom  of  that  covenant  made 


afterwards  to  Christians  in  Christ,  and  sealed 
to  them  in  the  sacred  rite  of  baptism. 

4.  of  many  nations^  Of  a multitude 
of  nations;  as  in  margin. 

5.  Abraham'^  i.e.  “father  of  a multi- 

tude.” He  was  originally  Ab-ram^  “exalted 
father.”  Now  he  Ab-raham^  “father 

of  a multitude;”  raham^  in  Arabic,  being  a 
vast  number,  a great  multitude.  Abraham 
was  literally  the  ancestor  of  the  twelve  tribes 
of  Israel,  of  the  Ishmaelites,  of  the  descend- 
ants of  Keturah  and  of  the  Edomites ; but 
spiritually  he  is  the  father  of  all  the  faithful, 
who  by  faith  in  Christ  are  “Abraham’s  sfeed, 
and  heirs  according  to  the  promise”  (Gal.  iii. 
29).  It  has  been  very  generally  believed  that 
the  letter  H here  introduced  into  the  names 
both  of  Abraham  and  Sarah  is  one  of  the  two 
radical  letters  of  the  name  Jehovah  (as  the 
other  radical  J was  introduced  into  the  name 
Joshua),  whereby  the  owner  cf  the  name  is 
doubly  consecrated  and  bound  in  covenant  to 
the  Lord  (see  Delitzsch,  in  loc.).  The  cus- 
tom of  giving  the  name  at  the  time  of  cir- 
cumcision (Luke  i.  59)  probably  originated 
from  the  change  of  Abraham’s  name  having 
been  made  when  that  rite  was  first  instituted. 

10.  This  is  my  covenant'\  i.d*.  the  sign, 
token  and  bond  of  the  covenant. 

12.  eight  days  old']  Seven  days,  a sacred 
number,  were  to  pass  over  the  child  before  he 
was  so  consecrated  to  God’s  service.  There 
was  a significance  in  the  number  7,  and  then? 
was  a reason  for  the  delay  that  the  child 
might  grow  strong  enough  to  bear  the  oper- 
ation. 


120 


GENESIS.  XVIL 


[v.  13—18. 


13  He  that  is  born  in  thy  house, 
and  he  that  is  bought  with  thy  money, 
must  needs  be  circumcised ; and  my 
covenant  shall  be  in  your  flesh  for  an 
everlasting  covenant. 

14  And  the  uncircumcised  man 
child  whose  flesh  of  his  foreskin  is  not 
circumcised,  that  soul  shall  be  cut  off 
from  his  people;  he  hath  broken  my 
covenant. 

15  ^ And  God  said  unto  Abraham, 
As  for  Sarai  thy  wife,  thou  shalt  not 
call  her  name  Sarai,  but  Sarah  shall 
her  name  be. 


16  And  I will  bless  her,  and  give 
thee  a son  also  of  her;  yea,  I will  bless 
her,  and  ^ she  shall  be  a mother  of  na-  t Heb. 
tions;  kings  of  people  shall  be  oVbecomJ^ 

nations. 

17  Then  Abraham  fell  upon  his 
face,  and  laughed,  and  said  in  his 
heart.  Shall  a child  be  born  unto  him  ^ 
that  is  an  hundred  years  old?  and 
shall  Sarah,  that  is  ninety  years  old, 

bear  ? 

18  And  Abraham  said  unto  God, 

O that  Ishmael  might  live  before 
thee ! 


13.  He  that  is  born  in  thy  house &c.] 
“ Moses  has  nowhere  given  any  command, 
nor  even  so  much  as  an  exhortation,  inculcat- 
ing the  duty  of  circumcision  upon  any  person 
not  a descendant,  or  a slave  of  Abraham,  or 
of  his  descendants,  unless  he  wished  to  par- 
take of  the  passover  ....  In  none  of  the  his- 
torical books  of  the  Old  Testament  do  we 
find  the  smallest  trace  of  circumcision  as  ne- 
cessary to  the  salvation  of  foreigners,  who  ac- 
knowledge the  true  God,  or  requisite  even  to 
the  confession  of  their  faith  : no  not  so  much 
as  in  the  detailed  story  of  Naaman  (2  K.  v.); 
in  which  indeed  every  circumstance  indicates 
that  the  circumcision  of  that  illustrious  per- 
sonage can  never  be  supposed”  (Michaelis, 
‘ Laws  of  Moses,’  Bk.  iv.  Art.  184).  There 
is  a marked  distinction  in  this  between  cir- 
cumcision and  baptism.  Judaism  was  in- 
tended to  be  the  religion  of  a peculiar  isolated 
people.  Its  rites  therefore  were  for  them  alone. 
Christianity  is  for  the  whole  human  race;  the 
Church  is  to  be  catholic;  baptism  to  bead- 
ministered  to  all  that  will  believe. 

14.  that  soul  shall  be  cut  ojf  from  his 
people'^  7'he  rabbinical  writers  very  generally 
understand  that  the  excision  should  be  by 
Divine  judgment.  Christian  interpreters  have 
mostly  understood  the  infiiction  of  death  by 
the  hand  of  the  magistrate:  some  (Cleric,  and 
Michael,  in  loc.)  either  exile  or  excommuni- 
cation. I'he  latter  opinion  was  afterwards 
retracted  by  Michaelis,  and  it  is  pretty  certain 
that  death  in  some  form  is  intended  (see  Gesen. 
‘I'hes.’  p.  718). 

15.  thou  shalt  not  call  her  name  Sarai., 
but  Sarah  *hall  her  name  be'\  There  is  but 
little  doubt  that  Sarah  signifies  “ Princess,”  in 
allusion  probably  to  the  princely  race  which 
was  to  spring  from  her,  though  Ikenius,  fol- 
lowed by  Rosenmliller,  argues  in  favour  of  a 
meaning  to  be  derived  from  the  Arabic  root 
Saraa,  signifying,  “ tfj  have  a numerous  pro- 
geny.” As  to  the  original  name  Sarai,  the 
older  interpreters  generally  understood  it  to 


signify  “my  princess;”  the  change  to  Sarah 
indicating  that  she  was  no  longer  the  princess 
of  a single  race,  but  rather  that  all  the  families 
of  the  earth  should  have  an  interest  in  her  (Je- 
rome, ‘ Qu.  Hebr.’  p.  522)  ; many  think  that 
Sarai  means  simply  “noble,  royal,”  whilst  Sa- 
rah more  definitely  means  “ princess;”  which, 
however,  seems  neither  etymologically  nor 
exegetically  probable.  Ewald  explains  Sarai 
as  meaning  “contentious,”  from  the  verb 
Sarah,  which  (Gen.  xxxii.  29;  Hos.  xii. 
4)  occurs  in  the  sense  of  “to  fight,  to  con- 
tend.” This  meaning  is  approved  by  Gese- 
nius  (‘Thes.’  p.  1338),  but  the  more 'usual 
derivation  is  probably  the  true. 

16.  s he  shall  be  a mother  of  nations'^  Heb. 
“she  shall  become  uations.” 

17.  laughed']  Onkel.  renders  “rejoiced.” 
Pseudo-Jon.  “marvelled.”  The  Jewish  com- 
mentators, and  many  of  the  Christian  fathers, 
understood  this  laughter  to  be  the  laughter  of 
joy  not  of  unbelief  (Aug.  ‘ De  Civ.’  xvi.  26). 
So  also  many  moderns,  e.g.  Calvin,  “partly 
exulting  with  gladness,  partly  carried  beyond 
himself  with  wonder,  he  burst  into  laughter.” 
It  is  thought  also  that  our  Blessed  Lord  may 
have  alluded  to  this  joy  of  Abraham  (Joh.  viii. 
56),  “ Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see 
My  day,  and  he  saw  it  and  was  glad;”  for  it 
was  at  the  most  distinct  promise  of  a son,  who 
was  to  be  the  direct  ancestor  of  the  Messiah, 
that  the  laughter  is  recorded  (cp.  also  the 
words  of  the.  Blessed  Virgin,  Luke  i.  47).  On 
the  other  hand  it  must  be  admitted,  that  A- 
braham's  words  immediately  following  the 
laughter,  seem  at  first  sight  as  implying  some 
unbelief,  or  at  least  weakness  of  faith,  though 
they  may  be  interpreted  as  the  language  of 
wonder  rather  than  of  incredulity. 

18.  0 that  Ishmael  might  live  before  thee!] 
These  words  may  be  interpreted  in  two 
ways,  according  as  we  understand  the  laugh- 
ter of  Abraham.  They  may  mean,  “ I dare 
not  hope  for  so  great  a boon  as  a son  to  be 
born  hereafter  to  myself  and  Sarah  in  our  old 


121 


V.  19-27.]  GENESIS.  XVII. 


^diap.  i8.  QqJ  said, -^Sarah  thy  wife 

Si  21.  2.  shall  bear  thee  a son  indeed  ; and  thou 
shalt  call  his  name  Isaac:  and  I will 
establish  my  covenant  with  him  for 
an  everlasting  covenant,  ami  with  his 
seed  after  him. 

20  And  as  for  Ishmael,  I have  heard 
thee:  Behold,  I have  blessed  him, 
and  will  make  him  fruitful,  and  will 

i^chap.  25.  niultiply  him  exceedingly;  •^’"twelve 
princes  shall  he  beget,  and  I will 
make  him  a great  nation. 

21  But  my  covenant  will  I establish 
with  Isaac,  which  Sarah  shall  bear  unto 
thee  at  this  set  time  in  the  next  year. 

22  And  he  left  off  talking  with  him, 
and  God  went  up  from  Abraham. 

23  ^1  And  Abraham  took  Ishmael 


his  son,  and  all  that  were  born  in  his 
house,  and  all  that  were  bought  with 
his  money,  every  male  among  the  men 
of  Abraham's  house  ; and  circumcised 
the  flesh  of  their  foreskin  in  the  self- 
same day,  as  God  had  said  unto  him. 

24  And  Abraham  mas  ninety  years 
old  and  nine,  when  he  was  circum- 
cised in  the  flesh  of  his  foreskin. 

25  And  Ishmael  his  son  mas  thir- 
teen years  old,  when  he  was  circum- 
cised in  the  flesh  of  his  foreskin. 

26  In  the  selfsame  day  was  Abra- 
ham circumcised,  and  Ishmael  his  son. 

27  And  all  the  men  of  his  house, 
born  in  the  house,  and  bought  with 
money  of  the  stranger,  were  circum- 
cised with  him. 


age,  but  O that  Ishmael  may  be  the  heir  of 
Thy  promises!”  or  they  may  imply  only  a 
fear,  that  now,  when  another  heir  is  assured 
to  Abraham,  Ishmael  should  be  excluded  from 
all  future  inheritance. 

19.  Isaac']  i.e.  “ he  laughs,”  the  third  per- 
son singular  of  the  present  tense : similar  forms 
are  Jacob,  Jair,  Jabin,  &c. 


20.  as  for  Ishmael^  I have  heard  thee] 
There  is  an  allusion  to  the  significance  of  the 
name  Ishmael,  viz.  “ God  heareth.” 

25.  Ishmael  his  son  voas  thirteen  years  old] 
The  Arabs  have  in  consequence  always  cir- 
cumcised their  sons  at  the  age  of  13.  Josephus 
mentions  this  (‘  Ant’  i.  13),  and  it  is  well 
known  that  the  custom  still  prevails  among 
the  Mahometan’ nations. 


NOTE  A on  Chap.  xvii.  v.  10.  Circumcision. 

(i)  Reasons  for  the  rite.  (2)  Origin  of  circumcision,  whether  pre-Abrahamic  or  not. 
(a)  Egyptians  said  to  have  first  used  it.  (/3)  Answer  from  lateness  and  uncertainty 
of  the  testimony,  (y)  Balance  of  arguments. 


The  reasons  for  this  rite  may  have  been 
various,  ist,  to  keep  the  descendants  of  Abra- 
ham distinct  from  the  idolatrous  nations 
round  about  them,  the  other  inhabitants  of 
Palestine  not  being  circumcised,  2ndly,  to 
indicate  the  rigour  and  severity  of  the  Law  of 
God,  simply  considered  as  Law,  in  contrast  to 
which  the  ordinance  that  succeeded  to  it  in 
the  Christian  dispensation  indicated  the  mild- 
ness and  mercy  of  the  new  covenant,  3rdly, 
to  signify  that  the  body  should  be  devoted  as 
a living  sacrifice  to  God,  “our  hearts’  and  all 
our  members  being  mortified  from  all  carnal  and 
worldly  lusts,”  and  so  to  typify  moral  purity. 
(See  Dent.  x.  16;  Jer.  iv.  4;  Acts  vii.  51). 

An  important  question  arises  as  to  the  ori- 
gin of  circumcision.  W^as  it  first  made  known 
and  commanded  to  Abraham,  having  nowhere 
been  practised  before  ? Or,  was  it  a custom 
already  in  use,  and  now  sanctified  by  God  to 
a higher  end  and  purport  ? A similar  question 
arose  concerning  sacrifice.  Was  it  prescribed 
by  revelation  or  dictated  by  natural  piety  and 
then  sanctioned  from  above  ? As  the  rainbow 
probably  did  not  first  appear  after  the  flood. 


but  was  then  made  the  token  of  the  Noachic 
covenant ; as  the  stars  of  heaven  were  made 
the  sign  of  the  earlier  covenant  with  Abraham 
(ch.  XV.  5)  ; may  it  have  been  also,  that  cir- 
cumcision already  prevailed  among  some  na- 
tions, and  was  now  divinely  authorized  and 
made  sacred  and  authoritative  ? There  would 
be  nothing  necessarily  startling  in  the  latter 
alternative,  when  we  remember  that  the  cor-  ^ 
responding  rite  of  baptism  in  the  Christian  dis- 
pensation is  but  one  adaptation  by  supreme  au- 
thority of  natural  or  legal  washings  to  a Chris- 
tian purpose  and  a most  spiritual  significance. 

It  is  certain  that  the  Egyptians  used  cir- 
cumcision (Herod,  ii.  36,  37,  104;  Diod. 
Sicul.  I.  26,  55;  Strabo,  xvii.  p.  524;  Phil. 
Jud.  ‘De  Circumcis.’ii.p.  210  ; Joseph.  ‘Ant.’ 
viii.  10;  ‘ Cont.  Apion.’ I.  22;  ii.  13).  The 
earliest  writer  who  mentions  this  is  Herodo- 
tus. He  says,  indeed,  that  the  Egyptians  and 
Ethiopians  had  it  from  the  most  remote  anti- 
quity, so  that  he  cannot  tell  which  had  it 
first ; he  mentions  the  Colchians  as  also  using 
it  (whence  Diodorus  inferred  that  they  were 
an  Egyptian  colony),  and  says  that  the  Phee- 


122 


GENESIS.  XVIII. 


nicians  and  Syrians  in  Palestine  admit  that 
they  “ learned  this  practice  from  the  Egyp- 
tians” (Herod,  ii.  104).  This  is  evidently  a 
very  loose  statement.  The  Phoenicians  pro- 
bably did  not  use  it,  and  the  Jews,  whom  He- 
rodotus here  calls  “the  Syrians  in  Palestine,” 
admitted  that  they  had  once  dwelt  in  Egypt, 
but  never  admitted  that  they  derived  circum- 
cision from  thence.  The  statements  of  Dio- 
dorus and  Strabo,  which  are  more  or  less 
similar  to  those  of  Herodotus,  were  no  doubt 
partly  derived  from  him,  and  partly  followed 
the  general  belief  among  the  Greeks,  that  the 
“ Jews  were  originally  Egyptians”  (Strabo,  as 
above).  It  is  stated  by  Origen  (‘  in  Epist.  ad 
Rom,’  ch.  II.  13)  that  the  Egyptian  priests, 
soothsayers,  prophets,  and  those  learned  in 
hieroglyphics  were  circumcised;  and  the  same 
is  said  by  Horapollo  (i.  13,  14).  If  these 
ancient  writers  were  unsupported  by  other 
authorities,  there  would  be  no  great  difficulty 
in  concluding  that  Herodotus  had  found  cir- 
cumcision among  the  Egyptian  priests^  had 
believed  the  Jews  to  be  a mere  colony  from 
Egypt,  and  had  concluded  that  the  custom 
originated  in  Egypt,  and  from  them  was  learned 
by  the  Ishmaelites  and  other  races.  It  is,  how- 
ever, asserted  by  some  modern  Egyptologists, 
that  circumcision  must  have  prevailed  from 
the  time  of  the  fourth  dynasty,  />.  from  at 
least  2400  B.C.,  therefore  much  before  the  date 
generally  assigned  to  Abraham,  r.c.  1996,  and 
that  it  was  not  confined  to  the  priests,  as  is, 
they  say,  learned  from  the  murnmies  and  the 
sculptures,  where  circumcision  is  made  a dis- 
tinctive mark  between  the  Egyptians  and  their 
enemies  (see  Sir  Gardiner  Wilkinson,  in  Raw- 
linson’s  ‘ Herodotus,’ pp.  52,  146,  147,  notes). 
If  this  be  correct,  we  must  conclude,  that  the 
Egyptians  practised  circumcision  when  Abra- 
ham first  became  acquainted  with  them,  that 
probably  some  of  Abraham’s  own  Egyptian 
followers  were  circumcised,  and  that  the  Di- 
vine command  was  not  intended  to  teach  a 
new  rite,  but  to  consecrate  an  old  one  into  a 
sacramental  ordinance.  Some  even  think  that 
they  see  in  the  very  style  of  this  and  the  follow- 
ing verses  indications  that  the  rite  was  not  al- 
, together  new  and  before  unknown ; for  had  it 
been  new  and  unknown,  more  accurate  di- 
rections would  have  been  given  of  the  way  in 
which  a painful  and  dangerousoperation  should 
be  performed  (.Michaelis,  ‘Laws  of  Moses,’ 
Bk.  IV.  Ch.  iii.  Art.  185).  The  Egyptians, 
Ethiopians,  and  perhaps  some  other  African 
races,  are  sujiposed  to  have  adopted  it,  partly 
from  regard  to  cleanliness  (Herod.  Ii.  36), 


[v.  I,  2. 

which  the  Egyptians,  and  above  all  the  Egyp- 
tian priests,  especially  affected,  partly  to  guard 
against  disease  incident  in  those  hot  climates 
(see  Philo,  as  above,  p.  2 1 1 ; J oseph.  ‘ C.  Apion.’ 
II.  13),  partly  for  other  reasons,  which  may 
have  been  real  or  imaginary  (see  Michaelis,  as 
above.  Art.  186).  This  side  of  the  question 
is  ably  defended  by  Michaelis,  ‘ Laws  of  Moses,’ 
as  above,  and  Kalisch,  in  loc. 

In  answer  it  is  truly  said,  that  the  Greek 
historians  are  too  late  and  too  loose  in  their 
statements  to  command  our  confidence  ; that 
the  tribes  cognate  with  the  Egyptians,  such  as 
the  Hamite  inhabitants  of  Palestine,  were  no- 
toriously uncircumcised,  that  the  Egyptians, 
especially  the  Egyptian  priests,  are  not  un- 
likely to  have  adopted  the  rite  at  the  time 
when  Joseph  was  their  governor  and  in  such 
high  estimation  among  them,  and  that  the 
question  concerning  the  relative  dafes  of  Abra- 
ham and  the  different  Egyptian  dynasties  is 
involved  in  too  much  obscurity  to  be  made  a 
ground  for  such  an  argument  as  the  above  to 
be  built  upon  it.  (See  Bp.  Patrick,  in  loc.; 
Heidegger,  ‘Hist.  Patr.’ ii.  240;  Wesseling 
and  Larcher,  ‘ad  Herod.’  11.37,  Graves 
‘ on  the  Pentateuch,’  Pt.  ii.  Lect.  v.;  Words- 
worth, in  loc.)  Again,  the  argument  de- 
rived from  the  ancient  Egyptian  language 
proves  nothing,  the  words  are  lost  or  doubt- 
ful. The  argument  from  the  mummies  proves 
nothing,  as  we  have  no  mummies  of  the  an- 
cient empire.  The  figures  in  the  hieroglyphics 
are  later  still.  The  only  argument  of  weight 
is  that  derived  from  the  old  hieroglyphic, 
common  in  the  pyramids,  which  is  thought 
to  represent  circumcision.  It  may  on  the 
whole  be  said,  that  we  cannot  conclude  from 
the  loose  statements  of  Greek  writers  15 
centuries  later  than  Abraham,  nor  even  from 
the  evidence  of  monuments  and  sculptures 
as  yet  perhaps  but  imperfectly  read  and  un- 
certain as  to  their  comparative  antiquity, 
that  circumcision  had  been  known  before 
it  was  given  to  Abraham;  yet  that  on  the 
other  hand,  there  would  be  nothing  incon- 
sistent with  the  testimony  of  the  Mosaic 
history  in  the  belief,  that  it  had  been  in  use 
among  the  Egyptians  and  other  African  tribes, 
before  it  was  elevated  by  a Divine  ordinance 
into  a sacred  rite  for  temporary  purposes,  to 
be  served  in  the  Mosaic  dispensation.  A very 
able  summary  of  the  arguments  on  both  sides, 
not,  of  course,  embracing  those  drawn  from 
the  more  recent  discoveries  in  Egypt,  is  given 
by  Spencer,  ‘ De  Legg.  Heb.’  lib.  i.  c.  5.  § 4. 
See  Deut.  x.  16  and  Note. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

I Abraham  cutertaiueth  three  angels.  9 Sarah 
is  reprirred  for  laughing  at  the  strange  pro- 
mise. 17  The  destruction  0/ Sodo?n  is  revealed 
to  A braham.  2 3 A braham  maketh  intercession 
for  the  men  thereof 


AND  the  ‘^Lord  appeared  unto-* Heb.  13 
jT^  him  in  the  plains  of  Mamre: 
and  he  sat  in  the  tent  door  in  the 
heat  of  the  day ; 

2 And  he  lift  up  his  eyes  and 


V.  3—7-] 


GENESIS.  XVIII. 


123 


looked,  and,  Lo,  three  men  stood  by 
him:  and  when  he  saw  them^  he  ran 
to  meet  them  from  the  tent  door,  and 
bowed  himself  toward  the  ground, 

3 And  said.  My  Lord,  if  now  I have 
found  favour  in  thv  sight,  pass  not 
away,  I pray  thee,  from  thy  servant : 

4 Let  a little  water,  I pray  you,  be 
fetched,  and  wash  your  feet,  and  rest 
yourselves  under  the  tree : 

5 And  I will  fetch  a morsel  of  bread. 


and  ^comfort  ye  your  hearts;  after 
that  ye  shall  pass  on:  for  therefore 
^are  ye  come  to  your  servant.  And 
they  said.  So  do,  as  thou  hast  said.  passed. 

6 And  Abraham  hastened  into  the 
tent  unto  Sarah,  and  said,  ^ Make  ready 
quickly  three  measures  of  fine  meal, 
knead  /7,  and  make  cakes  upon  the 
hearth. 

7 And  Abraham  ran  unto  the  herd, 
and  fetcht  a calf  tender  and  good,  and 


Chap.  XVIII.  1.  plains  of  Mamre]  Oaks 
or  oak  grove  of  Mamre,  see  xiii.  18; 
xiv.  13. 

in  the  heat  of  the  3ay^  Abraham  was  sitting 
in  his  tent  under  the  shade  of  the  trees,  at  the 
noon  day  when  the  sun  was  oppressive,  and 
when  the  duty  of  hospitality  specially  sug- 
gested to  him  the  receiving  of  travellers,  who 
might  be  wearied  with  their  hot  journey.  The 
time  of  the  day  may  be  also  mentioned,  that 
it  might  be  the  more  certain  that  this  was  an 
open  vision,  not  a dream  of  the  night. 

2.  three  men']  In  v.  i it  is  said,  “The 
Lord  appeared  unto  him;”  in  v. 22  it  is  said, 
“The  turned  their  faces  from  thence,  and 
went  towards  Sodom;  but  Abraham  stood 
yet  before  the  Lord;”  in  ch.  xix.  i it  is  said, 
“There  came  t^vo  Angels  to  Sodom  at  even.” 
It  appears  from  the  comparison  of  these  pas- 
sages, and  indeed  from  the  whole  narrative, 
that  of  the  three  men  who  appeared  to  Abra- 
ham, two  were  angels,  and  one  was  Jeho- 
vah Himself.  On  the  belief  of  the  ancient 
Church  that  these  manifestations  of  God  were 
manifestations  of  God  the  Son,  anticipations 
of  the  Incarnation,  see  note  on  ch.  xii.  7.  See 
also  on  this  passage,  Euseb.  ‘ Demonst.  Evan.’ 
Lib.  v.  c.  9.  There  was,  however,  a belief 
among  many  of  the  ancients  that  the  three 
men  here  appearing  to  Abraham  symbolized 
the  three  Persons  of  the  Trinity;  and  the 
Church  by  appointing  this  chapter  to  be  read 
on  Trinity  Sunday  seems  to  indorse  this 
belief.  This  need  not  conflict  with  the 
opinion,  that  the  only  Person  in  the  Trinity 
really  manifested  to  the  eyes  of  Abraham  was 
the  Son  of  God,  and  that  the  other  two  were 
created  angels.  Indeed  such  a manifestation 
may  have  been  reason  enough  for  the  choice 
of  this  lesson  on  Trinity  Sunday.  It  has  been 
observed  that  One  of  the  three  mentioned  in 
this  chapter  is  called  repeatedly  J eho vah,  but 
neither  of  the  two  in  ch.  xix.  is  ever  so  called. 

bo'used  himself  toward  the  ground]  This  was 
i^erely  the  profound  eastern  salutation  (cp. 
ch.  xxiii.  7,  12,  xxxiii.  6,  7).  Abraham  as  yet 
was  “entertaining  angels  unawares''''  (Heb.xiii. 
a).  He  may  have  observed  a special  dignity 


in  the  strangers,  but  could  not  have  known 
their  heavenly  mission. 

3.  My  Lord]  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  Abra- 
ham here  addresses  One  of  the  three,  who 
appears  more  noble  than  the  rest.  The  title 
which  he  gives  Him  is  AJonai,  a plural  of  excel- 
lence, but  the  Targum  of  Onkelos  has  rendered 
Jehovah  (^'.),  as  supposing  that  Abraham 
had  recognized  the  divinity  of  the  visitor. 

4.  'Wash  your  feet]  In  the  hot  plains  of 
the  east  travellers  shod  only  with  sandals 
found  the  greatest  comfort  in  bathing  their 
feet,  when  resting  from  a journey.  (See  ch. 
xix.  2,  xxiv.  32;  Judg.  xix.  21;  iTim.v.  10.) 

5.  comfort  ye  your  hearts]  Lit.  “ sup- 
port your  hearts.”  The  heart,  considered  as 
the  centre  of  vital  functions,  is  put  by  the 
Hebrews  for  the  life  itself.  To  support  the 
heart  therefore  is  to  refresh  the  whole  vital 
powers  and  spirits.  (See  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  738, 
6,  IDh,  I.  a.) 

for  therefore  are  ye  come  to  your  servant] 
The  patriarch  recognizes  a providential  call 
upon  him  to  refresh  strangers  of  noble  bear- 
ing, come  to  him  on  a fatiguing  journey. 

6.  three  measures  of  fine  meal]  Three 
seahs  of  the  finest  flour.  A seah  was 
the  third  part  of  an  ephah  according  to  the 
Rabbins.  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  ix.  4)  and  Jerome 
(‘  Comm,  on  Matt.’  xiii.  33),  say  that  the 
seah  was  a modiiis  and  a half.  The  accuracy 
of  this  comparison  between  the  Hebrew  and 
Roman  measures  is  doubted,  as  it  does  not  cor- 
respond with  the  calculations  of  Rabbinical 
writers.  (See  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  pp.  83,  932 ; Smith, 
‘Dict.of  Bible,’ Vol.  III.  pp.  1741,1742.)  The 
two  words,  Kemach  soleth.,  rendered  “ fine 
meal,”  are  nearly  synonymous,  both  appearing 
to  mean  fine  flour,  the  latter  being  the  finer 
of  the  two.  They  might  be  rendered  “ flour 
of  fine  flour.”  According  to  the  Rabbinical 
Commentary,  ‘ Vajikra  Rabba,’  soleth  is  the 
kemach  of  kemachs^  the  fine  flour  of  fine  flour. 
(See  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  959,) 

cakes  upon  the  hearth]  Probably  the  sim- 
pler form  of  cake  baked  in  the  midst  of  hot 
cinders. 


124 


GENESIS.  XVIII. 


gave  it  unto  a young  man ; and  he 
hasted  to  dress  it. 

8 And  he  took  butter,  and  milk,  and 
the  calf  which  he  had  dressed,  and  set 
it  before  them ; and  he  stood  by  them 
under  the  tree,  and  they  did  eat. 

9 And  they  said  unto  him.  Where 
is  Sarah  thy  wife?  And  he  said.  Be- 
hold, in  the  tent. 

10  And  he  said,  I will  certainly 
return  unto  thee  according  to  the  time 

*chap.  17.  of  life;  and,  lo,  '^Sarah  thy  wife  shall 
& 21. 2.  have  a son.  And  Sarah  heard  it  in 
the  tent  door,  which  was  behind 
him. 

1 1 Now  Abraham  and  Sarah  were 
old  and  well  stricken  in  age;  and  it 


[v.  8—15. 

ceased  to  be  with  Sarah  after  the 
manner  of  women. 

12  Therefore  Sarah  laughed  within 
herself,  saying,  After  I am  waxed  old 

shall  1 have  pleasure,  my  ‘^lord  being  Pet.  3. 
old  also  ? 

13  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Abra- 
ham, Wherefore  did  Sarah  laugh, 
saying.  Shall  I of  a surety  bear  a 
child,  which  am  old  ? 

14  Is  any  thing  too  hard  for  the 
Lord  ? At  the  time  appointed  I will 
return  unto  thee,  according  to  the 
time  of  life,  and  Sarah  shall  have  a son. 

15  Then  Sarah  denied,  saying,  I 
laughed  not ; for  she  was  afraid.  And 
he  said.  Nay;  but  thou  didst  laugh. 


8.  hutter'\  i.  e.  thick  milk  or  clotted 
cream.  The  modern  Arabs  have  a simple 
mode  of  churning,  and  make  very  good  but- 
ter. Robinson  (‘Res.’  ii.  p.  180)  describes 
the  baking  of  cakes  and  making  of  butter 
among  them  in  the  present  day.  It  is,  how- 
ever, most  probable,  that  the  word,  rendered 
butter  in  the  Old  Testament,  was  rather  thick 
milk,  or  more  probably,  thick  cream,  though* 
in  one  place  (Prov,  xxx.  33),  it  may  perhaps 
be  rendered  cheese.  The  ancient  inhabitants  of 
Palestine  used  olive  oil  where  we  use  butter. 
(See  Rosenm.  and  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p,  486.) 

they  did  eat\  That  spiritual  visitants,  though 
in  human  form,  should  eat,  has  been  a puzzle 
to  many  commentators.  Josephus  (‘  Ant,’  i. 
ii)  and  Philo  (‘Opp.’  ii.  18),  say  it  was  in 
appearance  only,  which  is  implied  by  Pseudo- 
Jonathan,  Rashi  and  Kimchi.  If  the  angels 
had  assumed  human  bodies,  though  but  for  a 
time,  there  would  have  been  nothing  strange 
in  their  eating.  In  any  case,  the  food  may 
have  been  consumed,  miraculously  or  not ; 
and  the  eating  of  it  was  a proof  that  the  visit 
of  the  angels  to  Abraham  wai^no  mere  vision, 
but  a true  manifesUitibn  of  heavenly  beings. 

10.  he  said]  In  v.  9 we  read  “they 
said,”  i.e.  one  of  the  three  heavenly  guests 
spoke  for  the  others.  Now  we  have  the 
singular  number,  and  the  speaker  uses  lan- 
guage suited  only  to  the  Ruler  of  nature  and 
of  all  things. 

according  to  the  time  of  life]  There  is  some 
difficulty  in  the  rendering  of  these  words, 
d'he  phrase  occurs  again,  2 K.  iv.  16.  It  is 
now  generally  thought  that  the  sense  is  the 
same  as  in  civ,  xvii.  21,  “at  this  set  time  in 
the  next  year”  (cp.  xviii.  14);  and  that  the 
words  should  be  translated,  “when  the  season 
revives,”  i.e.  when  spring  or  summer  comes 
round  again.  Compare 


Xdipc,  yvvai,  <})i\6Tr]Td  TTcpmXoixivov  S* 
iviavTOv 

resets  dyXaa  rcKva. 

Horn.  ‘Od.’  A.  247. 

(vSee  Rosenm.  in  loc.;  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  470.) 
Prof.  Lee  (‘Lex.’  p.  193)  denies  the  sound- 
ness of  this  criticism,  and  virtually  indorses 
the  Authorized  Version,  “as  (at)  the  season, 
period,  of  a vigorous  woman.”  There  is, 
however,  very  little  doubt  that  the  criticism 
is  correct. 

12.  laughed]  Whatever  may  have  been 
the  nature  of  Abraham’s  laughter  (see  xvii. 
17),  this  of  Sarah’s  seems  to  have  resulted 
from  incredulity.  She  may  scarcely  have 
recognized  the  Divinity  of  the  speaker,  and 
had  not  perhaps  realized  the  truth  of  the 
promise  before  made  to  Abraham.  St  Au- 
gustine distinguishes  between  the  laughter  of 
Abraham  and  that  of  Sarah  thus,  “The 
father  laughed,  when  a son  was  promised  to 
him,  from  wonder  and  joy;  the  mother 
laughed,  when  the  three  men  renewed  the 
promise,  from  doubtfulness  and  joy.  The 
angel  reproved  her,  because  though  that  laugh- 
ter was  from  joy,  yet  it  was  not  of  full  faith. 
Afterwards  by  the  same  angel  she  was  con- 
firmed in  faith  also.”  ‘ De  C.  D.’  xvi.  31. 

my  lord]  See  i Pet.  iii.  6. 

13.  the  Lord  said]  Here  the  speaker 
is  distinctly  called  Jehovah,  and  it  seems 
much  more  reasonable  to  believe  that  there 
was  a Theophania  of  the  Son  of  G(xl,  than 
that  a created  angel  was  personating  God  and 
speaking  in  His  name. 

14.  Is  any  thing  too  hard  for  the  Lord?] 
Lit,  “ Is  anything  too  wonderful  for  the 
Lord?”  Cp.  Lukei.  37. 

At  the  time  appointed  I nvill  return  unto  thee., 
according  to  the  time  of  Ife]  See  on  v.  10. 


V.  1 6 — 28.] 


GENESIS.  XVIII. 


125 


16  ^ And  the  men  .rose  up  from 
thence,  and  looked  toward  Sodom: 
and  Abraham  went  with  them  to 
bring  them  on  the  way. 

17  And  the  Lord  said,  Shall  I 
hide  from  Abraham  that  thing  which 
Ido; 

18  Seeing  that  Abraham  shall  surely 
become  a great  and  mighty  nation, 
and  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  shall 

a chap.  12.  be  ^blessed  in  him? 

^9  ^ know  him,  that  he  will 

Gal.  3. 8.  command  his  children  and  his  house- 
hold after  him,  and  they  shall  keep 
the  way  of  the  Lord,  to  do  justice 
and  judgment;  that  the  Lord  may 
bring  upon  Abraham  that  which  he 
hath  spoken  of  him. 

20  And  the  Lord  said.  Because  the 
cry  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  is  great, 
and  because  their  sin  is  very  grievous ; 

21  I will  go  down  now,  and  see 
whether  they  have  done  altogether 
according  to  the  cry  of  it,  which  is 
come  unto 'me;  and  if  not,  I will 
know. 

22  And  the  men  turned  their  faces 


from  thence,  and  went  toward  Sodom; 
but  Abraham  stood  yet  before  the 
Lord. 

23  ^ And  Abraham  drew  near, 
and  said.  Wilt  thou  also  destroy  the 
righteous  with  the  wicked  ? 

24  Peradventure  there  be  fifty  right- 
eous within  the  city:  wilt  thou  also 
destroy  and  not  spare  the  place  for 
the  fifty  righteous  that  are  therein  ? 

25  That  be  far  from  thee  to  do  after 
this  manner,  to  slay  the  righteous.with 
the  wicked : and  that  the  righteous 
should  be  as  the  wicked,  that  be  far 
from  thee:  Shall  not  the  Judge  of  all 
the  earth  do  right? 

26  And  the  Lord  said.  If  I find  in 
Sodom  fifty  righteous  within  the  city, 
then  I will  spare  all  the  place  for  their 
sakes. 

27  And  Abraham  answered  and 
said.  Behold  now,  I have  taken  upon 
me  to  speak  unto  the  Lord,  which  am 
but  dust  and  ashes: 

28  Peradventure  there  shall  lack 
five  of  the  fifty  righteous:  wilt  thou 
destroy  all  the  city  for  lack  of  five  ? 


•16.  Abraham  <iuent  nvith  theni]  The  three 
heavenly  visitors  all  go  towards  Sodom,  A- 
braham  goes  some  way  with  them,  how  far 
is  not  said.  There  is  a tradition  that  he  went 
as  far  as  Gaphar-berucha,  from  which  the 
Dead  Sea  is  visible,  through  a ravine. 

17.  Shall  I hide  from  Abraham~\  The 
LXX.  adds  here  “ my  son,”  which  is  quoted 
by  Philo  (i.  p.  401,  Mangey)  as  “Abraham, 
my  friend;”  so  that  in  all  probability,  copies 
of  the  LXX.  in  the  time  of  Philo  had  this 
afterwards  familiar  name  of  Abraham  ex- 
pressed in  this  verse.  Cp.  2 Chr.  xx.  7 ; Isa. 
xli.  8 ; James  ii.  23. 

19.  For  I kno^u  him^  that~\  This  is  the 
general  reading  of  the  ancient  Versions,  LXX., 
Vulg.,  Targg.,  &c.  &c.  It  does  not,  how- 
ever, seem  to  correspond  with  the  Hebrew 
idiom.  The  literal  rendering  would  be,  “I 
have  known  him,  to  the  end  that,  in  order 
that,  he  should  command  his  children,  &c.” 
The  word  (VT',  to  kno^v')  is  sometimes  used 
of  the  eternal  foreknowledge  and  election  of 
God,  as  in  Amos  iii.  2,  “ You  only  have  I 
known  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth.”  Cp. 
Exod.  xxxiii.  12;  Job  xxii.  13;  Ps.  Ixxiii.  ii, 
cxliv.  3 ; Is.  Iviii.  3 ; Nah.  i.  7.  And  compare 
a similar  use  in  the  Greek  Testament,  Rom. 


viii.  29,  xi.  2.  The  meaning  would  then  be, 
“ 1 have  foreknown  and  chosen  Abraham, 
that  he  should  be  the  depositary  of  my  truth, 
and  should  teach  his  children  in  the  way  of 
religion  and  godliness,  that  so  the  promises 
made  to  him  should  be  fulfilled  in  his  seed 
and  lineage.  So  Ges.  (‘Thes.’  p.5  71),  Rosenm., 
Tuch,  Knobel,  Delitzsch,  Keil,  &c. 

20.  the  cry']  Cp.  ch.  iv.  10;  Ps.  ix.  13. 

21.  I ‘Will  go  down]  Ch.  xi.  5,  7;  Ex. 
iii.  8.  The  reason  for  God’s  thus  revealing 
His  purpose  to  Abraham  seems  to  have  been, 
that,  as  Abraham  was  to  be  the  heir  of  the 
promises,  he  might  be  taught  and  might  teach 
his  children,  who  were  afterwards  to  dwell  in 
that  very  country,  that  God  is  not  a God  of 
mercy  only,  as  shewn  to  Abraham  and  his 
descendants,  but  a God  of  judgment  also,  as 
witnessed  by  His  destruction  of  the  guilty 
cities  of  the  plain. 

22.  the  men  turned  their  faces  from  thence^ 
&c.]  The  two  created  angels  went  on  to  So- 
dom (see  ch.  xix.  i),  “but  Abraham  stood 
yet  before  the  Lord,”  stood  yet  in  the  pre- 
sence of  that  third  Being  who  was  not  a 
created  angel,  but  the  eternal  Word  of  God, 
“the  Angel  of  Mighty  counsel”  (Isai.  ix.  6, 
LXX.);  “the  Messenger  of  the  covenant.” 
(Mai.  iii.  i). 


126 


GENESIS.  XVIII.  "'XIX. 


[v.  29—3. 


And  he  said,  If  I find  there  forty  and 
five,  I will  not  destroy  it. 

29  And  he  spake  unto  him  yet  again, 
and  said,  Peradventure  there  shall  be 
forty  found  there.  And  he  said,  I 
will  not  do  it  for  forty’s  sake. 

30  And  he  said  unto  him^  Oh  let  not 
the  Lord  be  angry,  and  I will  speak: 
Peradventure  there  shall  thirty  be 
found  there.  And  he  said,  I will  not 
do  //,  if  I find  thirty  there. 

3 1 ’And  he  said.  Behold  now,  I have 
taken  upon  me  to  speak  unto  the 
Lord:  Peradventure  there  shall  be 
twenty  found  there.  And  he  said,  I 
will  not  destroy  it  for  twenty’s  sake. 

32  And  he  said.  Oh  let  not  the  Lord 
be  angry,  and  I will  speak  yet  but  this 
once : Peradventure  ten  shall  be  found 
there.  And  he  said,  I will  not  de- 
stroy it  for  ten’s  sake. 

33  And  the  Lord  went  his  way,  as 
soon  as  he  had  left  communing  with 
Abraham:  and  Abraham  returned 
unto  his  place. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

I Lot  aitertaineth  two  angels.  4 The  vicious 
Sodomites  are  stricken  with  blindness.  1 ^ Lot 
is  sent  far  safety  into  the  mountains.  18  He 
obtaineth  leave  to  go  into  Zoar.  24  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah  are  destroyed.  26  Lot's  wife  is  a 
pillar  of  salt.  30  Lot  dwelleth  iti  a cave.  31 
The  incestuous  original  of  Moab  and  Ammon. 

AND  there  came  two  angels  to 
±\_  Sodom  at  even ; and  Lot  sat  in 
the  gate  of  Sodom:  and  Lot  seeing 
them  rose  up  to  meet  them ; and  he 
bowed  himself  with  his  face  toward 
the  ground ; 

2 And  he  said.  Behold  now,  my 
lords,  turn  in,  I pray  you,  into  your 
servant’s  house,  and  tarry  all  night, 

and  ‘^wash  your  feet,  and  ye  shall  rise  «chap.  18 
up  early,  and  go  on  your  ways.  And 
they  said.  Nay;  but  we  will  abide  in 
the  street  all  night. 

3 And  he  pressed  upon  them  greatly ; 
and  they  turned  in  unto  him,  and 
entered  into  his  house;  and  he  made 
them  a feast,  and  did  bake  unleavened 
bread,  and  they  did  eat. 


32.  I avill  not  destroy  it  for  ten's  sake^ 
A noted  example  of  the  efficacy  of  prayer,  of 
the  hle?ssedness  of  a good  leaven  in  a city  or 
nation,  and  of  the  longsuffering  mercy  of  God. 

Chap.  XIX.  1.  t^wo  angels']  Lit.  the 
two  angels.  So  LXX.  The  two  men,  who 
left  Abraham  still  standing  in  the  presence  of 
the  Lord  (ch.  xviii.  22)  now  came  to  Sodom 
at  even. 

Lot  sat  in  the  gate  of  Sodom]  The  gate  of 
the  city  was,  in  the  ancient  towns  of  the 
east,  the  common  place  of  public  resort,  both 
for  social  intercourse  and  public  business. 
This  gate  of  the  city  nearly  corresponded  with 
the  forum  or  market-place  of  Greece  and 
Rome.  Not  only  was  it  the  place  of  public 
sale,  but  judges  and  even  kings  held  courts  of 
justice  there.  I'he  gate  itself  was  probably  an 
arch  with  deep  recesses,  in  which  were  placed 
the  seats  of  the  judges,  and  benches  on  either 
side  were  arranged  for  public  convenience. 
(Cp.  ch.  xxxiv.  20;  Dent.  xxi.  19,  xxii.  15; 
Ruth  iv.  I.  See  also  Horn.  ‘11.’  Lib.  iii. 
148.) 

bovued  himself]  See  on  ch.  xviii.  2. 

2.  my  lords]  The  Masorites  mark  this  word 
as  “ profane,”  i.  e.  as  not  taken  in  the  divine, 
but  in  the  human  sense.  Lot,  like  Abraham, 
only  saw  in  the  angels  two  men,  travellers 
appai-ently  wearied*with  the  way,  and  he  offers 


them  all  the  rites  of  hospitality.  In  those  days 
there  were  neither  inns  nor  perhaps  even 
caravanserais,  so  that  private  houses  only  could 
give  lodging  to  strangers. 

qjuill  abide  in  the  street  all  night]  The 
“street,”  lit.  “the  broad,  open  space,”  pro- 
bably included  all  the  streets,  squares,  and 
inclosures,  frequently  extensive  in  an  eastern 
city,  and  in  these  early  days  perhaps  less 
built  over  than  in  modern  towns.  The  warmth 
of  the  climate  would  make  it  easy  to  pass  the 
night  in  such  a place.  The  words  of  the  angels 
may  be  compared  with  our  Lord’s  manner  as 
recorded  Luke  xxiv.  28,  “He  made  as  though 
He  would  have  gone  further.”  The  visit  of 
the  angels  was  one  of  trial  previous  to  judg- 
ment (see  ch.  xviii.  21),  trial  of  Lot  as  well  as 
of  the  people  of  Sodom.  Lot’s  character, 
though  he  is  called  “a  righteous”  or  upright 
“man”  (2  Pet.  ii.  7),  was  full  of  faults  and 
infirmities,  but  here  he  comes  out  well  under 
the  trial.  His  conduct  is  altogether  favour- 
ably contrasted  with  that  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  city,  and  so  he  is  delivered,  whilst  they 
are  destroyed. 

3.  a feast]  Lit. .“  a drink,  or  banquet, 
symposium.”  It  is  the  word  used  commonly 
for  a sumptuous  repast. 

unlea-vened  bread]  As  having  no  time  to 
leaven  it.  Literally  the  words  mean  “bread 
of  sweetness,”  i.e.  bread  wliich  had  not  been 
made  bitter  by  leaven. 


V.  4— J3-] 


GINESIS.  XIX. 


127 


4 ^ But  before  they  lay  down,  the 
men  of  the  city,  even  the  men  of 
Sodom,  compassed  the  house  round, 
both  old  and  young,  all  the  people 
from  every  quarter: 

5 And  they  called  unto  Lot,  and 
said  unto  him.  Where  are  the  men 
which  came  in  to  thee  this  night? 
bring  them  out  unto  us,  that  we  may 
know  them. 

6 And  Lot  went  out  at  the  door 
unto  them,  and  shut  the  door  after 
him, 

7 And  said,  I pray  you,  brethren, 
do  not  so  wickedly. 

8 Behold  now,  I have  two  daughters 
which  have  not  known  man ; let  me, 
I pray  you,  bring  them  out  unto  you, 
and  do  ye  to  them  as  is  good  in  your 
eyes : only  unto  these  men  do  nothing; 
for  therefore  came  they  under  the 
shadow  of  my  roof. 


9 And  they  said.  Stand  back.  And 
they  said  again^  This  one  fellow  came 
in  to  sojourn,  and  he  will  needs  be  a 
judge:  now  will  we  deal  worse  with 
thee,  than  with  them.  And  they 
pressed  sore  upon  the  man,  even  Lot, 
and  came  near  to  break  the  door. 

10  But  the  men  put  forth  their 
hand,  and  pulled  Lot  into  the  house 
to  them,  and  shut  to  the  door. 

11  And  they  smote  the  men  ^that  *9- 
were  at  the  door  of  the  house  with 
blindness,  both  small  and  great:  so 

that  they  wearied  themselves  to  find 
the  door. 

12  H And  the  men  said  unto  Lot, 

Hast  thou  here  any  besides?  son  in 
law,  and  thy  sons,  and  thy  daughters, 
and  whatsoever  thou  hast  in  the  city, 
bring  them  out  of  this  place: 

13  For  we  will  destroy  this  place, 
because  the  ‘^cry  of  them  is  waxen 


4.  all  the  p.  ople  from  e'very  quarter"]  The 
utter  shamelessness  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Sodom,  as  well  as  their  unbridled  licentious- 
ness, is  briefly  but  most  emphatically  expressed 
in  this  verse.  The  Canaanitish  nations  in 
general,  and  the  cities  of  the  plain  especially, 
were  addicted  to  those  deadly  sins  so  strictly 
forbidden  to  the  Israelites.  See  Lev.  xx. 
22,  23. 

6.  Lot  (Went  out  at  the  door  unto  them^ 
and  shut  the  door  after  him]  Lit.  “went  out 
at  the  doorway,  and  shut  the  door  after 
him.” 

8.  I hauee  t^wo  daughters]  These  words 
of  Lot  have  been  much  canvassed  in  all  times. 
St  Chrysostom  thought  it  virtuous  in  him  not 
to  spare  his  own  daughters,  rather  than  sacri- 
fice the  duties  of  hospitality,  and  expose  his 
guests  to  the  wickedness  of  the  men  of  Sodom 
(‘Horn,  xxiii. in  Gen.’).  So  St  Ambrose  (‘ De 
Abrah.’  Lib.  i.  c.  6),  speaking  as  if  a smaller 
sin  were  to  be  preferred  to  a greater.  But  St 
Augustine  justly  observes,  that  we  should 
open  the  way  for  sin  to  reign  far  and  wide,  if 
we  allowed  ourselves  to  commit  smaller  sins, 
lest  others  should  commit  greater  (‘  Lib.  contr. 
Mend.’  c.  9.  See  also  ‘‘Qu.  in  Gen.’  42).  We 
see  in  all  this  conduct  of  Lot  the  same  mixed 
character.  He  intended  to  do  rightly,  but 
did  it  timidly  and  imperfectly.  He  felt  strongly 
the  duty  of  hospitality,  perhaps  by  this  tiwie 
he  had  even  some  suspicion  of  the  sacred  cha- 
racter of  his  guests,  but  his  standard  of  right, 
though  high  when  compared  with  that  of  his 
neighbours,  was  not  the  highest.  The  sacred 


writer  relates  the  history  simply  and  without 
comment,  not  holding  up  Lot  as  an  example 
for  imitation,  but  telling  his  faults  as  well  as 
his  virtues,  and  leaving  us  to  draw  the  infer- 
ences. He  brought  all  his  troubles  on  himself 
by  the  home  he  had  chosen.  He  was  bound 
to  defend  his  guests  at  the  risk  of  his  own 
life,  but  not  by  the  sacrifice  of  his  daughters. 

9.  Stand  back]  Lit.  “Gome  near,  farther 
off.” 

(will  needs  be  a judge]  or,  “judging,  he  will 
judge,”  referring,  probably,  as  Tuch  obsei*ves, 
to  Lot’s  frequent  remonstrances  with  them  for 
their  licentiousness  and  violence,  which  is  re- 
ferred to  in  2 Pet.ii.  7,  8. 

11.  they  smote  the  men  that  (were  at  the 
door  of  the  house  (with  blindness]  Perhaps  the 
word  for  blindness  rather  indicates  confused 
vision,  LXX.  aopao-tn.  In  Wisd.  xix.  17,  the 
darkness  in  which  these  men  were  involved  is 
compared  with  the  plague  of  ‘ darkness  which 
may  be  felt,”  which  fell  on  the  Egyptians 
(Ex.  X.  22).  If  it  had  been  actual  blindness, 
they  would  hardly  have  wearied  themselves  to 
find  the  door,  but  would  have  sought  some 
one  to  lead  them  by  the  hand  (August.  ‘ De 
Civit.  Dei.’  xxii.  19).  The  same  word,  the 
root  of  which  is  very  doubtful  (see  Gesen. 
‘ Thes.’  p.  961),  occurs  only  once  again,  in 
2 K.  vi.  18,  where,  apparently  (see  vv.  19,  20), 
not  real  blindness,  but  indistinctness  of  vision 
and  misleading  error  are  described.  Aben 
E/.ra  interprets  it  as  meaning  “ blindness  of 
eye  and  m.ind.” 


128 


GENESIS.  XilX. 


[v.  14 2 2. 


great  before  the  face  of  the  Lord  ; 
and  the  Lord  hath  sent  us  to  de- 
stroy it. 

14  And  Lot  went  out,  and  spake 
unto  his  sons  in  law,  which  married 
his  daughters,  and  said.  Up,  get  you 
out  of  this  place;  for  the  Lord  will 
destroy  this  city.  But  he  seemed  as 
one  that  mocked  unto  his  sons  in 
law. 

15  ^ And  when  the  morning  arose, 
then  the  angels  hastened  Lot,  saying, 
Arise,  take  thy  wife,  and  thy  two 

tH.ib.  daughters,  which  Gre  here;  lest  thou 
be  consumed  in  the  " iniquity  of  the 
city. 

16  And  ‘^while  he  lingered,  the 
men  laid  hold  upon  his  hand,  and 
upon  the  hand  of  his  wife,  and  upon 
the  hand  of  his  two  daughters;  the 
Lord  being  merciful  unto  him:  and 
they  brought  him  forth,  and  set  him 
without  the  city. 

17  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  when 


they  had  brought  them  forth  abroad, 
that  he  said.  Escape  for  thy  life;  look 
not  behind  thee,  neither  stay  thou  in 
all  the  plain ; escape  to  the  mountain, 
lest  thou  be  consumed. 

18  And  Lot  said  unto  them.  Oh, 
not  so,  my  Lord : 

19  Behold  now,  thy  servant  hath 
found  grace  in  thy  sight,  and  thou 
hast  magnified  thy  mercy,  which  thou 
hast  shewed  unto  me  in  saving  my 
life;  and  I cannot  escape  to  the  moun- 
tain, lest  some  evil  take  me,  and  I 
die : 

20  Behold  now,  this  city  is  near  to 
flee  unto,  and  it  is  a little  one:  Oh, 
let  me  escape'  thither,  [is  it  not  a little 
one?)  and  my  soul  shall  live. 

21  And  he  said  unto  him.  See,  I 
have  accepted  Ehee  concerning  this  t Heb. 
thing  also,  that  I will  not  overthrow 
this  city,  for  the  which  thou  hast 
spoken. 

22  Haste  thee,  escape  thither;  for 


13.  the  Lord  hath  sent  us  to  destroy  /V] 
I'he  angels  speak  here  as  messengers  of  judg- 
ment, not  as  He,  who  conversed  with  Abra- 
ham, ch,  xviii.  17 — 33. 

14.  (ivhich  married  his  daughters']  Lit. 
“the  takers  of  his  daughters.”  LXX.  “who 
had  taken  his  daughters.”  Vulg.  “who  were 
about  to  marry  his  daughters.”  Some,  Kno- 
bel,  Delit/sch,  &;c.,  have  held  that  besides 
tljose  mentioned,  vv.  8,  30,  Lot  had  other 
daughters,  who  had  married  men  of  the  city, 
and  who  perished  in  the  conflagration  with 
their  husbands.  It  is  more  commonly  thought 
that  he  had  only  two  daughters,  who  were 
betrothed,  but  not  yet  married ; betrothal 
being  sufficient  to  give  the  title  “son  in  law” 
or  “bridegroom”  to  their  affianced  husbands. 

15.  ^h'lch  are  here]  Lit.  “ which  are 
found.”  I his  seems  to  Knobel  and  others  to 
indicate  that  there  were  other  daughters,  but 
that  these  two  only  were  at  home,  the  others 
being  with  their  husbands  in  the  city  (see  on 
v.  14);  but  it  very  probably  points  only  to 
the  fact,  that  Lot's  wife  and  daughters  were 
at  hoir.e  and  ready  to  accompany  him,  whilst 
his  sons  in  law  scoffed  and  refused  to  go. 

16.  the  Lord  being  merciful  unto  him] 
Lit.  “in  the  mercy”  (the  sparing  pity)  “of 
the  Lord  to  him.” 

17.  that  he  saiiL]  i.e.  one  of  the  angels. 

the  plain]  I'he  kikkar,  the  circuit  of  the 
Jordan.  Lot  was  to  escape  from  the  whole 


of  the  devoted  region,  which  he  had  formerly 
coveted  for  his  .own,  and  where,  when  he 
parted  from  Abraham,  he  had  made  his  habi- 
tation, and  sought  to  enrich  himself. 

18.  my  Lord]  The  Masorites  have  the 
note  kadesh^  i.e.  “ holy,”  but  it  is  probably  no 
more  than  the  salutation  of  reverence,  see 
V.  2.  For,  though  Lot  had  now  found  out 
the  dignity  of  his  guests,  there  is  no  evidence 
that  he  thought  either  of  them  to  be  the  Most 
High.  Indeed  the  word  might  be  rendered 
in  the  plural  “my  lords,”  as  the  Syr.  and 
Saad. 

19.  1 cannot  escape  to  the  mountain]  Lot 
and  his  family  were,  no  doubt,  exhausted  by 
fear  and  anxiety,  and  he  felt  that,  if  he  had  to 
go  to  the  mountains  of  Moab,  he  would  be 
exposed  to  many  dangers,  which  might  prove 
his  destruction ; another  instance  of  defective 
courage  and  faith,  which  yet  is  pardoned  by  a 
merciful  God. 

some  e'vil]  The  evil,  i.e.  the  destruction 
about  to  fall  on  Sodom;  all  Lot’s  conduct 
here  denotes  excessive  weakness. 

20.  is  it  not  a little  one?]  Though  Zoar 
may  have  been  involved  in  the  guilt  of  the 
other  cities  of  the  plain.  Lot  pleads  that  it  has 
but  few  inhabitants,  and  that  the  sins  of  such 
a small  city  can  be  but  comparatively  small. 
So  Kashi. 

21.  / hai-'e  accepted  thee]  Lit.  “ I have 
lifted  up  thy  face.”  It  was  the  custom  in  the 


GENESIS.  XIX. 


129 


V.  23 — 28.] 


I cannot  do  anything  till  thou  be 
come  thither.  Therefore  the  name 
of  the  city  was  called  Zoar. 
t Heb.  23  ^ The  sun  was  ^ risen  upon  the 
^one forth,  when  Lot  entered  into  Zoar. 

'Deut.  29.  24  Then  ^the  Lord  rained  upon 

Luke  17.  Sodom  and  upon  Gomorrah  brim- 
stone  and  fire  from  the  Lord  out  of 

lmos4  ti‘  > 

Jude  7.  ‘ 25  And  he  overthrew  those  cities, 


and  all  the  plain,  and  all  the  inhabitants 
of  the  cities,  and  that  which  grew  upon 
the  ground. 

26  ^ But  his  wife  looked  back  from 
behind  him,  and  she  became  a pillar  of 
salt. 

27  IT  And  Abraham  gat  up  early  in 
the  morning  to  the  place  where  he 
stood  before  the  Lord  : 

28  And  he  looked  toward  Sodom 


East  to  make  supplication  with  the  face  to 
the  ground ; when  the  prayer  was  granted, 
the  face  was  said  to  be  raised. 

22.  Zoar\  i.e,  “little.”  It  appears  by 
several  ancient  testimonies  to  have  been  be- 
lieved that  Zoar  or  Bela,  though  spared  from 
the  first  destruction  of  the  cities  of  the  plain, 
was  afterwards  swallowed  up  by  an  earth- 
quake, probably  when  Lot  had  left  it,  v.  30. 
(See  Jerom.  ‘ ad  Jos.’  xv.  and  ‘Qu.  in  Gen.’ 
c.  XIV.;  Theodoret  ‘in  Gen.’  xix.).  This 
tradition  may  account  for  the  statement  in 
Wisdom  X.  6,  that  five  cities  were  destroy- 
ed, and  of  Josephus  (‘  B.  J.’  iv.  8.  4),  that 
the  “ shadowy  forms  of  five  cities”  could  be 
seen ; whereas  Deut.  xxix.  23  only  mentions 
four,  viz.  Sodom,  Gomorrah,  Admah  and 
Zeboim : yet,  on  the  other  hand,  Eusebius 
(v.  jSaXa)  witnesses  that  Bela,  or  Zoar,  was 
inhabited  in  his  day,  and  garrisoned  by  Ro- 
man soldiers. 

24.  the  Lord  rained  upon  Sodom  and  upon 
Gomorrah  brimstone  and  fire  from  the  Lord  out 
of  hean)en\  The  Lord  is  said  to  have  rained 
from  the  Lord,  an  expression  much  noted  by 
commentators,  Jewish  and  Christian.  Several 
of  the  Rabbins,  Manasseh  Ben  Israel,  R.  Si- 
meon, and  others,  by  the  first  J ehovah  under- 
stand the  angel  Gabriel,  the  angel  of  the 
Lord:  but  there  is  certainly  no  other  passage 
in  Scripture,  where  this  most  sacred  name 
is  given  to  a created  angel.  Many  of  the 
fathers,  Ignatius,  Justin  M.,  Tertullian,  Cy- 
prian, Athanasius,  Hilary,  The  Council  of 
Sirmium.  &c.  see  in  these  words  the  mystery 
of  the  Holy  Trinity,  as  though  it  were  said, 
“ God  the  Word  rained  down  fire  from  God 
the  Father;”  an  interpretation  which  may 
seem  to  be  supported  by  the  Jerusalem  Tar- 
gum,  where  “ the  Word  of  the  Lord”  is 
said  to  have  “rained  down  fire  and  bitumen 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord.”  Other  pa- 
tristic commentators  of  the  highest  authority 
(as  Chrysostom,  Jerome  and  Augustine)  do 
not  press  this  argument.  A ben  Ezra,  whom 
perhaps  a majority  of  Christian  commentators 
have  followed  in  this,  sees  in  these  words  a 
peculiar  “elegance  or  grace  of  language;” 
“ The  Lord  rained... from  the  Lord”  being  a 
grander  and  more  impressive  mode  of  saving, 
VoL.  1. 


“The  Lord  rained  from  Himself.”  It  is  a 
common  idiom  in  Hebrew  to  repeat  the  noun 
instead  of  using  a pronoun. 

brimstone  and  f re... out  of  hea'ven\  Many 
explanations  have  been  offered  of  this.  Whe- 
ther the  fire  from  heaven  was  lightning,  which 
kindled  the  bitumen  and  set  the  whole  country 
in  a blaze,  whether  it  was  a great  volcanic 
eruption  overwhelming  all  the  cities  of  the 
plain,  or  whether  there  was  simply  a miracu- 
lous raining  down  of  ignited  sulphur,  has 
been  variously  disputed  and  discussed.  From 
comparing  these  words  with  Deut.  xxix.  23, 
where  it  is  said,  “The  whole  land  thereof  is 
brimstone  and  salt  and  burning,”  it  may  be 
reasonably  questioned,  whether  the  “ brim- 
stone” in  both  passages  may  not  mean  bitu- 
men.,  with  which  unquestionably,  both  before 
(see  ch.  xiv.  10),  and  after  the  overthrow,  the 
whole  country  abounded  (see  also  Jerusalem 
Targum  quoted  in  the  last  note).  The  Al- 
mighty, in  His  most  signal  judgments  and 
even  in  His  most  miraculous  interventions, 
has  been  pleased  often  to  use  natural  agencies ; 
as,  for  instance,  He  brought  the  locusts  on 
Egypt  with  an  East  wind  and  drove  them 
back  with  a West  wind  (Ex.  x.  13,  19). 
Possibly  therefore  the  bitumen,  which  was  the 
natural  produce  of  the  country,  volcanic  or 
otherwise,  was  made  the  instrument  by  which 
the  offending  cities  were  destroyed.  The  re- 
velation to  Abraham,  the  visit  of  the  angels, 
the  deliverance  of  Lot,  mark  the  whole  as 
miraculous  and  the  result  of  direct  interven- 
tion from  above,  whatever  may  have  been  the 
instrument  which  the  Most  High  made  use  of 
to  work  His  pleasure. 

26.  a pillar  of  salt]  All  testimony  speaks 
of  the  exceeding  saltness  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
and  the  great  abundance  of  salt  in  its  neigh- 
bourhood {e.g.  Galen.  ‘ De  Simp.  Medic. 
Facult.’  IV.  19).  In  what  manner  Lot’s  wife 
actually  perished  has  been  questioned.  Aben- 
Ezra  supposed  that  she  was  first  killed  by  the 
brimstone  and  fire  and  then  incrusted  over 
with  salt,  so  as  to  become  a statue  or  pillar  of 
salt.  ^There  was  a pillar  of  salt  near  the  Dead 
Sea,  which  later  tradition  identified  with  Lot's 
wife  (Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  i.  ii;  Iren.  iv.  51;  Ter- 
tullian, ‘ Carmen  de  Sodoma ; ’ Benjamin  of 

I 


130 


GENESIS.  XIX. 


.E-  2 9—37* 


and  Gomorrah,  and  toward  all  the 
land  of  the  plain,  and  beheld,  and,  lo, 
the  smoke  of  the  country  went  up  as 
the  smoke  of  a furnace. 

29  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
God  destroyed  the  cities  of  the  plain, 
that  God  remembered  Abraham,  and 
sent  Lot  out  of  the  midst  of  the  over- 
throw, when  he  overthrew  the  cities 
in  the  which  Lot  dwelt. 

30  ^ And  Lot  went  up  out  of 
Zoar,  and  dwelt  in  the  mountain,  and 
his  two  daughters  with  him ; for  he 
feared  to  dwell  in  Zoar : and  he  dwelt 
in  a cave,  be  and  his  two  daughters. 

31  And  the  firstborn  said  unto  the 
younger.  Our  father  is  old,  and  there 
is  not  a man  in  the  earth  to  come  in 
unto  us  after  the  manner  of  all  the 
earth : 

32  Come,  let  us  make  our  father 
drink  wine,  and  we  will  lie  with  him. 


that  we  may  preserve  seed  of  our 
father. 

33  And  they  made  their  father 
drink  wine  that  night : and  the  first- 
born went  in,  and  lay  with  her  father; 
and  he  perceived  not  when  she  lay 
down,  nor  when  she  arose. 

34  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
morrow,  that  the  firstborn  said  unto 
the  younger.  Behold,  I lay  yesternight 
with  my  father : let  us  make  him  drink 
wine  this  night  also;  and  go  thou  in, 
and  lie  with  him,  that  we  may  pre- 
serve seed  of  our  father. 

35  And  they  made  their  father 
drink  wine  that  night  also:  and  the 
younger  arose,  and  lay  with  him ; and 
he  perceived  not  when  she  lay  down, 
nor  when  she  arose. 

36  Thus  were  both  the  daughters 
of  Lot  with  child  by  their  father. 

37  And  the  firstborn  bare  a son, 


Tudela,  ‘ Itin.’  p.44.  See  Heidegger,  il.  p.  269). 
The  American  expedition,  under  Lynch, 
found  to  the  East  of  Usdum  a pillar  of  salt 
about  forty  feet  high,  which  was  perhaps  that 
referred  to  by  Josephus,  &c. 

29.  God  remembered  Ahraham~\  He  re- 
membered Abraham’s  intercession  recorded  in 
ch.  xviii.  and  also  the  covenant  which  He  had 
made  with  Abrahar.i,  and  which  was  gra- 
ciously extended  so  as  to  benefit  his  kinsman 
Lot. 

30.  he  feared  to  d-well  in  Zoar~\  Jerome 
(‘ Qu.’  ad  h.l.)  supposes  that  Lot  had  seen 
Zoar  so  often  affected  by  earthquakes  that  he 
durst  no  longer  abide  there,  see  on  v.  22. 
Rashi  thought  that  the  proximity  to  Sodom 
was  the  reason  for  his  fear.  The  weakness  of 
Lot  s character  is  seen  here  again,  in  his  not 
trusting  God’s  promises. 

d-iveh  in  a ca^'e']  These  mountainous  re- 
gions abound  in  caves,  and  the  early  inhabit- 
ants foiTncd  them  into  dwellingplaces ; see 
on  ch.  xiv.  6. 

31.  there  is  not  a man  in  the  earth']  Iren, 
(iv.  51;)  Chrysostom  (‘Horn.  34  in  Ge- 
nes.’), Ambros.  (‘He  Abrahamo,’  i.  6),  Theo- 
dorct,  (‘  Qu.  in.  Gen.’  69),  excuse  this  incestu- 
ous conduct  of  the  daughters  of  Lot  on  the 
ground,  that  they  supposed  the  whole  human 
race  to  have  -been  destroyed,  excepting  their 
father  and  themselves.  Even  if  it  were  so,  the 
words  of  St  Augustine  would  be  true,  that 
“ they  should  have  j)referred  to  be  childless 
rather  than  to  treat  their  father  so.”  (^Potius 


nunqiiam  esse  matres  quam  sic  uti  patre  debu- 
erunt,  ‘ C.  Faustumf  xxii.  43.)  It  is  too  appa- 
rent that  the  licentiousness  of  Sodom  had  had 
a degrading  influence  upon  their  hearts  and 
lives. 

32.  let  us  make  our  father  drink  'wine] 
It  has  been  suggested  in  excuse  for  Lot,  that 
his  daughters  drugged  the  wine.  Of  this, 
however,  there  is.  no  intimation  in  the  text. 
But  the  whole  history  is  of  the  simplest  cha- 
racter. It  tells  plainly  all  the  faults,  not  of 
Lot  only,  but  of  Abraham  and  Sarah  also. 
Still  though  it  simply  relates  and  neither  praises 
nor  blames,  yet  in  Lot’s  history  we  may  trace 
the  judgment  as  well  as  the  mercy  of  God. 
His  selfish  choice  of  the  plain  of  Jordan  led 
him  perhaps  to  present  wealth  and  prosperity, 
but  withal  to  temptation  and  danger.  In 
the  midst  of  the  abandoned  profligacy  of 
Sodom  he  indeed  was  preserved  in  compara- 
tive purity,  and  so,  when  God  overthrew  the 
cities  of  the  plain,  he  yet  saved  Lot  from  de- 
struction. Still  Lot’s  feebleness  of  faith  first 
caused  him  to  linger,  v.  16,  then  to  fear  escape 
to  the  mountains,  v.  19,  and  lastly  to  doubt 
the  safety  of  the  place  which  God  had  spared 
for  him,  v.  30.  Now  again  he  is  led  by 
his  children  into  intoxication,  which  betrays 
him,  unconsciously,  into  far  more  dreadful 
wickedness.  And  then  we  hear  of  him  no 
more.  He  is  left  by  the  sacred  narrative, 
saved  indeed  from  the  conflagration  of  Sodom, 
but  an  outcast,  widowed,  homeless,  hopeless, 
without  children  or  grandchildren,  save  the 
authors  and  the  heirs  of  his  shame. 


GENESIS.  XIX. 


131 


V.  38.] 

and  called  his  name  Moab:  the  same 
is  the  father  of  the  Moabites  unto 
this  day. 

38  And  the  younger,  she  also  bare 


a son,  and  called  his  name  Ben- 
ammi : the  same  is  the  father  of 
the  children  of  Ammon  unto  this 
day. 


37.  Moab']  According  to  the  LXX.  = ;w^>- 
ab^  i.e.  “from  the  father.”  So  also  the 
Targ.  of  Pseudo- Jonathan,  Augustine,  Je- 
rome, &c.  alluding  to  the  incestuous  origin  of 
Moab.  The  Moabites  dwelt  originally  to  the 
East  of  the  Dead  Sea,  from  whence  they 
expelled  the  Emims  (Deut.  ii.  it).  Afterwards 
they  were  driven  by  the  Amorites  to  the 
South  of  the  river  Arnon,  which  formed  their 
Northern  boundary. 

38.  Ben-amml]  I.e.  “son  of  my  people,” 
in  allusion  to  his  being  of  unmixed  race.  The 
Ammonites  are  said  to  have  destroyed  the 
Zam-zummim,  a tribe  of  the  Rephaim,  and  to 
have  succeeded  them  and  dwelt  in  their  stead. 
(Deut.  ii.  22.)  They  appear  for  the  most  part 
to  have  been  an  unsettled  marauding  violent 


race,  of  Bedouin  habits,  worshippers  of  Mo- 
lech,  “the  abomination  of  the  Ammonites.” 
I K.  xi,  7. 

De  W ette  and  his  followers,  Rosenmuller, 
Tuch,  Knobel,  &c.  speak  of  this  narrative,  as 
if  it  had  arisen  from  the  national  hatred  of 
the  Israelites  to  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites, 
but  the  Pentateuch  by  no  means  shews  such 
national  hatred  (see  Deut.  ii.  9,  19):  and  the 
book  of  Ruth  gives  the  history  of  a Moabitess 
who  was  ancestress  of  David  himself  It  was 
not  till  the  Moabites  had  seduced  the  Israelites 
to  idolatry  and  impurity,  Num.  xxv.  i,  and 
had  acted  in  an  unfriendly  manner  towards 
them,  hiring  Balaam  to  curse  them,  that  they 
were  excluded  from  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord  for  ever.  Deut.  xxiii.  3,  4. 


NOTE  A on  Chap.  xix.  25.  The  Dead  Sea,  Site  of  Sodom  and  Zoar. 
(i)  Characteristics  of  Dead  Sea.  Testimonies  ancient  and  modem.  (2)  Geological 
formation.  (3)  Were  Sodom,  Zoar,  &c.  on  the  North  or  South  of  the  Dead  Sea? 


The  Dead  Sea,  if  no  historical  importance  at- 
tached to  it,  would  still  be  the.  most  remark- 
able body  of  water  in  the  known  world. 
Many  fabulous  characteristics  were  assigned 
to  it  by  ancient  writers,  as  that  birds  could 
not  Ry  over  it,  that  oxen  and  camels  floated  in 
it,  nothing  being  heavy  enough  to  sink  (Ta- 
cit. ‘ Hist.’  V.  6;  Plin.  ‘H.  N.’  v.  16;  Seneca, 
‘ Qu.  Nat.’  lib.  11.).  It  has  been  conjectured 
by  Reland,  with  some  probability,  that  le- 
gends belonging  to  the  lake  of  Asphalt  said  to 
have  existed  near  Babylon  (see  on  ch.  xi.  3) 
were  mixed  up  with  the  accounts  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  and  both  exaggerated  (Reland,  ‘ Palest.’ 
II.  pp.  244  seq.). 

The  Dead  Sea  called  in  Scripture  the 
Salt  Sea  (Gen.  xiv.  3;  Numb,  xxxiv.  3,  12), 
the  Sea  of  the  Plain  (Deut.  hi.  17,  iv.  49; 
Josh.  hi.  16),  and  in  the  later  books,  “the 
East  Sea”  (Ezek.  xlvh.  18;  Joel  ii,  20;  in 
Zech.  xiv.  8,  “the  former  sea”  should  be  ren- 
dered “the  East  Sea”),  is  according  to  Lynch 
40  geographical  miles  long  by  9 to  9^  broad. 
Its  depression  is  1316  feet  below  the  level  of 
the  Mediterranean.  Its  depth  in  the  northern 
portion  is  1308  feet.  Its  extreme  saltness  was 
known  to  the  ancients.  Galen.  (‘De  Simplic. 
Medicam.  Facultat.’  c.  19)  says  that  “ its  taste 
was  n®t  only  salt  but  bitter.”  Modern  travel- 
lers describe  the  taste  as  most  intensely  and 
intolerably  salt,  its  specific  gravity  and  its 
buoyancy  being  consequentlv  so  great  that 
people  can  swim  or  float  in  it,  who  could  not 
swim  in  any  other  water.  Thus  excessive 
saltness  is  probably  caused  by  the  immense 


masses  of  fossil  salt  which  lie  in  a mountain  at 
its  South-west  border,  and  by  the  rapid  eva- 
poration of  the  fresh  water,  which  flows  into 
it  (Stanley,  ‘ S.  and  P.’  p.  292;  Robinson’s 
‘ Phys.  Geog.’  p.  195).  Both  ancient  and 
modern  writers  assert  that  nothing  animal  or 
vegetable  lives  in  this  sea  (Tacit.  ‘ Hist.’  v.  6; 
Galen.  ‘ De  Simpl.  Med.’  iv.  19;  Hieron.  ad 
Ezech.  XLVii.  18;  Robinson,  ‘Bib.  Res.’ 11. 
p.  226),  The  few  living  creatures  which  the 
Jordan  washes  down  into  it  are  destroyed 
(Stanley,  ‘ S.  and  P.’  p.  293).  No  wonder, 
then,  that  the  Salt  Sea  should  have  been  called 
the  Dead  Sea,  a name  unknown  to  the  sacred 
writers,  but  common  in  after  times.  Even 
its  shores,  incrusted  with  salt,  present  the  ap- 
pearance of  utter  desolation.  The  ancients 
speak  much  of  the  masses  of  asphalt,  or  bitu- 
men, which  the  lake  threw  up.  Diodorus 
Sic.  affirms  that  the  masses  of  bitumen  were 
like  islands,  covering  two  or  three  plethra 
(Diod.  Sic.  II.  48)  ; and  Josephus  says  that 
they  were  of  the  form  and  magnitude  of  oxen 
(‘  B.  J.’  IV.  8.  4).  Modern  travellers  testify 
to  the  existence  of  bitumen  still  on  the  shores 
and  waters  of  the  Dead  Sea,  but  it  is  sup- 
posed by  the  Arabs,  that  it  is  only  thrown  up 
by  earthquakes.  Especially  after  the  earth- 
quakes of  1834  and  1837,  large  quantities  are 
said  to  have  been  cast  upon  the  Southern 
shore,  probably  detached  by  shocks  from  the 
bottom  of  the  Southern  bay  (Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’ 
II.  p.  229;  ‘Physical  Geog.’  p.  201.  See  also 
Thomson,  ‘Land  and  Book,’  p.  223). 

There  is  great  difference  between  the  North- 

I 2 


132 


GENESIS.  XX. 


ern  and  Southern  portions  of  the  sea.  The 
great  depth  of  the  Northern  division  does  not 
extend  to  the  South.  The  Southern  bay  is 
shallow,  its  shores  low  and  marshy,  almost 
like  a quicksand,  (Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’p.  293). 
It  has  been  very  generally  supposed  from  Gen. 
xiv.  3,  that  the  Dead  Sea  now  occupies  the 
site  of  what  was  originally  the  Plain  of 
Jordan,  the  vale  of  Siddim,  and  to  this  has 
been  added  the  belief  that  the  cities  of  Sodom, 
Gomorrah,  &c.  were  situated  in  the  vale  of 
Siddim,  and  that  they  too  were  covered  by 
the  Dead  Sea.  Recent  observations  have  led 
many  to  believe  that  probably  a lake  must 
have  existed  here  before  historic  times.  Yet 
it  is  quite  conceivable  that  the  terrible  catas- 
trophe recorded  in  Genesis,  traces  of  which 
are  visible  throughout  the  whole  region,  may 
have  produced  even  the  deep  depression  of 
the  bed  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  so  have  arrested 
the  streams  of  the  Jordan,  which  may  before 
that  time  have  flowed  onwards  through  the 
Arabah,  and  emptied  itself  into  the  Gulph  of 
Akabah.  At  all  events,  it  is  very  probable 
that  the  Southern  division  of  the  lake  may 
have  been  formed  at  a comparatively  recent 
date.  The  character  of  this  Southern  part, 
abounding  with  salt,  frequently  throwing  up 
bitumen,  its  shores  producing  sulphur  and 
nitre  (Robinson,  ‘Phys.  Geog.’  p.  204),  corre- 
sponds accurately  with  all  that  “is  told  us  of 
the  valley  of  Siddim,  which  was  “full  of 
slime  pits”  (Gen.  xiv.  10),  and  with  the  his- 
tory of  the  destruction  of  the  cities  by  fire 
and  brimstone  and  the  turning  of  Lot’s  wife 
into  a pillar  of  salt.  Very  probably  there- 
fore the  vale  of  Siddim  may  correspond  with 
what  is  now  the  Southern  Bay  of  the  Dead 
Sea.  There  is,  however,  no  Scriptural  au- 
thority for  saying  that  Sodom  and  the  other 
guilty  cities  were  immersed  in  the  sea.  They 
are  always  spoken  of  as  overthrown  by  fire 
from  heaven  (cf.  Deut.  xxix.  23;  Jer.  xlix. 
18,1.40;  Zeph.  ii.  9;  2Pet.ii.6).  And  Jose- 
phus (‘  B.  J.’  IV.  8.  4)  speaks  of  “ Sodomitis, 
once  a prosperous  country  from  its  fertility 
and  abundance  of  cities,  but  now  entirely 
burnt  up,”  as  adjoining  the  lake  Asphaltites. 
This  was  observed  long  ago  by  Reland  (ii.  p. 
256),  and  is  now  generally  admitted  by  tra- 
vellers and  commentators.  All  ancient  testi- 
mony is  in  favour  of  considering  the  cities  of 


[v.  1,  2. 

the  plain  as  having  lain  at  this  Southern  ex- 
tremity of  the  sea.  The  general  belief  at  pre- 
sent that  that  portion  only  of  the  sea  can  have 
been  of  recent  formation,  and  hence  that  that 
only  can  have  occupied  the  site  of  the  vale  of 
Siddim,  the  belief  that  Sodom  was  near  the 
vale  of  Siddim,  the  bituminous,  saline,  volcanic 
aspect  of  the  Southern  coast,  the  traditional 
nam.es  of  Usdum,  &c.,  the  traditional  site  of 
Zoar,  called  by  Josephus  (as  above)  Zoar  of 
Arabia,  the  hill  of -salt,  said  to  have  been  Lot’s 
wife,  and  every  other  supposed  vestige  of  the 
destroyed  cities  being  to  the  South,  all  tend  to 
the  general  conviction  that  the  cities  of  the 
plain  (of  the  Kikkar)  lay  either  within  or 
around  the  present  South  bay  of  the  Dead 
Sea.  On  the  other  hand,  Mr  Grove  (in. Smith’s 
‘ Diet,  of  the  Bible’)  has  argued  with  great 
ability  in  favour  of  a Northern  site  for  these 
cities,  and  he  is  supported  by  Tristrani  (‘  Land 
of  Israel,’  pp.  360 — 363).  The  chief  grounds 
for  his  argument  are  ist,  that  Abraham  and 
Lot,  at  or  near  Bethel,  could  have  seen  the 
plain  of  Jordan  to  the  North  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
but  could  not  have  seen  the  Southern  valleys 
(see  Gen.  xiii.  10);  2ndly,  that  what  they  saw 
was  “the  Kikkar  of  the  Jordan,”  whereas 
the  Jordan  flowed  into  the  Dead  Sea  at  its 
Northern  extremity,  but  probably  never  flow- 
ed to  the  South  of  that  sea : 3rdly,  that  later 
writers  have  been  misled  by  apparent  simi- 
larity of  names,  by  the  general  belief  that  the 
sea  had  overflowed  the  sites  of  the  cities  and 
by  uncertain  traditions.  It  is,  however,  to 
be  observed,  that  Mr  Grove’s  arguments  rest 
on  two  somewhat  uncertain  positions:  first, 
that,  in  Gen.  xiii.  10 — 13,  Lot  must  have  been 
able  to  see,  from  between  Bethel  and  Ai,  the 
cities  of  the  plain ; whereas  it  is  possible  that 
the  language  is  not  to  be  pressed  too  strictly. 
Lot  seeing  at  the  time  the  river  Jordan  North 
of  the  present  Dead  Sea,  and  knowing  that 
the  whole  valley  both  North  and  South  was 
fertile  and  well  watered;  secondly,  that  no 
part  of  the  Dead  Sea  can  be  of  recent  for- 
mation, notwithstanding  the  terrible  catas- 
trophes all  around  it,  to  which  not  only  Scrip- 
ture but  tradition  and  the  present  appear- 
ance of  the  whole  country  bear  testimony. 
On  the  other  hand,  both  tradition,  local  names 
and  local  evidences  are  strongly  in  favour  of 
the  Southern  site  of  the  cities  destroyed. 


CHAPTER  XX. 

I Abraham  sojoiirncth  at  Gerar,  2 denieth  his 
7vife.,  and  loscth  her.  3 Abvndcch  is  re- 
proved Jor  her  in  a dream.  9 He  rebiiketh 
Abraham.,  14  restoreth  Sarah,  16  and  re- 
provetk  her.  17  He  is  healed  by  Abraham's 
prayer. 


K 


ND  Abraham  journeyed  from 
thence  toward  the  south  coun- 
try, and  dwelled  between  Kadesh 
ayd  Shur,  and  sojourned  in  Gerar. 

2 And  Abraham  said  of  Sarah  his 
wife,  She  is  my  sister:  and  Abime- 


CiiAi’.  XX.  1.  From  thmce'\  i.e.  from  visitors,  and  whence  he  had  beheld  the  smoke 
Mamre,  where  he  had  received  tlie  heavenly  from  the  conflagration  of  the  cities  of  the  plain. 


t Heb. 
rtfarried 
to  an 
husband. 


v.3-7.]  GENESIS.  XX. 


133 


lech  king  of  Gerar  sent,  and  took 
Sarah. 

3 But  God  came  to  Abimelech  in 
a dream  by  night,  and  said  to  him, 
Behold,  thou  art  but  a dead  man,  for 
the  woman  which  thou  hast  taken ; 
for  she  is  ^a  man’s  wife. 

4 But  Abimelech  had  not  come 
near  her:  and  he  said.  Lord,  wilt 
thou  slay  also  a righteous  nation  ? 

5 Said  he  not  unto  me,  She  is  my 
sister  ? and  she,  even  she  herself  said. 


•He  is  my  brother:  in  the  " integrity  u Or, 
of  my  heart  and  innocency  of  my 
hands  have  I done  this. 

6 And  God  said  unto  him  in  a 
dream,  Yea,  I know  that  thou  didst 
this  in  the  integrity  of  thy  heart;  for 
I also  withheld  thee  from  sinning 
against  me:  therefore  suffered  I thee 
not  to  touch  her. 

7 Now  therefore  restore  the  man 
his  wife ; for  he  is  a prophet,  and  he 
shall  pray  for  thee,  and  thou  shalt 


It  may  have  been  painful  to  him  to  abide  in  a 
place,  where  he  would  be  hourly  reminded  of 
this  terrible  catastrophe,  or  he  may  merely 
have  travelled  onward  in  search  of  fresh  pas- 
turage. 

d-ivelled  bet<iveen  Kadesh  and  Shur.,  and  so- 
journed in  Gerar']  He  settled  apparently  in  a 
fertile  country  lying  between  the  two  deserts 
of  Kadesh  and  Shur,  and  finally  took  up  his 
residence  as  a stranger  or  sojourner  (so  the 
word  “sojourned”  signifies)  at  Gerar,  a place 
which,  St  Jerome  says,  was  on  the  southern 
border  of  the  Canaanites.  Gerar  was  not  far 
from  Gaza  (Gen.  x.  19),  and  Beersheba  (xxvi. 
26).  Its  site  has  probably  been  identified  by 
Rowlands  (Williams’  ‘Holy  City,’  I.  465) 
with  the  traces  of  an  ancient  city  now  called 
Khirbet-el-Gerar.,  near  a deep  Wady  called 
Jurf-el-Gerar.,  about  three  hours  to  the  south- 
south-east  of  Gaza. 

2.  She  is  wy  sister]  This  was  Abraham’s 
plan  of  action,  when  sojourning  among 
strangers,  of  whose  character  he  was  ignorant, 
see  V.  13.  He  has  been  defended  as  having 
“ said  she  was  his  sister,  without  denying  that 
she  was  his  wife,  concealing  the  truth  but  not 
speaking  what  was  false”  (August,  ‘c.  Faust.’ 
XXII.  3).  But,  though  concealment  may  not 
necessarily  be  deception,  we  can  scarcely  ac- 
quit Abraham  either  of  some  disingenuous- 
ness or  of  endangering  his  wife’s  honour  and 
chastity,  in  order  to  save  his  own  life. 

Abimelech]  Father  of  the  king.,  or  perhaps 
father  king.,  the  common  title  of  the  Philistine 
kings,  as  Pharaoh  was  of  the  Egyptians.  The 
age  at  whfeh  Sarah  must  have  been  at  this 
time,  some  twenty-three  or  twenty-four  years 
older  than  when  Pharaoh  took  her  into  his 
house  (ch.  xii.  15),  creates  a considerable  dif- 
ficulty here.  We  may  remember  that  Sarah 
after  this  became  a mother,  that  though  too 
old  for  childbearing  under  normal  conditions, 
she  had  had  her  youth  renewed  since  the  visit 
of  the  angels  (Kurtz),  when  it  was  promised 
that  she  should  have  a son.  The  assertion  of 
rnodern  critics  that  this  is  merely  another  ver- 
sion of  ch.  xii.  10 — 20,  the  work  of  the  Elohist, 
whilst  that  was  by  the  Jehovist,  is  ably  com- 


bated by  Keil  (p.  170,  Eng.Trans.  p.  242).  He 
observes,  that  the  name  Elohim  indicates  the 
true  relation  of  God  to  Abimelech ; but  that 
in  V.18,  Jehovah,  the  covenant  God  of  Abra- 
ham, interposes  to  save  him.  All  the  more  mi- 
nute details  of  this  history  are  different  from 
that  in  ch.  xii.  In  Abimelech  we  see  a totally 
different  character  from  that  of  Pharaoh ; the 
character,  namely,  of  a heathen  imbued  with 
a moral  consciousness  of  right  and  open  to 
receive  a divine  revelation,  of  which  there  is 
no  trace  in  the  account' of  the  king  of  Egypt. 
It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the  same 
danger  should  twice  have  occurred  to  Sarah, 
if  we  remember  that  the  customs  of  the  hea- 
then nations,  among  which  he  was  sojourning, 
were  such  as  to  induce  Abraham  to  use  the 
artifice  of  calling  his  wife  his  sister. 

4.  had  not  come  near  her]  Apparently 
a divinely  sent  illness  had  been  upon  him, 
vv.  6,  18. 

a righteous  nation]  i.  e.  a nation  guiltless  as 
regards  this  act  of  their  king  ; but  it  may  be, 
that  the  people  of  Gerar  were  really  exempt 
from  the  worst  vices  of  Canaan,  and  living  in 
a state  of  comparative  piety  and  simplicity. 

6.  suffered  I thee  not  to  touch  her]  See 
on  V.  4. 

7.  he  is  a prophet]  i.  e.  one  inspired  by 
^ God,  or  the  medium  of  God’s  communications 

and  revelations  to  mankind.  Thus  Exod.  vii.  i, 
Aaron  is  said  to  be  Moses’  prophet,  because 
he  was  to  convey  the  messages  and  commands 
of  Moses  to  Pharaoh.  An  objection  has  been 
made  to  the  antiquity  of  the  Pentateuch  from 
the  statement  in  i S.  ix.  9,  that  “he  that  is 
now  called  a Prophet  was  beforetime  called  a 
Seer.”  Hence  it  is  argued  that  the  Pentateuch, 
which  always  uses  the  word  prophet,  cannot 
be  of  the  great  antiquity  assigned  to  it.  The 
difficulty  is  only  on  the  surface.  “Prophet” 
was  the  genuine  name  applied  to  all  who  de- 
clared God’s  will,  who  foretold  the  future, 
or  even  to  great  religious  teachers.  “Seer” 
had  a more  restricted  sense,  and  was  appro- 
priated to  those  only  who  were  favoured 
with  visions  from  heaven.  The  word  prophet 
occurs  constantly  in  the  Pentateuch  in  the 


134 


GENESIS.  XX. 


[v.  8 — 1 6. 


live:  and  if  thou  restore  her  not, 
know  thou  that  thou  shalt  surely  die, 
thou,  and  all  that  are  thine. 

8 Therefore  Abimelech  rose  early 
in  the  morning,  and  called  all  his 
servants,  and  told  all  these  things  in 
their  ears:  and  the  men  were  sore 
afraid. 

9 Then  Abimelech  called  Abra- 
ham, and  said  unto  him.  What  hast 
thou  done  unto  us?  and  what  have 
I offended  thee,  that  thou  hast  brought 
on  me  and  on  my  kingdom  a great 
sin?  thou  hast  done  deeds  unto  me 
that  ought  not  to  be  done. 

10  And  Abimelech  said  unto  Abra- 
ham, What  sawest  thou,  that  thou 
hast  done  this  thing? 

11  And  Abraham  said,  Because  I 
thought.  Surely  the  fear  of  God  is 
not  in  this  place ; and  they  will  slay 
me  for  my  wife’s  sake. 


general  sense  of  one  in  communion  with  God, 
and  made  the  medium  of  God’s  communica- 
tions to  man.  The  word  “ seer”  would  gen- 
erally be  out  of  place  in  such  a passage  as  this, 
or  such  as  Ex.  vii.  i,  xv.  zo;  Mum.  xi.  29, 
xii.  6,  &c.;  but  in  the  time  of  Samuel,  wfieu 
“the  word  of  the  Lord  was  precious  there 
was  no  open  vision,”  (i  S.  iii.  i ;)  the  appli- 
cation of  the  title  “seer”  to  Samuel,  who  had 
visions  specially  vouchsafed  to  him,  was  very 
appropriate;  yet  after  his  time,  though  the 
name  was  sometimes  employed  to  designate 
the  inspired  teachers  of  mankind,  the  older 
and  more  comprehensive  title  of  “prophet” 
again  came  into  common  use,  not  only  for 
teachers  of  religion  generally,  but  also  for  the 
most  favoured  of  God's  servants.  (See  ‘ Mosaic 
Origin  of  the  Pentateuch,’  by  a Layman, 
P-97-) 

he  shall  pray  for  thee'\  As  the  prophets 
were  the  instruments  of  God’s  revelations. 
His  messengers,  to  man;  so  men  made  the 
prophets  instruments  for  sending  their  prayers 
up  to  God  (Cleric.).  Cp.  Jer.  vii.  16,  xi.  14, 
xiv.  II. 

10.  What  sawest  thou]  Many  recent 
commentators,  Knobel,  Delitzsch,  Keil,  &c., 
render,  “ What  hadst  thou  in  view?”  The 
more  simple  sense  is,  what  didst  thou  see  in 
the  conduct  and  manners  of  me  or  my  people, 
that  thou  shouldest  have  done  so  to  us  ? Didst 
thou  see  us  taking  away  the  wives  of  strangers 
and  murdering  the  husbands? 

11.  Surely  the  fear  of  God  is  not  in  this 
place]  Abraham  had  seen  the  impiety  and 


12  And  yet  indeed  she  is  my  sister; 
she  is  the  daughter  of  my  father,  but 
not  the  daughter  of  my  mother;  and 
she  became  my  wife. 

13  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  God 
caused  me  to  wander  from  my  father’s 
house,  that  I said  unto  her.  This  is 
thy  kindness  which  thou  shalt  shew 
unto  me;  at  every  place  whither  we 

shall  come,  ^say  of  me.  Pie  is  my  » chap.  12. 
brother. 

14  And  Abimelech  took  sheep,  and 
oxen,  and  menservants,  and  women- 
servants,  and  gave  thein  unto  Abra- 
ham, and  restored  him  Sarah  his 
wife. 

15  And  Abimelech  said,  Behold, 

my  land  is  before  thee:  dwell  ^ where  t Heb. 
it  pleaseth  thee. 

16  And  unto  Sarah  he  said.  Behold, 

I have  given  thy  brother  a thousand 
pieces  of  silver:  behold,  he  is  to  thee 


heathenism  of  the  Canaanitish  races,  and  had 
lately  witnessed  the  overthrow  of  Sodom  for 
the  licentiousness  of  its  people,  and  he  natu- 
rally thought  that  the  inhabitants  of  Gerar 
might  be  equally  forgetful  of  God,  and  there- 
fore prone  to  all  wickedness. 

12.  she  is  my  sister  she  is  the  daughter  of 
my  father^  but  not  the  daughter,  of  my  mother] 
Sarah’s  name  does  not  occur  in  the  genea- 
logies, and  we  do  not  know  any  thing  of  her 
birth  but  that  which  is  here  stated.  Such 
marriages,  though  afterwards  forbidden  (Lev. 
xviii.  9,  II,  XX.  17;  Deut.  xxvii.  22),  may 
not  have  been  esteemed  unlawful  in  patri- 
archal times,  and  they  were  common  among 
the  heathen  nations  of  antiquity  (Ach.Tatius, 
Lib.  I.;  Diod.  I.  27;  Herod,  ill.  31;  Nepos, 

‘ Cimon,’  c.  i.)  Many  Jewish  and  Christian 
interpreters,  however,  think  that  daughter  here 
means  granddaughter.^  and  that  Sarah  was  the 
same  as  I scab,  the  sister  of  Lot  (ch.  xi.  29), 
who  is  called  “the  brother  of  Abraham”  (ch. 
xiv.  16). 

13.  God  caused  me  to  wander]  *In  general 
the  name  of  God  (Elohim),  though  of  plural 
form,  IS  joined  with  a singular  verb.  In  this 
case,  however,  the  verb  is  in  the  plural.  Similar 
constructions  occur  ch.  XXXV.  7 ; Exod.  xxii.  8; 
2 S.  vii.  23;  (cp.  I Chr.  xvii.  21);  Ps.  Iviii.  12. 
In  Josh.  XXIV.  19,  the  adjective  is  in  the  plural. 
The  Samaritan  Pentateuch  here  and  in  ch. 
XXXV.  7 has  the  verb  in  the  singular. 

16.  a thousand  pieces  of  sil-ver]  Lit.  “a 
thousand  of  silver.”  I'he  versions  insert  “she- 
kels” or  “didrachmas; ” nothing  can  be  known 
of  the  weights  and  measures  of  this  early  time. 


V.  17—6.] 


GENESIS.  XX.  XXI. 


135 


a covering  of  the  eyes,  unto  all  that 
are  with  thee,  and  with  all  other:  thus 
she  was  reproved. 

17  ^ So  Abraham  prayed  unto 
God : and  God  healed  Abimelech, 
and  his  wife,  and  his  maidservants; 
and  they  bare  children. 

18  For  the  Lord  had  fast  closed 
up  all  the  wombs  of  the  house  of 
Abimelech,  because  of  Sarah  Abra- 
ham’s wife. 

CHAPTER  XXL 

I Isaac  is  born.  4 He  is  circtwicised.  6 Sarah's 
joy.  9 Hagar  and  Ishmael  are  cast  forth. 
15  Hagar  in  distress.  17  The  angel  com- 
forteth  her.  22  Abimelech' s covenant  with 
Abraham  at  Beer-sheba. 


AND  the  Lord  visited  Sarah  as  he 
had  said,  and  the  Lord  did 
unto  Sarah  '*as  he  had  spoken.  <*chap. 

2 For  Sarah  '^conceived,  and  bare  10. 
Abraham  a son  in  his  old  age,  at  the  Oat 
set  time  of  which  God  had  spoken  to  “• 
him. 

3 And  Abraham  called  the  name 
of  his  son  that  was  born  unto  him, 
whom  Sarah  bare  to  him,  Isaac. 

4 And  Abraham  circumcised  his 

son  Isaac  being  eight  days  old,  ‘^as  God  '^chap.  17. 
had  commanded  him. 

5 And  Abraham  was  an  hundred 
years  old,  when  his  son  Isaac  was 
born  unto  him. 

6 ^ And  Sarah  said,  God  hath 


Probably  the  thousand  pieces  of  silver  indicate 
the  value  of  the  sheep  and  oxen,  which  Abi- 
melech gave  to  Abraham,  though  some  think 
it  was  an  additional  present. 

16.  he  is  to  thee  a coaoering  of  the  eyes^ 
Thei-e  is  great  variety  of  opinion  as  to  the 
sense  of  these  words.  If  we  follow  the  ren- 
dering of  the  Authorized  Version,  the  most 
probable  interpretation  is  that  of  Heidegger, 
Schroeder,  Rosenmiiller,  &c.,  viz.  this,  that  in 
early  times  in  the  East  unmarried  women  often 
went  unveiled,  but  married  women  always 
veiled  themselves.  Cp.  Gen.  xxiv.  65.  Hence 
Abimelech  meant  to  say,  that  Abraham  should 
be  like  a veil  to  Sarah,  screening  her  from  the 
eyes  of  all  other  men.  See  Rosenm.  in  loc. 
Heidegger,  ii.  p.  163.  The  words  might  have 
been  rendered,  as  by  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Targg., 
Syr.,  “it”  or  “they,”  i.e.  the  one  thousand 
pieces  of  silver  “ are  to  thee  a covering  of  the 
eyes,”  in  which  case  the  meaning  would  pro- 
bably be  “this  gift  is  to  thee  for  a covering  to 
the  eyes,  so  that  thou  shouldest  overlook  or 
condone  the  injury  done  to  thee.”  So  St 
Chrysostom,  and  among  moderns,  Gesenius, 
Tuch,  Knobel,  &c. 

thus  she  ojoas  repron}ed'\  Here  also  there  is 
great  diversity  of  interpretation;  but  the  Au- 
thorized Version  is  probably  correct,  and  we 
must  understand  the  words  to  be  those  of  the 
historian,  not  of  Abimelech.  So  apparently 
Onk.,  Arab.,  Saad.,  Kimchi,  Gesen.,  Rosenm., 
&c. 

18.  the  Lord]  Keil  has  observed,  that 
'the  various  names  of  the  Most  High  are  used 
very  significantly  in  these  two  last  verses.  The 
care  of  Abimelech  and  his  wives  belonged  to 
the  Deity  {Ehhim).  Abraham  directed  his 
intercession  not  to  Elohhn.^  an  indefinite  and 
unknown  god,  but  to  Ha-Elohirn^  “the”  true 
“ God;”  and  it  was  Jehovah,  the  covenant 


God,  who  interposed  for  Abraham  and  pre- 
served the  mother  of  the  promised  seed. 

Chap.  XXI.  1.  the  Lord  did  unto  Sarah 
as  he  had  spoken]  In  ch.  xvii.  16,  God  pro- 
mised that  He  would  give  Abraham  a son 
by  Sarah  his  wife,  on  which  promise  Abra- 
ham fell  on  his  face  and  laughed,  whether 
from  incredulity  or  fbr  joy.  What  God  (Elo- 
him)  then  promised  here  the  Lord  (Jeho- 
vah) fulfils. 

2.  at  the  set  time  of  which  God  had  spoken 
to  him]  The  “set  time”  was  fixed,  ch.  xvii. 
21,  and  xviii.  10,  14.  (See  note  on  ch.  xviii. 
10.)  Modern  critics  see  in  ch.  xvii.  and  in 
this  ch.  xxi.  an  Elohistic  portion  of  the  his- 
tory of  Abraham,  and  in  ch.  xviii.  a Jeho- 
vistic  portion.  Yet  this  present  chapter  seems 
clearly  to  point  back  to  both  ch.  xvii.  and  ch. 
xviii.,  and  in  its  first  verse  it  uses  twice  the 
name  Jehovah,  whilst  in  the  second  and 
subsequent  verses  it  has  constantly  the  name 
Elohim  until  we  come  to  v.  33,  when  both 
names  are  conjoined,  for  Abraham  is  said  to 
have  called  on  the  name  of  “The  Lord,  the 
everlasting  God.” 

3.  Isaac]  The  name  which  God  had  ap- 
pointed for  him,  ch.  xvii.  19.  See  also  note 
on  ch.  xviii.  12. 

6.  God  hath  made  me  to  laugh]  What- 
ever was  the  nature  of  Sarah’s  laughter  when 
the  promise  was  made  to  her  (see  ch.  xviii. 
12),  she  now  acknowledges  that  God  had 
made  her  to  laugh  for  joy;  and  she  recognizes 
that  He,  whom  she  then  took  foi*-  a traveller 
and  who  made  the  promise,  at  which  she 
laughed,  was  truly  God. 

will  laugh  with  me]  The  Hebrew  might 
mean  “laugh  at  me”  or  “laugh  with  me.” 
The  Authorised  Version  rightly  follows  the 
LXX.,  Vulg.,  Targg.,  &c. 


136 


GENESIS.  XXI. 


[v.  7—14. 


s'  Gal.  4. 

30- 


made  me  to  laugh,  so  that  all  that 
hear  will  laugh  with  me. 

7 And  she  said,  Who  would  have 
said  unto  Abraham,  that  Sarah  should 
have  given  children  suck?  for  I have 
born  him  a son  in  his  old  age. 

8 And  the  child  grew,  and  was 
weaned:  and  Abraham  made  a great 
feast  the  same  day  that  Isaac  was 
weaned. 

9 ^ And  Sarah  saw  the  son  of 
Hagar  the  Egyptian,  which  she  had 
born  unto  Abraham,  mocking. 

10  Wherefore  she  said  unto  Abra- 
ham, ^Cast  out  this  bondwoman  and 
her  son:  for  the  son  of  this  bond- 


woman shall  not  be  heir  with  my  son, 
even  with  Isaac. 

1 1 And  the  thing  was  very  griev- 
ous in  Abraham’s  sight  because  of  his 
son. 

12  ^ And  God  said  unto  Abraham, 
Let  it  not  be  grievous  in  thy  sight 
because  of  the  lad,  and  because  of  thy 
bondwoman ; in  all  that  Sarah  hath 
said  unto  thee,  hearken  unto  her 
voice;  for  in  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be 
called. 

1 3 And  also  of  the  son  of  the  bond- 
woman  will  I make  a nation,  because 
he  IS  thy  seed. 

14  And  Abraham  rose  up  early  in 


7.  Who  <u)ould  have  sal(f\  The  render- 
ing of  the  Authorised  Version  is  most  like- 
ly correct.  The  obscurity  of  the  passage 
probably  arises  from  its  poetical  form.  It 
has  been  long  ago  observed,  that  the  words 
are  apparently  those  of  a short  poem  or  hymn, 
like  the  hymn  of  Hannah,  i S.  ii.  i — 7,  or 
the  Magnificat  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  Luke  i. 
46 — 55,  the  resemblance  to  which  is  the  more 
noticeable,  as  Isaac  was  an  eminent  type  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  (see  Wordsworth  ad  loc.). 
That  these  words  were  of  the  nature  of  a 
hymn  or  poem  is  seen  in  the  use  of  a poetical 
word  (millel)  for  “said,”  instead  of  the  more 
common  words  {(libber  or  amar) ; and  also  in 
the  appearance  of  regular  parallelism  of  the 
members  of  the  sentence. 

8.  the  child  grevj^  and  <zvas  ^veanecT]  F rom 
I S.  i.  23,  24;  2 Macc.  vii.  27;  Joseph.- 
‘ Ant.’  II.  9.  6,  it  has  been  inferred  that  chil- 
dren were  not  weaned  among  the  Hebrews 
till  they  were  three  years  old.  Ishmael  was 
thirteen  years  old  when  he  was  circumcised, 
ch.  xvii.  25,  and  one  year  after  Isaac  was 
born,  ch.  xvii.  21.  If  therefore  Isaac  was 
three  years  old  at  his  weaning,  Ishmael  must 
have  been  then  seventeen.  If  Isaac  was  but 
one  year  old,  Ishmael  would  have  been  fifteen. 

made  a great  feast']  By  comparing  i S. 
i.  24,  25,  it  would  seem  that  this  was  very 
probably  a religious  feast. 

9.  mocking]  The  word,  which  natural- 
ly means  to  laugh^  is  rendered  by  the  LXX. 
and  Vulg.,  “playing  with  Isaac.”  Tuch, 
Knobel,  &c.  s.'iy  the  word  means  merely, 
“playing  like  a child.”  Goscnius  thinks  it 
was  “ playing  and  dancing  gracefully,”  and 
so  attracting  the  favour  of  his  father,  which 
moved  the  envy  of  Sarah.  The  Targum  of 
Onkelos  appears  to  give  the  sense  of  “ de- 


riding” (see  Buxtorf,  ‘Lex.  Chald.  and  Tal- 
mud.’p.  719),  as  does  the  Syriac.  The  later 
Targums  (Pseudo-Jon,  and  Jerusalem)  un- 
derstand some  acts  of  idolatrous  worship  or 
perhaps  impurity,  (comp.  Ex.  xxxii.  6,  where 
the  same  word  is  used  for  “ play,”  and  i Cor. 
X.  7).  It  is  quite  untrue  that  the  word 
“laugh,”  here  rendered  “mocking,”  is  never 
used  but  in  a good  sense.  In  ch.  xix.  14,  it 
is  rightly  rendered  “ mocked,”  See  also  Gen. 
xxvi.  8,  xxxix.  14,  17;  Ex.  xxxii.  6.  It  pro- 
bably means  in  this  passage,  as  it  has  generally 
been  understood,  “ mocking  laughter.”  As 
Abraham  had  laughed  for  joy  concerning 
Isaac,  and  Sarah  had  laughed  incredulously,  so 
now  Ishmael  laughed  in  derision,  and  proba- 
bly in  a persecuting  and  tyrannical,  spirit 
(see  Gal.  iv.  29). 

10.  Cast  out]  These  words  are  quoted 
by  St  Paul  (Gal.  iv.  30),  introduced  by  “ But 
what  saith  the  Scripture?”  The  words  were 
those  of  Sarah,  but  they  are  confirmed  by  the 
Almighty,  v.  12. 

12.  in  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called]  Here 
is  the  distinct  limitation  of  the  great  pro- 
mises of  God  to  the  descendants  of  Abra- 
ham in  the  line  of  Isaac  (see  Rom.  ix.  7). 
God's  promises  gradually  developed  them- 
selves in  fulness,  and  yet  were  gradually  re- 
stricted in  extent:  to  Adam  first;  then  to 
Noah;  to  Abraham;  then  to  one  race  or  seed 
of  Abraham,  viz.  Isaac;  to  one  of  Isaac’s 
children,  viz.  Jacob;  to  one  of  the  twelve  pa- 
triarchs, viz.  Judah;  then  to  his  descendant 
David;  and  lastly  to  the  great  Son  of  David, 
the  true  promised  Seed;  but  as  all  centred  in 
Him,  so  too  from  Him  they  have  spread  out 
to  all  redeemed  by  Him,  though  more  espe- 
cially taking  effect  in  those,  who  are  “the 
children  of  God  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus” 
(Gal.  iii.  26). 


V.  15— 1 7-] 


GENESIS.  XXI. 


137 


the  morning,  and  took  bread,  and  a 
bottle  of  water,  and  gave  it  unto 
Hagar,  putting  it  on  her  shoulder,  and 
the  child,  and  sent  her  away : and  she 
departed,  and  wandered  in  the  wilder- 
ness of  Beer-sheba. 

15  And  the  water  was  spent  in  the 
bottle,  and  she  cast  the  child  under 
one  of  the  shrubs. 


16  And  she  went,  and  sat  her  down 
over  against  him  a good  way  off,  as  it 
were  a bowshot : for  she  said,  Let  me 
not  see  the  death  of  the  child.  And 
she  sat  over  against  hi?n^  and  lift  up 
her  voice,  and  wept. 

17  And  God  heard  the  voice  of  the 
lad;  and  the  angel  of  God  called  to 
Hagar  out  of  heaven,  and  said  unto 


14.  a bottle]  A skin  or  leathern  bot- 
tle, probably  made  of  the  skin  of  a goat  or  a 
kid,  (See  the  word  bottle  in  Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of 
the  Bible.’) 

putting  it  on  her  shoulder]  Hagar  was  an 
Egyptian,  and  Herod,  (ii.  35)  says  that  the 
women  in  Egypt  carried  burdens  on  their 
shoulders^  but  the  men  carried  them  on  their 
heads.  According  to  the  testimony  of  the 
sculptures  both  men  and  women  carried  bur- 
dens on  their  shoulders.  It  is  common  now 
in  the  East  to  see  women  carrying  skins  of 
water  in  this  way.  (See  Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  l. 
p.  340,  II.  pp.  163,  276.) 

and  the  child]  The  sacred  writer  has  been 
charged  with  an  anachronism  here,  both  from 
his  use  of  the  word  “child,”  when  Ishmael 
must  have  been  from  fifteen  to  seventeen 
years  old  (see  note  on  v.  8),  and  because  it  is 
said  that  the  original  indicates  that  he,  as  well 
as  the  bread  and  water,  was  placed  on  Ha- 
gar’s  shoulder.  The  word  for  “child”  {ye~ 
led)^  however,  is  used  for  boys  of  adolescent 
age,  as  in  Gen.  xlii.  22,  of  Joseph,  when  he 
was  seventeen.  It  is  true,  the  Vatican  MS. 
of  the  LXX.  renders  “he  placed  the  boy  on 
her  shoulders,”  which  Tuch  adopts  as  the 
right  rendering;  but  the  Alexandrian  MS.  of 
the  LXX.  has  simply  “and  the  boy,”  whilst 
the  Vulg.,  Targg.,  Syr.,  connect  the  words 
“putting  it  on  her  shoulder”  only  with  the 
bread  and  the  bottle  of  water,  Vv^hich  is  per- 
fectly consistent  with  the  Hebrew,  whether 
the  verb  be  rendered  by  the  past  tense,  or,  as 
probably  with  accuracy  in  the  Authorised 
Version,  by  the  participle.  The  promise, 
which  Abraham  had  just  received,  that  God 
would  make  a nation  of  Ishmael  also,  v.  13, 
may  probably  have  led  him  to  trust  that  the 
boy  and  his  mother  would  be  provided  for, 
and  so  to  leave  them  with  only  provision  for 
their  immediate  wants. 

in  the  <wilderness  of  Beer-sheba]  Abraham, 
who  had  been  now  for  at  least  a year  dwell- 
ing in  the  neighbourhood  of  Gerar  (ch.  xx.  i), 
may  very  probably  have  by  this  time  taken 
up  his  residence  at  Beersheba  (see  vv.  33,  34). 
The  name  Beersheba  is  here  given  prolepti- 
cally  (see  v.  31),  unless  the  events  in  the  lat- 
ter part  of  this  chapter  took  place  before 


those  in  the  former  part,  not  having  been  re- 
lated at  first,  lest  there  should  be  a break  in 
the  continuity  of  the  history  of  Isaac  and 
Ishmael. 

15.  she  cast  the  child  under  one  of  the 
shrubs]  From  this  expression  again  it  is  in- 
ferred that  Ishmael  must  have  been  a child  in 
arms.  Such  a conclusion,  however,  is  not 
borne  out  by  these’  words,  nor  by  the  whole 
narrative.  The  boy  was  young,  but  he  was 
evidently  old  enough  to  give  offence  to  Sarah 
by  mocking  (v.  9).  At  a time  when  human 
life  was  much  longer  than  it  is  now  (Ishmael 
himself  died  at  137),  fifteen  or  sixteen  would 
be  little  removed  from  childhood.  The  grow- 
ing lad  would  easily  be  exhausted  with  the 
heat  and  wandering;  whilst  the  hardy  habits 
of  the  Egyptian  handmaid  would  enable  her 
to  endure  much  greater  fatigue.  She  had 
hitherto  led  the  boy  by  the  hand,  now  she  left 
him  fainting  and  prostrate  under  the  shelter 
of  a tree.  (So  Le  Clerc  followed  by  Rosen- 
miiller.) 

16.  a good  nvay  ojf^  as  it  nvere  a bonv- 
shot]  Lit.  “ as  far  off  as  the  drawers  of  a 
bow,”  or  “as  they  who  draw  a bow,”  i.e.  as 
far  as  archers  can  shoot  an  arrow. 

17.  the  angel  of  God]  No  where  else  in 
Genesis  does  this  name  occur.  Elsewhere  it 
is  always  “the  Angel  of  the  Lord.”  We 
meet  with  it  again  in  Exod.  xiv.  19,  “And 
the  Angel  of  God,  which  went  before  the 
camp  of  Israel,  removed,  and  went  behind 
them.”  The  identification  of  the  Malach  Elo- 
him  with  Elohim  (cp.  vv.  17,  19,  20,)  here  is 
exactly  like  the  identification  of  the  Malach 
Jehovah  with  Jehovah  in  other  passages; 
a clear  proof  that  there  is  not  that  difference 
between  the  Elohistic  and  Jehovistic  passages 
in  the  Pentateuch,  of  which  so  much  has  been 
written.  In  ch.  xvi.  7,  whilst  Hagar  was 
still  Abraham’s  secondary  wife,  we  read  that 
the  Angel  of  the  Lord,  the  covenant  God  of 
Abraham,  appeared  to  her.  She  and  her  son, 
by  Isaac’s  birth  and  their  expulsion  from 
Abraham’s  household,  are  now  separated  from 
the  family  and  covenant  of  promdse,  yet  still 
objects  of  care  to  Him  who  is  “ the  God  of 
the  spirits  of  all  flesh,”  and  “ of  all  the  ends 
of  the  earth.” 


138 


GENESIS.  XXL 


[v.  18—32. 


tHeb. 

if  tho7i 
shalt  lie 
unto  me. 


her,  What  aileth  thee,  Hagar?  fear 
not;  for  God  hath  heard  the  voice  of 
the  lad  'where  he  is. 

18  Arise,  lift  up  the  lad,  and  hold 
him  in  thine  hand;  for  I 'will  make 
him  a great  nation. 

19  And  God  opened  her  eyes,  and 
she  sa-w  a 'well  of  water;  and  she 
went,  and  filled  the  bottle  with  water, 
and  gave  the  lad  drink. 

20  And  God  was  with  the  lad  ; and 
he  grew,  and  dwelt  in  the  wilderness, 
and  became  an  archer. 

21  And  he  dwelt  in  the  wilderness 
of  Paran : and  his  mother  took  him  a 
wife  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt. 

22  And  it  came  to  pass  at  that 
time,  that  Abimelech  and  Phichol 
the  chief  captain  of  - his  host  spake 
unto  Abraham,  saying,  God  is  with 
thee  in  all  that  thou  doest : 

23  Now  therefore  swear  unto  me 
here  by  God  ^that  thou  wilt  not  deal 
falsely  with  me,  nor  with  my  son,  nor 
with  my  son’s  son : hut  according  to 
the  kindness  that  I have  done  unto 
thee,  thou  shalt  do  unto  me,  and  to 
the  land  wherein  thou  hast  sojourned. 


24  And  Abraham  said,  I will  swear. 

25  And  Abraham  reproved  Abi- 
melech because  of  a well  of  water, 
which  Abimelech’s  servants  had  vio- 
lently taken  away. 

26  And  Abimelech  said,  I wot  not 
who  hath  done  this  thing:  neither 
didst  thou  tell  me,  neither  yet  heard 
I of  it.^  but  to  day. 

27  And  Abraham  took  sheep  and 
oxen,  and  gave  them  unto  Abimelech ; 
and  both  of  them  made  a covenant. 

28  And  Abraham  set  seven  ewe 
lambs  of  the  flock  by  themselves. 

29  And  Abimelech  said  unto  Abra- 
ham, What  mean  these  seven  ewe 
lambs  which  thou  hast  set  by  them- 
selves ? 

30  And  he  said.  For  these  seven 
ewe  lambs  shalt  thou  take  of  my  hand, 
that  they  may  be  a witness  unto  me, 
that  I have  digged  this  well. 

31  Wherefore  he  called  that  place 

" Beer-sheba;  because  there  they  sware  i[,Thati.s, 
both  of  them. 

32  Thus  they  made  a covenant  at 
Beer-sheba;  then  Abimelech  rose  up, 
and  Phichol  the  chief  captain  of  his 


18.  Arhe^  lift  up  the  lad,,  and  hold  him 
in  thine  hand\  So  the  Versions,  according 
to  the  common  use  of  the  same  verb  "with 
the  same  preposition.  Cp.  Deut.  xxii.  25 ; 
Judg.  xix.  25,  29;  a S.  xili.  ii,  &c. ; and  see 
Gesen.  ‘Thes.’  p.  463.  “From  this,”  says 
St  Jerome,  “it  is  plain  that  the  boy  -whom 
she  held  in  her  hand  had  been  her  companion 
on  the  journey,  not  a burden  on  her  shoul- 
ders,” ‘Qu.  in  Gen’. 

19.  God  opened  her  eyes,,  and  she  sansj  a 
moell  of  <r^vater\  Very  probably  the  mouth  of 
the  well  had  been  purposely  covered  by  the  in- 
habitants of  the  desert,  and  was  now  by  God’s 
gracious  intervention  discovered  to  Hagar. 

21.  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran\  (See  on 
ch.  xiv.  6).  Probably  the  great  desert,  now 
called  the  desert  El-l'ih,  i.e.  “the  wander- 
ings,” extending  from  the  Wady-el-Arabah 
on  the  cast,  to  the  gulf  of  Suez  on  the  west, 
and  from  the  Sinaitic  range  on  the  south  to 
the  borders  of  Palestine  on  the  north. 

took  him  a wife  out  of  the  land  of  Egypf\ 
According  to  the  custom  then  prevalent  in 
.the  East  for  parents  to  choose  wives  for  their 
sons.  (See  ch.  xxiv.  4,  55  ; Exod.  xxi.  10.) 

22.  Phichol]  The  name  occurs  again  in 


ch.  xxvi.  26,  and,  as  it  signifies  “the  mouth 
of  all,”  it  has  been  supposed  to  have  been  the 
name  of  an  officer,  the  grand  vizier  or  prime 
minister  of  the  king,  through  whom  all  com- 
plaints and  petitions  were  to  be  made  to  him. 
Abimelech  was  also  an  official  name.  See  on 
ch.  XX.  2. 

23.  that  thou  wilt  not  deal  falsely  with 
me]  Lit.  “if  thou  shalt  lie  unto  me;”  the 
common  form  of  an  oath  in  Hebrew.  See 
above,  on  xiv.  23. 

31.  Beer-sheba]  i.e.  “the  well  of  the 
oath,”  or,  it  might  be,  “ the  well  of  the 
seven.”  There  was  a connection  between  the 
sacred  number  seven  and  an  oath ; oaths  being 
ratified  with  the  sacrifice  of  seven  victims  or 
by  the  gift  of  seven  gifts  (as  seems  to  have 
been  the  case  here),  or  confirmed  by  seven 
witnesses  and  pledges.  (See  Herod,  iii.  8 ; 
Horn.  ‘II.’  XIX.  243).  Beer-sheba  was  in  the 
Wady-es-Seba,  a wide  water-course  or  bed 
of  a torrent,  twelve  hours  south  of  Hebron, 
in  which  there  are  still  relics  of  an  ancient 
town  or  village,  called  Bir-es-Seba,  with  two 
deep  wells  of  good  water.  See  Robinson, 

‘ B.  R.’  I.  p.  204,  seq.  St  Jerome  speaks  of 
the  city  as  remaining  in  his  day  (‘Qu.adGen.’ 
XXI.  31). 


V.  33— 1-] 


GENESIS.  XXL  XXII. 


139 


host,  and  they  returned  into  the  land 
of  the  Philistines. 

0 Or,  tree.  33  ^ And  Abrahatii  planted  a ” grove 
in  Eeer-sheba,  and  called  there  on  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  the  everlasting 
God. 

34  And  Abraham  sojourned  in  the 
Philistines’  land  many  days. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 


I AbraJtam  is  tempted  to  offer  Isaac.  3 He 
giveth  p7-oof  of  his  faith  and  obedience,  i r 
The  attgel  stayeth  him.  1 3 Isaac  is  exchanged 
with  a ram.  14  The  place  is  called  Jehovah- 
jireh.  15  Abi'aJuun  is  blessed  agam.  20  The 
generation  of  Nahor  unto  Rebekah. 


K 


ND  it  came  to  pass  after  these 
things,  that  "God  did  tempt 


« Heb.  II 

17- 


33.  Abraham  planted  a grc've'\  Rather 
a tamarisk  tree.  This  is  the  rendering  of 
Kimchi,  which  is  adopted  by  Gesenius  (‘  Th,’ 
p.  159),  Rosenm.,  and  most  of  the  German 
critics.  (The  ancient  versions  vary  very  much 
in  their  interpretation.)  The  hardiness  of  this 
evergreen  shrub  would  fit  it  to  be  a perpetual 
memorial  to  Abraham  and  his  followers  that 
this  well  was  theirs. 

the  Lord.,  the  e-verlastlng  Cod']  “ JEHO- 
VAH, the  God  of  eternity.”  The  word,  ren- 
dered everlasting,  means  probably  “the  hidden 
time,”  that,  whose  beginning  and  ending  are 
hidden  in  darkness,  hence  “eternity”  (Ges. 
‘Th.’  p.  1035).  It  signifies  also  “the  world,” 
“the  universe,”  and  hence,  according  to  Mai- 
monides,  it  means  here  the  God  of  the  uni- 
verse, the  Creator  of  the  world.  So  the 
Samaritan,  Syr.,  and  Arab,  versions.  The 
more  probable  sense,  however,  is  that  given 
in  the  Authorised  Version,  which  corresponds 
with  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  *Onk.,  and  other 
Targg.  The  Jehovah  whom  Abraham 
worshipped  is  here  identified  with  “El-Olam,” 
the  God  of  eternity,  which  was  very  probably 
a local  name  for  the  supreme  Being.  Com- 
pare “Elion”  in  ch.  xiv.  zz. 

Chap.  XXII.  1.  And  it  came  to  pass 
after  these  things']  This  is  the  only  note  of 
time  that  we  have  in  this  chapter,  excepting 
the  fact  that  Isaac  was  now  grown  old  enough 
to  bear  the  wood  of  the  burnt  offering,  and  to 
carry  it  up  the  mountain.  The  words  “after 
these  things,”  rather  refer  us  to  all  that  had 
been  passing  before.  Abraham,  after  long 
wanderings  and  many  trials,  is  presented  to  us 
in  the  last  chapter,  as  eminently  comforted 
and  in  a condition  of  peaceful  prosperity. 
The  promised,  longed-for  son  has  been  given 
to  him;  his  other  son  Ishmael,  though  no 
longer  in  his  household,  is  growing  up  and 
prospering,  Abraham  is  in  treaty  and  at  peace 
with  his  neighbours  the  Philistines,  he  sojourns 
for  many  days  at  Beer-sheba  and  its  neigh- 
bourhood, with  abundance  of  cattle,  in  a 
place  well  watered  and  fertile.  Thus  it  ap- 
pears to  have  been  with  him  till  now,  when 
his  son,  his  only  son  Isaac,  whom  he  loved,  is 
growing  up  to  early  manhood,  his  chief  com- 
fort and  stay  and  hope  in  this  world.  But 
times  of  prosperity  are  often  times  when  trial 
is  needed  for  us,  and  so  we  find  it  here.  There 


is  great  variety  of  tradition,  but  no  evidence, 
as  to  the  age  of  Isaac  in  this  chapter.  Ac- 
cording to  Josephus  (‘Ant’  I.  14),  he  was 
twenty-five.  Aben-Ezra  supposes  that  he 
was  only  thirteen,  whilst  some  of  the  rabbins 
put  him  even  at  thirty-seven  (see  Heidegger, 
II.  282). 

God  did  tempt  Abraham]  Lit.  “The  God 
did  tempt,”  &;c.  possibly  referring  to  the 
last  two  verses  of  the  last  chapter  (where  J e- 
hovah  is  called  El-olam),  meaning  “this 
same  God.”  Much  difficulty  has  been  most 
needlessly  found  in  these  words.  St  James 
tells  us  (i.  13)  that  “ God  cannot  be  tempted 
with  evil,  neither  tempteth  He  any  man,” 
language  which  it  has  been  thought  difficult 
to  reconcile  with  this  history  in  Genesis.  So, 
some  have  endeavoured  to  explain  away  the 
words  of  this  passage,  as  though  Abraham 
had  felt  a strong  temptation  rising  in  his  own 
heart,  a temptation  from  Satan,  or  from  self, 
a horrible  thought  raised  perhaps  by  witness- 
ing the  human  sacrifices  of  the  Phoenicians, 
and  had  then  referred  the  instigation  to  God, 
thinking  he  was  tempted  from  above,  whereas 
the  real  temptation  was  from  beneath.  The 
difficulty,  however,  has  arisen  from  not  ob- 
serving the  natural  force  of  the  word  here 
rendered  “did  tempt,”  and  the  ordinary  use 
of  that  word  in  the  language  of  the  Old 
Testament,  especially  of  the  Pentateuch. 
According  to  the  highest  authorities,  the  pri- 
mary sense  of  the  verb  corresponds  with  that 
of  a similar  word  in  Arabic,  viz.  “to  smell,” 
and  thence  “to  test  by  smelling”  (see  Ges. 
‘Thes.’p.  889,  and  the  testimonies  there  cited). 
Hence  it  came  to  signify  close,  accurate,  deli- 
cate testing  or  trying.  It  is  translated  by 
“prove,”  “assay,”  “adventure,”  “try,”  and 
that  very  much  more  frequently  than  it  is 
translated  by  “tempt.”  For  instance,  David 
would  not  take  the  sword  and  armour  of 
Saul,  because  had  not  “proved  them,” 
I S.  xvii.  39.  Again,  he  prayed  in  the  words 
“examine  me,  O Lord,  and  me”  (Ps. 

xxvi.  %) ; and  in  very  numerous  and  familiar 
passages  in  the  Pentateuch,  we  read  of  God 
“proving”  men,  whether  they  would  be  obe- 
dient or  disobedient,  the  same  Hebrew  verb 
being  constantly  made  use  of.  (See  Ex.  xv. 
25,  xvi.  4,  XX.  20;  Dent.  iv.  34,  viii.  2,  16, 
xiii.  3,  xxxiii.  8).  Accordingly,  whilst  most 
of  the  versions  adhere  closely  to  the  sense  of 


140 


GENESIS.  XXII. 


[v.  2. 


Abraham,  and  said  unto  him,  Abra- 
tHeb.  ham:  and  he  said,  'Behold,  here  I 

Behold  vie, 

am. 


2 And  he  said.  Take  now  thy  son, 
thine  only  son  Isaac,  whom  thou  lovest, 
and  get  thee  into  the  land  of  Moriah ; 


“try,”  tent  are,,  in  this  passage,  the  Arabic 
renders  it  very  correctly,  “ God  did  prove 
Abraham.”  Words  having  the  sense  of  “try  ” 
may  generally  be  used  either  in  a good  or  a 
bad  sense.  This  particular  word  has  gener- 
ally a good  sense,  except  where  men  are  said 
to  try  or  tempt  God,  e.g.  Ex.  xvii.  2;  Num. 
xiv.  ; Deut.  vi.  16  ; Ps.  Ixxviii.  18  ; cvi.  14, 
&c.  The  whole  history  of  Abraham  is  a 
history  of  his  moral  and  spiritual  education 
by  the  teaching  of  God  himself.  He  was  to 
be  the  head  of  the  chosen  seed,  the  father  of 
the  faithful,  himself  the  type  of  justifying 
faith.  Here  then,  after  long  schooling  and 
training,  in  which  already  there  had  been 
many  trials  (such  as  his  first  call,  his  danger 
in  Egypt,  his  circumcision,  his  parting  with 
Lot,  &c.  &c.),  one  great  test  of  his  now 
matured  and  strengthened  faith  is  ordained 
by  God.  We  have  many  instances  of  the 
trial  of  men’s  faith  by  the  Most  High.  One 
remarkable  example  is  that  recorded  in  Matt, 
xix.  21.  It  cannot  be  that  He  who  sees  the 
heart  needs  such  trials  for  His  own  informa- 
tion : but  it  is  important  for  our  instruction 
and  correction,  for  example  to  future  ages, 
and  for  the  vindication  of  God's  justice,  that 
such  trials  should  be  permitted,  and  that  so 
m.en's  characters  should  be  dra  wn  out  and  ex- 
hibited to  themselves  and  others.  So  St  Au- 
gustine, “all  temptation  is  not  to  be  blamied, 
but  that  whereby  probation  is  made  is  rather 
to  be  welcomed.  For  the  most  part  a man’s 
spirit  cannot  be  known  to  himself,  unless  his 
strength  be  proved  not  by  word  but  by  actual 
trial.”  (‘De  Civit.  Dei,’  xvi.  32.  See  also 
Ambros,  ‘De  Abr.’  i.  8.) 

2.  Take  no^  thy  son,,  thine  only  son']  In 
more  ways  than  one  Isaac  might  be  called 
his  “only  son.”  He  was  the  only  son  by  his 
wife  Sarah:  he  was  the  only  son  of  promise, 
and  to  whom  the  promises  were  given  and 
assured:  by  the  expulsion  of  Hagar  and  Ish- 
m.ael  he  was  the  only  son  left  to  his  father's 
house.  The  rendering  therefore  of  the  LXX. 
“beloved”  is  not  necessary.  The  words,  em- 
phatic as  they  are,  “Thy  son,  thine  onl^  son, 
whom  thou  lovest,”  are  all  calculated  to  im- 
press and  enhance  the  sacrifice  which  Abra- 
ham is  called  on  to  make. 

Moriah']  The  meaning  of  the  name  seems 
clearly  to  be  Mori-jah,  “the  vision”  or  “the 
manifested  of  Jehovah.”  To  this  root  it 
is  evidently  referred  by  Sym.,  Vulg.  (“the  land 
of  vision”),  Aq.  (“the  conspicuous  land”), 
LXX.  (“the  lofty  land”).  In  2 Chr.  iii.  i, 
Solo:non  is  slid  to  have  built  his  temple  on 
Mount  Moriah;  and  the  Jewish  tradition 
(Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  I.  13.  2;  vii.  13.  4)  has  iden- 


tified this  Mount  Moriah  of  the  temple  with 
the  mountain  in  the  land  of  Moriah,  on  which 
Abraham  was  to  ofler  his  son,  whence  proba- 
bly here  Onkelos  and  the  Arab,  render  “the  • 
land  of  worship.”  No  sufficient  reason  has 
been  alleged  against  this  identification  except 
that  in  v.  4,  it  is  said  that  “ Abraham  lifted  up 
his  eyes,  and  saw  the  place  afar  off,”  whereas 
Mount  Zion  is  said  not  to  be  conspicuous 
from  a great  distance.  Thence  Bleek,  De 
Wette,  Tuch,  Stanley  (‘S.  and  P.’  p.  251, 
‘Jewish  Church,’  I.  49),  and  Grove  (‘Diet, 
of  Bible,’  s.  v.  Moriah'),  have  referred  to  Moreh 
(Gen.  xii.  6),  and  attempted  to  identify  the 
site  of  the  saciifice  with  “the  natural  altar  on 
the  summit  of  Mount  Gerizim,”  which  the 
Samaritans  assert  to  be  the  scene  of  the  sacri- 
fice. Really,  however,  the  words  in  v.  4, 
mean  nothing  more  than  this,  that  Abraham 
savv^  the  spot  to  which  he  had  been  directed  at 
some  little  distance  off,  not  farther  than  the 
character  of  the  place  readily  admits.  The 
evident  meaning  of  the  words  “ the  mount  of 
the  vision  of  the  Lord”  (see  v.  14);  the  fact 
that  the  m.ount  of  the  temple  bore  the  same 
name  (2  Chr.  iii.  i),  the  distance,  two  days’ 
journey  from  Beer-sheba,  which  would  just 
suffice  to  bring  the  company  to  Jerusalem, 
whereas  Gerizim  could  not  have  been  reached 
from  Beer-sheba  on  the  third  day,  are  a.-gu- 
ments  too  strong  to  be  set  aside  by  the  single 
difficulty  mentioned  above,  which  is  in  fact 
no  difficulty  at  all.  This  identity  is  ably  de- 
fended by  Hengstenberg  (‘Genuineness  of  the 
Pentateuch,’  ii.  162,  translated  by  Ryland), 
Knobel  {in  loc),  Kalisch  {in  loc.),  Kurtz  (‘  Hist, 
of  Old  Covenant,’ Vol.  1. 271), Thomson  (‘The 
Land  and  the  Book’,  p.  475),  Tristram  (‘  Land 
of  Israel,’  p.  152). 

offer  him  there  for  a burnt  offering]  It  can- 
not justly  be  urged  that  the  command  was 
(i)  in  itself  immoral,  or  (2)  that  it  was  a 
vii-liial  sanction  of  human  sacrifice,  (i)  As 
to  the  objection  that  it  was  immoral,  it  may 
be  said,  that  the  true  basis  of  all  morality  is 
obedience  to  the  will  of  God;  but  further 
than  this,  it  is  plain  from  the  whole  story, 
that  the  command  was  wholly  of  the  nature 
of  a trial  Abraham  was  the  special  type  of 
trustful,  obedient,  loving  faith.  He  believed 
that  all  which  God  commanded  must  be  right, 
all  that  He  promised  must  be  true.  Hence 
he  knew  that  when  the  injunction  was  clear, 
the  obedience  must  be  undoubting.  The 
wisdom,  the  justice,  and  the  goodness  of  God, 
were  such  that,  though  he  might  not  under- 
stand the  reason  of  the  dispensation,  he  must 
reverently  and  patiently  submit  to  it.  This 
too  was  not  a mere  blind  credulity.  He  had 
lived  a long  life  under  the  special  guiding, 


GENESIS.  XXII. 


V-  3—9.] 


141 


and  offer  him  there  for  a burnt  offer- 
ing  upon  one  of  the  mountains  which 
1 will  tell  thee  of. 

3 ff  And  Abraham  rose  up  early  in 
the  morning,  and  saddled  his  ass,  and 
took  two  of  his  young  men  with  him, 
and  Isaac  his  son,  and  clave  the  wood 
for  the  burnt  offering,  and  rose  up, 
and  went  unto  the  place  of  which  God 
had  told  him. 

4 Then  on  the  third  day  Abraham 
lifted  up  his  eyes,  and  saw  the  place 
afar  off. 

5 And  Abraham  said  unto  his  young 
men, Abide  ye  herewith  the  ass;  and 
I and  the  lad  will  go  yonder  and  wor- 
ship, and  come  again  to  you. 


6 And  Abraham  took  the  wood  of 
the  burnt  offering,  and  laid  it  upon 
Isaac  his  son ; and  he  took  the  fire  in 
his  hand,  and  a knife;  and  they  went 
both  of  them  together. 

7 And  Isaac  spake  unto  Abraham 
his  father,  and  said.  My  father:  and 

he  said,  TIere  am  I,  my  son.  AndtHeb. 
he  said.  Behold  the  fire  and  the  wood : 
but  where  is  the  " lamb  for  a burn,t " Or,  k^d, 
offering  ? 

8 And  Abraham  said,  My  son,  God 
will  provide  himself  a lamb  for  a burnt 
offering : so  they  went  both  of  them 
together. 

9 And  they  came  to  the  place  which 
God  had  told  him  of;  and  Abraham 


Behold  me. 


training,  and  teaching  of  the  Lord,  and  so  he 
knew  in  whom  he  had  believed.  The  com- 
mand therefore,  strange  as  it  was,  was  but  a 
final  test  of  the  firmness  of  his  faith ; and  his 
obedience  to  that  command  testified  that  the 
faith  was  intelligent  as  well  as  unconditional 
and  unwavering.  (2)  The  objection  that 
this  was  a virtual  sanction  to  the  heathen 
custom  of  offering  human  sacrifices  is  still 
less  tenable.  That  such  sacrifices  were  com- 
mon in  later  times  is  unquestionable,  and  pro- 
bably they  may  have  been  already  adopted  by 
the  Canaanites,  who  certainly  were  afterwards 
much  addicted  to  them.  Although  we  must 
ascribe  them  not  to  Divine  but  to  Satanic 
infiuence,  their  obseiwance  plainly  shewed  the 
devotion  of  the  offerers  to  the  religion  of  their 
demon  gods.  The  God  of  Abraham  would 
have  His  special  servant,  the  father  of  the 
chosen  race  and  of  the  promised  Seed,  mani- 
fest his  faith  and  obedience  to  the  true  God 
to  be  not  less  than  the  faith  and  obedience  of 
idolaters  to  their  false  gods.  This  could  not 
be  more  signaby  done  than  by  his  readiness  to 
overcome  all  scruples  and  all  natural  feelings 
at  the  command  of  Him  whose  voice  he  knew, 
and  whose  leading  he  had  so  long  followed. 
But  the  conclusion  of  the  history  is  as  clear  a 
condemnation  of  human  sacrifice  as  the  earlier 
part  might  have  seemed,  had  it  been  left  in- 
complete, to  sanction  it.  The  intervention  of 
the  angel,  the  substitution  of  the  lamb,  the 
prohibition  of  the  human  sacrifice,  proved 
that  in  no  case  could  such  an  offering  be  ac- 
ceptable to  God,  even  as  the  crowning  evidence 
of  faith,  devotion,  and  self-sacrifice.  The 
following  is  the  well-known  perverted  account 
of  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac  in  the  Phoenician 
traditions,  as  preserved  from  Sanchoniatho  by 
Philo  Byblius,  “Cronus,  whom  the  Phoeni- 
cians call  Israel,  being  king  over  that  country, 
who  after  his  death  was  deified  and  conse- 


crated into  the  planet  bearing  his  name,  having 
an  only  son  by  a nymph  named  Anobret, 
called  therefore  JehoucV'  (=  Heb.  Jahid), 
“which  is  even  now  the  name  for  only-be~ 
gotten  among  the  Phoenicians,  when  great 
perils  from  wars  were  impending  over  the 
land,  having  clothed  his  son  in  royal  appa- 
rel offered  him  up  upon  an  altar  which  he 
had  built,”  (Euseb.  ‘Prjep.  Evang.’  Lib.  i. 
c.  10). 

3.  rose  up  early  in  the  morning']  The 
promptness  and  steadiness  of  Abraham's  obe- 
dience are  plainly  marked  in  all  the  simple 
details  of  this  verse. 

5.  come  again  to  you]  It  may  be  questioned 
whether  this  had  in  it  a prophetic  significance, 
Abraham  “accounting  that  God  was  able  to 
raise  his  son  up  even  from  the  dead”  (Heb.  xi. 
17).  In  fact  it  was  proved  by  the  event  to  be 
a prophecy,  though  Abraham  may  have  ut- 
tered it  unconsciously  (so  Rashi):  and  that 
faith  in  God,  which  never  forsook  the  patri- 
arch, probably  in  the  lowest  depth  of  his 
anxiety  brought  a gleam  of  hope,  that  in  some 
unforeseen  way  his  son,  even  though  slain, 
should  yet  be  restored  to  him  at  last  (see 
Origen,  ‘ Homil.  viii.  in  Gen.’  § 5). 

6.  laid  it  upon  Isaac  his  so7i]  Compare 
Joh.  xix.  17,  the  great  Antitype  bearing  the 
wood  for  the  sacrifice  of  Himself  (Origen, 
‘Horn.  VIII.  in  Gen.’ § 6 : Aug.  ‘ De  C.  D.’ 
XVI.  32;  ‘ De  Trin.’  iii.  6). 

8.  God  nvill  provide  himself  a lamh  for  a 
burnt  offering]  Thelamb.  The  fathers  see 
in  this  again  an  unconscious  prophecy  by 
Abraham  (see  Origen  as  above,  and  Ambrose 
‘ De  Abr,’  lib.  i.  8).  He  probably  meant  to  say 
that  God  had  provided  that  Isaac  should  be 
the  lamb  or  victim  for  the  burnt-offering  : but 
his  words  were  more  literally  fulfilled  in  the 


GENESIS.  XXII. 


fv.  10—13. 


142 


built  an  altar  there,  and  laid  the  wood 
in  order,  and  bound  Isaac  his  son,  and 
* James  2.  -^laid  him  on  the  altar  upon  .the  wood. 

10  And  Abraham  stretched  forth 
his  hand,  and  took  the  knife  to  slay 
his  son. 

1 1 And  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
called  unto  him  out  of  heaven,  and 
said,  Abraham,  Abraham : and  he  said, 
.Here  am  I. 


12  And  he  said.  Lay  not  thine  hand 
upon  the  lad,  neither  do  thou  any  thing 
unto  him : for  now  I know  that  thou 
fearest  God,  seeing  thou  hast  not  with- 
held thy  son,  thine  only  son  from 
me. 

13  And  Abraham  lifted  up  his  eyes, 
and  looked,  and  behold  behind  him  a 
ram  caught  in  a thicket  by  his  horns ; 
and  Abraham  went  and  took  the  ram. 


unexpected  event,  the  ram  caught  in  a thicket, 
and  in  a deeper  spiritual  significance  when  God 
sent  His  Son  to  be  “the  Lamb  of  God  that 
taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world.” 

9,  Abraham  built  an  altar  there\  R. 
Eliezer  in  ‘ Pirke  Avoth,’  c.  31,  has  a tradi- 
tion that  this  was  the  same  place  at  which 
Adam  sacrificed,  at  which  Abel  offered  his 
burnt-offering,  and  where  Noah  built  an  altar 
and  offered  a sacrifice:  so  that  it  was  appa- 
rently supposed  that  Abraham  merely  re- 
paired the  ruins  of  the  ancient  altar.  What- 
ever the  tradition  is  worth,  it  may  illustrate 
the  history.  An  altar  of  earth  or  of  loose 
stones  would  be  very  quickly  raised. 

bowid  Isaac  his  son']  It  was  common  to 
bind  victims,  especially  human  victims  (Ovid, 
‘ Eleg.  ex.  Ponto.’  ill.  2;  Virg.  ‘ Ain.  ii.  134). 
The  Jews  agree  that  Isaac  yielded  submis- 
sively to  his  father’s  will  and  consented  to  be 
bound  and  sacrificed  (Joseph.  ‘A.  J.’  i.  13; 
Eliezer,  ‘in  Pirke,’  c.  31;  so  also  Chrysost. 
‘ Homil.  in  Gen.’  46).  Herein  he  was  the 
truer  type  of  Him,  “ who,  when  He  was  re- 
viled, reviled  not  again  ; when  He  suffered. 
He  threatened  not;  but  committed  Himself  to 
Him  that  judgeth  righteously”  (i  Pet.  ii.  23). 

10.  stretched  forth  his  hand]  The  steady 
deliberate  purpose  of  Abraham,  and  yet  all 
the  natural  shrinking  of  his  spirit,  are  admi- 
rably expressed  in  the  details  of  the  history. 

11.  the  Angel  of  the  Lord]  Up  to  this 
verse  we  have  only  the  name  Elohim,  God. 
Now  that  the  Divine  intervention  to  save 
Isaac  and  to  accept  a ransom  for  his  life  is 
related,  we  find  the  name,  Jehovah,  the 
great  covenant  name  frequently  made  use  of, 
though  the  name  Elohim  occurs  again  in  the 
next  verse.  ITe  Being  here  called  “the 
Angel  of  Jehovah,”  who  speaks  as  with 
Divine,  supreme  authority,  is  doubtless  the 
Angel  of  the  Covenant  (Mai.  iii.  i),  the  ever- 
lasting Son  of  the  Father,  who  alone  “hath 
declared  Him”  (John  i.  18). 

12.  no^jj  I knoui  that  thou  fearest  God] 
“ God  tried  Abraham,”  says Theodoret,  “not 
that  He  might  learn  what  He  knew  already, 
but  that  He  might  shew  to  others,  with  how 
great  justice  He  loved  the  jiatriarch”  (‘  Qu. 


in  Gen.’  Lxxiii).  Compare  Origen  (‘  Hotpil. 
VIII.  8),  who  refers  to  those  words  of  the 
Apostle:  “ God  spared  not  His  own  Son,  but 
freely  gave  Him  up  for  us  all.” 

thou  hast  not  q.vithheld  thy  son]  These  words 
in  the  LXX.  (ovk  e(pelaa>  rov  vloj  cron)  ap- 
pear to  be  referred  to  in  Rom.  viii.  32  (rov 
iStou  vtov  ovK  ((pclcraTo).  Whence  we  may 
learn  that  St  Paul  held  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac 
to  be  prophetic  of  Christ. 

13.  behold  behind  him  a ram  caught  in 
a thicket  by  his  horns]  I'here  is  a various 
reading  fsupportedby  many  MSS.,  by  the  Sa- 
maritan Pentateuch,  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Syr.,  Sam., 
and  perhaps  Onkelos),  which  might  be  ren- 
dered thus:  “ Behold  a single  ram  caught,” 
&c.  a ram,  that  is,  separated  from  the  flock. 
There  is  a similar  expression  in  Dan.  viii.  3 : 
“ Behold,  there  stood  before  the  river  a ram,” 
lit.  “ one  ram,”  or  a “ single  ram.”  The  sepa- 
ration of  the  ram  thus  caught  is  significant, 
both  historically,  as  shewing  the  Providential 
agency  of  God,  and  also  as  pointing  to  that 
Lamb  of  God,  who  was  “separate  from  sin- 
ners” (Heb.  vii.  26),  bearing  alone  the  burden 
of  our  iniquities.  St  Augustine  thinks  the 
horns  caught  in  the  thicket  typical  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  crowned  with  thorns  before  His 
sacrifice  (‘  De  C.  D.’  xvi.  32). 

offered  him  up  for  a burnt  offering  in  the 
stead  of  his  son]  It  has  been  argued  that  the 
lamb  substituted  for  Isaac,  not  Isaac  himself, 
was  the  true  type  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  who 
died  that  we  might  live.  This,  however, 
would  be  a very  imperfect  explication  of  the 
mystery.  The  antitype  is  always  greater  than 
the  type,  and  hence  in  the  prophetic  system 
of  the  Old  Testament,  types  are  multiplied 
that  they  may  express  collectively  that  which 
can  but  partially  be  expressed  by  one  of  them. 
The  fathers  recognize  the  double  type  in  this 
whole  history.  The  father  witli  full  delibe- 
rate purpose  offering  up  his  dearly  beloved, 
only-begotten  son,  the  son  willingly  obedient 
unto  death,  the  wood  for  the  sacrifice  carried 
by  the  victim  up  the  hill,  the  sacrifice  ful- 
filled in  purpose  though  not  in  act,  and  then 
the  father  receiving  his  son  in  a figure  from 
the  dead  (Heb.  xi.  19)  after  three  days  of 
death  in  the  father’s  purpose  and  belief;  all 


V.  14 — 1 6.] 


GENESIS.  XXII. 


143 


and  offered  him  up  for  a burnt  offer- 
ing in  the  stead  of  his  son. 
t That  is,  14  And  Abraham  called  the  name 
LORD  place  “ Jehovah-jireh:  as  it  is 

will  see,  s^id  to  tfiis  day,  In  the  mount  of  the 
vide.  Lord  it  shall  be  seen. 


15  ^ And  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
called  unto  Abraham  out  of  heayen 

the  second  time,  ‘^Ps.  103. 

16  And  said,  ^By  myself  have  I eccIus.  44. 
sv^orn,  saith  the  Lord,  for  because  ^ 
thou  hast  done  this  thing,  and  hast  HeU  6.’ I3.' 


this  is  as  much  an  actual  prophecy  of  the 
sacrifice  and  resurrection  of  the  Son  of  God 
as  was  possible  without  a true  slaying  of 
Isaac,  for  which  was  substituted  the  slaying 
of  the  ram.  That  which  Isaac’s  sacrifice 
wanted  to  make  it  perfect  as  a type  was 
actual  death  and  the  notion  of  substitution. 
These  therefore  were  supplied  by  the  death  of 
the  ram,  and  his  substitution  for  a human 
life.  Theodoret  says  (‘Qu,  in  Gen.’  Lxxiii.) 
that  “ Isaac  was  the  type  of  the  Godhead,  the 
ram  of  the  manhood.”  This  perhaps  sounds 
fanciful  at  first;  but  the  correspondence  is  in 
truth  very  exact.  Isaac  was  of  too  noble  a 
nature  to  be  slain  upon  the  altar ; God  would 
have  abhorred  such  an  offering.  Hence  the 
Most  High  prepares  a victim  to  be  as  it  were 
joined  with  Isaac  and  then  to  suffer,  that 
thus  the  sacrifice  should  not  be  imperfect. 
So  the  ever  blessed  Son  of  God  was  by  nature 
above  the  possibility  of  suffering;  hence  the 
Eternal  Father  prepares  for  Him  a perfect 
humanity  (“a  Body  hast  Thou  prepared 
me”),  that  He  might  die  in  that  nature  which 
was  mortal,  the  immortal,  impassible  nature 
being  yet  inseparably  united  with  it.  Thus, 
Isaac  and  the  ram  together  symbolized  and 
typified  in  almost  all  particulars  the  sacrifice, 
the  death  and  the  resurrection  of  the  .Son  of 
God,  who  also  was  the  Son  of  man. 

We  may  observe  too,  that  not  only  was 
Isaac  thus  made  the  most  memorable  type  of 
the  Redeemer  of  the  world  (Isaac,  who  other- 
wise seems  less  noticeable  than  either  Abra- 
ham or  Jacob),  but  also  that  Abraham  had  the 
singular  honour  of  representing  the  highest, 
holiest  God  and  Father,  who  “ spared  not  His 
own  Son,  but  freely  gave  Him  up  for  us  all” 
(Rom.  viii.  32.  See  Aug.  ‘De  Civ.  D.’  xvi. 

32). 

14.  jEHOVAH-jireh~\  i.e.  “the  Lord  will 
see,”  or  “ the  Lord  will  provide.”  The  same 
words  which  Abraham  had  used  in  v.  8, 
but  with  a change  in  the  sacred  names.  In 
v.  8,  when  Isaac  had  asked,  “where  is  the 
Lamb?”  Abraham  answered,  Elohim  jireh, 
“ God  will  see,”  or  “ provide  a lamb  for  Him- 
self.” Now  he  perceives  that  he  had  uttered 
an  unconscious  prophecy,  and  that  the  God 
(Elohim)  in  whom  he  trusted  had  shewn 
Himself  indeed  J ehovah,  the  Eternal  Truth 
and  the  covenated  Saviour  of  his  servants,  and 
so  he  names  the  place  Jeho  VAH-jireh.  The 
connection  which  there  is  between  these  words 
and  the  word  Moriah  (see  on  v.  z)  has  sug- 


gested the  belief,  that  the  name  Moriah  in  v. 
2 is  used  proleptically,  and  that  it  really  ori- 
ginated in  this  saying  of  Abraham. 

as  it  is  said  to  this  day.,  In  the  mount  of  the 
Lord  it  shall  be  seen'\  Or,  “it  shall  be  pro- 
vided.” 

There  is  great  variety  of  renderings  in  the 
ancient  Versions.  Indeed,  if  we  disregard  the 
vowel  points,  it  would  be  equally  possible  to 
translate  “In  the  mount  of  the  Lord  it  shall 
be  seen  or  provided,”  or  “In  the  mount  the 
Lord  will  see  or  provide,”  or  “In  the  mount 
the  Lord  will  be  seen.”  The  LXX.  takes  the 
last,  the  Vulgate,  Syriac  and  Samaritan  take 
the  second.  Onkeios  departs  from  his  habit 
of  translating,  and  paraphrases,  like  the  late 
Targums;  “And  Abraham  worshipped  and 
prayed  there  and  said  before  the  Lord,  Here 
shall  generations  worship ; whereupon  it  shall 
be  said  in  that  day.  In  this  mountain  Abra- 
ham worshipped  before  the  Lord.’.’  St  Jerome, 
taking  the  Latin,  explained  it  thus:  “This  be- 
came a proverb  among  the  Hebrev/s,  that  if 
any  should  be  in  trouble  and  should  desire 
the  help  of  the  Lord,  they  should  say.  In  the 
mount  the  Lord  ^ill  see.,  that  is,  as  He  had 
mercy  on  Abraham,  so-  will  He  have  mercy 
on  us”  (‘  Qu.  Hebraic,  in  Gen.’  xxii). 

On  the  whole,  the  pointing  of  the  Maso- 
rites,  a tradition  never  lightly  to  be  rejected, 
which  is  followed  by  the  Authorised  Version, 
seems  to  give  the  most  probable  sense  of  the 
passage  (So  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1246;  Rosemn., 
Knobel).  But,  in  any  case,  there  seems  not 
only  a general  assurance  of  God’s  providential 
care  of  His  people,  who  in  trouble  may  re- 
member that  “ the  Lord  will  provide,”  but 
also  a special  prophecy,  ist  of  the  manifesta- 
tion of  the  Lord  in  His  temple  at  Jerusalem, 
where  He  was  to  be  seen  in  the  Shechinah  or 
cloud  of  glory  between  the  Cherubim,  where 
He  provided  access  to  Himself  and  sacrifices 
for  His  service;  zndly,  of  the  coming  of  the 
Lord  to  His  temple  (Mai.  iii.  i),  thereby 
making  “ the  glory  of  the  latter  house  greater 
than  of  the  former”  (Hagg.  ii.  9);  and  of  His 
providing  there  a Lamb  for  a sacrifice,  which 
should  save  not  only  from  temporal  but  from 
eternal  death,  taking  away  the  sin  of  the 
world. 

16.  by  myself  hanse  I sworn'\  This  is 
the  final  promise  of  the  Lord  to  Abraham, 
confirming  all  the  former  promises  by  the 
solemnity  of  an  oath,  and  “because  He  could 
swear  by  no  greater,  He  sware  by  Himself” 


1 


144 

not  withheld  thy  son,  thine  only 
son: 

17  That  in  blessing  I will  bless 
thee,  and  in  multiplying  I will  mul- 
tiply thy  seed  as  the  stars  of  the  heaven, 
and  as  the  sand  which  is  upon  the  sea 
tHeb.  lip.  ^ shore;  and  thy  seed  shall  possess  the 
gate  of  his  enemies ; 

‘^chap.  12.  18  "^And  in  thy  seed  shall  all  the 

&18. 18.  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed;  be- 
Ej:cius.  44.  cause  thou  hast  obeyed  my  voice. 

Acts  3.  25.  jg  So  Abraham  returned  unto  his 
^ ■ young  men,  and  they  rose  up  and  went 

together  to  Beer-sheba ; and  Abraham 
dwelt  at  Beer-sheba. 


[v.  17—24. 

20  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  after 
these  things,  that  it  was  told  Abra- 
ham, saying,  Behold,  Milcah,  she  hath 
also  born  children  unto  thy  brother 
Nahor; 

21  Huz  his  first-born,  and  Buz  his 
brother,  and  Kemuel  the  father  of 
Aram, 

22  And  Chesed,  and  Flazo,  and 
Pildash,  and  Jidlaph,  and  BethueL 

23  And  Bethuel  begat  ^ Rebekah : Called, 
these  eight  Alilcah  did  bear  to  Nahor,  Rebecca. 
Abraham’s  brother. 

24  And  his  concubine,  whose  name 
was  Reumah,  she  bare  also  Tebah, 


GENESIS.  XXII. 


(Heb.  vi,  13).  The  vast  importance  of  the 
revelation  and  of  the  promise  here  recorde'd  is 
proved  by  this  remarkable  act  of  the  Most 
High.  “ God,  willing  more  abundantly  to 
shew  unto  the  heirs  of  promise  the  immuta- 
bility of  His  counsel,  interposed  Himself  by 
an  oath”  (or  “ made  Himself  the  Mediator  to 
be  sworn  by,”  efiecrireva-ev  opKco)]  “that  by 
two  immutable  things”  (i.e.  His  word  and  His 
oath,  Chry.sost.,  Theod.,  Theophyl),  “ in 
which  it  was  impossible  for  God  to  lie,  we 
might  have  a strong  consolation,  who  have 
fled  for  refuge  to  lay  hold  upon  the  hope  set 
before  us”  (Heb.  vi,  17,  18).  Abraham  had 
by  Divine  grace  achieved  a victory  of  faith 
unheard  of  before  in  the  world's  history ; and 
so  to  him  personally  a most  blessed  and  most 
solemn  promise  is  given  of  prosj^erity,  honour 
and  enlargement  to  him  and  to  his  seed  after 
him.  But  this  great  victory  of  Abraham’s 
was  the  type  of  a still  greater  victory  to  be 
won  hereafter  by  God  and  God’s  only  begot- 
ten Son ; and  so  the  promise  to  Abraham  in- 
cludes a promise  still  greater  to  all  mankind, 
for  in  the  seed  of  Abraham  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth  were  to  be  blessed  for  ever.  N.  B. 
Onkelos  renders  here,  “ I have  sworn  by  My 
Word,”  Memra;  and  the  Arabic,  “ I have 
sworn  by  My  own  Name.” 

20.  it  <vjas  told  Abraham\  This  is  in- 
troduced for  the  sake  of  tracing  the  genealogy 
of  Abraham's  brother  Nahor  down  to  Re- 
bekah  the  wife  of  Isaac,  v.  23. 

21.  Huz]  See  on  ch.  x.  23,  where  we 
have  seen  U/  and  Aram  together  before.  It 
is  only  natural  that  names  should  have  been 
repeated  in  the  same  race,  the  race  of  Shem.  U z 
and  Aram  also  occur  among  the  posterity  of 
Esau  (Gen.  xxxvi.  28),  whence  Idumea  is 
called  “the  land  of  Uz”  (Lam.  iv.  21).  This 
recurrence  of  names  in  juxtaposition  creates 
some  obscurity  as  to  the  sites  to  be  assigned 
to  their  descend-'ints  in  the  division  of  the 


nations.  St  Jerome  (‘  Qu.  in  Gen.’)  thinks 
that  Job  was  a descendant  of  Huz  or  Uz  the 
son  of  Nahor.  It  is  said  that  Job  was  of  the 
land  of  Uz  (Job  i.  i),  and  his  friend  Elihu 
was  “a  Buzite  of  the  kindred  of  Ram”  (xxxii. 
2).  If  Ram  be  the  same  as  Aram,  we  have 
then  the  three  names  in  this  verse — Huz,  Buz 
and  Aram  occurring  in  the  history  of  Job. 
In  Jerem.  xxv,  23  Buz  is  placed  with  Dedan 
and  Tema,  apparently  in  Arabia  Petrsea. 

22.  Cbesed]  Jerome  supposes  the  Chas- 
dim  (or  Chaldneans)  to  have  derived  their 
name  from  him,  to  which  conjecture  the  oc- 
currence of  the  Chasdim  also  in  the  Book  of 
Job,  gives  some  colour  (see  on  v.  21).  If, 
indeed,  “Ur  of  the  Chaldees”  was  so  called 
when  Abraham  dwelt  there  (Gen.  xi.  31), 
this  would  be  an  anachronism,  but  very  pro- 
bably it  may  have  been  known  as  Ur  of  the 
Chaldees  when  Moses  wrote,  and  so  desig- 
nated by  him,  though  the  Chaldees  or  Chas- 
dim m.ay  not  have  been  in  existence  in  the 
days  of  Abraham. 

23.  Bethuel  begat  Rebekah]  The  rela- 
tionship therefore  of  Rebekah  to  Isaac  was 
that  Rebekah  was  daughter  of  Isaac’s  first 
cousin.  They  were,  as  we  should  say,  first 
cousins  once  removed.  Nahor  was  the  elder 
brother  of  Abraham,  and  hiS  granddaughter 
may  have  been  of  a suitable  age  to  be  the 
wife  of  Abraham’s  son. 

these  eight]  The  sons  of  Nahor,  like  the 
sons  of  Ishmael  and  of  Jacob,  were  twelve  in 
number.  But  though  it  happens  that  among 
the  descendants  of  Terah  three  persons  had 
twelve  sons,  there  is  such  a diversity  in  the 
other  circumstances  of  the  family,  such  a 
diflerence  with  regard  to  their  mothers,  and 
there  are  so  many  other  patriarchs,  Abraham, 
Isaac,  &c.,  the  numbering  of  whose  children 
were  quite  unlike  these,  that  the  notion  of  a 
mystic  number  is  utterly  untenable  (see  Keil 
in  ioc.). 


V.  1—7.] 


GENESIS.  XXII.  XXIII. 


145 


and  Gaham,  and  Thahash,  and  Maa- 
chah. 

CHAPTER  XXIIT. 

1 Tfie  age  and  death  of  Sarah.  3 The  pur- 
chase of  Machpelah^  19  where  Sarah  was 
buried, 

AND  Sarah  was  an  hundred  and 
]f\^  seven  and  twenty  years  old: 
these  were  the  years  of  the  life  of  Sarah. 

2 And  Sarah  died  in  Kirjath-arba ; 
the  same  is  Hebron  in  the  land 
of  Canaan : and  Abraham  came  to 
mourn  for  Sarah,  and  to  weep  for 
her. 

3 ^ And  Abraham  stood  up  from 


before  his  dead,  and  spake  unto  the 
sons  of  Heth,  saying, 

\ 1 am  7i  stranger  and  a sojourner 
with  you : give  me  a possession  of  a 
buryingplace  with  you,  that  I may 
bury  my  dead  out  of  my  sight. 

5 And  the  children  of  Heth  an- 
swered Abraham,  saying  unto  him, 

6 Hear  us,  my  lord:  thou  art  a 
^mighty  prince  among  us : in  the  choice  i Heb. 
of  our  sepulchres  bury  thy  dead ; none 

of  us  shall  withhold  from  thee  his 
sepulchre,  but  that  thou  mayest  bury 
thy  dead. 

7 And  Abraham  stood  up,  and 


Chap.  XXIII.  1.  Sarah  avas  an  hun- 
dred and  se'ven  and  taventy  years  old']  Sarah 
is  the  only  woman  whose  age  is  mention- 
ed in  the  Scriptures  (Lightfoot,  ‘ Har.  of 
Old  Testament,’  Gen.  xxiii.),  because  as  the 
mother  of  the  promised  seed,  she  became  the 
mother  of  all  believers,  (i  Pet.  iii.  6)  (Del., 
Keil.)  She  died  37  years  after  the  birth  of 
Isaac,  as  she  was  90  when  he  was  born. 

2.  Kirjath-arha;  the  same  is  Hebron  in  the 
land  of  Canaan]  See  on  ch.  xiii.  18.  The  suppo- 
sition that  the  name  Hebron  was  not  given  till 
the  time  of  Joshua,  and  that  the  use  of  it  in 
Genesis  indicates  a later  hand,  is  contradicted 
by  the  natural  force  of  these  words.  They 
appear  plainly  to  have  been  written  by  some 
one  not  then  living  in  the  land  of  Canaan. 
Hebron  was  apparently  the  original  name, 
which  was  changed  to  Kirjath-arba,  and  re- 
stored again  by  Caleb,  Josh.  xiv.  15. 

Abraham  came  to  mourn  for  Sarah]  Aben- 
ezra  and  others  infer  from  this  that  Abraham 
was  not  with  Sarah  when  she  died.  It  may 
mean  no  more  than  that  Abraham  went  into 
Sarah’s  tent  to  mourn  for  her. 

4.  I am  a stranger  and  a sojourner] 
(Cp.  Heb.  xi.  13).  Abraham  had  only  pas- 
tured his  flocks,  moving  from  place  to  place, 
as  a nomad  chief;  but  the  various  Canaanitish 
tribes  had  settled  in  the  land,  building  cities 
and  cultivating  fields;  and  so  as  Lightfoot 
observes  (‘Harm.:’  on  Gen.  xxiii.),  “ a burial 
place  is  the  first  land  that  Abraham  has  ia 
Canaan.”  The  heir  of  the  promises  was  but 
a stranger  and  a pilgrim,  never  to  rest  but  in 
the  grave,  but  with  a glorious  future  before 
him  for  his  race  and  for  himself;  assured  that 
his  seed  should  possess  the  land,  and  him.self 
“desiring  a better  country,  that  is  a heavenly.” 

GH'e  me  a possession  of  d buryingplace  avith 
you]  This  is  the  first  mention  of  burial.  It 
was  noted  by  the  heathen  historian  as  a cha- 
racteristic of  the  Jews,  that  they  preferred  to 
VOL.  I. 


bury  their  dead  rather  than  to  burn  them; 
corpora  condere  quam  cremare  (Tac.  ‘Hist.’ 
V.  5).  It  is  observable  that  this  is  thus  men- 
tioned first,  when  the  first  death  takes  place 
in  the  family  of  him,  who  had  received  the 
promises.  The  care  of  the  bodies  of  the  de- 
parted is  a custom  apparently  connected  with 
the  belief  in  their  sanctity  as  vessels  of  the 
Grace  of  God,  and  with  the  hope  that  they 
may  be  raised  again  in  the  day  of  the  restitu- 
tion of  all  things.  The  elaborate  embalming 
of  the  Egyptians  had  perhaps  a very  different 
significance,  looking  rather  to  retain  the  be- 
loved body  in  its  former  shape,  and  perhaps 
to  preserve  the  living  principle  in  permanent 
existence  with  it,  rather  than  hoping  that  the 
body,  being  “sown  a natural  should  be  raised 
a spiritual  body.” 

5.  saying  unto  him]  The  Sam.  Pent.  and. 
LXX.  read  (by  the  variation  of  a single  letter), 
“saying.  Not  so.” 

6.  thou  art  a mighty  prince  among  us]  lit.  “ a 
prince  of  God.”  See  on  ch.  x.  9,  the  name 
of  God  being  apparently  added  to  give  a su- 
perlative force:  cp.  i Sam.  xxvi.  12,  where 
R.  D.  Kimchi  writes,  “When  the  Scripture 
would  magnify  anything,  it  joins  it  to  the  . 
name  of  God.” 

in  the  choice  of  our  sepulchres  bury  thy  dead] 
The  Hittites  in  the  complimentary  manner 
common  in  oriental  bargains  (see  Thomson, 
‘Land  and  Book,’  p.  578)  offer  Abraham  to 
bury  his  dead  in  their  sepulchres;  but  there 
was  a separation  between  them  of  faith  and 
life,  which  forbade  Abraham  to  deposit  the 
body  of  Sarah  in  the  same  grave  with  the 
people  of  the  land.  We  know  nothing  of  the 
funeral  rites  of  the  Canaanites  at  this  early 
period,  nor  whether  they  buried  the  bodies 
of  the  departed  or  only  their  ashes.  It  is, 
however,  very  probable,  that  there  were  ido- 
latrous rites  connected  with  their  sepulture, 
which  it  would  have  been  unlawful  for  Abra- 
ham to  countenance. 


K 


146 


GENESIS.  XXIII. 


[y.  S— 15. 


tHeb. 

full 

money. 


tHeb. 

ears. 


bowed  himself  to  the  people  of  the 
land,  even  to  the  children  of  Heth. 

8 And  he  communed  with  them, 
saying.  If  it  be  your  mind  that  I 
should  bury  my  dead  out  of  my  sight ; 
hear  me,  and  intreat  for  me  to  Ephron 
the  son  of  Zohar, 

9 That  he  may  give  me  the  cave 
of  Machpelah,  which  he  hath,  which 
is  in  the  end  of  his  field;  for  ^as 
much  money  as  it  is  worth  he  shall 
give  it  me  for  a possession  of  a bury- 
ingplace  amongst  you. 

10  And  Ephron  dwelt  among  the 
children  of  Heth:  and  Ephron  the 
Hittite  answered  Abraham  in  the  ^au- 
dience of  the  children  of  Heth,  even 
of  all  that  went  in  at  the  gate  of  his 
city,  saying. 


11  Nay,  my  lord,  hear  me:  the 
field  give  I thee,  and  the  cave  that 
is  therein,  I give  it  thee ; in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  sons  of  my  people  give  I 
it  thee : bury  thy  dead. 

12  And  Abraham  bowed  down  him- 
self before  the  people  of  the  land. 

13  And  he  spake  unto  Ephron  in 
the  audience  of  the  people  of  the  land, 
saying.  But  if  thou  wilt  give  it,,  I pray 
thee,  hear  me : I will  give  thee  money 
for  the  field  take  it  of  me,  and  I 
will  bury  my  dead  there. 

14  And  Ephron  answered  Abra- 
ham, saying  unto  him, 

1 5 My  lord,  hearken  unto  me : the 
land  is  worth  four  hundred  shekels 
of  silver ; what  is  that  betwixt  me 
and  thee  ? bury  therefore  thy  dead. 


7.  bonved  himself '\  The  Vulgate  has 
“ adoravit  coram  populo.”  It  was  simply  the 
deep  reverence  common  in  the  East  (cp.  i 
Sam.  XXV.  24;  xxviii.  14;  i Kings  xviii.  7; 
2 Kings  ii.  15;  Esth.  viii.  3).  It  was  a matter 
of  courtesy  and  respect,  also  of  entreaty  or  of 
gratitude. 

9.  the  ca've  of  Machpelah']  The  soil  of 
Palestine  being  rocky  naturally  suggested 
sepulture  in  caves  (see  ^Viner,  ‘Realw.’  s,  v. 
Grabes,  Smith,  ‘Diet,  of  Bible,’  s.v.  Burial), 
All  the  ancient  Versions  render  the  words 
'‘cave  of  Machpelah”  by  “the  double  cave,” 
deriving  Machpelah  from  the  verb  Caphal  to 
divide,  to  double.  Interpreters  have  explained 
this  in  various  ways,  as  eitk-er  that  there  were 
two  entrances  to  the  cave,  or  that  it  had  a 
double  structure  such  that  two  bodies  (as 
e.g.  that  of  Abraham  and  Sarah)  might  oe 
laid  there  (see  Heidegger,  ii.  131).  Others, 
however,  treat  the  word  as  a proper  name, 
and  Gesenius  considers  it  more  probably  to 
signify  “portion”  than  “duplication.”  Thesite 
of  this  ancient  burialplace  is  well  ascertained. 
Josephus  tells  us  that  “Abraham  and  his  de- 
scendantsbuilt  monuments  over  the  sepulchres” 
here  (A.  J.  i.  14),  which  were  said  to  be 
still  visible  in  the  days  of  Jerome  (‘  Onomast.’). 
Now  a mosejue  is  erected  over  the  ground 
believed  to  cover  the  sepulchres.  The  Haram 
or  sacred  precinct  of  the  mosque  is  surrounded 
by  a wall,  believed  to  be  as  ancient  as  any- 
thing now  remaining  in  Palestine,  The,  pre- 
sent condition  and  appearance  of  it  are  de- 
scribed by  Robinson  (‘B.  R.’  11.  p.  431  sq.), 
see  also  Thomson,  ‘ Land  and  Book, ’p.  5 80,  and 
a full  account  of  the  sepulchre  in  the  appendix 
to  Stanleys  ‘Sermons  in  the  East.’ 


for  as  much  money  as  it  is  nvorth]  lit.  “for 
full  money.”  The  same  words  are  rendered 
I Chron.  xxi.  22,  “for  the  full  price.” 

10.  all  that  ^ent  in  at  the  gate  of  his 
city]  The  transaction  took  place  publicly  at 
the  gate  of  the  city,  the  forum  or  public  place 
of  the  ancient  cities  of  the  East,  see  on 
ch.  xix.  I. 

11.  the  field  gi^e  I thee]  Compare  2 Sam. 
xxiv.  20,  24.  Both  conversations,  that  be- 
tween Abraham  and  Ephron,  and  that  be- 
tween David  and  Araunah,  are  .specimens  of 
the  extreme  courtesy  of  the  Eastern  people  in 
the  transaction  of  business. 

13.  But  if  thou  ^ilt  gh'e  it,  I pray  thee, 
hear  me]  Rather  perhaps,  “But  do  thou, 
I pray  thee,  hear  me.”  Two  particles  of 
wishing  or  intreating  are  used. 

money  for  the  fold]  Lit.  “the  money  of  the 
field,”  i.e.  the  value  of  the  field. 

15.  four  hundred  shekels  of  sil'ver]  The 
word  shekel  means  merely  weight,  cp.  pondus, 
pound.  See  on  ch.  xx.  i6,  where  no  name  fo 
a coin  or  weight  occurs,  but  only  the  words  “a 
thousand  of  silver.”  Here  we  first  have  the 
name  of  a weight,  though  probably  not  of 
a coin.  There  is  no  mention  of  coinage  in 
Scripture  before  the  Babylonish  Captivity ; 
but  the  Egyptians  had  rings  of  gold  and  silver 
of  fixed  weight  long  before  Moses,  which 
are  represented  on  the  monuments.  The  first 
actual  Jewish  money  appears  to  have  been 
coined  by  Simon  Maccabasus  (i  Macc.  xv.). 
It  is  not  easy  to  conjecture  accurately  what 
the  value  of  a shekel  may  have  been  in  the 
time  of  Abraham,  In  later  times  the  LXX. 
and  the  New  Testament  (Matt.  xvii.  24) 


V.  I6— 3-J 


GENESIS.  XXIIL  XXIV. 


14; 


1 5 And  Abraham  hearkened  unto 
Ephron ; and  Abraham  weighed  to 
Ephron  the  silv^er,  which  he  had 
named  in  the  audience  of  the  sons  of 
Heth,  four  hundred  shekels  of  silver, 
current  money  with  the  merchant. 

17  ^ And  the  held  of  Ephron, 
which  was  in  Machpelah,  which  vjas 
before  Mamre,  the  held,  and  the  cave 
which  was  therein,  and  all  the  trees 
that  tvere  in  the  held,  that  were  in  all 
the  borders  round  about,  were  made 
sure 

18  Unto  Abraham  for  a possession 
in  the  presence  of  the  children  of 
Heth,  before  all  that  went  in  at  the 
gate  of  his  city. 

19  And  after  this,  Abraham  buried 
Sarah  his  wife  in  the  cave  of  the  held 
of  Machpelah  before  Mamre  : the 
same  is  Hebron  in  the  land  of  Ca- 
naan. 

20  And  the  held,  and  the  cave  that 
is  therein,  were  made  sure  unto  Abra- 


ham for  a possession  of  a buryingplace 
by  the  sons  of  Heth. 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

I Abraham  swearetk  his  servant.  10  The 
servant' s journey : his  prayer:  14  his  sign. 

15  Rebekah  meeteih  hhn.,  {ii  f iii fillet h his  sign^ 

22  receivetli  je^.oels,  23  shewet/i  her  kindred, 

25  and  invihth  hhn  koine.  26  The  servant 
blesseth  God.  29  Laban  entertaineth  him. 

'34  The  servant  sheweth  his  message.  50 
Laban  and  Bethiiel  approve  it.  58  Rebekah 
consenteth  to  go.  62  Isaac  meeieth  her. 

AND  Abraham  was  old,  ^ welD  Heb. 
stricken  in  age : and  the  Lord 
had  blessed  Abraham  in  all  things. 

2 And  Abraham  said  unto  his  eld- 
est servant  of  his  house,  that  ruled 

over  all  that  he  had,  "Put,  I pray « chap.  47, 
thee,  thy  hand  under  my  thigh : 

3 And  I will  make  thee  swear  by 
the  Lord,  the  God  of  heaven,  and 
the  God  of  the  earth,  that  thou  shalt 
not  take  a wife  unto  my  son  of  the 
daughters  of  the  Canaanites,  among 
whom  I dwell': 


identify  the  half  shekel  with  the  didrachma, 
which  would  make  the  shekel  nearly  half  an 
ounce,  220  grains  of  our  weight,  or  a little 
less  in  value  than  half-a-crown  of  our  present 
money.  The  field  therefore  would  have  been 
purchased  for  about  fifty  guineas,  52/.  ioj. 
(See  Gesenius,  ‘Thes.’  p.  1474;  Winer,  ‘R. 
W,  B.’  s.v.  sekel]  Smith’s  ‘Diet,  of  Bib.’  s.vv. 
money,  shekel,  weights  and  measures  j) 

16.  current  money  nvith  the  merchant^ 
Lit.  “silver  passing  with  the  merchant.”  The 
Canaanites  were  great  merchants,  so  much 
so  that  the  very  word  Ganaanite  became  a 
synonym  for  merchant,  see  Job  xl.  30  (in 
Authorised  Version  xli.  6);  Prov.  xxxi.  24. 
It  is  therefore  very  probable  that  they  early 
learned  the  use  of  silver  as  a means  of  barter : 
and  though  it  may  not  have  been  coined,  yet 
the  masses  or  bars  of  silver  may  have  been 
early  formed  into  conventional  shapes,  or 
marked  with  some  rude  sign  to  indicate  their 
weight  (see  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  982). 

17.  the  field,  &c.]  Not  only  the  cave, 
as  first  proposed  by  Abraham,  but  the  whole 
field  with  trees  in  it,  which  may  have  formed 
part  of  that  grove  of  Mamre,  where  Abraham 
dwelt  before  the  overthrow  of  Sodom  and 
where  he  built  an  altar  to  the  Lord. 

<vjere  made  sure  unto  Abrahani]  Lit.  “stood 
firm  to  Abraham.” 


was  137  at  the  death  of  Sarah.  Isaac  was 
then  3 7 ; and  when  he  married  Rebekah,  he 
was  40  (see  ch.  xxv.  20).  Abraham  therefore 
must  have  been  in  his  140th  year  at  this  time, 
and  he  lived  35  years  after  it  (ch.  xxv.  7). 

2.  unto  his  eldest  ser-vant  of  his  house^  Lit. 

“ to  his  servant,  the  elder  of  his  house.”  The 
word  elder  in  Hebrew  as  in  most  languages  is 
used  as  a title  of  honour,  cp.  Sheykh,  Senatus, 
yepovres,  presbyter,  Signor,  Mayor,  See.  (Ges. 
‘Thes.’  p.  427;  Hammond,  on  Acts  xi.  30). 

It  is  generally  supposed  that  this  was  Eliezer 
of  Damascus,  see  ch.  xv.  2. 

Rut,  I pray  thee,  thy  hand  under  my  tbigh’\  A 
form  of  adjuration  mentioned  only  here  and 
of  Jacob,  ch.  xlvii,  29.  Various  conjectures 
have  been  made  by  Jews  (Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  1. 16 ; 
Hieron.  ‘Qu.  in  Gen.;’  Ambrose,  ‘De  Abra- 
ham.’ I.  6;  Eliezer,  in  ‘Pirke,’  c.  39),  and  by 
the  fathers  (Ambros.  ‘De  Abrahamo,  i.  9; 
Hieron.  ubi  supra ; August.  ‘ De  G.  D.’ 
XVI.  33) ; but  nothing  is  known  with  certainty 
of  the  signification  of  the  action.  Aben-Ezra 
supposes  that  it  was  a form  of  oath  prevalent 
in  patriarchal  times  but  only  taken  by  inferiors, 
as  hereby  Abraham’s  steward,  and  in  Gen. xlvii. 

29  by  a son  to  his  father;  that  accordingly  it 
was  a kind  of  homage,  the  servant  or  son  there- 
by indicating  subjection  and  the  purpose  of 
obedience,  (See  Heidegger,  ii.  pp.  134,  135; 
Rosenrti,  in  loc.) 

3.  of  the  daughters  of  the  Canaanites\  . 

K 2 


Chap.  XXIV.  l.  Abraham  ‘was  old'\  He 


148 


GENESIS.  XXIV. 


[v.  4— II. 


4 But  thou  shalt  go  unto  my  coun- 
try, and  to  my  kindred,  and  take  a 
wife  unto  my  son  Isaac. 

5 And  the  servant  said  unto  him, 
Peradventure  the  woman  will  not 
be  willing  to  folloyv  me  unto  this 
land  : must  I needs  bring  thy  son 
a^ain  unto  the  land  from  whence 

o 

thou  earnest  r 

6 And  Abraham  said  unto  him. 
Beware  thou  that  thou  bring  not  my 
son  thither  again. 

7 ^ The  Lord  God  of  heaven, 
which  took  me  from  my  father’s  house, 
and  from  the  land  of  my  kindred,  and 

ichap  12  which  spake  unto  me,  and  that  sware 
7.  &13. 15-  unto  me,  saying,  '^Unto  thy  seed  will 
& 26!  ' 1 give  this  land ; he  shall  send  his 


angel  before  thee,  and  thou  shalt  take 
a wife  unto  my  son  from  thence. 

8 And  if  the  woman  will  not  be 
willing  to  follow  thee,  then  thou  shalt 
be  clear  from  this  my  oath : only  bring 
not  my  son  thither  again. 

9 And  the  servant  put  his  hand 
under  the  thigh  of  Abraham  his  master, 
and  sware  to  him  concerning  that 
matter. 

10  And  the.  servant  took  ten 
camels  of  the  camels  of  his  master,  and 
departed;  "for  all  the  goods  oif  his^Or,  w, 
master  were  in  his  hand : and  he  arose, 

and  went  to  Mesopotamia,  unto  the 
city  of  Nahor. 

1 1 And  he  made  his  camels  to  kneel 
down  without  the  city  by  a well  of 


The  licentiousness  of  the  Canaanites  had  pro- 
bably determined  Abraham  against  marrying 
his  son  to  one  of  their  daughters.  He  had 
also,  no  doubt,  reference  to  the  Promised 
Seed,  and  desired  that  the  race  from  which 
He  was  to  come  should  be  kept  pure  from 
admixture  with  the  race  of  Ham. 

6.  Beavare  thou  that  thou  bring  not  my  son 
thither  again']  Abraham  had  been  distinctly 
called  of  God  to  leave  his  own  country,  and 
to  be  a stranger  and  sojourner  in  the  land  which 
was  to  be  his  hereafter.  It  would  therefore 
have  been  an  act  both  of  unbelief  and  of 
disobedience,  to  send  his  son  back  again.  He 
trusted  that  He,  who  had  so  called  him, 
would  provide  his  son  with  a wife  from  his 
own  kindred,  not  defiled,  at  least  as  the 
Canaanites  were,  with  heathen  worship  and 
heathen  morality;  but  in  any  case  he  would 
rather  his  son  should  wed  among  the  aliens 
than  return  to  the  place  whence  he  himself 
had  been  bidden  to  depart. 

10.  ten  camels^  &c.]  The  journey  was 
long  and  could  only  be  performed  in  safety 
t)y  a considerable  company  or  caravan.  The 
words  which  follow,  “for  all  the  goods  of  his 
master  were  in  his  hand,”  very  probably  are 
no  more  than  an  explanation  of  his  taking  so 
many  camels  with  him,  his  master  sparing 
nothing  to  make  the  journey  successful.  The 
LXX.  and  Vulgate  render  “and  he  took  pail 
of  all  his  master's  goods  in  his  hand,”  as  though 
Abraham  had  sent  a present  with  the  servant 
to  conciliate  the  favour  of  the  bride’s  family. 

to  Mesopotamia]  Lit.  “ Aram  of  the  two 
rivers,”  or  “ Aram-Naharaim.”  The  name 
Naharina  constantly  occurs  in  Egyptian  in- 
scriptions of  the  1 8th  and  19th  dynasties.  In 


other  passages  in  Genesis  (xxv.  20;  xxviii.  2, 
6,  7 ; xxxi.  18;  xxxiii.  18;  xxxv.  9,  26;  xlvi.  15) 
we  read  of  Padan  Aram  or  simply  Padan 
(Gen.  xlviii.  7),  “the  Plain  of  Syria,”  “the 
flat  land  of  Syria.”  Aram-Naharaim  occurs 
again  Deut.  xxiii.  5 ; Judg.  iii.  8 ; Ps.  lx.  2 
(Heb.).  Both  names  describe  the  low  flat 
country  lying  between  the  two  rivers  Tigris 
and  Euphrates,  though  Padan  Aram  was 
more  limited  in  extent  than  Aram-Naharaim. 
The  whole  highland  country  of  Syria  appears 
to  have  been  called  Aram,  as  many  think  to 
distinguish  it  from  Canaan,  the  low  country, 
Aram  meaning  “high”  and  Canaan  “low” 
land.  The  country,  however,  which  lies  be- 
tween the  two  rivers,  is  chiefly  a vast  plain, 
though  intersected  by  the  Sinjar  range,  and 
becoming  more  mountainous  towards  the 
North  (see  Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’  p.  129 ; Smith’s 
‘Diet,  of  Bible,’  li.  p.  338).  Aram-Na- 
haraim was  the  whole  region  afterwards  called 
Mesopotamia,  lying  between  the  two  rivers: 
Padan  Aram  being  a limited  portion  of  this 
country  of  flat  character  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Haran  (see  on  xxv.  20,  xxvii.  43). 

the  city  of  Nahor]  i.  e.  Haran  or  Charran 
(compare  ch.  xxvii.  43,  and  see  ch.  xi.  31; 
Acts  vii.  2). 

11.  made  his  camels  to  kneel  donvn]  That 
they  might  be  unloaded,  and  rest  there.  (See 
on  the  whole  of  this  scene,  Thomson,  ‘ Land 
and  Book,’  p.  592.) 

the  time  that  <women  go  out  to  dranv  ^vater] 
Le  Clerc  compares  Horn.  Od.  vii.  20,  where 
Minerva,  in  the  form  of  a girl  carrying  a 
pitcher,  meets  Ulysses  as  he  is  about  to  enter 
the  city  of  the  Phoenicians  in  the  evening. 
See  also  Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  vol.  ii.  p.  368,  where 
a somewhat  similar  scene  to  this  is  T'seribed. 


V.  12 2 2.] 


GENESIS.  XXIV. 


149 


water  at  the  time  of  the  evening, 
tHeb.  the  time  ^that  women  go  out  to  draw 

that  wo-  , 

men  which  WCltCY' . 

12  And  he  said,  O Lord  God  of 
forth.  my  master  Abraham,  I pray  thee, 
send  me  good  speed  this  day,  and  shew 
kindness  unto  my  master  Abraham. 

••  Ver.  43.  13  Behold,  stand  here  by  the 

well  of  water;  and  the  daughters  of 
the  men  of  the  city  come  out  to  draw 
water : 

14  And  let  it  come  to  pass,  that 
the  damsel  to  whom  I shall  say,  Let 
down  thy  pitcher,  I pray  thee,  that  I 
may  drink ; and  she  shall  say,  Drink, 
and  I will  give  thy  camels  drink  also : 
let  the  same  be  she  that  thou  hast 
appointed  for  thy  servant  Isaac;  and 
thereby  shall  I know  that  thou  hast 
shewed  kindness  unto  my  master. 

15  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  before 
he  had  done  speaking,  that,  behold, 
Rebekah  came  out,  who  was  born  to 
Bethuel,  son  of  Milcah,  the  wife  of 

tHeb.  Nahor,  Abraham’s  brother,  with  her 

^counti  pitcher  upon  her  shoulder. 

nance.  16  And  the  damsel  was  Wery  fair 


to  look  upon,  a virgin,  neither  had 
any  man  known  her:  and  she  went 
down  to  the  well,  and  filled  her  pitcher, 
and  came  up. 

17  And  the  servant  ran  to  meet 
her,  and  said.  Let  me,  I pray  thee, 
drink  a little  water  of  thy  pitcher. 

18  And  she  said.  Drink,  my  lord: 
and  she  hasted,  and  let  down  her 
pitcher  upon  her  hand,  and  gave  him 
drink. 

19  And  when  she  had  done  giving 
him  drink,  she  said,  I will  draw  zuater 
for  thy  camels  also,  until  they  have 
done  drinking. 

20  And  she  hasted,  and  emptied 
her  pitcher  into  the  trough,  and  ran 
again  unto  the  well  to  draw  water., 
and  drew  for  all  his  camels. 

21  And  the  man  wondering  at  her 
held  his  peace,  to  wit  whether  the 
Lord  had  made  his  journey  prosperous 
or  not. 

22  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  the 
camels  had  done  drinking,  that  thej^^ 
man  took  a golden  " earring  of  half  a jeivlijor 
shekel  weight,  and  two  bracelets  for 


12.  O Lord  God  of  my  master  Ahra- 
hani]  The  Damascene  recognizes  Jehovah, 
the  God  of  his  master  Abraham,  the  Supreme 
Disposer  of  all  things.  He  had  probably 
been  born  a heathen  idolater ; but  Abraham, 
to  whom  God  h^d  been  revealed  as  Jeho- 
vah, the  eternal  self-existing,  had  no  doubt 
taught  his  household  to  acknowledge  Him  as 
the  Covenant  God  of  Abraham  and  his  family. 
It  is  very  observable,  however,  that  when 
Abraham  administers  an  oath  to  his  servant, 
he  makes  him  swear  not  only  by  Jehovah, 
but  adds  the  God  of  heaven  and  the  God  of 
the  earth,  which  might  be  a stronger  sanction 
to  one  brought  up  in  ignorance  of  the  faith  of 
his  master. 

g'rve  me  good  speedy  Lit.  “ cause  to  meet 
me,”  i.  e.  the  person  of  whom  1 am  in  quest. 

14.  the  damsel~\  The  word  here  used 
for  damsel  is  of  common  gender,  signifying 
a child  or  young  person  of  either  sex.  This 
is  a peculiarity  of  the  Pentateuch.  In  all  the 
later  books  the  distinction  of  gender  is  ob- 
served, the  feminine  affix  (H)  being  used  when 
a girl  is  intended.  It  is  important  to  notice 
this  here;  first  as  shewing  the  antiquity  of 
the  Pentateuch  generally  ; secondly,  as  shew- 
ing that  this  chapter,  which  is  markedly  je- 
hovistic,  is  also  of  marked  antiquity.  Those, 


who  accuse  the  so-called  Jehovistic  chapters 
of  being  modern  (of  the  date  of  Samuel  for 
instance),  ground  their  arguments  on  a minute 
criticism  of  the  difference  of  the  words  used 
by  the  Elohist  and  the  Jehovist  writers  re- 
spectively. It  is,  however,  here  very  appa- 
rent that  the  word  child,  “nangar,”  had  not, 
in  the  time  of  the  writer  of  this  most  Jeho- 
vistic history,  been  distinguished  in  the  singu- 
lar number  into  masculine  and  feminine, 
nangar  and  nangarah.,  boy  and  girl. 

thereby  shall  I kno^~\  Perhaps  more  cor- 
rectly “by  her  shall  1 know;”  though  the 
Versions  generally  render  the  feminine  pro- 
noun here  by  a neuter,  the  Hebrew  having  no 
neuter  gender. 

15.  ^ho  avas  born  to  Bethuel'^  See  ch. 
xxii.  20  and  note. 

21. _  wondering  at  her^  “ Amazed  and  ' 
astonished  ” at  finding  his  prayer  so  suddenly 
answered. 

22.  earring]  So  LXX.,  Vulg.,  but  per- 
haps more  probably  “nose-ring.”  St  Jerome 
in  Ezek.  xvi.  ii,  12,  mentions  that  to  his  day 
the  women  in  the  East  wore  golden  rings 
hanging  down  from  their  foreheads,  on  their 
noses.  Hence  here  the  marginal  reading  gives 
“jewel  for  the  forehead.”  To  the  present 


150 


GENESIS.  XXIV. 


[v.  23—41. 


her  hands  of  ten  shekels  weight  of 
gold ; 

23  And  said,  Whose  daughter  art 
thou.?  tell  me,  I pray  thee:  is  there 
room  in  thy  father’s  house  for  us  to 
lodge  in .? 

24  And  she  said  unto  him,  I am 
the  daughter  of  Bethuel  the  son  of 
Milcah,  which  she  bare  unto  Nahor. 

25  She  said  moreover  unto  him. 
We  have  both  straw  and  provender 
enough,  and  room  to  lodge  in. 

26  And  the  man  bowed  down  his 
head,  and  worshipped  the  Lord. 

27  And  he  said.  Blessed the  Lord 
God  of  my  master  Abraham,  who  hath 
not  left  destitute  my  master  of  his 
mercy  and  his  truth : I being  in  the 
way,  the  Lord  led  me  to  the  house 
of  my  master’s  brethren. 

28  And  the  damsel  ran,  and  told 
them  of  her  mother’s  house  these 
things. 

29  fl  And  Rebekah  had  a brother, 
and  his  name  was  Laban : and  Laban 
ran  out  unto  the  man,  unto  the  well. 

30  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  he 
saw  the  earring  and  bracelets  upon 
his  sister’s  hands,  and  when  he  heard 
the  words  of  Rebekah  his  sister,  say- 
ing, Thus  spake  the  man  unto  me  ; 
that  he  came  unto  the  man ; and, 
behold,  he  stood  by  the  camels  at  the 
well. 

31  And  he  said.  Come  in,  thou 
blessed  of  the  Lord  ; wherefore 
standest  thou  without  ? for  I have 
prepared  the  house,  and  room  for  the 
camels. 


32  ^ And  the  man  came  into  the 
house:  and  he  ungirded  his  camels, 
and  gave- straw  and  provender  for  the 
camels,  and  water  to  wash  his  feet,  and 
the  men’s  feet  that  were  with  him. 

33  And  there  was  set  meat  before 
him  to  eat:  but  he  said,  I will  not 
eat,  until  I have  told  mine  errand. 
And  he  said.  Speak  on. 

34  And  he  said,  I am  Abraham’s 
servant. 

35  And  the  Lord  hath  blessed  my 
master  greatly ; and  he  is  become 
great:  and  he  hath  given  him  docks, 
and  herds,  and  silver,  and  gold,  and 
menservants,  and  maidservants,  and 
camels,  and  asses. 

36  And  Sarah  my  master’s  wife 
bare  a son  to  my  master  when  she 
was  old : and  unto  him  hath  he  given 
all  that  he  hath. 

37  And  my  master  made  me  swear, 
saying.  Thou  shalt  not  take  a wife  to 
my  son  of  the  daughters  of  the  Canaan- 
ites,  in  v/hose  land  I dwell: 

38  But  thou  shalt  go  unto  my 
father’s  house,  and  to  my  kindred, 
and  take  a wife  unto  my  son. 

39  And  I said  unto  my  Tnaster, 
Perad venture  the  woman  will  not 
follow  me. 

40  And  he  said  unto  me.  The 
Lord,  before  whom  I walk,  will  send 
his  angel  with  thee,  and  prosper  thy 
way;  and  thou  shalt  take  a wife  for 
my  son  of  my  kindred,  and  of  my 
father’s  house: 

41  Then  shalt  thou  be  clear  from 
this  my  oath,  when  thou  comest  to 


, day  some  l’'astcrn  nations  wear  nose-rings. 
Schreeder  (‘  De  Vest.  Mul.  Hebr.’  c.  xxii.  § 
2),  Hartmann  (‘ Hebr.’ II.  166);  Winer  (‘ R. 
W.  B.’  II.  162);  Gesen.  (‘Th.’  p.  870);  Rosen- 
mllller  (in  loc.),  argue  for  the  rendering 
“ nose-ring”  in  tins  passage.  The  word,  how- 
over,  simply  signilies  a ring. 

half  a shekel]  Probably  about  2 drachms 
or  a quarter  of  an  ounce.  See  on  ch.xxxiii.  14. 

28.  her  mother's  house]  Pier  father  Be- 
thuel was  still  living  (see  v.  50);  but  the 
mother  is  mentioned,  perhaps  because  even 
thus  early  women  may  have  lived  in  se- 
parate tents  from  the  men  (Rashi)  : which 


appears  also  frorri  v.  67,  where  Sarah’s  tent 
is  named,  and  Rebekah  is  installed  in  it  at 
her  marriage.  The  daughter  naturally  went 
to  tell  her  mother  rather  than  her  father  of 
what  the  servant  of  Abraham  had  done ; the 
jewel,  which  he  gave  her,  being  perhaps  in- 
tended to  denote  the  nature  of  his  embassage. 

33.  / <ivill  not  eat^  until  I ha've  told  mine 

errand]  Ancient  hospitality  taught  men  to 
set  meat  before  their  guests  before  asking 
them  their  names  and  their  business ; but 
here  the  servant  of  Abraham  felt  his  message 
to  be  so  momentous,  that  he  would  not  eat 
till  he  had  unburdened  himself  of  it. 


V.  42— '58.] 


GENESIS.  XXIV. 


151 


«fVer.  13. 


my  kindred ; and  if  they  give  not 
thee  one^  thou  shalt  be  clear  from  my 
oath. 

42  And  I came  this  day  unto  the 
well,  and  said,  O Lord  God  of  my 
master  Abraham,  if  now  thou  do  pro- 
sper my  way  which  I go : 

43  '^Behold,  I stand  by  the  well  of 
water ; and  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that 
when  the  virgin  cometh  forth  to  draw 
water^  and  I say  to  her.  Give  me,  I 
pray  thee,  a little  water  of  thy  pitcher 
to  drink ; 

44  And  she  say  to  me.  Both  drink 
thou,  and  I will  also  draw  for  thy 
camels:  let  the  same  be  the  woman 
whom  the  Lord  hath  appointed  out 
for  my  master’s  son. 

45  And  before  I had  done  speaking 
in  mine  heart,  behold,  Rebekah  came 
forth  with  her  pitcher  on  her  shoulder ; 
and  she  went  down  unto  the  well,  and 
drew  water:  and  I said  unto  her,  Let 
me  drink,  I pray  thee. 

46  And  she  made  haste,  and  let 
down  her  pitcher  from  her  shoulder^ 
and  said.  Drink,  and  I will  give  thy 
camels  drink  also:  so  I drank,  and 
she  made  the  camels  drink  also. 

47  And  I asked  her,  and  said. 
Whose  daughter  art  thou  ? And  she 
said.  The  daughter  of  Bethuel,  Nahor’s 
son,  whom  Milcah  bare  unto  him : and 
I put  the  earring  upon  her  face,  and 
the  bracelets  upon  her  hands, 

48  And  I bowed  down  my  head, 
and  worshipped  the  Lord,  and  blessed 
the  Lord  God  of  my  master  Abra- 
ham, which  had  led  me  in  the  right 


way  to  take  my  master’s  brother’s  ^ 
daughter  unto  his  son. 

49  And  now  if  ye  will  deal  kindly 
and  truly  with  my  master,  tell  me: 
and  if  not,  tell  me;  that  I may  turn 
to  the  right  hand,  or  to  the  left. 

50  Then  Laban  and  Bethuel  an- 
swered and  said.  The  thing  proceedeth 
from  the  Lord  : we  cannot  speak  un- 
to thee  bad  or  good. 

5 1 Behold,  Rebekah  is  before  thee, 
take  hei\  and  go,  and  let  her  be  thv 
master’s  son’s  wife,  as  the  Lord  hath 
spoken. 

52  And  it  came*to  pass,  that,  when 
Abraham’s  servant  heard  their  words, 
he  worshipped  the  Lord,  bowing  him- 
self to  the  earth. 

53  And  the  servant  brought  forth 
^jewels  of  silver,  and  jewels  of  gold,  t Heb. 
and  raiment,  and  gave  them  to  Re- 
bekah:  he  gave  also  to  her  brother 
and  to  her  mother  precious  things. 

54  And  they  did  eat  and  drink,  he 
and  the  men  that  were  with  him,  and 
tarried  all  night;  and  they  rose  up  in 

the  morning,  and  he  said,  ^Send  me^Ver.  56. 
away  unto  my  master. 

55  And  her  brother  and  her  mother 
said.  Let  the  damsel  abide  with  us  ” a 
few  days,  at  the  least  ten;  after  that  or, 
she  shall  go. 

56  And  he  said  unto  them.  Hinder 
me  not,  seeino;  the  Lord  hath  pro- 

that 


away 


spered  my  way;  send  n 
I may  go  to  my  master. 

57  And  they  said.  We  will  call  the 
damsel,  and  inquire  at  her  mouth. 

58  And  they  called  Rebekah, 


50.  Laban  and  Bethuel^  The  brother  is 
here  put  before  the  father,  and  in  v.  39  the 
brother  only  is  mentioned.  It  appears  that 
in  those  days  the  brother  was  much  con- 
sulted concerning  the  marriage  of  his  sisters 
(Cp.  ch.  xxxiv.  13;  Judg.  xxi.  22):  but  it 
has  also  been  observed  that  Bethuel  is  alto- 
gether kept  in  the  background  in  this  history, 
as  though  he  were  a person  of  insignificant 
character,  see  ch.  xxix.  6,  where  he  is  alto- 
gether passed  over,  Laban  being  called  the 
son  of  Nahor,  who  was  his  grandfather.  (See 
Blunt’s  ‘ Coincidences,’  p.  35,  and  Words- 
worth in  loc.)  Laban  was  evidently  an  active 
stirring  man,  as  is  manifested  throughout  the 


subsequent  history  of  Jacob.  The  Hebrew 
tradition  was  that  Bethuel  died  on  the  day  that 
Eliezer,  Abraham’s  servant,  arrived  (Tar- 
gum  of  Pseudo- Jonathan,  on  v.  55).  Josephus 
(‘Ant.’  I.  16)  speaks  of  him  as  dead,  which, 
however,  is  unlikely,  see  on  ch.  xxvii.  2. 

53.  jewels  of  sil'ver,  &c.]  Lit.  “vessels 
of  silver,”  &c. 

55.  days^  at  the  least  ten"]  Lit.  “days 
or  ten.”  Certain  days  or  at  least  ten  ; unless 
“days”  be  a phrase  for  the  regular  period 
of  seven  days,  i.  e.  a week,  when  it  would  be 
“ a week  of  days  or  ten  days.” 


152 


GENESIS.  XXIV. 


[v.  59—67. 


/chap.  16. 
14-  25- 

tOr, 
to  pray. 


and  said  unto  her,  Wilt  thou  go  with 
this  man  ? And  she  said,  I will  go. 

59  And  they  sent  away  Rebekah 
their  sister,  and  her  nurse,  and  Abra- 
ham’s servant,  and  his  men. 

60  And  they  blessed  Rebekah,  and 
said  unto  her.  Thou  art  our  sister,  bt* 
thou  the  jnother  of  thousands  of  mil- 
lions, and  let  thy  seed  possess  the  gate 
of  those  which  hate  them. 

61  ^ And  Rebekah  arose,  and  her 
damsels,  and  they  rode  upon  the 
camels,  and  followed  the  man  : and 
the  servant  took  Rebekah,  and  went 
his  way. 

62  And  Isaac  came  from  the  way 
of  the  -^well  Lahai-roi ; for  he  dwelt 
in  the  south  country. 

63  And  Isaac  went  out  "to  medi- 
tate in  the  field  at  the  eventide:  and 
he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and  saw,  and, 
behold,  the  camels  were  coming. 


64  And  Rebekah  lifted  up  her  eyes, 
and  when  she  saw  Isaac,  she  lighted 
off  the  camel. 

65  For  she  had  said  unto  the  ser- 
vant, What  man  is  this  that  walketh 
in  the  field  to  meet  us  ? And  the  ser- 
vant had  said.  It  is  my  master : there- 
fore she  took  a’  vail,  and  covered  her- 
self. 

66  And  the  servant  told  Isaac  all 
things  that  he  had  done. 

67  And  Isaac  brought  her  into  his 
mother  Sarah’s  tent,  and  took  Rebe- 
kah, and  she  became  his  wife ; and  he 
loved  her:  and  Isaac  was  comforted 
after  his  mother’s  death, 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

I The  sons  of  Abraham  by  Keticrah.  5 The 
division  of  his  goods.  7 His  age,  and  death. 
9 His  burial.  12  The  generations  of  Ish- 
mael.  His  age,  arid  death.  \e)  Isaac  pray- 
eth  for  Rebekah,  being  barre7i.  22  The  children 


59.  their  sisterl  Only  one  brother  is 
mentioned,  viz.  Laban : but  her  relatives  gene- 
rally are  spoken  of  here,  as  saying  of  her, 
“Thou  art  our  sister,”  sister  being  used  in 
that  wide  sense  for  relation,  in  which  brother 
is  so  often  found  in  Scripture. 

her  fiurse]  Her  name,  Deborah,  and  her 
death  are  mentioned  ch.  xxxv.  8. 

62.  And  Isaac  came  from  the  <voay  of  the 
(Well  of  Lahai-roi]  Perhaps  “Isaac  had  come 
from  a journey  to  Lahai-roi,”  or  “had  returned 
from  going  to  Lahai-roi.” 

for  he  dvoelt  in  the  south  country']  Probably  at 
Beer-sheba.  Abraham’s  later  dwelling  places 
had  been  Hebron  and  Beer-sheba.  After  the 
sacrifice  of  Isaac,  we  find  him  dwelling  at 
Beer-sheba  (xxii.  19),  until  we  hear  of  the 
death  of  Sarah  at  Hebron.  Very  probably 
Abraham  returned  after  this  to  Beer-sheba. 
And  so  Isiiac,  whether  living  with  his  father, 
or  pitching  his  tent  and  feeding  his  flocks  near 
him,  is  here  represented  as  dwelling  in  the 
south  country.  In  ch.  xxv.  ii  we  find  that, 
after  Abraham’s  death,  Isaac  took  up  his 
residence  at  Lahai-roi,  to  which  we  find  that 
he  had  been  on  a vi.sit,  when  Rebekah  arrived, 
where  perhaps  he  had  already  been  pasturing 
his  flocks  and  herds  (Knobel).  All  this  is 
in  the  strictest  harmony;  though  the  German 
critics  discover  the  hand  of  the  Elohist  in 
chapter  xxiii.,  and  in  the  earlier  verses  of  xxv., 
and  that  of  the  Jehovist  throughout  xxiv. 

63.  to  meditate]  So  LXX.,  Vulg.,  but 
the  Targg.,  Sam.,  Arab.,  Saad.,  Rashi,  ren- 


der “to  pray;”  some  (Syr.,  Aben-Ezra)  “to 
walk.”  The  word,  however,  appears  most 
probably  to  signify  religious  meditation  (see 
Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1322).  Such  occupation 
seems  very  characteristic  of  Isaac,  whose 
whole  life  was  so  tranquil,  and  his  temper 
and  spirit  so  calm  and  submissive,  as  suiting 
one  who  was  made  an  eminent  type  of  Him, 
who  “was  oppressed  and  afflicted,  yet  He 
opened  not  His  mouth:  He  was  brought  as 
a lamb  to  the  slaughter;  and  as  a sheep  be- 
fore her  shearers  is  dumb,  so  He  opened  not 
His  mouth”  (Is.  liii.  7).  St  Jerome  (‘  Qu.  in 
Gen.’)  sees  in  this  quiet  meditation  and  prayer 
a type  of  Him  “who  went  out  into  a moun- 
tain apart  to  pray”  (Matt.  xiv.  23). 

64.  lighted  off  the  camel]  “It  is  cus- 
tomary for  both  men  and  women,  when  an 
Emir  or  great  personage  is  approaching,  to 
alight  some  time  before  he  comes  up  with 
them.  Women  frequently  refuse  to  ride  in 
the  presence  of  men ; and  when  a company  of 
them  are  to  pass  through  a town,  they  often 
dismount  and  walk.”  (Thomson,  ‘ Land  and 
Book,’  p.  593.) 

65.  a 'vail]  The  long  cloak-like  vail, 
with  which  the  Eastern  women  covered  their 
faces  (sec  Jerome  in  loc.  and  in  ‘ Comment, 
ad  Jes.’  III.;  Tertullian,  ‘ De  velandis  Virgi- 
nibus’  (Cap.  xvi.).  Even  at  this  early  period 
it  seems  to  have  been  the  custom  for  brides 
not  to  suffer  the  bridegroom  to  see  their  faces 
before  marriage  (cp.  ch.  xxix.  23,  25). 

67.  Sarah's  tent]  See  on  v.  28. 


V.  I— 7.J 


GENESIS.  XXV. 


153 


strive  in  her  rvomb.  24  The  birth  of  Esau  and 
Jacob.  27  Their  difference,  Esau  sel/eth 
his  birthright. 

Then  again  Abraham  took  a wife, 
and  her  name  was  Keturah. 

I Chron.  2 Aiid  "she  bare  him  Zimran,  and 
' Jokshan,  and  Medan,  and  Midian,  and 
Ishbak,  and  Shuah. 

3 And  Jokshan  begat  Sheba,  and 
Dedan.  And  the  sons  of  Dedan 
were  Asshurim,  and  Letushim,  and 
Leummim. 


4 And  .the  sons  of  Midian ; Ephah, 
and  Epher,  and  Hanoch,  and  Abidah, 
and  Eldaah.  All  these  were  the  chil- 
dren of  Keturah. 

5 ^ And  Abraham  gave  all  that  he 
had  unto  Isaac. 

6 But  unto  the  sons  of  the  concu- 
bines, which  Abraham  had,  Abraham 
gave  gifts,  and  sent  them  away  from 
Isaac  his  son,  while  he  yet  lived,  east- 
ward, unto  the  east  country. 

7 And  these  are  the  days  of  the  years 


Chap,  XXV.  1.  Then  again  Abraham  took 
a avife.^  and  her  name  'vuas  Keturah^  The 
later  Targg.  and  some  other  Jewish  commen- 
tators (Rashi  and  R.  Eliezer,  in  ‘ Pirke,’  c. 
30;  see  also  Jerome,  ‘ Qu.  in  Gen.J,  say  that 
Keturah  was  the  same  as  Hagar,  whom  Abra- 
ham took  again,  after  Sarah’s  death.  This 
seems  inconsistent  with  v.  6,  which  speaks  of 
“the  concubines”  in  the  plural,  meaning, 
doubtless,  Hagar  and  Keturah.  The  latter, 
though  called  wife  here,  is  called  concubine 
in  I Chron.  i.  32.  Moreover,  in  i Chron.  i. 
28,  32,  the  sons  of  Keturah  are  named  sepa- 
rately from  Isaac  and  Ishmael.  The  concu- 
bine (Pilegesh)  was  a kind  of  secondary  wife, 
sometimes  called  “the  concubine  wife,”  Judg. 
xix.  i;  2 S.  XV.  16;  XX.  3.  It  is  generally 
supposed,  that  Abraham  did  not  take  Keturah 
to  wife,  till  after  Sarah’s  death.  So  the  fa- 
thers generally.  Abraham  lived  to  the  age  of 
175.  If  we  consider  this  extreme  old  age  as 
equivalent  to  eighty-five  or  ninety  in  the  pre- 
sent day,  his  age  at  the  time  of  Sarah’s  death 
would  correspond  to  that  of  a man  of  from 
sixty-five  to  seventy  now. 

Some,  however,  think,  that  Abraham  took 
Keturah  to  be  a secondary  wife,  during 
Sarah’s  life,  though  no  mention  is  made  of 
this  marriage  till  this  time,  as  the  chief  pur- 
pose of  mentioning  it  was  that  some  account 
should  be  given  of  Keturah’s  children.  So 
Keil,  Poole  (in  ‘ Diet,  of  Bible’),  &c.  It  is 
impossible  to  decide  this  question,  as  the  text 
gives  no  note  of  time.  The  Authorised  Ver- 
sion indeed  renders,  “Then  again  Abraham 
took  a wife,”  but  the  Hebrew  only  conveys 
the  notion  that  Abraham  took  another  wife. 

2.  she  bare  him  Zimran']  Josephus  (‘A. 
J.’  I.  15)  tells  us  that  the  descendants  of 
Keturah  occupied  the  Troglodyte  country 
and  Arabia  Felix,  which  statement  is  repeated 
by  Jerome  (‘  Qu.  Heb.  in  Gen.’).  Some  of  their 
names  occur  among  the  Arab  tribes,  but  it  is 
not  easy  to  identify  them  all  clearly 

Zimran  has  been  thought  to  be  identified 
with  the  Zabram  of  Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  5),  the 
royal  city  of  the  Cinaedocolpitae  to  the  West 


of  Mecca,  on  the  Red  Sea;  Jokshan  with  the 
Gassanitas  on  the  Red  Sea  (Ptol.  vi.  7,  6); 
Ishbak  with  Shobek,  in  Idumaea  (Knobel, 
Del,  Keil). 

Medan.!  and  Midian]  In  ch,  xxxvii.  28,  36, 
the  Midianites  and  Medanites  are  identified. 
The  Midianites  dwelt  partly  in  the  peninsula 
of  Sinai,  partly  beyond  Jordan,  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  Moabites.  We  meet  with 
them  first  as  the  merchants  to  whom  Joseph 
w’as  sold  by  his  brethren  (as  ch.  xxxvii.  28 
sqq.),  trafficking  between  Egypt  and  Canaan. 
Next  we  find  Moses  flying  to  the  land  of  Mi- 
dian, and  marrying  the  daughter  of  a priest 
of  Midian,  Exod.  n.  15,  16,  21,  whose  flocks 
pastured  in  the  desert,  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Mount  Horeb  (Ex.  iii.  i).  Later  we  find 
the  people  of  Midian  in  immediate  juxta-po- 
sition  with  the  Moabites  (Num.  xxii.  4,  xxv. 
6,  17,  18).  We  find  them  aftenvards  as  for- 
midable neighbours  to  the  Israelites,  invading 
and  oppressing  them,  though  afterwards  ex- 
pelled and  conquered  (Judg.  vi.  vii.  viii,).  It 
has  been  thought  that  traces  of  the  name  of 
Midian  may  be  found  in  Modiana  on  the 
Eastern  coast  of  the  Elanitic  Gulf  men- 
tioned by  Ptolemy  (\i.  7),  (Knobel). 

3.  Sheba.!  Dedan]  Are  named,  ch. 
X.  7,  among  the  descendants  of  Cush.  It  has 
been  thought  that  in  these,  as  in  other  in- 
stances, the  Shemite  and  Hamite  races  inter- 
married, and  that  there  consequently  arose  a 
certain  confusion  in  their  names,  or  that  very 
probably  they  adopted  names  from  those  with 
whom  they  were  thus  connected  (see  on  ch. 
X.  6,  7;  also  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  322). 

4.  Ephah]  We  meet  with  this  Midian- 
itish  tribe  in  Is.  lx.  6,  as  a people  rich  in 
camels  and  gold  and  incense.  The  attempts 
to  identify  the  various  descendants  of  Ketu- 
rah, mentioned  in  this  chapter,  with  the 
names  of  tribes  or  cities  known  to  later  geo- 
graphers and  historians,  may  be  seen  in  Kno- 
bel, Del,  Keil,  &c.  The  uncertainty  of  such 
identification  is  very  great. 

6.  eastward.,  unto  the  east  country]  That 


‘54 


GENESIS.  XXV. 


of  Abraham’s  life  which  he  .lived,  an 
hundred  threescore  and  fifteen  years. 

8 Then  Abraham  gave  up  the 
ghost,  and  died  in  a good  old  age,  an 
old  man,  and  full  of  years i and  was 
gathered  to  his  people. 

9 And  his  sons  Isaac  and  Ishmael 
buried  him  in  the  cave  of  Machpelah, 
ill  the  field  of  Ephron  the  son  of 
Zohar  the  Hittite,  which  is  before 
Mamre ; 

*chap.  23.  10  ^The  field  which  Abraham  pur- 

^ ■ chased  of  the  sons  of  Heth : there  was 
Abraham  buried,  and  Sarah  his  wife. 

1 1 ^ And  it  came  to  pass  after  the 
death  of  Abraham,  that  God  blessed 
his  son  Isaac ; and  Isaac  dwelt  by  the 
cchap.  16.  tf^vell  Lahai-roi. 

& 24.  62.  1 2 Now  these  are  the  generations 

of  Ishmael,  Abraham’s  son,  whom 
Hagar  the  Egyptian,  Sarah’s  hand- 
maid, bare  unto  Abraham: 

‘'iChron.  And  ^these  are  the  names  of 

the  sons  of  Ishmael,  by  their  names, 
according  to  their  generations : the 
firstborn  of  Ishmael,  Nebajoth;  and 
Kedai,  and  Adbeei,  and  Mibsam, 


[v.  8 — 21. 

14  And  Mishma,  and  Dumah,  and 
Massa, 

15  “Hadar,  and  Tema,  Jetur,  Na- 
phish,  and  Kedemah: 

16  These  are  the  sons  of  Ishmael, 
and  these  are  their  names,  by  their 
towns,  and  by  their  castles;  twelve 
princes  according  to  their  nations. 

17  And  these  are  the  years  of  the 
life  of  Ishmael,  an  hundred  and  thirty 
and  seven  years : and  he  gave  up  the 
ghost  and  died;  and  was  gathered 
unto  his  people. 

18  And  they  dwelt  from  Havilah 
unto  Shur,  that  is  before  Egypt,  as 
thou  goest  toward  Assyria:  and  he 

^ died  in  the  presence  of  all  his  bre-  ^Heb. 
thren. 

19  ^ And  these  are  the  genera- 
tions of  Isaac,  Abraham’s  son : Abra- 
ham begat  Isaac: 

20  And  Isaac  was  forty  years  old 
when  he  took  Rebekah  to  wife,  the 
daughter  of  Bethuel  the  Syrian  of 
Padan-aram,  the  sister  to  Laban  the 
Syrian. 

21  And  Isaac  intreated  the  Lord 


is  into  Arabia,  the  inhabitants  ot  which  were 
called  Benc-Kedem,  “children  of  the  East” 
(Judg.  VI.  3;  I K.  iv.  30;  Job  i.  3,  Is.  xi.  14), 
and  afterwards  “ Saracens,”  i.e.  “ Easterns.” 

8.  Abraham  ga've  up  the  gbost\  The  his- 
tory of  Abraham  is  thus  wound  up  before 
the  history  of  Isaac’s  family  is  told.  Abra- 
ham did  not  die  till  Jacob  and  Esau  were 
born.  Indeed  they  were  fifteen  years  old  at 
Abraham’s  death:  for  he  died  at  175,  Isaac 
was  then  seventy-fiye  years  old,  but  Esau 
and  Jacob  were  born  when  Isaac  was  sixty 
(see  V.  26). 

^as  gathered  to  his  people']  This  cannot 
mean  that  he  was  buried  where  his  fathers 
had  been  buried,  for  he  had  been  a hundred 
years  a pilgrim  in  the  land  of  Israel,  far  from 
the  home  of  his  ancestors,  and  he  was  buried 
in  the  cave  of  Machpelah.  The  place  therefore 
seems  to  indicate  the  belief  of  the  patriarchal 
ages  in  a place  of  departed  spirits,  to  which 
the  souls  of  the  dead  were  gathered.  Thus 
Jacob  expected  to  “go  down  into  the  grave 
(to  Sheolj  unto  his  son,”  though  he  did  not 
believe  his  son  to  have  been  buried,  but  to 
have  been  devoured  by  wild  beasts  (ch.  xxxvii. 
35;  compare  also  Deut.  xxxii.  50).  St  Au- 
gustine (‘  Qu.  in  Gen.’  268)  interprets  the  words 
“ his  people,”  of  “ the  people  of  that  city, 


the  heavenly  Jerusalem,”  spoken  of  in  Heb. 
xii.  22,  and  which  God  is  said  to  have  pre- 
pared for  the  faithful  patriarchs,  Heb.  xi.  16. 

9.  his  sons  Isaac  and  Ishmael]  From 
this  we  see  that  Ishmael,  though  sent  to  dwell 
Eastward,  had  not  lost  sight  of  his  father 
and  Isaac;  and  very  probably  their  father’s 
death  reconciled  the  two  brothers  to  each 
other.  Isaac  is  put  first  as  the  heir,  and  the 
heir  of  the  promises. 

16.  castles]  See  on  Num.  xxxi.  10. 

19.  And  these  are  the  generations  of  Isaac^ 
Abraham's  son]  This  is  the  beginning  of  a 
new  Section  in  the  history  of  Genesis,  which 
continues  to  the  end  of  ch.  xxxv.  Accord- 
ing to  the  uniform  plan  of  the  author,  there 
is  a brief  recapitulation,  in  order  to  make 
the  Section  complete.  In  this  case  it  is  very 
brief,  consisting  of  the  latter  part  of  v.  19, 
and  V.  20. 

20.  the  Syrian  of  Padan-aram]  The 
Aramean  of  Padan-aram.  Padan-aram 
is  the  “plain  or  flat  land  of  Aram,”  translated 
or  paraphrased  in  Hosea  xii.  12  by  Sedeh- 
Ararn,  “the  field  or  plain  of  Aram.”  In  the 
last  chapter  the  country  of  Rebekah  is  called 
Aram-Naharaim,  or  Aram  of  the  two  rivers. 
See  on  ch.  xxiv.  10.  There  is  no  reasonable 
foundation  for  the  belief  that  Padan-aram 


V.  22 — 25-] 


GENESIS.  XXV. 


155 


for  his  wife,  because  she  was  barren : 
and  the  Lord  w££s  intreated  of  him, 
and  Rebekah  his  wife  conceived. 

22  And  the  children  struggled  to- 
gether within  her;  and  she  said.  If  it 
be  so,  why  am  I thus  ? And  she  we»nt 
to  inquire  of  the  Lord. 

23  And  the  Lord  said  unto  her. 
Two  nations  are  in  thy  womb,  and 


two  m.anner  of  people-  shall  be  sepa- 
rated from  thv  bowels ; and  the  one 
people  shall  be  stronger  than  the  other 
people;  and  “^the  elder  shall  serve  the  ^Rom.  9. 
vouno-er. 

J O 

24  And  when  her  days  to  be  de- 
livered v/ere  fulhlled,  behold,  there 
were  twins  in  her  womb. 

25  And  the  first  came  out  red,  all 


was  the  old  name  used  by  the  so-called  Elo- 
hist,  Aram-Naharaim  being  the  name  which 
had  been  adopted  by  the  later  Jehovist.  It 
was  natural  that  the  historian,  when  relating 
the  embassy  of  Eliezer  of  Damascus  to  Me- 
sopotamia to  seek  a wife  for  Isaac,  should 
have  used  the  general  name  of  the  country 
into  which  Eliezer  was  sent,  whereas  in  the 
present  Section  more  particularity  is  to  be 
expected,  where  Jacob  is  described  as  sojourn- 
ing for  years  in  Padan-aram,  the  land  of 
Laban;  just  as  in  one  case  it  might  be  natural 
to  speak  of  going  into  Scotland,  whilst  in  a 
more  detailed  account,  we  might  prefer  to 
speak  of  the  Highlands  of  Scotland,  or  the 
Lowlands,  or  of  some  particular  county  or 
district. 

21.  Isaac  intreated  the  Lord  for  his 
’luife^  because  she  <ivas  barren^  This  barren- 
ness had  lasted  twenty  years  (v.  a 6).  An- 
other instance  of  the  delay  in  the  fulfilment 
of  God’s  promises,  and  of  the  trial  of  the 
faith  of  those  for  whom  the  greatest  blessings 
are  reserved.  The  word  here  used  for  prayer 
is  by  many  thought  to  mean  frequent  and  re- 
peated prayer;  implying  the  anxious  desire  of 
Isaac  to  be  blessed  with  offspring.  Gesenius 
(p.  1085)  thinks  the  word  is  connected  with 
a root  signifying  “to  offer  incense,”  which 
certainly  appears  to  belong  to  it  in  Ezek.  viii. 
II.  If  it  be  so,  we  must  believe  that  the  pa- 
triarchal worship,  which  from  the  earliest 
times  was  accompanied  with  sacrifice,  had 
also,  whether  from  Divine  revelation  or  from 
an  instinctive  feeling,  adopted  the  use  of  in- 
cense. 

22.  If  it  be  jo,  ^hy  am  I thus?'\  An 
obscure  saying.  The  Vulg.  and  Targums 
render,  “If  it  was  to  be  thus  with  me,  why 
did  I conceive?”  The  Arabic  has,  “ If  I 
had  known  it  would  be  thus,  I would  not 
have  sought  for  offspring.”  Much  to  the  same 
effect  Rashi,  “If  such  be  the  sufferings  of 
pregnancy,  why  did  I desire  it  ? ” The  Syriac 
and  most  of  the  German  Comm,  understand 
it,  “If  it  be  so,  wherefore  do  I live?” 

And  she  ewent  to  inquire  of  the  Lord']  By 
prayer,  or  by  sacrifice,  perhaps  at  some  spe- 
cial place  of  prayer ; as  to  the  domestic  altar 
of  Isaac  (Theodor.  ‘Qu.  in  Gen.’),  or  more 


likely,  by  going  to  a prophet.  The  Jerusa- 
lem Targum,  followed  by  several  Jewish 
commentators  says,  she  went  to  Shem;  others 
say  to  Melchizedec.  Abraham,  who  was 
still  living,  was  the  head  of  the  family  then 
dwelling  in  Palestine;  he  had  been  specially 
honoured  by  revelations  from  heaven;  and 
was  probably  esteemed  the  patriarch-priest  of 
the  whole  race.  It  is  most  likely,  therefore, 
that  if  the  inquiry  was  made  through  a man, 
it  would  have  been  made  through  him.  Still 
we  may  conclude  with  St  Augustine  (‘  Q^u,’ 
72),  that  nothing  is  certain  except  that  Re- 
bekah went  to  ask  of  the  Lord,  and  that  the 
Lord  answered  her. 

23.  T'wo  nations^  &c.]  The  response  is 
in  antistrophic  parallelisms,  a poetic  form,  in 
which  no  doubt  it  was  more  readily  handed 
down  from  father  to  son : 

Two  nations  are  in  thy  worah: 
and  two  peoples  shall  be  sepa- 
rated from  thy  bowels; 
and  nation  shall  be  stronger  than 
nation, 

and  the  elder  shall  serve  the 
younger. 

To  this  see  the  reference  Mai.  i.  2,  3,  “Jacob 
have  I loved,  and  Esau  have  I hated,”  and  in 
Rom.  ix.  10 — 13,  where  St  Paul  shews  that 
election  to  the  privilege  of  being  the  deposi- 
tories of  God’s  truth  and  the  Church  of  God 
on  earth  is  inscrutable,  but  not  therefore  ne- 
cessarily unjust  or  unmerciful.  Such  election 
indeed  plainly  marks  that  God  does  not  choose 
men  as  His  instruments  because  of  their  merits, 
but  it  does  not  shew  that  He  is  therefore  sim- 
ply arbitrary.  In  all  there  is  a hidden  stream 
of  mercy  flowing.  The  chosen  race  shall  be 
made  the  means  of  salvation  to  others  as  well 
as  to  themselves.  Their  privileges  will  be  blessed 
to  them,  if  they  use  those  privileges  faithfully. 
Otherwise  whilst  they  are  the  channels  of  God’s 
grace  to  their  brethren,  they  themselves  will 
be  cast  out,  and  others  shall  come  into  their 
inheritance. 

25.  red^  all  oruer  like  an  hairy  garment] 
He  seemed  as  if  covered  with  a kind  of  fur,  a 
thick  down,  which  is  said  to  be  found  on  some 
new  born  infants.  It  gave  an  animal  aunear- 


GENESIS.  XXV. 


156 


[v.  26 — 32. 


over  like  an  harry  garment ; and  they 
called  his  name  Esau. 

26  And  after  that  came  his  brother 
/Hos.  X2.  out,  and-^his  hand  took  hold  on  Esau’s 

heel;  and  his  name  was  called  Jacob: 
and  Isaac  was  threescore  years  old 
when  she  bare  them. 

27  And  the  boys  grew : and  Esau 
was  a cunning  hunter,  a man  of  the 
held;  and  Jacob  was  a plain  man, 
dwelling  in  tents. 

28  And  Isaac  loved  Esau,  because 


^ he  did  eat  of  his  venison : but  Rebe-  ^ 

Kan  loved  J acob.  was  in  his 

29  ^ And  Jacob  sod  pottage  : and 
Esau  came  from  the  field,  and  he  was 
faint : 

30  And  Esau  said  to  Jacob,  Feed 

me,  I pray  thee,  ^ with  that  same  red  t Heb. 
pottage;  for  I a?n  faint:  therefore  with 

his  name  called  " Edom. 

31  And  Jacob  said,  Sell  me  this^hatis, 
day  thy  birthright. 


Red, 


32  And  Esau  said.  Behold,  I 


am 


ance  to  Esau,  and  probably  indicated  his  more 
sensual  nature.  Owing  to  this  he  was  called 
Esau,  “hairy.” 

Jacob]  Meaning,  literally,  “he  holds  the 
heel but,  from  the  act  of  a person  tripping 
up  an  adversary  in  wrestling  or  running  by 
taking  hold  of  the  heel,  it  signifies  also  t(j 
“ trip  up,”  “to  outwit,”  “to  supplant.”  (See 
xxvii.  36). 

27.  a cunning  hunter]  Skilled  in  hunt- 
ing. Instead  of  following  the  quiet  pastoral 
life  of  his  forefathers,  Esau  preferred  the  wilder 
life  of  a hunter,  betokening  his  wild,  restless, 
self-indulgent  character,  and  leading  him  pro- 
bably to  society  with  the  heathen  Ganaanites 
round  about. 

a man  of  the  field]  This  is  antithetic  to 
what  follows,  “a  dweller  in  tents.”  It  pro- 
bably indicates  still  more  fully  the  wild  life  of 
Esau.  Instead  of  spending  his  life  in  the  society 
of  his  family,  returning  to  his  tent  after  the 
day’s  labour  at  night,  he  roved  over  the  coun- 
try, like  the  uncivilized  hunters  in  half  savage 
lands. 

Jacob  (was  a plain  man]  An  upright 
man,  a man  of  steady,  domestic,  moral 
habits. 

dwelling  in  tents]  i.e.  staying  at  home,  at- 
tending to  the  pasturing  of  the  flocks  and  the 
business  of  the  family,  instead  of  wandering 
abroad  in  search  of  pleasure  and  amusement. 
(See  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p,  634.) 

28.  Isaac  loved  Esau,,  because  he  did  eat 
of  his  venison]  Lit.  “ because  venison  was  in 
his  mouth.”  The  bold  daring  of  Esau  was, 
perhaps  by  force  of  contrast,  pleasant  to  the 
quiet  spirit  of  Isaac.  That  cjuiet  temper  was 
not  strong  enough  to  rule  such  a restless 
youth;  there  was  also  a marked  selfishness  in 
Isaac's  affection,  which  brought  with  it  its 
own  punishment.  I'he  mother,  on  the  con- 
trary. loved  the  well-conducted  and  helpful 
Jacob.  Yet  her  love  too  was  not  guided  by 
the  highest  principle,  and  so  led  her  and  her 


favourite  son  to  sin  against  truth  and  justice, 
and  brought  heavy  trials  and  sorrows  on  them 
both. 

30.  Feed  me,,  1 pray  thee,,  with  that  same 
red  pottage]  Let  me,  I pray  thee,  de- 
vour some  of  that  red,  that  red.  The 
words  express  the  vehemence  of  the  appetite, 
and  probably  the  very  words  uttered  by  Esau 
in  his  impatient  hunger  and  weariness.  The 
red  lentil  is  still  esteemed  in  the  East,  and  has 
been  found  very  palatable  by  modern  travel- 
lers (Robinson,  ‘Bib.  Res.’  i.  246).  Dr  Kitto 
says  he  often  partook  of  a red  pottage  made 
of  lentils.  “The  mess  had  the  redness,  which 
gained  for  it  the  name  of  red”  (‘Piet.  Bib.’ 
Gen.  XXV.  30,  quoted  in  Smith’s  ‘Diet,  of 
Bib.’  II.  92).  It  is  also  described  by  Thom- 
son, ‘Land  and  Book,’  p.  587,  as  exhaling  an 
odour  very  tempting  to  a hungry  man. 

therefore  was  his  name'called  Edom]  Names 
appear  to  have  been  frequently  given  from  ac- 
cidental causes,  especially  in  the  East;  and 
sometimes  the  occurrence  of  more  than  one 
circumstance  to  the  same  person  seems  to 
have  riveted  a name.  Thus  we  read  above 
that  Esau  was  born  with  red  hair  and  colour. 
His  frantic  demand  for  red  pottage  and  selling 
his  birthright  to  gain  it,  may  have  conspired 
v/ith  his  hair  and  complexion  to  stamp 'the 
name  Edom  (or  Red)  upon  him.  The  con- 
jecture of  Tuch  and  others,  that  the  name 
was  connected  with  the  Red  Sea,  near  which 
the  Edomites  dwelt,  is  wholly  groundless. 
The  Red  Sea  was  never  so  called  in  early 
times,  or  in  Semitic  tongues.  The  name  Red 
was  given  in  later  days  to  this  sea  by  the 
Greeks. 

31.  Sell  me  this  day  thy  birthright]  It  is 
doubtful  what  privileges  the  birthright  car- 
ried with  it  in  patriarchal  times.  In  after 
times  a double  portion  of  the  patrimony  was 
assigned  to  the  firstborn  by  law  (Deut.  xxi. 
15 — 17);  but  in  the  earliest  days  the  respect 
paid  to  the  eldest  son  is  very  apparent;  and 
as  the  family  spread  out  into  a tribe,  the 
patriarchal  head  became  a chieftain  or  prince. 


V.  33— !•] 


GENESIS.  XXV.  XXVI. 


157 


point  to  die;  and  what  profit 
die.  shall  this  birthright  do  to  me  ? 

33  And  Jacob  said,  Swear  to  me 
this  day;  and  he  sware  unto  him: 

^^Heb.  12.  and  ^he  sold  his  birthright  unto 
Jacob. 

34  Then  Jacob  gave  Esau  bread 
and  pottage  of  lentiles ; and  he  did 
eat  and  drink,  and  rose  up,  and  went 
his  way : thus  Esau  despised  his  birth- 
right. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

1 Isaac  because  of  famine  7vent  to  Gerar.  7 God 
mstmcteth,  and  blcsseth  him.  He  is  reproved 
by  Abimelech  for  denying  his  zvife.  I7  He 
grozveth  rich.  i8  He  diggeth  Eseh,  Sitnah, 
and  Rehobo th.  26  Abimelech  maketh  a cove- 
nant with  him  at  Beer  sheba.  34  Esan's 
wives. 


AND  there  was  a famine  in  the 
±\.  land,  beside  the  first  famine  that 
was  in  the  days  of  Abraham.  And 


It  also  looks  as  if  the  head  of  the  family  exer- 
cised a kind  of  priesthood.  Then  the  father’s 
chief  blessing  was  given  to  his  firstborn  son. 
Above  all,  in  the  family  of  Abraham,  there 
was  a promise  of  peculiar  spiritual  privileges, 
which,  if  not  fully  understood,  would  have 
been  much  dwelt  upon  by  believing  minds. 
All  this  was  to  Esau  of  little  account  com- 
pared with  the  desire  of  present  gratification 
of  appetite.  It  has  been  thought,  not  im- 
probably, that  the  famine  impending  (see 
xxvi.  i)  was  already,  more  or  less,  pressing  on 
the  family  of  Isaac  (Lightfoot,  ‘Harm,  of 
O.  T.’  in  loc.).  Esau  had  perhaps  been  seek- 
ing in  vain  for  food  in  the  chase,  whilst  Jacob 
had  prepared  a mess  of  pottage,  sufficient  to 
relieve  the  pains  of  hunger.  If  it  were  so, 
Esau,  wearied  and  famished,  may  have  been 
strongly  tempted  to  give  up  much  for  food. 
But  his  worldly  and  “profane”  character  is 
exhibited  in  his  contempt  for  that,  which  was, 
whether  in  a worldly  or  in  a spiritual  point'of 
view,  rather  an  gbject  of  faith  or  sentiment, 
than  of  sight  and  sense.  Jacob,  a man  of 
widely  different  character,  had  probably  looked 
with  reverence  on  the  spiritual  promises,  though 
with  culpable  ambition  for  the  personal  pre- 
eminence of  the  firstborn.  He  and  Esau  were 
twins,  and  it  may  have  seemed  hard  to  him 
to  be  shut  out  from  the  chief  hope  of  his 
house  by  one  not  older  than  himself,  and 
whose  character  was  little  worthy  of  his  posi- 
tion. This  may  be  some  excuse  for  his  con- 
duct, but  the  sacred  history,  whilst  exposing 
the  carnal  indifference  of  Esau,  does  not  ex- 
tenuate the  selfishness  of  Jacob.  Throughout 
their  history,  Esau  is  the  bold,  reckless,  but 
generous  and  openhearted  man  of  this  world ; 
Jacob,  on  the  contrary,  is  a thoughtful,  reli- 
gious man,  but  with  many  infirmities,  and 
especially  with  that  absence  of  simplicity  and 
uprightness,  which  often  characterizes  those 
who  have  made  their  choice  of  heaven 
and  yet  let  their  hearts  linger  too  much  on 
earth. 

The  events  correspond  with  the  characters 
of  the  men.  Esau  lives  on  his  rough  and 
reckless  life;  though  towards  the  end  of  it 


we  see  his  better  feelings  overcoming  his  vin- 
dictiveness. Whatever  his  own  final  state 
with  God  may  have  been,  he  has  disinherited 
his  children,  left  them  wild  men  of  the  desert 
and  the  rocks,  instead  of  leaving  them  heirs 
of  the  promises  and  ancestors  of  the  Messiah. 
Jacob,  with  a less  prosperous  life,  has  yet 
gone  through  a long  training  and  chastening 
from  the  God  of  his  fathers,  to  whose  care 
and  guidance  he  had  given  him.self ; he  suffers 
heavily,  but  he  learns  from  that  he  suffered ; 
at  last  he  goes  down  to  Egypt  to  die,  com- 
forted in  having  his  children  yet  alive,  confess- 
•ing  that  few  and  evil  had  been  the  days  of 
the  years  of  his  pilgrimage,  but  yet  able  to 
say  in  peaceful  confidence  upon  his  deathbed, 
“ I have  waited  for  thy  salvation,  O Lord.” 
He  has  inherited  the  promises;  but  for  trying 
by  unworthy  means  to  anticipate  the  promise 
of  inheritance,  he  has  to  go  through  a life  of 
trial,  sorrow,  and  discipline,  and  to  die  at  last, 
not  in  the  land  of  promise,  but  in  the  house 
of  bondage. 

Chap.  XXVI.  l.  AbimelecE]  It  has  been 
doubted  whether  this  be  the  Abimelech  with 
whom  Abraham  was  concerned  or  not.  The 
events  related  in  this  chapter  took  place  about 
eighty  years  after  those  related  in  ch.  xx. 
It  is  not  therefore  impossible,  when  men 
lived  to  180,  that  the  same  king  may  still 
have  been  reigning  over  the  Philistines;  and  it 
has  been  thought  that  the  character  described 
here  is  very  similar  to  that  in  ch.  xx.  It 
seems  more  probable  that  the  present  Abime- 
lech should  have  been  the  son  or  successor  of 
the  earlier  king.  Names  were  very  frequently 
handed  down  to  the  grandson,  recurring  al- 
ternately, and  this  may  very  possibly  have 
been  the  case  here:  but  moreover,  Abimelech 
{father  king.,  or  father  of  the  kingf  may  very 
likely  have  been,  like  Pharaoh,  a title  rather 
than  a name,  so  also  Phichol  {the  mouth  of  all., 
i.e.  commanding  all),  sounds  like  the  title  of 
the  commander  in  chief  or  the  grand  vizier, 
Cp.  xxi.  22,  xxvi.  26. 

Gerar'\  The  chief  city  of  the  Philistines, 
now  Kirbet  el  Gerar. 


158 


GENESIS.  XXVI. 


Isaac  went  unto  Abimelech  king  of 
the  Philistines  unto  Gerar. 

2 And  the  Lord  appeared  unto 
him,  and  said,  Go  not  down  into 
Egypt;  dwell  in  the,  land  which  I 
shall  tell  thee  of: 

3 Sojourn  in  this  land,  and  I will 
be  with  thee,  and  will  bless  thee ; for 

«chap.  13.  unto  thee,  and  unto  thy  seed,  "I  will 

&15  18  these  countries,  and  I will 

perform  the  oath  which  I sware  unto 
Abraham  thy  father; 

4 And  I will  make  thy  seed  to 
multiply  as  the  stars  of  heaven,  and 
will  give  unto  thy  seed  all  these  coun- 
tries; and  in  thy  seed  shall  all  the 

*chap.  12.  nations  of  the  earth  be  '^blessed; 

&  22^^181^’  5 Because  that  Abraham  obeyed 

my  voice,  and  kept  my  charge,  my 
commandments,  my  statutes,  and  my 
laws. 

6 ^1  And  Isaac  dwelt  in  Gerar: 

7 And  the  men  of  the  place  asked 
hbn  of  his  wife;  and  he  said.  She  is 
my  sister:  for  he  feared  to  say,  She  is’ 


[v.  2 — 12. 

my  wife;  lest,  said  he^  the  men  of 
the  place  should  kill  me  for  Rebekah  j 
because  she  was  fair  to  look  upon. 

8 And  it  came  to  pass,  when  he 
had  been  there  a long  time,  that 
Abimelech  king  of  the  Philistines  look- 
ed out  at  a window,  and  saw,  and, 
behold,  Isaac  was  sporting  with  Re- 
bekah his  wife. 

9 And  Abimelech  called  Isaac,  and 
said.  Behold,  of  a surety  she  is  thy 
wife : and  how  saidst  thou.  She  is  my 
sister?  And  Isaac  said  unto  him.  Be- 
cause I said.  Lest  I die  for  her. 

10  And  Abimelech  said.  What  is 
this  thou  hast  done  unto  us?  one  of 
the  people  might  lightly  have  lien  with 
thy  v/ife,  and  thou  shouldest  have 
brought  guiltiness  upon  us. 

11  ‘And  Abimelech  charged  all  his 
people,  saying.  He  that  toucheth  this 
man  or  his  wife  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death. 

12  Then  Isaac  sowed  in  that  land, 
and  deceived  in  the  same  year  any^^,2 


2.  the  Lord  appeared  unto  him']  The 
last  recorded  vision  was  at  the  sacrifice  of 
Isaac  more  than  sixty  years  before,  ch.  xxii. 
These  revelations  were  not  so  frequent  as 
they  seem  to  us,  as  we  read  one  event  rapidly 
after  the  other,  but  just  sufficient  to  keep  up 
the  knowledge  of  God  and  the  faith  of  the 
patriarchs  in  the  line  of  the  chosen  people 
and  of  the  promised  seed. 

Go  not  do^vn  into  Egypt]  “In  the  first 
famine,  which  was  in  the  days  of  Abraham,” 
Abraham  had  gone  down  to  Egypt.  Proba- 
bly, after  this  example,  and  from  the  plenty 
with  which  Egypt  was  blessed,  Isaac  had 
purposed  to  go  down  there  now. 

3.  Sojourn  in  this  land]  He  was  the 
heir,  to  whom  the  land  had  been  promised. 
He  is  to  dwell  in  it,  as  a stranger  and  so- 
journer, and  not  to  be  tempted  by  suffering 
to  go  down  to  that  land  of  spiritual  danger, 
from  which  his  father  so  narrowly  escaped. 

4.  all  these  countries]  The  lands  of  the 
different  Canaanitish  tribes  named  in  ch.  xv. 
19 — 21.  The  pronoun  here  rendered  “these” 
is  one  of  those  ancient  forms  peculiar  to  the 
Pentateuch  {ha-el]  in  the  later  books  it  would 
lx.*  ha-eieh). 

7.  She  is  my  sister]  Isaac  acted  on  this 
occa.sion  just  as  Abraham  had  done  in  Egypt 
and  in  Philistia.  Probably  too,  he  called 
Relrekah  his  sister  because  she  was  his  cou- 


sin, and  the  deep  importance  of  strict  truth- 
fulness had  not  been  fully  unfolded  to  the 
patriarchs  in  their  twilight  state  of  faith. 
The  difference  in  the  details  of  this  story 
and  the  events  in  the  life  of  Abraham  is  too 
marked  to  allow  it  to  be  thought  that  this  is 
only  a repetition  of  the  histories  in  ch.  xii. 
and  XX.  In  the  history  of  Abraham  Sarah 
was  taken  into  the  house  of  Pharaoh,  and 
afterwards  into  that  of  Abimelech,  and  in 
both  cases  preserved  by  Divine  intervention. 
In  the  history  of  Isaac,  there  is  no  apparent 
intention  on  the  part  of  Abimelech  to  take 
Rebekah  into  his  house,  but  he  accidentally 
discovers  that  Isaac  and  Rebekah  were  not 
brother  and  sister  but  husband  and  wife,  and 
then  reproves  Isaac  for  his  concealment  of 
the  truth,  on  the  ground  that  .so  some  of  his 
people  might  have  ignorantly  taken  Rebekah 
to  wife.  • 

12.  so^ed  in  that  landj  The  patriarchs 
were  not  so  wholly  nomadic  and  pastoral 
in  their  habits  of  life  as  to  neglect  agricul- 
ture entirely.  Even  the  Bedouins  practise 
agriculture  at  the  present  day  as  well  as  graz- 
ing (Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  Vol.  i.  p.  77). 

an  hundredfold]  An  hundred  measures; 
i.  e.  probably  a hundred  measures  for  each 
measure  sown,  a very  unusual  increase,  though 
not  quite  unknown  in  a virgin  soil,  especially 
if  the  corn  were  barley.  (The  LXX.  and 
Syr.  render  here  “a  hundred  of  barley,” 


V.  13—2  9-1 


GENESIS.  XXVI. 


159 


t Heb. 

went 

going. 


POr, 

husban- 

dry. 


t Heb. 
living. 


P That  is, 
Conten- 
tion. 


• That  is, 
Hatred. 


hundredfold:  and  the  Lord  blessed 
him. 

13  And  the  man  waxed  great,  and 
^went  forward,  and  grew  until  he  be- 
came very  great : 

14  For  he  had  possession  of  flocks, 
and  possession  of  herds,  and  great 
store  of  “ servants : and  the  Philistines 
envied  him. 

15  For  all  the  wells  which  his  fa- 
ther’s servants  had  digged  in  the  days 
of  Abraham  his  father,  the  Philistines 
had  stopped  them,  and  filled  them 
with  earth. 

16  And  Abimelech  said  unto  Isaac, 
Go  from  us ; for  thou  art  much 
mightier  than  we. 

17  ^ And  Isaac  departed  thence, 
and  pitched  his  tent  in  the  valley  of 
Gerar,  and  dwelt  there. 

18  And  Isaac  digged  again  the 
wells  of  water,  which  they  had  digged 
in  the  days  of  Abraham  his  father; 
for  the  Philistines  had  stopped  them 
after  the  death  of  Abraham:  and  he 
called  their  names  after  the  names  by 
which  his  father  had  called  them. 

19  And  Isaac’s  servants  digged  in 
the  valley,  and  found  there  a well  of 
^springing  water. 

20  And  the  herdmen  of  Gerar  did 
strive  with  Isaac’s  herdmen,  saying. 
The  water  is  ours : and  he  called  the 
name  of  the  well  " Esek ; because  they 
strove  with  him. 

21  And  they  digged  another  well, 
and  strove  for  that  also : and  he  called 
the  name  of  it  "Sitnah. 


22  And  he  removed  from  thence, 
and  digged  another  well’;  and  for  that 
they  strove  not : and  he  called  the 
name  of  it  "Rehoboth;  and  he  said, 

For  now  the  Lord  hath  made  room 
for  us,  and  we  shall  be  fruitful  in  the 
land. 

23  And  he  went  up  from  thence 
to  Beer-sheba. 

24  And  the  Lord  appeared  unto 
him  the  same  night,  and  said,  I am 
the  God  of  Abraham  thy  father:  fear 
not,  for  I am  with  thee,  and  will  bless 
thee,  and  multiply  thy  seed  for  my 
servant  Abraham’s  sake. 

25  And  he  budded  an  altar  there, 
and  called  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord, 
and  pitched  his  .tent  there:  and  there 
Isaac’s  servants  digged  a well. 

26  ^ Then  Abimelech  went  to  him 
from  Gerar,  and  Ahuzzath  one  of  his 
friends,  and  Phichol  the  chief  captain 
of  his  army. 

27  And  Isaac  said  unto  them. 
Wherefore  come  ye  to  me,  seeing  ye 
hate  me,  and  have  sent  me  away  from 
you  ? 

28  And  they  said,  ^We  saw  cer-tHeb. 
tainly  that  the  Lord  was  with  thee : ^saw'.^ 
and  we  said.  Let  there  be  now  an  oath 
betwixt  us,  even  betwixt  us  and  thee, 

and  let  us  make  a covenant  with  thee ; 

29  ^ "Fhat  thou  wilt  do  us  no  hurt,  t Heb. 
as  we  have  not  touched  thee,  and  as 

we  have  done  unto  thee  nothing  but 
good,  and  have  sent  thee  away  in 
peace:  thou  art  now  the  blessed  of 
the  Lord. 


which  Michaelis  and  others  have  adopted. 
The  reading  and  rendering  of  the  Authorised 
Version  are  more  generally  supported,  and  are 
probably  c<?rrect.)  The  fertility  of  the  soil 
in  this  neighbourhood  is  still  very  great. 

17.  the  valley  of  Gerar\  The  word  for 
valley  signifies  properly  the  bed  or  course  of  a 
stream  or  mountain  torrent,  a vuady.  It  is  not 
easy  to  say  which  of  the  valleys  running  to 
the  sea,  South  of  Beer-sheba,  may  be  identified 
with  this  valley  of  Gerar  (see  Robinson, 
‘Physical  Geography,’  p.  112). 

22.  Rehoboth']  Probably  identified  as  to 
site  with  the  Wady  er~Ruhaibeh,  where  are 
the  ruins  of  an  extensive  city,  eight  hours 
South  of  Beer-sheba.  Here  is  an  ancient  well. 


now  filled  up,  twelve  feet  in  diameter,  and 
regularly  built  with  hewn  stone  (Robinson, 
‘ Phys.  Geog.’  p.  243  ; see  also  ‘ B.  R.’  p.  289). 

26.  PhichoT\  See  on  v.  i.  The  name  sig- 
nifies “the  mouth  of  all,”  which  would  be 
applicable  to  a grand  vizier,  through  whom 
all  might  have  access  to  the  sovereign,  or  to  a 
general  whose  voice  gave  command  to  all. 
The  former  sefise  would  seem  the  more  pro- 
bable, if  it  had  not  been  said  that  Phichol  was 
( ‘ the  chief  captain  of  the  army.” 

29.  thou  art  novo  the  blessed  of  the 
Lord^  We  have  here  twice  (see  v.  28)  the 
sacred  name  Jehovah,  used  by  the  heathen 
king  of  Gerar.  This  does  not,  hov/ever,  in- 
dicate that  the  writer  of  this  portion  of  the 


1 


GENESIS.  XXVI.  XXVII.  [v.  30-1. 


160 

30  And  he  made  them  a feast,  and 
they  did  eat  and  drink. 

31  And  they  rose  up  betimes  in 
the  morning,  and  sware  one  to  an- 
other : and  Isaac  sent  them  away,  and 
they  departed  from  him  in  peace. 

32  And  it  came  to  pass  the  same 
day,  that  Isaac’s  servants  came,  and 
told  him  concerning  the  well  which 
they  had  digged,  and  said  ^unto  him. 
We  have  found  water. 

11  That  is,  33  And  he  called  it " Shebah : there- 
rrSt,  loi'e  the  name  of  the  city  is  "Beer- 
sheba  unto  this  day. 

34  And  Esau  was  forty  years 
old  when  he  took  to  wife  Judith  the 


history  had  so-called  Jehovistic  tendencies, 
or  that  he  simply  identified  the  name  Jeho- 
vah with  the  name  Elohim.  Abraham  had 
dwelt  for  some  time  in  Gerar,  either  under 
this  very  Abimelech,  or  under  his  immediate 
predecessor.  Abraham  was  known  as  a wor- 
shipper of  Jehovah,  and  was  seen  to  be 
blessed  and  prospered  by  his  God.  Now 
again  Abraham’s  son  Isaac  comes  and  so- 
journs for  a long  time  in  the  same  country. 
He  too  worships  his  father’s  God,  and  is 
seen,  like  his  father,  to  prosper  abundantly. 
The  Philistines  therefore  recognize  him,  as 
his  father,  to  be  a worshipper  of  Jehovah, 
and  perceive  that  he  has  succeeded  to  his  fa- 
ther in  the  favour  of  their  great  Protector. 
Abimelech  does  not  profess  himself  a wor- 
shipper of  the  Lord,  but  looks  on  the  Lord 
as  the  God  of  Abraham,  and  sees  that  Abra- 
ham’s son  Isaac  is  the  blessed  of  the 

Lord.” 

33.  he  called  it  Shebah:  therefore  the 
name  of  the  city  is  Beer-sheba  unto  this  day'\ 
“Shebah”  means  both  seven  and  oath;  the 
number  seven  being  a sacred  number  among 
the  Hebrews,  and , oaths  being  apparently 
ratified  with  presents  or  sacrifices  seven  in 
number  (see  ch.  xxi.  28).  There  is  no  in- 
consistency in  the  history  which  tells  us  that 
Abraham  gave  the  name  of  Beer-sheba  to  this 
well  long  before,  and  under  similar  circum- 
stances. The  well,  dug  by  Abraham,  and 
secured  to  him  by  oath,  had  been  covered 
and  lost.  It  is  found  by  Isaac’s  servants  just 
after  the  covenant  made  between  him  and 
Abimelech.  The  whole  series  of  events  re- 
calls to  Isaac’s  mind  the  original  name,  and 
that  which  gave  rise  to  the  name,  and  so  he 
restores,  not  the  well  only,  but  the  name 
also.  “ Upon  the  Northern  side  of  the  Wady 
es-Seba  are  the  two  deej)  and  ancient  wells, 
which  gave  occasion  to  this  name”  (Robin- 
son, ‘ Phys.  Geog.’  p.  242;  HL  R.’  i.  p. 


daughter  of  Beeri  the  Hittite,  anil 
Bashemath  the  daughter  of  Elon  the 
Hittite : 

35  Which  ‘^were  grief  of  mind  ^^hap.  27 
unto  Isaac  and  to  Rebekah.  t I'leb. 

bitterness 

CHAPTER  XXVII.  0/  spirit. 

I Isaac  sendeth  Esau  for  venison.  6 Rebekah 
instructeth  Jacob  to  obtain  the  blessing.  J5 
Jacob  under  the  person  of  Esau  obtaineth  it. 

30  Esau  bringeth  venison.  33  Isaac  trembleth. 

34  Esau  complaineth,  and  by  importunity  ob- 
taineth a blessing.  41  He  threateneth  Jacob. 

42  Rebekah  disappointeth  it. 

AND  it  came  to  pass,  that  when 
±\^  Isaac  was  old,  and  his  eyes  were 
dim,  so  that  he  could  not  see,  he 
called  Esau  his  eldest  son,  and  said 


300).  It  is  supposed  by  Robinson,  that  the 
one  is  that  dug  by  Abraham,  the  other  that 
dug  by  Isaac*  the  name  having  been  after- 
wards given  to  both. 

34.  Esau  2vas  forty  years  old.^  &c.]  Isaac 
was  now  a hundred  years  old.  Esau  mar- 
ries two  wives  ^and  both  of  them  Canaanites. 
On  account  of  his  polygamy  and  his  mar- 
rying without  consent  of  his  parents  from 
among  the  idolatrous  Hittites  and  Hivites 
(see  ch.  xxxvi.  2),  he  is  called  “a  fornicator” 
by  the  Apostle  (Heb.  xii.  16).  These  two 
verses  do  not  belong  so  much  to  this  chapter 
as  to  the  next.  The  account  of  Esau’s  mar- 
riage, and  the  consequent  grief  of  Isaac  and 
Rebekah,  is  intended  to  prepare  the  way  for 
the  succeeding  history. 

35.  a grief  of  mindl\  A bitterness  of 
spirit. 

Chap.  XXVII.  1.  Isaac  (was  old]  The 
Jewish  intepreters  say  he  was  now  one  hun- 
dred and  thirty-seven  years  old,  the  age  at 
which  Ishmael  died  fourteen  years  before, 
and  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  thought  of 
his  brother’s  death  at  this  age  put  Isaac  in 
mind  of  his  own  end.  The  calculation  on 
which  it  is  inferred  that  Isaac  was  one  hun- 
dred and  thirty-seven,  Esau'  and  Jacob  being 
seventy-seven  at  this  time,  is  as  follows; 
Joseph  was  thirty  years  old  when  he  stood 
before  Pharaoh  (Gen.  xli.  46),  then  came 
seven  years  of  plenty  (v.  47 — 53),  which  made 
Joseph  thirty-seven ; then  two  years  of 
famine  ere  Jacob  came  into  Egypt  (ch.  xlv. 
6),  which  brings  Joseph’s  age  to  thirty-nine; 
but  at  this  time  Jacob  was  one  hundred  and 
thirty;  therefore  Jacob  must  have  been  nine- 
ty-one when  Joseph  was  born.  Now  Joseph 
was  born  in  the  last  year  of  the  second  seven, 
or  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Jacob’s  seiwice 
with  Laban,  at  the  very  end  of  that  year 


V.  2 8.] 


GENESIS.  XXVir. 


i6i 


t Heb. 
hunt. 


unto  him,  My  son  ; and  he  said  unto 
him,  Behold,  here  am  I. 

2 And  he  said.  Behold  now,  I am 
old,  1 know  not  the  day  of  my 
death : 

3 Now  therefore  take,  I pray  thee, 
thy  weapons,  thy  quiver  and  thy  bow, 
and  go  out  to  the  field,  and  4ake  me 
some  venison ; 

4 And  make  me  savoury  meat,  such 
as  1 love,  and  bring  it  to  me,  that  I 
may  eat ; that  my  soul  may  bless  thee 
before  I die. 


5 And  Rebekah  heard  when  Isaac 
spake  to  Esau  his  son.  And  Esau 
went  to  the  field  to  hunt  for  venison, 
a7td  to  bring  it. 

6 ^ And  Rebekah  spake  unto  Ja- 
cob her  son,  saying.  Behold,  I heard 
thy  father  speak  unto  Esau  thy  brother, 
saying,  _ 

7 Bring  me  venison,  and  make  me 
savoury  meat,  that  I may  eat,  and 
bless  thee  before  the  Lor.d  before  my 
death. 

8 Now  therefore,  my  son,  obey  my 


(ch.  XXX.  25,  26),  Take  fourteen  years  out 
of  ninety-one,  Jacob's  age  when  Joseph  was 
born,  and  we  have  seventy-seven  for  the  age 
of  Jacob,  when  he  was  sent  away  from  the 
wrath  of  Esau  to  the  house  of  Laban.  (See 
Lightfoot’s  ‘Harmony  of  Old  Testament’  in 
loc.,  works  by  Pitman,  1822,  Vol.  ii.  pp.  96, 
97).  If  this  calculation  be  true,  Isaac  had 
still  forty-three  years  to  live,  his  quiet  life 
having  been  extended  to  an  unusual  length. 
There  is  however  great  risk  of  numerical  cal- 
culations from  various  causes  being  inexact. 
The  last  chapter  had  brought  us  down  only 
to  the  hundredth  year  of  Isaac's  life,  Esau 
being  then  but  forty;  and  in  some  respects 
an  earlier  date  seems  more  accordant  with 
the  tenor  of  the  subsequent  history,  it  being 
hardly  probable  that  Jacob  should  have  been 
seventy-seven  when  he  fled  to  Laban  and 
served  seven  years  for  his  wife,  and  then 
.another  seven  years  for  his  second  wife;  even 
at  a period  when  human  life  was  still  ex- 
tended so  far  beyond  that  of  future  genera- 
tions. On  the  chronology  of  Jacob’s  life  see 
note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xxxi. 

3.  qui’ver']  So  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Pseudo- 
Jon.:  but  Onkelos,  Syr.  have  “sword.”  The 
Jewish  commentators  are  divided  between 
the  two  senses.  The  word  occurs  nowhere 
else,  but  is  derived  from  a verb  meaning  to 
“hang,”  to  “suspend,”  which  would  suit 
either  the  quiver  which  hung  over  the 
shoulder,  or  the  sword,  the  “hanger,”  which 
was  suspended  by  the  side. 

4.  that  7ny  soul  may  bless  thee'\  There 
appears  a singular  mixture  of  the  carnal  and 
the  spiritual  in  this.  Isaac  recognizes  his 
own  character  as  that  of  the  priestly  and 
prophetic  head  of  his  house,  privileged  to 
bless  as  father  and  priest,  and  to  foretell  the 
fortunes  of  his  family  in  succession  to  Abra- 
ham in  his  office  of  the  prophet  of  God. 
Yet  his  carnal  affection  causes  him  to  forget 
the  response  to  the  enquiry  of  Rebekah,  “the 
elder  shall  serve  the  younger,”  and  the  fact 
that  Esau  had  sold  his  birthi’ight  and  alienated 

VoL.  [. 


it  from  him  for  ever  by  a solem.n  oath. 
Moreover,  in  order  that  his  heart  may  be  the 
more  warmed  to  him  whom  he  desires  to 
bless,  he  seeks  to  have  some  of  that  savoury 
meat  brought  to  him  which  he  loved. 

6.  Rebekah  spake  unto  Jacob~\  She  had 
no  doubt  treasured  up  the  oracle  which  had 
assured  her,  even  before  their  birth,  that  her 
younger  son  Jacob,  whom  she  loved,  should 
bear  rule  over  Esau,  whose  wild  and  reckless 
life,  and  whose  Canaanitish  wives  had  been  a 
“bitterness  of  soul”  to  her.  She  probably 
knew  that  Jacob  had  bought  Esau’s  birth- 
right. Now,  believing  rightly  that  the  fither’s 
benediction  would  surely  bring  blessing  with 
it,  she  fears  that  these  promises  and  hopes 
would  fail.  She  believed,  but  not  with  that 
faith,  which  can  patiently  abide  till  God 
works  out  His  plans  by  His  Providence.  So 
she  strove,  as  it  were,  to  force  forward  the 
event  by  unlawful  means;  even,  as  some  have 
thought  that  Judas  betrayed  Christ  that  he 
might  force  Him  to  declare  Himsell  a king 
and  to  take  the  kingdom.  Every  character 
in  this  remarkable  history  comes  in  for  some 
share  of  blame,  and  yet  some  share  of  praise. 
Isaac,  with  the  dignity  of  the  ancient  patriarcli 
and  faith  in  the  inspiring  Spirit  of  God, 
prepares  to  bless  his  son,  but  he  lets  carnal 
and  worldly  motives  weigh  with  him.  Re- 
bekah and  Jacob,  seeing  the  promises  afar 
off  and  desiring  the  spiritual  blessings,  yet 
practise  deceit  and  fraud  to  obtain  them, 
instead  of  waiting  till  He  who  promised 
should  shew  Himself  faithful.  Esau,  de- 
frauded of  what  seems  his  right,  exhibits  a 
natural  feeling  of  sorrow  and  indignation, 
which  excites  our  pity  and  sympathy;  but  w^e 
have  to  remember  how  “for  a morsel  of 
meat  he  sold  his  birthright,”  and  that  so, 
when  he  would  have  inherited  the  promises 
he  w^as  rejected,  being  set  forth  as  an  example 
of  the  unavailing  regret  of  such  as  w^antonly 
despise  spiritual  privileges,  and  when  they 
have  lost  them,  seek  too  late  for  the  blessings 
to  w'hich  they  lead. 


L 


i62 


GENESIS.  XXVII. 


[v.  9—24. 


voice  according  to  that  which  I com- 
mand thee. 

9 Go  now  to  the  flock,  and  fetch 
me  from  thence  two  good  kids  of  the 
goats;  and  I will  make  them  savoury- 
meat  for  thy  father,  such  as  he  loveth  : 

10  And  thou  shalt  bring  it  to  thy- 
father,  that  he  may  eat,  and  that  he 
may  bless  thee  before  his  death. 

1 1 And  Jacob  said  to  Rebekah  his 
mother.  Behold,  Esau  my  brother  is 
a hairy  man,  and  I am  a smooth  man  : 

12  My  father  peradventure  will  feel 
me,  and  I shall  seem  to  him  as  a de- 
ceiver; and  I shall  bring  a curse  upon 
me,  and  not  a blessing. 

13  And  his  mother  said  unto  him. 
Upon  me  be  thy  curse,  my  son:  only 
obey  my  voice,  and  go  fetch  me  them. 

14  And  he  went,  and  fetched,  and 
brought  them  to  his  mother:  and  his 
mother  made  savoury  meat,  such  as 
his  father  loved. 

•f  Heb.  15  And  Rebekah  took  ^ goodly  rai- 

.desirabie.  cldest  son  Esau-,  which 

were  v/ith  her  in  the  house,  and  put 
them  upon  Jacob  her  younger  son : 

16  And  she  put  the  skins  of  the 
^ kids  of  the  goats  upon  his  hands,  and 

upon  the  smooth  of  his  neck: 


17  And  she  gave  the  savoury  meat 
and  the  bread,  which  she  had  prepared, 
into  the  hand  of  her  son  Jacob. 

18  ^ And  became  unto  his  father, 
and  said.  My  father:  and  he  said. 

Here  am  I ; who  art  thou,  my  son  ? 

19  And  Jacob  said  unto  his  father, 

I am  Esau  thy  firstborn ; I have  done 
according  as  thou  badest  me : arise,  I 
pray  thee,  sit  and  eat  of  my  venison, 
that  thy  soul  may  bless  me. 

20  And  Isaac  said  unto  his  son. 

How  is  it  that  thou  hast  found  it  so 
quickly,  my  son?  And  he  said.  Be- 
cause the  Lord  thy  God  brought  it 

Ho  me.  +Heb. 

21  And  Isaac  said  unto  Jacob,  ^ 
Come  near,  I pray  thee,  that  I may 

feel  thee,  my  son,  whether  thou  be 
my  very  son  Esau  or  not. 

22  And  Jacob  went  near  unto  Isaac 
his  father;  and  he  felt  him,  and  said. 

The  voice  is  Jacob’s  voice,  but  the 
hands  are  the  hands  of  Esau. 

23  And  he  discerned  him  not,  be- 
cause his  hands  were  hairy,  as  his 
brother  Esau’s  hands:  so  he  blessed 
him. 

24  And  he  said.  Art  thou  my  very 
son  Esau  ? And  he  said,  I am. 


15.  goodly  raiment  of  her  elder  son  Esau\ 
St  Jerome  (‘Qu.  Hebr,’  in  loc.)  mentions 
it  as  a tradition  of  the  rabbins,  that  the 
f'rstborn  in  the  patriarchal  times,  holding 
the  office  of  priesthood,  had  a sacerdotal 
vestment  in  which  they  offered  sacrifice;  and 
it  was  this  sacerdotal  vestment  which  was 
kept  by  Rebekah  for  Esau,  and  which  was 
now  put  upon  Jacob.  See  on  ch,  xxxvii.  3. 

16.  the  skins  of  the  kids  of  the  goats'] 
Martial  (Lib.  xii.  Epig.  46)  alludes  to  kid 
skins  as  used  by  the  Romans  for  false  hair  to 
conceal  baldness.  The  wool  of  the  oriental 
goats  is  much  longer  and  finer  than  of  those  of 
this  country.  (Cp.  Gant.  iv.  i.  See  Bochart, 
‘ Hiero/..’  p.  i.  Lib.  11.  c.  ci.  See  also  Rosenm., 
Tuch,  ixc.) 

18.  fiL'ho  art  thou^  my  son?]  The  anxiety 
and  trepidation  of  Isaac  appear  in  these 
words.  He  had  perhaps  some  misgiving  as 
to  the  blessing  of  Esau,  and  doubted  whe- 
ther God  would  prosper  him  in  the  chase 
and  bring  liim  home  with  venison  to  his 
father. 


20.  Because  the  Lopd  thy  God  brought  it 
to  me]  The  covering  of  his  falsehood  with 
this  appeal  to  the  Most  High  is  the  worst 
part  of  Jacob’s  conduct.  In  the  use  ot  the 
names  of  God,  Jacob  speaks  of  Jehovah  as 
the  God  of  his  father.  A little  further  on  in 
the  history,  Jacob  vows  that,  if  he  is  pro- 
spered in  his  journey,  then  Jehovah  shall  be 
his  God  (ch.  xxviii.  ai).  This  is  exactly 
accordant  with  the  general  use  of  these  sacred 
names.  Elohism  would,  so  to  speak,  corre- 
spond with  our  word  Theism.  Though  Ja- 
cob was  a believer  in  Jehovah,  yet  revela- 
tion in  those  early  days  was  but  slight,  and 
the  knowledge  of  the  patriarchs  imperfect. 
There  were  gods  of  nations  round  about. 
Jehovah  had  revealed  Himself  to  Abraham 
and  was  Abraham’s  God,  and  again  to  Isaac, 
and  Isaac  had  served  Him  as  his  God.  It  is 
quite  possible  that  Esau,  with  his  heathen 
wives,  may  have  been  but  a half  worshipper 
of  Jehovah;  but  Jacob  recognizes  Him  as 
the  God  of  his  father  Isaac  (cp.  ch.  xxxi.  53), 
and  afterwards  solemnly  chooses  Him  as  the 
object  of  his  own  worship  and  service.  See 
however  note  on  ch.  xxviii.  a. 


V.  25—37-] 


GENESIS.-  XXVII. 


163 


25  And  he  said,  Bring  it  near  to 
me,  and  I will  eat  of  my  son’s  veni- 
son, that  my  soul  may  bless  thee. 
And  he  brought  it  near  to  him,  and 
he  did  eat:  and  he  brought  him  wine, 
and  he  drank. 

26  And  his  father  Isaac  said  unto 
him.  Come  near  now,  and  kiss  me, 
my  son. 

27  And  he  carrre  near,  and  kissed 
him : and  he  smelled  the  smell  of  his 
raiment,  and  blessed  him,  and  said. 
See,  the  smell  of  my  son  is  as  the 
smell  of  a field  which  the  Lord 
hath  blessed: 

«Tieb.  II.  28  Therefore  "God  give  thee  of 
the  dew  of  heaven,  and  the  fatness  of 
the  earth,  and  plenty  of  corn  and 
wine : 

29  Let  people  serve  thee,  and  na- 
tions bow  down  to  thee : be  lord  over 
thy  brethren,  and  let  thy  mother’s 
sons  bow  down  to  thee:  cursed  be 
every  one  that  curseth  thee,  and 
blessed  be  he  that  blesseth  thee. 

30  U And  it  came  to  pass,  as  soon 
as  Isaac  had  made  an  end  of  blessing 
Jacob,  and  Jacob  was  yet  scarce  gone 
out  from  the  presence  of  Isaac  his 
father,  that  Esau  his  brother  came  in 
from  his  hunting. 


31  And  he  also  had  made  savoury 
meat,  and  brought  it  unto  his  father, 
and  said  unto  his  father.  Let  my  fa- 
ther arise,  and  eat  of  his  son’s  venison, 
that  thy  soul  may  bless  me. 

32  And  Isaac  his  father  said  unto 
him.  Who  art  thou .?  And  he  said,  I 
am  thy  son,  thy  firstborn  Esau. 

33  And  Isaac  Trembled  very  ex- t Heb. 
ceedingly,  and  said.  Who .?  where  is 

he  thjt  hath  Taken  venison,  and 
brought  it  me,  and  I have  eaten  ^eaiiy. 
all  before  thou  earnest,  and  have  bless-  hunted. 
ed  him?  yea,  and  he  shall  be  blessed. 

34  And  when  Esau  heard  the  words 
of  his  father,  he  cried  with  a great  and 
exceeding  bitter  cry,  and  said  unto  his 
father.  Bless  me,  even  me  also,  O my 
father. 

35  And  he  said.  Thy  brother  came 
with  subtilty,  and  hath  taken  away 
thy  bless;  ng. 

36  And  he  said.  Is  not  he  rightly 
named  "Jacob  ? for  he  hath  supplant-  n That  is, « 
ed  me  these  two  times : he  took  away 

my  birthright ; and,  behold,  now  he 
hath  taken  away  my  blessing.  And 
he  said.  Hast  thou  not  reserved  a 
blessing  for  me  ? 

37  And  Isaac  answered  and  said 
unto  Esau,  Behold,  I have  made  him 


26.  kiss  me\  Tuch  has  suggested  that 
Isaac  asked  his  son  to  kiss  him,  that  he 
might  distinguish  the  shepherd  who  would 
smell  of  the  flock  from  the  huntsman  who 
would  smell  of  the  field.  It  may  have  been 
so  (see  next  verse),  or  it  may  have  only  been 
paternal  love, 

28.  God~\  Lit,  The  God.,  i.e.  that  God 
just  named,  the  God  of  thy  Father,  viz. 
Jehovah.  It  does  not  indicate  (as  Keil) 
“the  personal  God,”  nor  is  it  (as  some  would 
have  it)  a Jehovistic  formula.  The  article  is 
perfectly  natural  as  referring  to  Jacob’s 
words  V.  20.  The  blessing  is,  as  usual, 
thrown  into  the  poetic  form  of  an  anti- 
strophic  parallelism. 

29.  Let  people  serve  thee.,  and  nations  bovj 
donvn  to  thee']  This  was  fulfilled  in  the 
extensive  dominions  of  the  descendants  of 
Jacob  under  David  and  Solomon,  but,  no 
doubt,  has  a fuller  reference  to  the  time  when 
“the  Lord  should  arise  upon  Israel,  and  His 
glory  should  be  seen  on  her,  when  Gentiles 
sliould  come  to  her  light,  and  kings  to  the 


brightness  of  her  rising” . . . when  ‘ ‘ the  abundance 
of  the  sea  should  be  converted  unto  her,  the 
forces  of  the  Gentiles  should  come  unto 
her”  (Isa.  lx.  5,  6.  Cp.  Rom.  xi.  25). 

29.  cursed  be  every  one.,  &c,]  This  is 
the  continued  promise  to  the  chosen  race,  first 
given  (Gen.  xii,  3)  to  Abraham.  It  is  ob- 
served, however,  that  Isaac  does  not  pronounce 
on  Jacob  that  emphatic  spiritual  blessing,  which 
God  Himself  had  assured  to  Abraham  twice 
(xii.  3;  xxii.  18),  and  to  Isaac  once  (xx’d.  4), 
“ In  thy  seed* shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth 
be  blessed.”  There  was  something  carnal  and 
sinful  in  the  whole  conduct  of  the  persons 
concerned  in  the  history  of  this  chapter,  Isaac, 
Rebekah,  Jacob,  Esau:  and  it  may  have  been 
this  which  withheld  for  the  time  the  bright- 
est prorrJse  to  the  family  of  Abraham;  or 
perhaps  it  may  have  been  that  that  promise 
should  come  only  from  the  mouth  of  God  Him- 
self, as  it  is  given  afterwards  in  ch.  xxviii.  14. 

36.  Is  not  he  rightly  named  Jacobf]  Lit. 
“ Is  it  that  he  is  called  Jacob,  and  he  sup- 
planteth  or  outwitteth  me  these  two  times?” 

L 2 


164 


GENESIS.  XXVII. 


[v.  38—45* 


rOr, 

suf  ported 


t Heb.  12 

17- 

ver.  28. 
n Or. 

0/  the  fat- 
ness. 


thy  lord,  and  all  his  brethren  have  I 
given  to  him  for  servants ; and  with 
corn  and  wine  have  I " sustained  him : 
and  what  shall  I do  now  unto  thee, 
my  son  ? 

38  And  Esau  said  unto  his  father, 
Hast  thou  but  one  blessing,  my  fa- 
ther? bless  me,  even  me  also,  O my 
father.  And  Esau  lifted  up  his  voice, 
^and  wept. 

39  And  Isaac  his  father  answered 
and  said  unto  him.  Behold,  ‘^thy  dwell- 
ing shall  be  " the  fatness  of  the  earth, 
and  of  the  dew  of  heaven  from  above ; 

40  And  by  thy  sword  shalt  thou 
live,  and  shalt  serve  thy  brother;  and 
it  shall  come  to  pass  when  thou  shalt 
have  the  dominion,  that  thou  shalt 
break  his  voke  from  off  thy  neck. 

41  ^ And  Esau  hated  Jacob  be- 
cause of  the  blessing  wherewith  his 


father  blessed  him:  and  Esau  said  in 
his  heart,  The  days  of  mourning  for 
my  father  are  at  hand;  ‘^then  will  I “^Obad-io. 
slay  my  brother  Jacob. 

42  And  these  words  of  Esau  her 
elder  son  were  told  to  Rebekah : and 
she  sent  and  called  Jacob  her  younger 
son,  and  said  unto  him.  Behold,  thy 
brother  Esau,  as  touching  thee,  doth 
comfort  himself,  purposing  to  kill  thee. 

43  Now  therefore,  my  son,  obey 
my  voice;  and  arise,  flee  thou  to 
Laban  my  brother  to  Haran ; 

44  And  tarry  with  him  a few  days, 
until  thy  brother’s  fury  turn  away;, 

45  Until  thy  brother’s  anger  turn 
away  from  thee,  and  he  forget  that 
which  thou  hast  done  to  him : then  I 
will  send,  and  fetch  thee  from  thence : 
why  should  I be  deprived  also  of  you 
both  in  one  day? 


A paronomasia  on  the  name  Jacob.  See  on 
ch.  XXV.  26.  The  words  seem  to  mean,  Is 
there  not  a connection  between  the  meaning 
of  his  name  Jacob,  and  the  fact  that  he  thus 
supplants  or  outwits  me? 

39.  ihy  drivelling  shall  be  the  fatness  of 
the  earth.,  and  of  the  denjo  of  heaven  from 
above']  Lit.  “ from  tlie  fatness  of  the  earth 
and  from  the  dew  of  heaven.”  Castalio,  Le 
Clerc,  Knobcl,  Del,,  Keil,  render  the  prepo- 
sition “from”  by  “far  from.”  So  apparently 
Gesenius  (‘Thes.’  p.  805,  absque.,  sine).  But 
the  Authorized  Version  corresponds  with  the 
ancient  versions.  The  very  same  words  with 
the  very  same  prepcjsition  occur  in  v.  28,  and 
it  is  difficult  to  make  that  preposition  parti- 
tive in  v.  28,  and  privative  in  v.  39. 

40.  by  thy  s^iuord  thou  shalt  live.,  and 
shalt  serve  thy  brother.,  &c.]  Josephus  (‘  B.  J.’ 
IV.  4.  i)  describes  the  Edomites  as  a tu- 
multuous, disorderly  race,  and  all  their  history 
seems  to  confirm  the  truth  of  this  description. 
The  prophecy  thus  delivered,  by  Isaac  was 
fulfilled  in  every  particular.  At  first  Esau, 
the  elder,  seemed  to  prosper  more  than  his 
brother  Jacob.  There  were  dukes  in  Edom 
before  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  (Gen.  xxxvi.  31);  and  whilst 
Israel  was  in  bondage  in  Egypt,  Edom  was  an 
independent  people.  But  Saul  defeated  and 
David  conquered  the  Edomites  (i  S.  xiv.  47; 
2 S.  viii.  14),  and  they  were,  notwithstand- 
ing some  revolts,  constantly  subject  to  Judah 
(see  I K.  xi.  14;  2 K.  xiv.  7,  22;  2 Chr.  xxv. 
II ; xxvi.  2)  till  the  reign  of  Aha/,  when  they 
threw  off' the  yoke  (2  K.  xvi.  6;  2 Chr.  xxviii. 


7).  Judas  Maccabaeus  defeated  them  fre- 
quently (i  Macc.  v. ; 2 Macc.  x.).  At  last 
his  nephew  Hyreanus  completely  conquered 
them,  and  compelled  them  to  be  circumcised, 
and  incorporated  them  into  the  Jewish  nation 
(Joseph.  ‘Ant.’  xiii.  9.  i);  though  finally 
under  Antipater  and  Herod  they  established 
an  Idumaean  dynasty,  which  continued  till  the 
destruction  of  the  Jewish  polity. 

vohen  thou  shalt  have  dominion]  More  pro- 
bably when  thou  shalt  toss  (the  yoke). 
So  the  LXX.,  Vulg.  (excutias) ; Gesen.  ‘Thes.’ 
p.  1269;  Hengst.,  Keil,  &c.  The  allusion  is 
to  the  restlessness  of  the  fierce  Edomite  under 
the  yoke  of  the  Jewish  dominion.  The  pro- 
phecy was  fulfilled  when  they  revolted  under 
Joram  and  again  under  Aha/;  and  finally 
when  they  gave  a race  of  rulers  to  Judaea  in 
the  persons  of  Herod  and  his  sons  (see  last 
note). 

43.  Haran]  It  appears  that  not  only  A- 
braham  and  the  family  of  his  brother  Haran 
must  have  left  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  (see  ch.  xi. 
31);  but  that  the  family  of  Nahor  must  have 
followed  them  to  Haran,  which  is  therefore 
called  “the  city  of  Nahor”  (ch.  xxiv.  10). 
The  name  Harran  still  remains  in  the  centre 
of  the  cultivated  district  at  the  foot  of  the 
hills  lying  between  the  Khabour  and  the  Eu- 
phrates. 

45.  nvhy  should  I be  deprived  also  of  you 
both  in  one  dayl]  i.e.  of  Jacob  by  the  hand  of 
Esau,  and  of  Esau  by  the  hajid  of  justice  (ch. 
ix.  6).  The  sacred  history  has  shewn  us  the 
sins  and  errors  of  the  family  of  Isaac;  it  here 
briefly  but  emphatically  exhibits  the  distress 


V.  46-11-]  GENESIS.  XXVII.  XXVIII. 


chap.  26,  46  And  Rebekah  said- to  Isaac, 

am  weary  of  my  life  because  of  the 
daughters  of  Heth : if  Jacob  take  a 
wife  of  the  daughters  of  Heth,  such 
as  these  which  are  of  the  daughters  of 
the  land,  what  good  shall  my  life 
do  me? 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

I Isaac  hlesseth  “Jacob,  and sendeth  him  to  Padan- 
aram.  6 Esau  marrieth  Mahalath  the  daugh- 
ter of  Ishmael.  10  The  vision  of  Jacob's 
ladder.  The  stone  of  Bet h-el.  20  Jacob's 

V07U. 


« Hos.  12. 
12. 


+ Heb. 
a/i  a sse ni- 
tty of 

people. 


AND  Isaac  called  Jacob,  and  bless- 
£\_  ed  him,  and  charged  him,  and 
said  unto  him.  Thou  shalt  not  take  a 
wife  of  the  daughters  of  Canaan. 

2 Arise,  go  to  Padan-aram,  to 
the  house  of  Bethuel  thy  mother’s 
father;  and  take  thee  a wife  from 
thence  of  the  daughters  of  Laban  thy 
mother’s  brother. 

3 And  God  Almighty  bless  thee, 
and  make  thee  fruitful,  and  multiply 
thee,  that  thou  mayest  be  ^ a multi- 
tude of  people; 

4 And  give  thee  the  blessing  of 
Abraham,  to  thee,  and  to  thy  seed 
with  thee;  that  thou  mayest  inherit 


6s 


the  land  ^wherein  thou  art  a stranger,  t Heb. 
which  God  gave  unto  Abraham.  fouriiTgs. 

5 And  Isaac  sent  away  Jacob ; 
and  he  went  to  Padan-aram  unto 
Laban,  son  of  Bethuel  the  Syrian, 
the  brother  of  Rebekah,  Jacob’s  and 
Esau’s  mother. 

6 ^ When  Esau  saw  that  Isaac 
had  blessed  Jacob,  and  sent  him  away  . 
to  Padan-aram,  to  take  him  a wife 
from  thence ; and  that  as  he  blessed 
him  he  gave  him  a charge,  saying. 

Thou  shalt  not  take  a wife  of  the 
daughters  of  Canaan ; 

7 And  that  Jacob  obeyed  his  father 
and  his  mother,  and  was  gone  to 
Padan-aram ; 

8 And  Esau  seeing  that  the  daugh- 

ters of  Canaan  ^ pleased  not  Isaac  his  ^ 
rather ; in  the 

9 Then  went  Esau  unto  Ishmael, 
and  took  unto  the  wives  which  he 
had  Mahalath  the  daughter  of  Ish- 
mael Abraham’s  son,  the  sister  of 
Nebajoth,  to  be  his  wife. 

10  ^ And  Jacob  went  out  from 
Beer-sheba,  and  went  toward  ^Haran. 

1 1 And  he  lighted  upon  a certain  Ckarran 
place,  and  tarried  there  all  night. 


and  misery  which  at  once  followed;  Isaac 
and  Rebekah  left  in  their  old  age  by  both 
their  children;  idols  become  scourges;  Esau 
disappointed  and  disinherited ; Jacob  banished 
from  his  hom.e,  destined  to  a long  servitude 
and  a life  of  disquietude  and  suffering.  Even 
those,  whom  God  chooses  and  honours,  can- 
not sin  against  Him  without  reaping,  at  least 
in  this  world,  the  fruit  of  evil  doings  (i  Cor. 
xi.  32). 

Chap.  XXVIII.  1.  Isaac  called  Jacob, 
and  blessed  him\  Isaac  has  learned  that  God 
had  decreed  that  Jacob  should  be  the  heir 
of  the  promises,  the  recipient  of  the  blessings. 
Accordingly,  in  v.  4,  he  invokes  on  Jacob 
“the  blessing  of  Abraham,”  that  “he  and  his 
seed  should  inherit  the  land  of  his  sojourning,” 
and  no  doubt  also  the  spiritual  blessings  pro- 
nounced on  the  descendants  of  Abraham. 

2.  Padan-aram]  See  on  xxiv.  10,  xxv. 
20,  xxvii.  43. 

Bethuel]  This  looks  as  if  Bethuel  were  still 
living,  not  as  the  Jewish  tradition  says,  that 
he  died  before  Isaac’s  marriage.  It  is  more 
likely  that  he  was  either  naturally  of  weak 


character,  or  enfeebled  by  age.  (See  on  ch. 
xxiv.  50.) 

3.  God  Almighty]  “ El-Shaddai.”  It  was 
under  this  name  that  God  appeared  to  Abra- 
ham, ch.  xvii.  I,  and  gave  him  the  blessing  to 
which  Isaac  now  refers. 

4.  the  land  ojuherem  thou  art  a stranger] 
Lit.  the  land  of  thy  sojournings. 

8.  pleased  not]  Lit.  were  evil  in  the 
eyes  of. 

11.  he  lighted  upon  a certain  place]  Lit.  he 
lighted  on  the  place.  The  definite 
article  probably  indicates  either  that  it  was  the 
place  appointed  by  God,  or  that  it  was  the 
place  afterwards  so  famous  from  God’s  reve- 
lation to  Jacob.  We  may  well  picture  to  our- 
selves the  feelings  of  Jacob  on  this  night,  a 
solitary  wanderer  from  his  father's  house, 
going  back  from  the  land  of  promise,  con- 
scious of  sin  and  in  the  midst  of  danger,  with 
a dark  and  doubtful  future  before  him,  yet 
hitherto  having  always  cherished  the  hope  of 
being  the  chosen  of  God  to  bear  the  honours 
and  privileges  of  his  house,  to  have  the  inherit- 
ance promised  to  Abraham,  and  now  too  wit) 


1 66 


GENESIS.  XXVIII. 


[v.  12 20. 


because  the  sun  was  set ; and  he 
took  of  the  stones  of  that  place,  and 
put  them  for  his  pillows,  and  lay  down 
in  that  place  to  sleep. 

12  And  he  dreamed,  and  behold  a 
ladder  set  up  on  the  earth,  and  the 
top  of  it  reached  to  heaven:  and  be- 
hold the  angels  of  God  ascending  and 
. descending  on  it. 

< chap. 33.  13  ‘'And,  behold,  the  Lord  stood 

& ^8. 3.  above  it,  and  said,  I am  the  Lord 
God  of  Abraham  thy  father,  and  the 
God  of  Isaac : the  land  whereon  thou 
liest,  to  thee  will  I give  it,  and  to  thy 
seed ; 

14  And  thy  seed  shall  be  as  the 
t Heb.  dust  of  the  earth,  and  thou  shalt 
^spread  abroad  ‘^to  the  west,  and  to 
^j)eut.  12.  north,  and  to  the 

^ chap.  12.  south:  and  in  thee  and  ^ in  thy  seed 
& 18. 18.  shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  be 


15  And,  behold,  I am  with  thee, 
and  will  keep  thee  in  all  places  whi- 
ther thou  goest,  and  will  bring  thee 
again  into  this  land;  for  I will  not 
leave  thee,  until  I have  done  that 
which  I have  spoken  to  thee  of. 

16  ^ And  Jacob  awaked  out  of  his 
sleep,  and  he  said.  Surely  the  Lord  is 
in  this  place ; and  I knew  it  not. 

17  And  he  was  afraid,  and  said. 

How  dreadful  is  this  place ! this  is 
none  other  but  the  house  of  God, 
and  this  is  the  gate  of  heaven. 

18  And  Jacob  rose  up  early  in  the 
morning,  and  took  the  stone  that  he 
had  put  for  his  pillows,  and  set  it  up 
for  a pillar,  and  poured  oil  upon  the 
top  of  it. 

19  And  he  called  the  name  of  that 
place  "Beth-ei:  but  the  name  of  that ", 

City  was  called  Luz  at  the  first.  o/God. 

20  And  Jacob  vowed  a vow,  say- 


the  words  of  Isaac’s  blessing  just  ringing  in 
his  ears.  Whether  would  fear  or  faith  prevail  ? 

12.  a ladder']  God  takes  this  opportu- 
nity to  impress  Jacob  more  deeply  with  the 
sense  of  His  presence,  to  encourage  him  with 
promises  of  protection  and  to  reveal  to  him 
His  purpose  of  mercy  and  love. 

The  ladder  might  only  indicate  that  there 
was  a way  from  God  to  man,  and  that  man 
might  by  God's  help  mount  up  by  it  to  hea- 
ven, that  angels  went  up  from  man  to  God, 
and  came  down  from  God  to  man,  and  that 
there  was  a continual  providence  watching 
over  the  servants  of  God.  So  the  dream  would 
teach  and  comfort  the  heart  of  the  dreamer. 
But  we  cannot  doubt,  that  there  was  a deeper 
meaning  in  the  vision  thus  vouchsafed  to  the 
heir  of  the  promises,  in  the  hour  of  his  greatest 
desolation,  and  when  the  sense  of  sin  must 
have  been  most  heavy  on  his  soul.  Our  Lord 
Himself  teaches  (John  i.  51),  that  the  ladder 
signified  the  Son  of  Man,  Him,  who  was  now 
afresh  promised  as  to  be  of  the  Seed  of  Jacob 
(v.  14);  Him,  by  whom  alone  we  go  to  God 
(John  xiv.  6)  ; who  is  the  way  to  heaven,  and 
who  has  now  gone  there  to  prepare  a place 
for  us. 

13.  the  Lord  stood  aho've  //]  Onkelos 
renders  “the  glory  of  the  Lord.” 

16.  Surely  the  Lord  is  in  this  place]  It 
is  possible  that  Jacob  may  not  have  had  quite 
s<)  intelligent  a conviction  of  God’s  omnipre- 
sence as  (Christians  have;  but  it  is  apparent 
throughout  the  p.atriarchal  history  that  special 
sanctity  was  attached  to  special  places.  This 


feeling  is  encouraged  by  the  highest  sanction 
in  Ex.  iii.  5. 

18.  set  it  up  for  a pillar^  and  poured  oil 
upon  the  top  of  it]  This  was  probably  the  most 
ancient  and  simplest  form  of  temple  or  place 
for  religious  worship;  excepting  the  altar  of 
ston(!S  or  earth  fora  burnt  sacrifice.  Whether 
this  is  the  first  example  of  such  an  erection  we 
cannot  judge.  It  was  a very  natural  and  ob- 
vious way  of  marking  the  sanctity  of  a spot; 
as  in  Christian  times  wayside  crosses  and 
the  like  have  been  set  up  so  fi-equently.  The 
pouring  oil  on  it  was  a significant  rite,  though 
what  may  have  been  the  full  significance  to 
Jacob’s  mind  it  is  not  easy  to  s;iy.  St  Augus- 
tine (‘De  G.  D.’  XVI.  38)  says  that  it  was 
not  that  he  might  sacrifice  to  the  stone  or  v/or- 
ship  it,  but  that  as  Christ  is  named  from  chrism^ 
or  unction,  so  there  was  a great  mystery  (^4- 
ernmentum)  in  this  anointing  of  the  stone  with 
oil.  The  constant  connection  in  religious 
thought  between  unction  and  sanctification 
seems  a more  probable  solution  of  the  ques- 
tion. 

19.  Beth-el]  Abraham  had  built  an  altar 
in  this  neighbourhood  (xii.  8,  xiii.  4);  and 
it  is  possible  that  the  spot  thus  sanctified 
may  have  been  the  very  place  which  Jacob 
lighted  on  (v.  ii),  and  which  he  found  to  be 
the  house  of  God  and  the  gate  of  heaven. 

The  place  consecrated  perhaps  first  by 
Abraham's  altar,  and  afterwards  by  Jacob’s 
vision  and  pillar,  was  plainly  distinct  from  the 
city  which  was  “called  Luz  at  the  first,”  and 
which  afterwards  received  the  name  of  Bethel 


V.  21  — 3.] 


GENESIS.  XXVIII.  XXIX. 


167 


ing,  If  God  will  be  with  me,  and 
will  keep  me  in  this  way  that  I go, 
and  will  give  me  bread  to  eat,  and 
raiment  to  put  on, 

21  So  that  I come  again  to  my 
father’s  house  in  peace ; then  shall  the 
Lord  be  my  God: 

22  And  this  stone,  which  I have 
set  for  a pillar,  shall  be  God’s  house : 
and  of  all  that  thou  shalt  give  me  I 
will  surely  give  the  tenth  unto  thee. 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

I yacob  cometh  to  the  well  of  Haran.  9 He 
takcth  acquaintance  of  Rachel.  1 3 Laban 


enterfaineth  him.  18  facob  covenantcth  for 
Rachel.  23  He  is  deceived  with  Leah.  2^  He 
7narrieth  also  Rachel,  and  serveth  for  her 
sevc7t  years  i7iore.  32  Leah  beareth  Reuben, 

33  Simeon,  34  Levi,  35  and  fudah. 

Then  Jacob  ^went  on  his  jour- 

ney,  and  came  into  the  land  of  feet. 
the  ^ people  of  the  east.  [^itdren 

2 And  he  looked,  and  behold  a 
well  in  the  field,  and,  lo,  there  were 
three  flocks  of  sheep  lying  by  it;  for 
out  of  that  well  they  watered  the 
flocks:  and  a great  stone  was  upon 
the  well’s  mouth. 

3 And  thither  were  all  the  flocks 


from  its  proximity  to  the  sanctuary.  So  late 
as  the  time  of  Joshua  (see  Josh.  xvi.  i,  2)  the 
two  places  were  distinct.  When  the  tribe  of 
Joseph  took  the  city  (Judg.  i.  21 — 26),  they 
appear  to  have  given  to  the  city  the  name  of 
Bethel,  formerly  attaching  only  to  the  sanc- 
tuary, and  thenceforward,  the  name  Luz 
having  been  transferred  to  another  town,  the 
old  town  of  Luz  is  always  called  Bethel. 
According  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (‘  O no- 
mast.’ art.  /Bai^rjX)  it  lay  about  twelve  miles 
from  Jerusalem  on  the  road  to  Sichem.  Its 
ruins  are  still  called  by  the  name  of  Beitin. 
The  rocky  character  of  the  hills  around,  and 
the  stony  nature  of  the  soil,  have  been  much 
noted  by  travellers  (see  Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  ii. 
pp.  127 — 130,  and  Stanley,  ‘Sinai  and  Pales- 
tine,’ pp.  217 — 223).  It  has  been  thought  by 
many  that  this  act  of  Jacob,  in  setting  up  a 
stone  to  mark  a sacred  spot,  was  the  origin  of 
Cromlechs  and  all  sacred  stones.  Certainly 
we  find  in  later  ages  the  custom  of  having 
stones,  and  those  too  anointed  with  oil,  as 
objects  of  idolatrous  worship.  Clem.  Alex. 
(‘Stromat.’  Lib.  vii.  p.  713)  speaks  of  “wor- 
shipping every  oily  stone,”  and  Arnobius, 
(‘  Adv.  Gentes,’  Lib.  i.  39),  in  like  manner, 
refers  to  the  worshipping  of  “ a stone  smeared 
with  oil,  as  though  there  were  in  it  a present 
power.”  It  has  been  conjectured  farther  that  the 
name  Batulia,  given  to  stones,  called  animated 
stones  (\ldoi  e/xyp-vyoi),  by  the  Phoenicians 
(Euseb.  ‘ Praep.  Evang.’  i.  10)  was  derived 
from  this  name  of  Bethel.  (See  Spencer,  ‘ De 
Legg.’  I.  2;  Bochart,  ‘ Canaan,’  ii.  2.)  These 
Baetulia,  however,  were  meteoric  stones,  and 
denved  their  sanctity  from  the  belief  that  they 
had  fallen  from  heaven:  and  the  name  has 
probably  but  a fancied  likeness  to  the  name 
Bethel.  Still  the  connection  of  the  subse- 
quent worship  of  stones  with  the  primitive 
and  pious  use  of  them  to  mark  places  of  wor- 
ship is  most  probably  a real  connection.  The 
erection  of  all  such  stones  for  worship  was 
strictly  forbidden  in  later  times  (see  Lev.  xxvi. 


i;  Deut.  xvi.  22,  &c.).  What  was  good  in 
its  origin  had  become  evil  in  its  abuse. 

21.  th>en  shall  the  Lord  be  my  Gocr\ 
So  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Syr.;  but  the  Arab, 
and  several  of  the  Hebrew  commentators  put 
these  words  in  the  protasis;  “And  if  the 
Lord  will  be  my  God,  then  shall  this  stone 
be  God’s  house,”  &c.  The  Hebrew  is  am- 
biguous, and  so  is  the  Targum  of  Onkelos: 
but  the  change  of  construction  and  of  tense 
certainly  appears  to  be  at  the  beginning  of 
V.  22,  for  all  the  verbs,  beginning  with  “will 
keep  me”  in  v.  20  to  the  end  of  v.  21,  are  in 
the  same  form  (the  perfect  with  vau  conver- 
sive);  and  in  verse  22  there  is  a change  to  the 
future.  If  this  be  so,  the  whole  passage  will 
then  run,  “ If  God  will  be  with  me  and  will 
keep  me  in  the  way  that  I go,  and  will  give 
me  bread  to  eat,  and  laiment  to  put  on,  and 
if  I come  again  to  my  father’s  house  in  peace, 
and  if  the  Lord  will  be  my  God,  then  shall 
this  stone,  which  I have  set  for  a pillar,  be 
the  house  of  God,  and  of  all  that  Thou  shalt 
give  me,  I will  surely  give  a tenth  unto  Thee.” 
The  fulfilment  of  this  vow  is  related  in  ch. 
XXXV.  15,  where  God  again  appears  to  Jacob 
on  his  return  from  Padan-aram,  and  Jacob 
restores  the  pillar  which  he  had  before  set  up, 
’and  again  solemnly  gives  it  the  name  of  Beth- 
el, “the  house  of  God”  (see  Quarry,  ‘on 
Genesis,’  p.  486). 

22.  give  the  tenth  unto  thee]  In  ch.  xiv.  20, 
we  have  an  instance  of  Abraham  giving  tithes 
to  Melchizedek.  Here  we  have  another  proof 
that  the  duty  of  giving  a tenth  to  God  was 
recognized  before  the  giving  of  the  Law. 

Chap.  XXIX.  1.  Then  Jacob,  &c.]  Lit. 
“ Then  Jacob  lifted  up  his  feet  and  came  into 
the  land  of  the  children  of  the  East,”  i.e.  into 
Mesopotamia,  which  lies  East  of  Judaea. 

2.  he  looked,  and  behold  a nuell]  Cp. 
ch.  xxiv.  II — 15.  The  similarity  of  the  two 
stories  results  from  the  unvarying  customs  of 


i68 


GENESIS.  XXIX. 


gathered:  and  they  rolled  the  stone 
from  the  well’s  mouth,  and  watered 
the  sheep,  and  put  the  stone  again 
upon  the  well’s  mouth  in  his  place. 

4 And  Jacob  said  unto  them.  My 
brethren,  whence  be  ye?  And  they 
said.  Of  Ha  ran  are  we. 

5 And  he  said  unto  them.  Know 
ye  Laban  the  son  of  Nahor?  And 
they  said.  We  know  him. 

tHeb.  6 And  he  said  unto  them,'  ’'Is  he 
'well  ? And  they  said.  He  is  well : 

/urn?  behold,  Rachel  his  daughter  com- 

eth  with  the  sheep. 

t Heb.  7 And  he  said,  Lo,  ^ it  is  yet  high 

neither  is  it  time  that  the  cattle 
should  be  gathered  together:  water  ye 
the  sheep,  and  go  and  feed  the?n. 

8 And  they  said,  W e cannot,  until 
all  the  flocks  be  gathered  together, 
and  till  they  roll  the  stone  from  the 
well’s  mouth;  then  we  water  the 
sheep. 

9 ^ And  while  he  yet  spake  with 
them,  Rachel  came  with  her  father’s 
sheep:  for  she  kept  them. 

10  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Ja- 
cob saw  Rachel  the  daughter  of  La- 
ban his  mother’s  brother,  and  the 
sheep  of  Laban  his  mother’s  brother, 
that  Jacob  went  near,  and  rolled  the 
stone  from  the  well’s  mouth,  and  wa- 


tered the  flock  of  Laban  his  mother’s 
brother. 

11  And  Jacob  kissed  Rachel,  and 
lifted  up  his  voice,  and  wept. 

12  And  Jacob  told  Rachel  that  he 
was  her  father’s  brother,  and  that  he 
was  Rebekah’s  son:  and  she  pan  and 
told  her  father. 


a month 
of  days. 


13  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  La- 
ban heard  the  ^ tidings  of  Jacob  his  t Heb. 
sister’s  son,  that  he  ran  to  meet  him, 

and  embraced  him,  and  kissed  him, 
and  brought  him  to  his  house.  And 
he  told  Laban  all  these  things. 

14  And  Laban  said  to  him,  Surely 
thou  art  my  bone  and  my  flesh.  And 

he  abode  with  him  ^ the  space  of  a t Heb. 
month. 

15  ^ And  Laban  said  unto  Jacob, 
Because  thou  art  my  brother,  shouldest 
thou  therefore  serve  me  for  nought? 
tell  me,  what  shall  thy  wages  be? 

1 6 And  Laban  had  two  daughters : 
the  name  of  the  elder  was  Leah,  and 
the  name  of  the  younger  was  Rachel. 

17  Leah  was  tender  eyed;  but 
Rachel  was  beautiful  and  well  fa- 
voured. 

18  And  Jacob  loved  Rachel;  and 
said,  I will  serve  thee  seven  years  for 
Rachel  thy  younger  daughter. 

19  And  Laban  said,  It  is  better 


the  East,  and  from  the  natural  halting  place- 
being  a well  outside  a city. 

5.  Lahan  the  son  of  Nahor]  /.<?.’ the  de- 
scendant, the  grandson  of  Nahor.  Just  as  in 
V.  12,  Jacob  calls  himself  the  brother  of  La- 
ban, being  in  truth  his  nephew.  The  omis- 
sion of  Bethuel  is  here  again  observable. 

6.  Is  he  ’uselll]  Lit.  “ Is  it  peace  to  him  ? 

8.  IVe  cannot]  Probably  because  there 
was  an  agreement  not  to  roll  away  the  stone 
till  all  were  asseml)led,  not  because  the  stone 
was  too  heavy  for  three  shepherds  to  move, 

9.  Rachel  came  nxjith  her  father  s sheep] 
So  Lx.  ii.  16,  the  daughters  of  Reuel,  the 
priest  of  .Midian,  led  their  father’s  sheep  lo 
water.  And  even  now  among  the  Arabs  it  is 
not  beneath  the  daughter  of  an  Emir  to  water 
the  sheep. 

13.  he  told  Lahan  all  these  thinp;s]  i.e. 
probably  the  cause  of  his  exile  from  home,  his 
father’s  blessing  and  command  to  him  to  marry 
a wife  of  his  mother's  kindred,  and  the  va- 
rious events  of  his  jouniey. 


14.  the  space  of  a month]  Lit.  “a  month 
of  days;”  the  word  “days”  being  frequent- 
ly added  to  a note  of  time,  as  we  might 
say  “ a month  long,”  or  as  here  in  the  Autho- 
ri'/ed  Version,  “the  space  of  a month.” 

17.  tender  eyeef  i.e.  weak  eyed,  so  LXX., 
Vulg.,  &c, 

15.  7 <^viU  serve  thee  seven  years  for 
Rachel]  In  the  case  of  Isaac  and  Rebekah, 
Abraham’s  servant  gives  handsome  presents  to 
Rebekah,  ch.  xxiv.  53,  the  Eastern  custom  at 
marriages.  Jacob  could  give  neither  presents 
nor  dowry,  for  he  was  a bigitive  from  his  fa- 
ther’s house,  and  describes  himself  as  having 
passed  over  Jordan  with  only  his  staff  (ch. 
xxxii.  10).  He  proposes  therefore  to  serve 
I.aban  seven  years,  if  he  will  give  him  his 
daughter  to  wife,  a proposal,  which  Laban’s 
grasping  disposition  prompts  him  to  accept, 
even . from  one  whom  he  calls  brother  and 
of  his  own  bone  and  flesh  (vv.  14,  15). 

19.  It  is  better  that  I should  five  her  to 
thee.,  &;c.]  It  has  always  been  the  custom 


V.  20— 33-] 


GENESIS.  XXIX. 


169 


tHeb. 

place. 


that  I give  her  to  thee,  than  that  I 
should  o;ive  her  to  another  man : abide 
with  me. 

20  And  Jacob  served  seven  years 
for  Rachel ; and  they  seemed  unto 
him  but  a few  days,  for  the  love  he 
had  to  her. 

21  ^ And  Jacob  said  unto  Laban, 
Give  me  my  wife,  for  my  days  are 
fulfilled,  that  I may  go  in  unto  her. 

22  And  Laban  gathered  together  all 
the  men  of  the  place,  and  made  a feast. 

23  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  even- 
ing, that  he  took  Leah  his  daughter, 
and  brought  her  to  him ; and  he  went 
in  unto  her. 

24  And  Laban  gave  unto  his  daugh- 
ter Leah  Zilpah  his  maid  for  an  hand- 
maid. 

25  And  it  came  to  pass,  that  in  the 
morning,  behold,  it  was  Leah:  and 
he  said  to  Laban,  What  is  this  thou 
hast  done  unto  me?  did  not  I serve 
with  thee  for  Rachel  ? wherefore  then 
hast  thou  beguiled  me  ? 

26  And  Laban  said.  It  must  not 
be  so  done  in  our  ^country,  to  give 
the  younger  before  the  firstborn. 


27  Fulfil  her  week,  and  we  will 
give  thee  this  also  for  the  service  which 
thou  shalt  serve  with  me  yet  seven 
other  years. 

28  And  Jacob  did  so,  and  fulfilled 
her  week:  and  he  gave  him  Rachel 
his  daughter  to  wife  also. 

29  And  Laban  gave  to  Rachel  his 
daughter  Bilhah  his  handmaid  to  be 
her  maid. 

30  And  he  went  in  also  unto  Ra- 
chel, and  he  loved  also  Rachel  more 
than  Leah,  and  served  with  him  yet 
seven  other  years. 

31  ^ And  when  the  Lord  saw 
that  Leah  was  hated,  he  opened  her 
womb:  but  Rachel  was  barren. 

32  And  Leah  conceived,  and  bare 
a son,  and  she  called  his  name  " Reu-  " 
ben:  for  she  said.  Surely  the  Lord 
hath  looked  upon  my  affliction ; now 
therefore  my  husband  will  love  me. 

33  And  she  conceived  again,  and 
bare  a son;  and  said.  Because  the 
Lord  hath  heard  that  I was  hated, 
he  hath  therefore  given  me  this  son 
also:  and  she  called  his  name  “ Si- 

hear  mg. 

meon. 


with  Eastern  tribes  to  prefer  marrying  among 
their  own  kindred. 

20.  but  a fenv  days.,  for  the  lo^ae  he  had 
to  her'\  He  loved  Rachel  so  much,  that  he 
valued  the  labour  of  seven  years  as  though 
it  were  the  labour  of  but  few  days  in  com- 
parison with  the  great  prize,  which  that  la- 
bour was  to  bring  him. 

24.  Zilpah  his  maid  for  an  handmaid^ 
So  ch.  xxiv.  61. 

25.  it  ^'as  Leah'\  This  deception  was 
possible,  because  there  appears  to  have  been 
no  religious  or  other ‘solemn  ceremony,  in 
which  the  bride  was  presented  to  the  bride- 
groom, and  the  veil  in  which  brides  were 
veiled  was  so  long  and  close  that  it  concealed, 
not  only  the  face,  but  much  of  the  figure  also. 

27.  Fulfil  her  <u,eek'\  i.e.  celebrate  the 
marriage  feast  for  a week  with  Leah  (cp. 
Judg.  xiv.  12);  and  after  that  we  will  give 
thee  Rachel  also.  “ It  was  not  after  another 
week  of  years  that  he  should  receive  Rachel 
to  wife;  but  after  the  seven  days  of  the  first 
wife’s  nuptials.”  (St  Jerome,  ‘ Qu.  Hebr.’ 
in  loc.)  It  has  been  c’bserved  that  the 
fraud  practised  by  Laban  on  Jacob  was  a fit 
penalty  for  the  fraud  practised  by  Jacob  on 


Isaac  and  Esau.  The  polygamy  of  Jacob 
must  be  explained  on  the  same  principle  as 
that  of  Abraham.  It  had  not  yet  been  ex- 
pressly forbidden  by  the  revealed  law  of  God. 
The  marriage  of  two  sisters  also  was  after- 
wards condemned  (Lev.  xviii,  18),  but  as  yet 
there  had  been  no  such  prohibition. 

31.  wflj  hated'l  i.  e.  less  loved  (cp.  Mai. 

i.  3). 

32.  Reuben']  i.e.  “Behold  a son.”  The 
words  which  follow  are  but  one  of  those  plays 
on  a name  so  general  in  these  early  days; 
they  do  not  give  the  etymology  of  the  name; 
they  have  however  led  some  to  think  that  the 
meaning  of  “Reuben”  is  rather  “the  son  of 
vision,”  or  as  Jerome  interprets  it,  “the  son 
of  God’s  gracious  regard, respectus gra- 
tuiti.  The  Syr.  and  Josephus  give  the  name 
as  Reubel,  the  latter  explaining  it  as  “ the  pity 
of  God”  (‘Ant.’  I.  19.  8),  which  is  supported 
by  Michaelis,  though  it  is  obviously  a corrupt 
reading  (see  Rosenm.  in  loc.  and  Gesen. 
P.  1247). 

33.  Simeon]  i.e.  “hearing.”  The  birth  of 
her  first  son  convinces  her  that  God  hath 
seen  her,  the  second  that  God  hath  heard 
her. 


170 


GENESIS.  XXIX.  XXX. 


[v.  34—14- 


I That  is, 
jouted. 

Matt.  I. 

2. 

II  That  is, 
praise. 

+ Heb. 
stood  from 
bearing. 


34  And  she  conceived  again,  and 
bare  a son;  and  said,  Now  this  time 
will  my  husband  be  joined  unto  me, 
because  I have  born  him  three  sons: 
therefore  was  his  name  called  " Levi. 

35  And  she  conceived  again,  and 
bare  a son:  and  she  said,  Now  will  I 
praise  the  Lord:  therefore  she  called 
his  name  Judah;  and  Meft  bearing. 

CHAPTER  XXX. 


I Rachel,  in  grief  for  her  barrenttess,  giveth 
Bilhah  her  maid  unto  Jacob.  5 She  beareth 
Dan  and  Naphtali.  9 Leah  giveth  Zilpah 
her  maid,  -who  beareth  Gad  and  Asher.  14 
Reuben  fijideth  mandrakes,  with  which  Leah 
buyeth  her  husband  of  Rachel.  17  Leak  bear- 
, eth  Issachar,  Zelndun,  and  Dinah.  22  Rachel 
beareth  Joseph.  25  Jacob  desireth  to  depart, 
'll  Labati  stayeth  him  on  a neiu  covenant. 
37  Jacob's  policy,  whereby  he  became  rich. 


i Heb. 
he  built  by 
her. 


And  when  Rachel  saw  that  she 
bare  Jacob  no  children,  Rachel 
envied  her  sister;  and  said  unto  Ja- 
cob, Give  me  children,  or  else  I die. 

2 And  Jacob’s  anger  was  kindled 
against  Rachel : and  he  said.  Am  I in 
God’s  stead,  who  hath  withheld  from 
thee  the  fruit  of  the  womb? 

3 And  she  said.  Behold  my  maid 
Bilhah,  go  in  unto  her;  and  she  shall 
bear  upon  my  knees,  that  I may  also 
^have  children  by  her. 


4.  And  she  gave  him  Bilhah  her 
handmaid  to  wife:  and  Jacob  went 
in  unto  her. 

5 And  Bilhah  conceived,  and  bare 
Jacob  a son. 

6 And  Rachel  said,  God  hath 
judged  me,  and  hath  also  heard  my 
voice,  and  hath  given  me  a son : there- 
fore called  she  his  name  "Dan. 

7 And  Bilhah  Rachel’s  maid  con-'^ 
ceived  again,  and  bare  Jacob  a second 
son. 

8 And  Rachel  said.  With  ^ 

wrestlings  have  I wrestled  with  my  o/God. 
sister,  and  I have  prevailed:  and  she 
called  his  name  ""Naphtali.  a That  is, 

9 When  Leah  saw  that  she  had  left 

bean'ng,  she  took  Zilpah  her  maid,  and  Mau.' 4^^’ 
gave  her  Jacob  to  wife.  \3’ 

° A 1 1 T 1 > -11  Nephtha- 

10  And  Zilpah  Leahs  maid  bare 
Jacob  a son. 

1 1 And  Leah  said,  A troop  cometh  : 

and  she  called  his  name  "Gad.  a That  is, 

12  And  Zilpah  Leah’s  maid 
Jacob  a second  son. 

1 3 And  Leah  said,  ^ Happy  am  I,  for 

the  daughters  will  call  me  blessed  : and  happiness. 
she  called  his  name  " Asher.  ^''i^py 

14  ^ And  Reuben  went  in  the  days 
of  wheat  harvest,  and  found  man- 
drakes in  the  field,  and  brought  them 


34.  Le'vi\  “Association”  or  “associated.” 

35.  Judalo]  i.e.  “praised”  (from  the  Ho- 
phal  future  of  JadafS). 

Chap.  XXX.  3.  that  I may  also  have 
children  by  her']  Lit.  “that  I may  be  built  up 
by  her.”  (See  on  ch.  xvi.  2.) 

6.  Dan]  i.e.  “judge.” 

8.  With  great  ajorestUngs]  Lit.  “with 
wrestlings  of  (Jod.”  The  LXX.  renders  “ God 
has  helped  me,”  and  Onkelos,  “God  has  re* 
ceived  my  prayer.”  So  virtually  the  Syriac. 
Though  the  addition  of  the  name  of  God 
often  exprc'sses  a superlative,  yet  “wrestling” 
being  a type  of  prayer,  it  is  most  probable 
that  in  this  passage  the  allusion  is  to  Rachel’s 
earnest  striving  in  prayer  with  God  for  the 
blessing  of  offspring.  (So  Hengst.,  Del., 
Keil.)  Above,  v,  1,  Rachel  had  manifested 
impatience  and  neglect  of  prayer,  seeking  from 
Jacob  what  only  could  be  given  of  God. 
Jacob’s  remonstrance  with  her,  v.  2,  may  have 
directed  her  to  wiser  and  better  thoughts. 

11.  A troop  cometh]  Rather,  Good  for- 


tune cometh,  or,  “in  good  fortune,”  i.e. 
happily,  prosperously.  The  rendering  of  the 
Authorized  Version  is  favoured  by  the  Sama- 
ritan version,  and  has  been  supposed  to  be  in 
accordance  with  ch.  xlix.  19.  The  latter,  how- 
ever, may  have  no  reference  to  the  derivation, 
but  be  only  the  common  Oriental  play  upon  a 
word.  The  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Syr.,  Onk.,  Jerus., 
Pseudo-Jon.,  all  interpret  Gad  to  mean  “suc- 
cess,” “good  fortune,”  “prosperity.”  So 
Gesen.,  Rosenm.,  Knobel,  Del,  Keil,  &c. 

13.  Happy  am  I,  &c.]  Lit.  in  my  hap- 
piness {am  I),  for  the  daughters  call 
me  happy;  and  she  called  his  name 
Asher,  i.  e.  happy. 

14.  mandrakes]  So  with  great  unani- 
mity the  ancient  versions  and  most  of  the 
Jewish  commentators.  There  is  little  doubt 
that  the  plant  was  really  the  atropa  mandra- 
gora,  a species  closely  allied  to  the  deadly 
nightshade  {atropa  belladonna].  It  is  not  un- 
common in  Palestine  (Tristram,  pp.  103,  104). 
It  is  said  to  be  a narcotic,  and  to  have  stupefy- 
ing and  even  intoxicating  properties.  It  has 


GENESIS.  XXX. 


V.  15—25.] 


171 


unto  his  mother  Leah.  Then  Rachel 
said  to  Leah,  Give  me,  I pray  thee, 
of  thy  son’s  mandrakes. 

15  And  she  said  unto  her.  Is  it  a 
small  matter  that  thou  hast  taken  my 
husband  ? and  wouldest  thou  take 
away  my  son’s  mandrakes  also.?  And 
Rachel  said.  Therefore  he  shall  lie 
with  thee  to  night  for  thy  son’s  man- 
drakes. 

16  And  Jacob  came  out  of  the 
field  in  the  evening,  and  Leah  went 
out  to  meet  him,  and  said.  Thou 
must  come  in  unto  me;  for  surely 
I have  hired  thee  with  my  son’s  man- 
drakes. And  he  lay  with  her  that 
night. 

17  And  God  hearkened  unto  Leah, 
and  she  conceived,  and  bare  Jacob  the 
fifth  son. 

18  And  Leah  said,  God  hath  given 
me  my  hire,  because  I have  given  my 


maiden  to  my  husband  : and  she  called 
his  name  “Issachar. 

19  And  Leah  conceived  again,  and 
bare  Jacob  the  sixth  son. 

20  And  Leah  said,  God  hath  en- 
dued me  with  a good  dowry;  now 
will  my  husband  dwell  with  me,  be- 
cause I have  born 'him  six  sons:  and 
she  called  his  name  "^Zebulun. 

2 1 And  afterwards  she  bare  a daugh- 
ter, and  called  her  name  ” Dinah. 

22  ^ And  God  remembered  Rachel, 
and  God  hearkened  to  her,  and  opened 
her  womb. 

23  And  she  conceived,  and  bare  a 
son ; and  said,  God  hath  taken  away 
my  reproach  : 

24  And  she  called  his  name  "Jo- 
seph ; and  said.  The  Lord  shall  add 
to  me  another  son. 

25  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
Rachel  had  born  Joseph,  that  Jacob 


li  That  is, 
an  hire. 


II  That  is, 
dwelling, 
b Called, 
Matt.  4. 

Znbnlon. 

U That  i.s, 
judgment. 


II  That  is, 
adding. 


broad  leaves  and  green  apples,  which  become 
pale  yellow  when  ripe,  with  a strong  tuberous 
bifid  root,  in  which  Pythagoras  discerned  a 
likeness  to  the  human  form,  whence  many 
ancient  fables  concerning  it.  They  are  still 
found  ripe  about  the  time  of  wheat  harvest 
on  the  lower  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  Hermon. 
The  apples  are  said  to  produce  dizziness;  the 
Arabs  believe  them  to  be  exhilarating  and  sti- 
mulating even  to  insanity ; hence  the  name 
tuffab  el  jan.  “apples  of  the  jan”  (Thomson, 
‘Land  and  Book,’  p.  577).  The  ancients  be- 
lieved them  calculated  to  produce  fruitfulness, 
and  they  were  used  as  philtres  to  conciliate 
love,  hence  their  name  in  Hebrew,  dudaim^ 
i.e.  love-apples.  Rachel  evidently  shared  in 
this  superstitious  belief.  (See  Heid.  Tom.  ii. 
Ex.  xix. ; Winer,  ‘R.  W.  B.’  voc.  Abram; 
Ges.  ‘Thes.’ p.  324 ; Rosenm.  in  loc. ; Smith’s 
‘Diet.’  voc.  mandrake').,  &c. 

18.  Issachar']  i.  e.  “ there  is  a reward.” 

20.  Zebulun]  I.e.  “dwelling,”  derived  from 
%abal.,  to  dwell,  with  a play  on  the  word 
Zabad.,  “to  give,  to  endow.” 

21.  Dinah]  i.e.  “judgment.”  It  is  thought 
that  Jacob  had  other  daughters  (see  ch.  xxxvii. 
35  ; xlvi.  7).  Daughters,  as  they  did  not  con- 
stitute links  in  a genealogy,  are  not  mentioned 
except  when  some  important  history  attaches 
to  them,  as  in  this  case  the  history  in  ch. 
xxxiv. 

24.  Joseph]  i.e.  “adding,”  from  jasaph., 
“ to  add,”  with  a play  on  asaph.,  “ to  take 
away.” 

25.  nvhen  Rack  A had  born  Joseph]  It 


has  been  infen-ed  from  this,  that  Joseph  was 
born  at  the  end  of  the  second  seven  years  of 
Jacob’s  servitude;  though  it  is  by  no  means 
certain  that  Jacob  demanded  his  dismissal  at 
the  first  possible  moment.  The  words  of  this 
verse  seem  to  indicate  that  Jacob  did  not  de- 
sire to  leave  Laban,  at  all  events  till  after  Jo- 
seph’s birth.  Many  reasons  may  have  induced 
him  to  remain  in  Radan-aram  longer  than  the 
stipulated  fourteen  years;  the  youth  of  his 
children  unfitting  them  for  a long  journey, 
the  pregnancy  of  some  of  his  wives,  the  un- 
happy temper  of  his  beloved  Rachel,  whom  he 
may  have  been  unwilling  to  take  from  her 
parents,  till  she  had  a son  of  her  own  to  com- 
fort her;  above  all,  the  fear  of  Esau’s  anger, 
who  had  resolved  to  slay  him.  There  is  nothing 
necessarily  inconsistent  in  the  narrative.  It  is 
possible  that  Leah  should  have  borne  6,  Ra- 
chel I,  Bilhah  2,  and  Zilpah  2 sons  in  seven 
years.  It  is  not  certain  that  Dinah  was  born 
at  this  time  at  all.  Her  birth  is  only  incident- 
ally noticed.  It  would  be  possible  even  that 
Zebulun  should  have  been  borne  by  Leah 
later  than  Joseph  by  Rachel;  it  being  by  no 
means  necessary  that  we  should  believe  all  the 
births  to  have  followed  in  the  order  in  which 
they  are  enumerated,  which  is  in  the  order  of 
mothers,  not  of  births.  The  common  expla- 
nation is,  that  the  first  four  sons  of  Leah  were 
born  as  rapidly  as  possible,  one  after  the 
other,  in  the  first  four  years  of  marriage.  In 
the  meantime,  not  necessarily  after  the  birth  of 
Leah’s  fourth  son,  Rachel  gives  her  maid  to 
Jacob,  and  so  very  probably  Bilhah  gave  birth 
to  Dan  and  Naphtali  before  the  birth  of  Ju- 


GENESIS.  XXX.  [v.  26-36. 


said  unto  Laban,  Send  me  away,  that 
I may  go  unto  mine  own  place,  and 
to  my  country. 

26  Give  me  my  wives  and  my 
children,  for  whom  I have  served 
thee,  and  let  me  go ; for  thou  know- 
est  my  service  which  I have  done 
thee. 

27  And  Laban  said  unto  him,  I 
pray  thee,  if  I have  found  favour  in 
thine  eyes,  tarry:  for  I have  learned 
by  experience  that  the  Lord  hath 
blessed  me  for  thy  sake. 

28  And  he  said.  Appoint  me  thy 
v/ages,  and  I will  give  it, 

29  And  he  said  unto  him.  Thou 
knowest  how  I have  served  thee,  and 
how  thy  cattle  was  with  me. 

30  For  it  was  littlef  which  thou 
hadst  before  I ca?ne^  and  it  is  now  Mn- 

u7cb  creased  unto  a multitude ; and  the 
atmyfoot.  LoRD  hath  blessed  thee  ^ since  my 
coming : and  now  when  shall  I pro- 
vide for  mine  own  house  also? 

31  And  he  said.  What  shall  I give 
thee?  And  Jacob  said.  Thou  shalt 
not  give  me  any  thing : if  thou  wilt 


to  moT' 
row. 


do  this  thing  for  me,  I will  again  feed 
and  keep  thy  flock  : 

32  I will  pass  through  all  thy  flock 
to  day,  removing  from  thence  all  the 
speckled  and  spotted  cattle,  and  all 
the  brown  cattle  among  the  sheep, 
and  the  spotted  and  speckled  among 
the  goats : and  of  such  shall  be  my 
hire. 

33  So  shall  my  righteousness  an- 
swer for  me  Mn  time  to  come,  when  ^ Heb, 
it  shall  come  for  my  hire  before  thy 
face : every  one  that  i s not  speckled 
and  spotted  among  the  goats,  and 
brown  among  the  sheep,  that  shall  be 
counted  stolen  with  me. 

34  And  Laban  said.  Behold,  I 
would  it  might  be  according  to  thy 
word. 

35  And  he  removed  that  day  the 
he  goats  that  were  ringstraked  and 
spotted,  and  all  the  she  goats  that  were 
speckled  and  spotted,  and  every  one 
that  had  some  white  in  it,  and  all  the 
brown  among  the  sheep,  and  gave 
them  into  the  hand  of  his  sons. 

36  And  he  set  three  days’  journey 


dah.  Leah,  then  finding  that  she  was  not 
likely  to  bear  another  son  soon,  may,  in  the 
state  of  jealousy  between  the  two  sisters,  have 
given  Zilpah  to  Jacob,  of  whom  were  born 
Asher  and  Naphtali,  and  then  again  in  the 
very  last  year  of  the  seven,  at  the  beginning  of 
it.  Leah  may  have  borne  Issachar,  and  at  the 
end  of  it  Zebulun.  Another  difficulty  has 
found  in  Reuben’s  finding  the  mandrakes: 
but  there  is  no  reason  why  he  should  have 
been  more  than  four  years  old,  when  he  dis- 
covered them,  and  attracted  by  their  flowers 
and  fruits,  brought  them  to  his  mother.  (See 
Petav.  ‘De  Doct.  Temp.’  x.  19;  Heid.  II. 
Kxer.  XV.  xviii.;  Kurtz  ‘on  the  Old  Cove- 
nant,’ in  loc. ; Keil  in  loc.  &c.,  and  note  at 
end  of  ch.  xxxi.) 

27.  I have  learned  by  experience']  I have 
learned  by  divination,  literally  either 
‘T  have  hissed,  muttered”  (so  Knobel  on  ch. 
xliv.  5),  or  more  probably,  “1  have  divined  by 
omens  deduced  from  serpents ”(Boch.  ‘ Hier,’  i. 
20;  Gc'Scti.  ‘d'h.’  p.  875).  The  heathenism  of 
Laban  s househokl  appears  by  ch.  xxxi.  19,  .32  ; 
and  though  Laban  acknowledged  the  Lord  as 
Jacobs  God,  this  did  not  prevent  him  from 
using  idolatrous  and  healhenish  practices.  It 
is  however  quite  possible  that  the  word  here 
used  may  have  acquired  a wider  signification, 


originally  meaning  to  “divine,”  but  then  hav- 
ing the  general  sense  of  “investigate,”  “dis- 
cover,” “learn  by  enquiry,”  &c. 

30.  increased]  Lit.  broken  forth. 

since  my  coming]  Lit.  “at  my  foot,”  i.e. 
God  sent  blessing  to  thee  following  on  my 
footsteps,  wherever  I went.  (See  Ges.  ‘Th.’ 
p.  1262.) 

32.  removing  from  thence  all  the  spotted 
and  speckled  cattle]  It  is  said,  that  in  the  East 
the  sheep  are  generally  white,  very  rarely  black 
or  spotted,  and  that  the  goats  are  black  or 
brown,  rarely  speckled  with  white.  Jacob 
therefore  proposes  to  separate  from  the  flock 
all  the  spotted  and  speckled  sheep  and  goats, 
which  would  be  comparatively  few,  and  to 
tend  only  that  part  of  the  flock  which  was 
pure  white  or  black.  He  is  then  to  have  for 
his  hire  only  those  lambs  and  kids,  born  of 
the  unspeckled  flock,  which  themselves  should 
be  marked  with  spots  and  speckles  and  ring- 
strakes.  Laban  naturally  thinks  that  these  will 
be  very  few ; so  he  accepts  the  offer,  and,  to 
make  matters  the  surer,  he  removes  all  the 
spotted  and  ringstraked  goats,  and  all  the 
sheep  with  any  brown  in  them,  three  days’ 
journey  from  the  flock  of  white  sheep  and 
brown  goats  to  be  left  under  Jacob’s  care  (see 


V.  37— 8-] 


GENESIS.  XXX.  XXXI. 


173 


betwixt  himself  and  Jacob  : and  Jacob 
fed  the  rest  of  Laban’s  flocks. 

37  ^ And  Jacob  took  him  rods  of 
green  poplar,  and  of  the  hazel  and 
chesnut  tree  ; and  pilled  white  strakes 
in  them,  and  made  the  white  appear 
which  was  in  the  rods. 

38  And  he  set  the  rods  which  he 
had  pilled  before  ' the  flocks  in  the 
gutters  in  the  watering  troughs  when 
the  flocks  came  to  drink,  that  they 
should  conceive  when  they  came  to 
drink. 

39  And  the  flocks  conceived  before 
the  rods,  and  brought  forth  cattle 
ringstraked,  speckled,  and  spotted. 

40  And  Jacob  did  separate  the 
lambs,  and  set  the  faces  of  the  flocks 
toward  the  ringstraked,  and  all  the 
brown  in  the  flock  of  Laban ; and  he 
put  his  own  flocks  by  themselves,  and 
put  them  not  unto  Laban’s  cattle. 

41  And  it  came  to  pass,  whenso- 
ever the  stronger  cattle  did  conceive, 
that  Jacob  laid  the  rods  before  the 
eyes  of  the  cattle  in  the  gutters,  that 
they  might  conceive  among  the  rods. 

42  But  when  the  cattle  were  feeble, 
he  put  them  not  in ; so  the  feebler  were 
Laban’s,  and  the  stronger  Jacob’s. 

43  And  the  man  increased  exceed- 
ingly, and  had  much  cattle,  and  maid- 
servants, and  menservants,  and  camels, 
and  asses. 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

I yacob  upon  displeasure  departeth  secretly.  79 
Rachel  stealeth  her  father's  images.  2 z Laban 
pnrstieth  after  him,  26  and  cornplaineth  of 
the  wrong.  34  Rachel's  policy  to  hide  the 
images.  36  facob's  complaint  of  Laban.  43 
The  coz'enant  of  Laban  ajid  Jacob  at  Galeed. 

AND  he  heard  the  words  of  La- 
£\_  ban’s  sons,  saying,  Jacob  hath 
taken  away  all  that  was  our  father’s ; 
and  of  that  which  ivas  our  father’s 
hath  he  gotten  all  this  glory. 

2 And  Jacob  beheld  the  counte- 
nance of  Laban,  and,  behold,  it  was 
not  toward  him  ^as  before. 

3 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Jacob,  day  and 
Return  unto  the  land  of  thy  fathers, 

and  to  thy  kindred;  and  I will  be 
with  thee. 

4 And  Jacob  sent  and  called  Ra- 
chel and  Leah  to  the  field  unto  his 
flock, 

5 And  said  unto  them,  I see  your 
father’s  countenance,  that  it  is  not 
toward  me  as  before;  but  the  God 
of  my  father  hath  been  with  me. 

6 And  ye  know  that  with  all  my 
power  I have  served  your  father. 

7 And  your  father  hath  deceived 
me,  and  changed  my  wages  ten  times  ; 
but  God  suffered  him  not  to  hurt 
me. 

8 If  he  said  thus.  The  speckled 
shall  be  thy  wages ; then  all  the  cat- 
tle bare  speckled;  and  if  he  said  thus, 


35,  36),  lest  any  of  them  might  stray  unto 
Jacob’s  flock  and  so  be  claimed  by  him,  or  any 
lambs  or  kids  should  be  born  like  them  in 
Jacob’s  flock. 

37.  poplar^  So  Celsius  (‘  Hierobot.’  I. 
292),  and  many  other  authorities  after  the 
Vulg.,  but  the  LXX.  and  Arab,  have  the  storax 
tree,  which  is  adopted  by  Gesenius  (p.  740) 
and  many  others. 

hazel]  Almond,  Ges.  (p.  747). 

chesnut  tree]  Plane-tree,  Ges.  (p.  1071). 

40.  And  Jacob  did  separate  the  lambs] 
The  apparent  inconsistency  of  this  with  the 
rest  of  the  narrative,  especially  with  v.  36,  has 
induced  some  commentators  to  suspect  a cor- 
ruption in  the  text.  The  meaning,  however, 
appears  to  be,  that  Jacob  separated  those 
lambs,  which  were  born  after  the  artifice  men- 
tioned above,  keeping  the  spotted  lambs  and 
kids  apart ; but  though  he  thus  separated  them, 


he  contrived  that  the  ewes  and  she  goats  should 
have  the  speckled  lambs  and  kids  in  sight. 
“ His  own  flocks”  mentioned  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  verse  were  the  young  cattle  that  were 
born  ringstraked  and  speckled;  “Labans 
cattle,”  on  the  contrary,  were  those  of  uniform 
colour  in  the  flock  tended  by  Jacob;  not  that 
flock  which  Laban  had  separated  by  three  days’ 
journey  from  Jacob. 

Chap.  XXXI.  2.  as  bfore]  Lit.  “as 
yesterday  and  the  day  before.” 

5.  the  God  of  my  father  hath  been  nvith 
me]  i.e.  God  has  been  present  with  me  and 
has  protc'cted  me.  Jacob  calls  him  the  God 
of  h:s  hither,  so  distinguishing  the  Most  High 
from  the  gods  of  the  nations  and  from  the 
idols,  which  perhaps  the  family  of  Laban  had 
worshipped,  vv.  19,  30, 

7.  ten  times]  i.e.  probably  “very  fie- 
quently.”  Cp.  Num.  xiv.  22;  Job  xix.  3. 


174 


GENESIS.  XXXI. 


[v.  9 29. 


The  ringstraked  shall  be  thy  hire; 
then  bare  all  the  cattle  ringstraked. 

9 Thus  God  hath  taken  away  the 
cattle  of  your  father,  and  given  them 
to  me. 

10  And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  time 
that  the  cattle  conceived,  that  I lifted 
up  mine  eyes,  and  saw  in  a dream, 
and,  behold,  the  "rams  which  leaped 

.u  jro...s.  cattle  were  ringstraked,  spec- 

kled, and  grisled. 

1 1 And  the  angel  of  God  spake 
unto  me  in  a dream,  sayings  Jacob: 
And  I said.  Here  am  I. 

12  And  he  said.  Lift  up  now  thine 
eyes,  and  see,  all  the  rams  which  leap 
upon  the  cattle  are  ringstraked,  spec- 
kled, and  grisled : for  I have  seen  all 
that  Laban  doeth  unto  thee. 

^ciiap.28.  13  I the  God  of  Beth-el, '^where 

thou  anointedst  the  pillar,  and  where 
thou  vowedst  a vow  unto  me:  now 
arise,  get  thee  out  from  this  land,  and 
return  unto  the  land  of  thy  kindred. 


14  And  Rachel  and  Leah  answer- 
ed and  said  unto  him,  h there  yet  any 
portion  or  inheritance  for  us  in  our 
father’s  house  ? 

15  Are  we  not  counted  of  him 
strangers?  for  he  hath  sold  us,  and 
hath  quite  devoured  also  our  money. 

16  For  all  the  riches  which  God 
hath  taken  from  our  father,  that  is 
ours,  and  our  children’s:  now  then, 
whatsoever  God  hath  said  unto  thee, 
do. 

17  ^ Then  Jacob  rose  up,  and  set 
his  sons  and  his  wives  upon  camels ; 

18  And  he  carried  away  all  his 
cattle,  and  all  his  goods  which  he  had 
gotten,  the  cattle  of  his  getting,  which 
he  had  gotten  in  Padan-aram,  for  to 
go  to  Isaac  his  father  in  the  land  of 
Canaan. 

19  And  Laban  went  to  shear  his 
sheep : and  Rachel  had  stolen  the  \ 

’ images  that  were  her  rather  s.  t Heb. 

20  And  Jacob  stole  away  ^ una- 


10.  the  rams']  The  he  goats. 

grisled]  i.  e.  “ sprinkled  as  with  hail,”  the 
literal  meaning  of  the  word  “grisled.” 

13.  lam  the  God  of  Beth- eh]  (Heb.  “ El- 
Beth-cl.”)  In  v.  ii  it  is  said,  “the  angel  of 
God  spake  unto  me.”  The  Jewish  com- 
mentators explain  this  by  saying  that  God 
spoke  through  the  mouth  of  the  angel,  and 
therefore  though  the  angel  actually  spoke  to 
Jacob,  yet  the  words  are  the  words  of  God. 
The  Christian  fathers  generally  believe  all  such 
visions  to  have  been  visions  of  the  Son  of  God, 
who  is  both  God  and  the  angel  of  God : see 
on  ch.  xvi.  7. 

There  is  no  necessary  contradiction  between 
this  dream  and  the  account  of  Jacob’s  artifice 
given  in  the  last  chapter.  If  the  dream  oc- 
curred just  before  the  flight  of  Jacob  from 
Laban,  it  would  be  an  indication  to  Jacob 
that  all  his  artifices  would  have  had  no  effect, 
had  it  not  been  God’s  pleasure  that  he  should 
grow  rich.  The  labours  of  the  husbandman 
do  not  prosper  but  through  the  blessing  of 
God.  It  seems,  however,  not  improbable  that 
Jacob  is  here  relating  to  his  wives  two  dreams, 
that  concerning  the  sheep  and  goats  having 
occurred  at  the  beginning  of  his  agreement 
with  Laban,  and  that  in  which  he  was  com- 
manded to  depart  from  Padan-aram  just 
before  his  actual  departure.  This  was  sug- 
gestexl  by  Nachmanides  and  is  approved  by 
RosenmUller.  If  so,  we  may  infer,  that  Jacob 
believed  the  promise  that  the  sheep  which  were 


to  be  his  hire  should  multiply  rapidly:  but  yet 
consistently  with  his  mixed  character,  partly 
believing  and  partly  impatient  of  the  fulfil- 
ment, he  adopted  natural  means  for  bringing 
about  this  event  which  he  desired  (so  Kurtz 
and  apparently  Keil). 

15.  he  hath  sold  us]  Probably  refer- 
ring to  Laban’s  giving  his  daughter  to  Jacob 
as  wages  for  his  service. 

19.  Plnd  Laban  <went  to  shear  his  sheep] 
The  force  of  the  tenses  in  the  Hebrew  will 
perhaps  be  better  explained  as  follows:  “ Now 
Laban  had  gone  to  shear  his  sheep,  and  (or, 
whereupon)  Rachel  stole  the  Teraphim  which 
were  her  father’s,  and  Jacob  stole  away  una- 
wares to  (lit.  stole  the  heart  of)  Laban  the 
Syrian.”  There  may  be  a series  of  parono- 
masias in  the  Hebrew,  “ Rachel  stole  the 
Teraphim,”  “Jacob  stole  the  heart  of  Laban;” 
and  again,  “the  heart  of  Laban”  is  Leb- 
Laban^  the  first  syllable  of  Laban  correspond- 
ing with  the  word  for  “ heart.” 

images]  Teraphim.  These  were  un- 
doubtedly images  in  the  human  form,  but 
whether  whole  length  figures  or  only  busts 
has  been  much  doubted.  In  i S.  xix.  13,  Mich  .1 
puts  teraphim  (the  plural  perhaps  for  a single 
image)  in  David's  bed  to  deceive  the  messen- 
gers of  Saul;  which  looks  as  if  the  image  was 
of  the  size  of  life.  In  the  present  history  as 
Rachel  hides  them  under  the  camel’s  saddle, 
they  were  probably  not  so  large.  Laban  calls 
them  his  gods  v.  30,  which  corresponds  with 


V.  21— 34-] 


GENESIS.  XXXL 


175 


wares  to  Laban  the  Syrian,  in  that  he 
told  him  not  that  he  fled. 

21  So  he  fled  with  all  that  he  had; 
and  he  rose  up,  and  passed  over  the 
river,  and  set  his  face  toward  the 
mount  Gilead. 

22  And  it  was  told  Laban  on  the 
third  day  that  Jacob  was  fled. 

23  And  he  took  his  brethren  with 
him,  and  pursued  after  him  seven 
days’  journey ; and  they  overtook  him 
in  the  mount  Gilead. 

24  And  God  came  to  Laban  the 
Syrian  in  a dream  by  ni^ht,  and  said 
unto  him,  Take  heed  that  thou  speak 
not  to  Jacob  ^either  good  or  bad. 

25  ^ Then  Laban  overtook  Jacob. 
Now  Jacob  had  pitched  his  tent  in 
the  mount : and  Laban  with  his  bre- 
thren pitched  in  the  mount  of  Gilead. 

26  And  Laban  said  to  Jacob, 
What  hast  thou  done,  that  thou  hast 
stolen  away  unawares  to  me,  and 
carried  away  my  daughters,  as  cap- 
tives taken  with  the  sword  ? 

27  Wherefore  didst  thou  flee  away 
, secretly,  and  ^ steal  away  from  me; 

hast  stolen  , ,//  ,,  •;  t • 1 

me.  and  didst  not  tell  me,  that  1 might 
have  sent  thee  away  with  mirth,  and 
with  songs,  with  tabret,  and  with  harp  ? 


28  And  hast  not  suffered  me  to 
kiss  my  sons  and  my  daughters  ? thou 
hast  now  done  foolishly  in  so  doing. 

29  It  is  in  the  power  of  my  hand 
to  do  you  hurt:  but  the  God  of  your 
father  spake  unto  me  yesternight,  say- 
ing, Take  thou  heed  that  thou  speak 
not  to  Jacob  either  good  or  bad. 

30  And  now,  though  thou  would- 
est  needs  be  gone,  because  thou  sore 
longedst  after  thy  father’s  house,  yet 
wherefore  hast  thou  stolen  my  gods  ? 

31  And  Jacob  answered  and  said 
to  Laban,  Because  I was  afraid;  for 
I said,  Peradventure  thou  wouldest 
take  by  force  thy  daughters  from 
me. 

32  With  whomsoever  thou  findest 
thy  gods,  let  him  not  live:  before 
our  brethren  discern  thou  what  is 
thine  with  me,  and  take  it  to  thee. 
P'or  Jacob  knew  not  that  Rachel  had 
stolen  them. 

33  And  Laban  went  into  Jacob’s 
tent,  and  into  Leah’s  tent,  and  into 
the  two  maidservants’  tents ; but  he 
found  them  not.  Then  went  he  out 
of  Leah’s  tent,  and  entered  into  Ra- 
chel’s tent. 

34  Now  Rachel  had  taken  the  im- 


what  we  find  afterwards  concerning  their  wor- 
ship (see  Judg.  xvii.  5;  xviii.  14,  17,  t8,  20). 
They  are  condemned  with  other  idolatrous 
practices  (i  S.  xv,  23;  2 K.  xxiii.  24),  and  in 
later  times  we  find  that  they  were  consulted 
for  purposes  of  divination  (Ezek.  xxi.  21;  Zech. 
X.  2).  They  have  been  generally  considered 
as  similar  to  the  Penates  of  the  classical  na- 
tions. Most  probably  they  were  of  the  nature 
of  a fetish,  used  for  purposes  of  magic  and 
divination,  rather  than  strictly  objects  of  di- 
vine worship.  In  them  we  perhaps  see  the 
earliest  form  of  patriarchal  idolatry;  a know- 
ledge of  the  true  God  not  wholly  gone,  but 
images,  perhaps  of  ancestors,  preserved,  re- 
vered and  consulted.  There  have  been  nu- 
merous conjex:tures  as  to  the  derivation  of  the 
name.  The  majority  of  recent  Hebraists  refer 
to  the  Arab,  root  tarafa^  “ to  enjoy  the  good 
things  of  life,”  and  think  that  teraphim  were 
preserved  and  honoured,  like  the  penates,  or 
the  household  fairy,  to  secure  domestic  pro- 
sperity (see  Ges,  ‘ Thes.'  p.  1520).  Other  but 
improbable  derivations  are  that  suggested  by 
Castell  from  the  Syriac  Teraph.,  “ to  enquire,” 


alluding  to  their  use  as  oracles;  and  that  by 
Prof.  Lee,  from  the  .^iithiopic  root,  signifying 
“ to  remain,  survive,”  so  that  the  name  may 
originally  have  meant  “ relics.”  The  motive 
of  Rachel's  theft  has  been  as  much  debated  as 
the  root  of  the  word  and  the  use  of  the  images. 
It  is  at  all  events  probable,  that  Rachel,  though 
a worshipper  of  Jacob’s  God,  may  not  have 
thrown  off  all  the  superstitious  credulity  of  her 
own  house,  and  that  she  stole  the  teraphim  for 
some  superstitious  purpose. 

20.  stole  away  unawares  to  Lahan'\  Lit. 
“ stole  the  heart  of  Laban,”  i.e.  deceived  his 
mind  and  intelligence. 

21.  the  ri’ver'\  The  Euphrates. 

mount  Gilead']  So  called  by  anticipation. 
It  received  the  name  from  what  occurred  be- 
low, vv.  46,  47. 

26.  as  capti’ves  taken  with  the  sword] 
As  captives  of  the  sword. 

29.  It  is  in  the  power  of  my  hand]  So 
probably,  not  as  Hitzig,  Knobel,  Keil,  &:c., 
“ my  hand  is  for  God,”  i.e.  my  hand  serves 
me  for  God,  is  powerful. 


176 


GENESIS.  XXXI. 


[v.  35—47- 


f PTeb. 
felt. 


r Heb. 
fe.t. 


t’  Ex.  22. 


ages,  and  put  them  in-  the  earners 
furniture,  and  sat  upon  them.  And 
Laban  ^searched  all  the  tent,  but 
found  them  not.  , 

35  And  she  said  to  her  father.  Let 
it  not  displease  my  lord  that  I cannot 
rise  up,  before  thee ; for  the  custom  of 
women  is  upon  me.  And  he  search- 
ed, but  found  not  the  images. 

36  ^ And  Jacob  was  wroth,  and 
chode  with  Laban:  and  Jacob  an- 
swered and  said  to  Laban,  What  is 
my  trespass?  what  is  my  sin,  that 
thou  hast  so  hotly  pursued  after  me  ? 

37  Whereas  thou  hast  ^searched 
all  my  stuff,  what  hast  thou  found  of 
all  thy  household  stuff?  set  it  here 
before  my  brethren  and  thy  brethren, 
that  they  may  judge  betwixt  us  both. 

38  This  twenty  years  have  I been 
with  thee;  thy  ewes  and  thy  she 
goats  have  not  cast  their  young,  and 
the  rams  of  thy  flock  have  I not  eaten. 

39  That  which  was  torn  of  beasts 
I brought  not  unto  thee;  I bare  the 
loss  of  it;  of  "^my  hand  didst  thou 
require  it,  whether  stolen  by  day,  or 
stolen  by  night. 

40  Thus  I was;  in  the  day  the 
drought  consumed  me,  and  the  frost 
by  night ; and  my  sleep  departed  from 
mine  eyes. 


41  Thus  have  I been  twenty  years 
in  thy  house ; I served  thee  fourteen 
years  for  thy  two  daughters,  and  six 
years  for  thy  cattle:  and  thou  hast 
changed  my  wages  ten  times. 

42  Except  the  God  of  my  Lcher, 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  fear  of 
Isaac,  had  been  with  me,  surely  thou 
hadst  sent  me  away  now  empty.  God 
hath  seen  mine  affliction  and  the  la- 
bour of  my  hands,  and  rebuked  thee 
yesternight. 

43  ^ And  Laban  answered  and 
said  unto  Jacob,  These  daughters  are 
my  daughters,  and  these  children  are 
my  children,  and  these  cattle  are  my 
cattle,  and  all  that  thou  seest  is  mine  : 
and  what  can  I do  this  day  unto 
these  my  daughters,  or  unto  their 
children  which  they  have  born? 

44  Now  therefore  come  thou,  let 
us  make  a covenant,  I and  thou ; and 
let  it  be  for  a witness  between  me 
and  thee. 

45  And  Jacob  took  a stone,  and 
set  it  u)p  for  a pillar. 

46  And  Jacob  said  unto  his  bre- 
thren, Gather  stones ; and  they  took 
stones,  and  made  an  heap:  and  they 
did  eat  there  upon  the  heap. 

47  And  Laban  called  it  " Jegar-sa- 
hadutha:  but  Jacob  called  it  Galeed. 


H That  is, 
the  heap  of 
witness. 


34]  the  carnet s furniture~\  The  word  for 
furniture  {Car.,  perhaps  cognate  with  currus., 
car,  carry,  carriage,  See.),  seems  to  have  signi- 
fied a covered  seat,  litter,  or  palanquin,  which 
was  placed  on  the  back  of  the  camel  for  carry- 
ing wojucn  and  children  and  supplied  with 
curtains  for  concealing  them,  not  only  from 
sun  and  wind,  but  also  from  public  view  (see 
Oes.  ‘ d'hes.’  p.  715  and  the  authorities  there 
referred  to),  I'he  Teraphim,  being  probably 
not  of  large  si/e,  would  easily  be  concealed 
under  sucli  apparatus. 

38.  This  toMenty  years~\  See  above,  v.  41. 
On  the  chronology,  see  Note  A at  the  end 
of  this  chapter. 

40.  in  the  Jay  the  drought  consumed  me, 
and  the  frost  hy  nighf  In  the  East  it  is  com- 
mon for  extremely  hot  days  to  be  succeeded 
by  very  cold  nights. 

42.  the  fear  of  Isaac']  That  is  to  say, 
the  object  of  Isaac’s  reverential  awe.  I'he 
whole  history  of  Isaac  points  him  out  to  us  as 
a man  of  subdued  spirit,  whilst  his  father 


Abraham  appears  as  of  livelier  tai^h  and  as 
admitted  to  a more  intimate  communion  with 
God,  Hence  Jacob  not  unnaturally  calls  his  , 
father’s  God  “ the  fear  of  Isaac.” 

47.  Laban  called  it  Jegar-sahadutha : but 
Jacob  called  it  Galeed]  Jegar-sahadutha  is 
the  Aramaic  (Chaldee  or  Syriac)  equivalent 
for  the  Hebrew  Galeed;  both  meaning  the 
“heap  of  witness.”  It  appears  therefore  that 
at  this  time  Jacob  spoke  Hebrew  whilst  his 
uncle  Laban  spoke  Syriac.  We  can  only  ac- 
count for  this  by  supposing  either  that  the 
family  of  Nahor  originally  spoke  Syriac  and 
that  Abraham  and  his  descendants  learned 
Hebrew  in  Canaan,  where  evidently  the  He- 
brew language  was  indigenous  when  he  first 
went  there,  having  probably  been  acquired  by 
the  Hamitic  Canaanites  from  an  earlier  She- 
mite  race — or  else,  which  is  not  otherwise 
supported,  that  the  ancestors  of  Laban  having 
l(“ft  the  early  seat  of  the  family  had  unlearned 
their  original  I lebrew  and  actpiired  the  Syriac 
dialect  of  Padan-aram. 


V.  48—55*] 


177 


genesis.  XXXI. 


48  And  Laban  said,  This  heap  is 
a witness  between  me  and  thee  this 
day.  Therefore  was  the  name  of  it 
called  Galeed; 

And  "Mizpah ; for  he  said,  The 

or/^/S-  Lord  watch  between  me  and  thee, 
t07ver.  v/hen  we  are  absent  one  from  an- 
other. 

50  If  thou  shalt  afflict  my  daugh- 
ters, or  if  thou  shalt  take  other  wives 
beside  my  daughters,  no  man  is  with 
us;  see,  God  is  witness  betwixt  me 
and  thee. 

51  And  Laban  said  to  Jacob,  Be- 
hold this  heap,  and  behold  this  pillar, 
which  I have  cast  betwixt  me  and 
thee ; 

52  This  heap  he  witness,  and  this 


pillar  be  witness,  that  I will  not  pass 
over  this  heap  to  thee,  and  that  thou 
shalt  not  pass  over  this  heap  and  this 
pillar  unto  me,  for  harm. 

53  "Lhe  God  of  Abraham,  and  the 
God  of  Nahor,  the  God  of  their  fa- 
ther, judge  betwixt  us.  And  Jacob 
sware  by  the  fear  of  his  father  Isaac. 

54  Then  Jacob  “offered  sacrifice  b Or, 
upon  the  mount,  and  called  his  bre- 
thren  to  eat  bread : and  they  did  eat 
bread,  and  tarried  all  night  in  the 
mount. 

55  And  early  in  the  morning  La- 
ban rose  up,  and  kissed  his  sons  and 
his  daughters,  and  blessed  them:  and 
Laban  departed,  and  returned  unto 
his  place. 


49.  Mixpa/S]  i.e.  “watch-tower.” 

T:he  Lord  ^atcH]  Here  Laban  adopts  both 
the  language  and  the  theology  of  Jacob.  He 
calls  the  place  Mizpah,  which  is  a Hebrew 
name,  and  he  acknowledges  the  watchfulness 
of  Jehovah  the  God  of  Abraham. 

53.  Lhe  God  of  Abraham^  and  the  God  of 
Nahor  ^ the  God  of  their  father^  judge  between 
The  verb  judge  is  in  the  plural.  This  looks  as 
if  Laban  acknowledged  Jehovah  as  Jacob’s 
God  and  Abraham’s  God,  but  being  himself  de- 
scended from  Nahor  and  Terah  and  doubting 
whether  the  God  who  called  Abraham  from,  his 
father’s  house  was  the  same  as  the  God  whom 
Terah  and  Nahor  had  sei*ved  before,  he  couples 
the  God  of  Abraham  with  the  God  of  Nahor 
and  Terah,  and  calls  on  both  to  witness  and 
judge.  Polytheism  had  still  hold  on  Laban, 


though  he  felt  the  power  of  the  God  of  Jacob. 
We  learn  from  Josh.  xxiy.  2,  that  the  ances- 
tors of  Abraham  worshipped  strange  gods. 
There  is  a very  marked  unity  of  purpose 
throughout  this  chapter  in  the  use  of  the  names 
of  the  Most  High,  utterly  inconsistent  with 
the  modern  notion  of  a diversity  of  authors 
according  to  some  not  fewer  than  four,  in  the 
different  portions  of  the  same  chapter.  To 
Jacob  He  is  Jehovah,  v.  3,  and  the  God  of 
his  father,  v.  5,  &c.,  whilst  Laban  acknow- 
ledges Him  as  the  God  of  Jacob’s  father,  v. 
29.  Once  more  Jacob  refers  to  Him  as  the 
God  of  Abraham  and  the  fear  of  Isaac  (v.  42), 
by  appeal  to  whom  it  was  but  likely  that 
Laban  would  be  moved;  and  lastly  Laban, 
being  so  moved,  himself  appeals  to  the  watch- 
fulness of  Jehovah,  v.  49,  but  yet  joins  with 
Him,  as  possibly  a distinct  Being,  the  God  of 
their  common  ancestor  Nahor. 


NOPE  A on  Chap.  xxxi.  v.  41.  On  the  Chronology  of  Jacob’s  Life. 

(i)  Difficulty  of  the  question.  Common  reckoning.  (2)  Suggestion  of  Dr  Kennicott. 
(3)  Dates  on  this  hypothesis.  (4)  Greater  facility  for  explaining  the  events  thus 
obtained. 


The  difficulties  in  the  Chronology  of  the  life  of 
Jacob  and  his  sons  are  very  great,  so  great 
that  Le  Clerc  has  said,  “There  occur  en- 
tanglements (nodi)  in  these  things  which  no 
one  has  yet  unravelled,  nor  do  I believe 
will  any  one  ever  unravel  them.”  It  has 
been  generally  held  by  commentators,  Jew- 
ish and  Christian,  that  Isaac  was  137  and 
Jacob  77  when  Jacob  received  his  father’s 
blessing,  and  left  his  father’s  house  to  go  to 
Padan-aram.  (See  note,  ch.  xxxvii.  i.)  This 
calculation  rests  mainly  on  the  following  two 
points:  the  ist  is  that  Joseph  was  born  just 
fourteen  years  after  Jacob  went  to  Haran,  i.e. 
at  the  end  of  the  second  hebdomade  which 
VOL.  I. 


Jacob  served  for  his  wives;  an  inference, 
which  would  oblige  us  to  conclude  that  all 
the  sons  of  Jacob  except  Benjamin,  eleven  in 
number,  were  born  in  six  years,  a thing  not 
quite  impossible,  but  highly  improbable  (see 
on  ch.  XXX.  25).  The  second  is,  that  Jacob, 
in  vv.  38,  41,  of  this  ch.  xxxi.  seems  to  say 
that  his  whole  sojourn,  in  Padan-aram  was 
only  twenty  years.  If  these  points  be  made 
out,  we  cannot  deny  the  conclusion,  that  as 
Joseph  was  39  when.  Jacob  was  130,  and  so 
born  when  Jacob  was  91,  therefore  Jacob 
must  have  been  91-14^77,  when  he  fled 
from  Beer-sheba  to  Padan-aram. 

As  regards  the  first  point,  however,  it  has 

M 


[v.  1—4. 


178  GENESIS.  XXXII. 


already^  been  seen  (note  on  ch.  xxx.  23),  that 
it  is  not  necessary  to  conclude  that  Jacob 
should  have  wished  to  leave  Laban  immediately 
on  the  conclusion  of  his  14  years’  servitude. 
On  the  contrary,  with  his  children  too  young 
to  carry  on  so  long  a journey,  with  but  little 
independent  substance,  and  with  the  fear  of 
Esau  before  his  eyes,  it  is  far  more  likely  that 
he  should  have  been  willing  to  remain  longer 
in  the  service  of  Laban.  But,  if  this  be  so, 
we  have  then  an  indefinite  time  left  us  for  this 
additional  sojourn,  limited  only  by  the  words 
“when  Rachel  had  born  Joseph”  (ch.  xxx. 
25).  Jacob  may  have  lived  and  worked  for 
twenty  years  longer  with  Laban,  and  not  have 
asked  for  his  dismissal,  till  Joseph  was  old 
enough  to  travel,  or  at  all  events  till  he  was 
born. 

As  to  the  second  point,  almost  all  commen- 
tators take  the  statements  in  vv.  38  and  41  as 
identical,  v.  41  being  but  a repetition,  with 
greater  detail,  of  the  statement  in  v.  38,  as 
appears  in  the  translation  of  the  Authorized 
Version.  It  has,  however,  been  suggested  by 
Dr  Kennicott,  that  very  probably  the  twenty 
years  in  v.  38  are  not  the  same  twenty  years 
as  those  mentioned  in  v.  41,  and  that  the 
sense  of  the  Hebrew  would  be  better  express- 
ed as  follow's,  V.  38,  “one  twenty  years  I was 
with  thee”  (/.  g taking  care  of  thy  flocks  for 
thee  but  not  in  thy  house)  ; and  (v.  41),  “an- 
other twenty  years  I was  for  myself  in  thy 
house,  serving  thee  fourteen  years  for  thy  tvyo 
daughters  and  six  years  for  thy  cattle.”  This, 
he  contends,  is  a legitimate  mode  of  rendering 
the  repeated  particle  {%eb^  %eh).  Each  mention 
of  the  twenty  years  is  introduced  with  the 
wordzf/^,  “this,”  which  word,  when  repeated, 
is  used  in  opposition  or  by  way  of  distinction 
(see  Ex,  xiv.  20;  Job  xxi.  23,  25  ; Eccl.  vi.  5). 
He  understands  Jacob  therefore  as  saying,  that 
he  had  served  Laban  fourteen  years  for  his 
wives,  after  that  he  had  for  twenty  years 
taken  care  of  his  cattle,  not  as  a servant  but 
as  a neighbour  and,  friend ; and  then,  not 
satisfied  to  go  on  thus  without  profit,  at  last 
for  six  years  more  he  served  for  wages,  during 
which  short  period  Laban  had  changed  his 
hire  10  times. 

If  this  reasoning  be  correct,  and  Bp  Horsley 
has  said  that  Dr  Kennicott  assigns  unanswer- 
able reasons  for  his  opinion,  then  the  follow- 
ing table  will  give  the  dates  of  the  chief  events 
in  Jacob's  life. 


Years  of  Jacob’s 
life 


O 

40 

■57 

J8 

63 

64 


■71 

72 


^ S 


Jacob  and  Esau  born. 

Esau  marries  two  Hittite  wives, 
Gen.  xxvi.  34. 

Jacob  goes  to  Padan-aram,  Isaac 
being  117. 

Esau  goes  to  Ishmael  and  marries 
his  daughter,  Gen.  xxviii.  9. 
Ishmael  dies,  aged  137,  Gen.  xxv.  1 7. 
Jacob  marries  Leah  and  Rachel, 
Gen,  xxix.  20,  21,  27,  28. 

[■  Reuben,  Simeon,  Levi,  and  Judah, 
^ born  of  Leah. 
l_Dan  and  Naphtali  born  of  Bilhah. 
End  of  fourteen  years’  service. 
Beginning  of  20  years  mentioned 
in  Gen.  xxxi.  38. 

■ r Gad  and  Asher  born  of  Zilpah.  J 
J Issachar  and  Zebulun  born  of  y 
1 Leah.  j 

L Dinah  born. 

Joseph  born  of  Rachel. 

Agreement  made,  Gen.xxx.  25 — 3 4. 
Events  in  the  family  unknown. 
Flight  from  Padan-aram. 

Benjamin  born,  Rachel  dies. 
Joseph  at  17  is  carried  to  Egypt, 
Gen.  xxxvii.  2. 

Isaac  dies  at  180,  Gen.  xxxv.  28. 
Joseph,  aged  30,  Governor  of 
Egypt. 

Jacob  goes  down  to  Egypt,  Gen. 
xlvi.  I. 

Jacob  dies,  Gen.  xlvii.  28. 

It  is  not  possible  to  date  accurately  the 
events  in  ch.  xxxiv.,  xxxviii.,  but  the  above 
seems  a far  more  probable  chronology  than 
that  commonly  acquiesced  in.  According  to 
the  common  calculation,  Judah  and  his  sons 
Er  and  Onan  must  have  been  quite  children 
when  they  married,  whereas  the  assigning  40 
instead  of  20  years  to  the  sojourn  of  Jacob  in 
Padan-aram,  will  allow  time  for  them  to  have 
grown  up,  though  even  so  their  marriages 
must  have  been  for  that  time  unusually  early. 
The  common  calculation,  which  makes  Jacob 
84  at  his  marriage,  whilst  his  son  Judah  could 
not  have  been  more  than  20,  and  his  grand- 
children Er  and  Onan  not  above  15  when 
they  married  (see  Keil  on  ch.  xxxviii.),  must, 
surely  require  some  correction,  even  allowing 
for  the  length  of  patriarchal  lives  on  the  one 
side  and  for  the  early  age  of  eastern  marriages 
on  the  other. 


2 1 92 

VO  (^97 

98 

108 

120 

I2I 

130 

147 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 

I yacoFs  znsion  at  Mahanaim.  3 vies- 
sage  to  Esaii.  6 lie  is  afraid  of  Esau's 
coming.  9 He  prayeth  for  deliverance. 
13  lie  sendeth  a present  to  Esau.  24  He 
wrest  let  h with  aft  angel  at  Peniely  where  he  is 
called  Israel.  31  lie  haltcth. 

And  Jacob  went  on  his  way,  and 
^ the  angels  of  God  met  him. 


2 And  when  Jacob  saw  them,  he 
said,  This  is  Cjod’s  host:  and  he 
called  the  name  of  that  place  “ Ma-  n That  is. 

, . two  hosts, 

nanaim.  or,  comps. 

3 And  Jacob  sent  messengers  be- 
fore him  to  Esau  his  brother  unto  the 
land  of  Seir,  the  ^country  of  Edom.  tHeb. 

4 And  he  commanded  them,  say--^^' 


V.  5— '°-J 


GENESIS,  xxxrr. 


179 


ing,  Thus  shall  ve  speak  unto  my 
lord  Esau;  Thy  servant  Jacob  saith 
thus,  I have  sojourned  with  Laban, 
and  stayed  there  until  now: 

5 And  I have  oxen,  and  asses, 
flocks,  and  menservants,  and  women- 
servants:  and  I have  sent  to  tell  my 
lord,  that  I may  find  grace  in  thy 
sight. 

6 ^ And  the  messengers  returned 
to  Jacob,  saying.  We  came  to  thy 
brother  Esau,  and  also  he  cometh  to 
meet  thee,  and  four  hundred  men 
with  him. 

7 Then  Jacob  was  greatly  afraid 


and  distressed:  and  he  divided  the 
people  that  was  with  him,  and  the 
flocks,  and  herds,  and  the  camels,  in- 
to two  bands ; 

8 And  said.  If  Esau  come  to  the 
one  company,  and  smite  it,  then  the 
other  company  which  is  left  shall 
escape. 

9 ^ And  Jacob  said,  O God  of 
my  father  Abraham,  and  God  of  my 
father  Isaac,  the  Lord  which  saidst 

unto  me,  "Return  unto  thy  country,  « chap.  31, 
and  to  thy  kindred,  and  I will  deal 
well  with  thee:  i am  less 

10  G am  not  worthy  of  the  least 


Chap.  XXXII.  1.  the  angels  of  God 
met  him\  The  conjectures  of  various  Jewish 
interpreters  concerning  this  vision  of  angels 
may  be  seen  in  Heidegger,  Tom.  ii.  Ex.  xv. 
§ 37.  The  real  purpose  of  it  seems  to  have 
bc^n  this.  When  Jacob  was  flying  from  Esau’s 
anger  into  Mesopotamia,  he  had  a vision  of 
angels  ascending  and  descending  on  the  ladder 
of  God.  He  was  thus  assured  of  God’s  pro- 
vidential care  over  him,  and  mysteriously 
taught  that  there  was  a way  from  heaven  to 
earth  and  from  earth  to  heaven.  Now  he  is 
again  about  to  fall  into  the  power  of  Esau ; 
and  so  the  angels  encamped,  perhaps  on  each 
side  of  him  {Mahanaim^v.  2,  signifying  “two 
camps”),  may  hare  been  sent  to  teach  him, 
as  a similar  vision  taught  afterwards  the  serv- 
ant of  Elisha  (2  K.  vi.  16,  17),  that,  though 
he  was  encompassed  with  danger,  there  were 
more  with  him  than  could  be  against  him,  or, 
as  the  Psalmist  wrote  afterwards,  that  “the 
angel  of  the  Lord  encampeth  round  about 
them  that  fear  him,  and  delivereth  them”  (Ps. 
xxxiv.  7).  Thus  Josephus  (‘A.  J.’  I.  20) 
says,  “these  visions  were  vouchsafed  to  Jacob 
returning  into  Canaan,  to  encourage  him  with 
happy  hopes  of  what  should  befal  him  after- 
wards,” and  St  Chrysost.  (‘Horn.  58  in  Gen.’), 
“the  fear  of  Laban  having  passed  away,  there 
succeeded  to  it  the  fear  of  Esau ; therefore  the 
merciful  Lord,  willing  that  the  pious  man 
should  be  encouraged  and  his  fear  dispelled, 
ordained  that  he  should  see  this  vision  of 
angels.” 

2.  Maheinaim']  i.e.  “two  camps.”  Some 
have  thought  the  dual  here  used  for  the  plural ; 
others  that  Jacob  thought  of  his  own  camp 
and  the  camp  of  angels.  (So  Abenezra,  and 
after  him  Clericus.)  More  likely  the  angels 
were  encamped  on  the  right-hand  and  on  the 
left,  so  seeming  to  surround  and  protect  Jacob 
(see  pn  v.  i).  The  place  called  Mahanaim 
was  in  the  tribe  of  Gad,  and  was  assigned  to 
tbe  Levites,  Josh.  xxi.  38.  The  name  Mah^ 


neh  is  still  retained  in  the  supposed  site  of  the 
ancient  town  (Robinson). 

3.  unto  the  land  of  Seir,  the  country  of 
Edom']  It  does  not  follow  necessarily  from 
this  verse,  that  Seir  had  by  this  time  become 
Esau’s  permanent  place  of  residence.  The 
historian  calls  Seir  the  country  of  Edom,  be- 
cause it  had  become  so  long  before  Moses 
wrote.  Esau  was  a great  hunter,  and  very 
probably  a conqueror,  who  took  possession  of 
Seir,  driving  out  or  subjugating  the  Horites. 
It  may  have  been  for  this  very  conquest,  that 
he  was  now  at  the  head  of  400  anned  men 
(v.  6).  He  had  not  yet  removed  his  house- 
hold from  Canaan  (ch.  xxxvi.  6);  and  did 
not  settle  permanently  in  his  newly  conquered 
possession  till  after  his  father’s  death,  when, 
yielding  to  the  assignment  made  to  Jacob  by 
Isaac’s  blessing,  he  retires  to  Idumiea,  and  leaves 
Canaan  to  Jacob  (ch. xxxvi.  i — 8).  (See  Kurtz 
in  loc.) 

7.  Jacob  <ivas  greatly  afraid  and  dis- 
tressed] Though  he  had  just  seen  a vision  of 
angels,  he  was  not  unnaturally  alarmed  at  the 
apparently  hostile  approach  of  Esau.  He 
makes  therefore  all  preparation  for  that  ap- 
proach, and  then  takes  refuge  in  prayer.  His 
faith  was  imperfect,  but  he  was  a religious 
man,  and  so  he  seeks  in  ’his  terror  help  from' 
God. 

9.  0 God  of  my  father  Abraham^  and 
God  of  my  father  Isaac ^ the  Lord]  This 
combination  of  names  is  natural  and  exact.. 
He  appeals  to  the  Most  High  as  the  Covenant 
God,  who  had  given  promises  to  his  fathers, 
of  which  promises  he  himself  was  the  heir, 
and  who  had  revealed  Himself  to  the  chosen 
family  as  the  self-existent  Jehovah,  who 
would  be  their  God.  The  whole  prayer  is 
one  of  singular  beauty  and  piety. 

10.  / am  not  ^worthy  of  the  least  of  all 
the  mercies]  Lit.  “I  am  less  than  all  the 
mercies.” 


M 2 


i8o 


GENESIS.  XXXIL 


[v.  II — 24. 


t Heb. 

Uf>OH. 


of  all  the  mercies,  and  of  all  the 
truth,  which  thou  hast  shewed  unto 
thy  servant ; for  with  my  staff  I 
passed  over  this  Jordan;  and  now  I 
am  become  two  bands. 

1 1 Deliver  me,  I pray  thee,  from 
the  hand  of  my  brother,  from  the 
hand  of  Esau:  for  I fear  him,  lest 
he  will  come  and  smite  me,  and  the 
mother  ^ with  the  children. 

12  And  thou  saidst,  I will  surely 
do  thee  good,  and  make  thy  seed  as 
the  sand  of  the  sea,  which  cannot  be 
numbered  for  multitude. 

13  ^ And  he  lodged  there  that 
same  night;  and  took  of  that  which 
came  to  his  hand  a present  for  Esau 
his  brother; 

14  Two  hundred  she  goats,  and 
twenty  he  goats,  two  hundred  ewes, 
and  twenty  rams, 

15  Thirty  milch  camels  with  their 
colts,  forty  kine,  and  ten  bulls,  twenty 
she  asses,  and  ten  foals. 

16  And  he  delivered  them  into  the 
hand  of  his  servants,  every  drove  by 
themselves;  and  said  unto  his  ser- 
vants, Pass  over  before  me,  and  put 
a space  betwixt  drove  and  drove. 

17  And  he  commanded  the  fore- 
most, saying.  When  Esau  my  bro- 


ther meeteth  thee,  and  asketh  thee, 
saying.  Whose  art  thou?  and  whi- 
ther goest  thou  ? and  whose  are  these 
before  thee? 

18  Then  thou  shalt  say,  THoey  be 
thy  servant  Jacob’s;  it  is  a present 
sent  unto  my  lord  Esau : and,  behold, 
also  he  is  behind  us. 

19  And  so  commanded  he  the  se- 
cond, and  the  third,  and  all  that  fol- 
lowed the  droves,  saying,  On  this 
manner  shall  ye  speak  unto  Esau, 
when  ye  find  him. 

20  And  say  ye  moreover.  Behold, 

thy  servant  Jacob  is  behind  us.  For 
he  said,  I will  appease  him  with  the 
present  that  goeth  before  me,  and 
afterward  I will  see  his  face;  perad- 
venture  he  will  accept  ^ of  me.  t Heb. 

21  So  went  the  present  over  before 
him : and  himself  lodged  that 
the  company. 

22  And  he  rose  up  that  night, 
and  took  his  two  wives,  and  his 
two  womenservants,  and  his  eleven 
sons,  and  passed  over  the  ford  Jab- 
bok. 

23  And  he  took  them,  and  ^ sent  t Heb. 
them  over  the  brook,  and  sent  over^^'^f"^ 
that  he  had. 

24  ^ And  Jacob  was  left  alone; 


night  in 


11.  the  mother  (with  the  children\  Lit. 
“upon  the  children.”  Whence  some  have 
thought  that  there  was  allusion  to  the  mother 
protecting  the  child,  as  a bird  covers  its  young 
(Tuch,  Knobcl,  Keil),  or  to  the  slaying  of  the 
child  before  the  parent’s  eyes,  and  then  the 
parent  upon  him  (Ros.) ; but  the  sense  seems 
correctly  expressed  by  “with,”  as  in  Ex.  xxv. 
22;  Num.  XX.  II ; Deut.  xvi.  3;  Job  xxxviii. 
32,  &c.  (See  Gcs.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1027.) 

13.  of  that  (which  came  to  his  hancF] 
or  perhaps  “that  which  had  come  to  his 
hand,”  i.e.  into  his  possession,  what  he  pos- 
sessed. 

20.  I (will  appease  him,  &c.]  The  sen- 
tence literally  rendered  would  be,  “I  will 
cover  his  face  with  the  present  that  goeth  be- 
fore me,  and  afterward  I will  see  his  face, 
peradventure  he  will  accept  my  face.”  “To 
cover  the  eyes  or  the  face”  was  an  expression 
apparently  signifying  to  induce  the  person  to 
turn  away  from  or  connive  at  a fault.  (Gcs. 
pp.  7C0,  706.)  “To  accept  or  lift  up  the 


face”  was  equivalent  to  accepting  a person 
favourably  (^Ib.  p.  915). 

22.  the  ford  Jabbok]  or  “the  ford  of 
Jabbok.”  The  name  Jabbok  is  either  derived 
from  bakak,  “to  pour  forth,  to  gush  forth,” 
or  from  ahak,  “to  wrestle,”  from  the  wrest- 
ling of  Jacob  there.  It  flowed  into  the  Jor- 
dan about  half  way  between  the  Dead  Sea  and 
the  sea  of  Galilee,  at  a point  nearly  opposite 
to  Shechem.  It  is  now  -called  Zerka,  i.e. 
“blue”  (Gcs.  ‘Thes.’  p.  232). 

23.  the  brook']  The  word  signifies  either 
a brook,  a torrent,  or  the  bed  of  a torrent, 
sometimes  dry  and  sometimes  flowing,  like 
the  Arabic  IVady. 

24.  Jacob  (was  left  alone]  He  re- 
mained to  the  last  that  he  might  see  all  his 
family  pass  safely  through  the  ford,  that  he 
might  prevent  anything  being  left  behind 
through  carelessness;  and  most  probably  that 
he  might  once  more  give  himself  to  earnest 
prayer  for  God’s  protection  in  his  expected 
meeting  with  his  brother  Esau. 


V.  25—26.] 


GENESIS.  XXXII. 


181 


and  there  wrestled  a man  with  him 
tHeb.  until  the  ^breaking  of  the  day. 
a^cvdm^  25  And  when  he  saw  that  he  pre- 
vionim^.  j-jQt-  against  him,  he  touched 

the  hollov/  of  his  thigh  j and  the 


hollow  of  Jacob’s  thigh  was  out  of 
joint,  as  he  wrestled  with  him. 

26  And  he  said.  Let  me  go,  for  the 
day  breaketh.  And  he  said,  ^I  will*Hos.i2. 
not  let  thee  go,  except  thou  bless  me.  ^ 


there  <w  res  tied  a man  ^Mith  hlm~\  He  is 
called  “the  angel,”  Hos.  xii.  4,  and  Jacob 
says  of  him  (v.  30),  “ I have  seen  God  face 
to  face.”  The  Jews  of  course  believed  that 
he  was  a created  angel,  and  said  that  he  was 
the  angel  of  Esau,  i.e.  either  Esau’s  special 
guardian  angel  (cp.  Acts  xii.  15),  or  the 
angel  that  presided  over  Esau’s  country  (cp. 
Dan.  X.  r3).  So  Abenezra  and  Abarbanel. 
Many  Christian  commentators  also  prefer  to 
consider  this  a vision  of  a created  angel,  as 
thinking  it  inconsistent  with  the  greatness  of 
the  Creator  to  have  manifested  Himself  in 
this  manner  to  Jacob.  Most  of  the  fathers, 
however,  thought  this  to  have  been  one  of  the 
manifestations  of  the  Logos,  of  the  eternal 
Son,  anticipatory  of  His  incarnation.  Theo- 
doret  (Qu.  92  in  Gen.)  argues  thus  at 
length.  (See  also  Justin  M.  ‘Dial.’  § 126; 
Tertull.  ‘Contra  Marcion.’  c.  3;  Euseb. 

* H.  E.’  I.  22;  August.  ‘ De  C.  D.’  xvi.  39, 
&c.  &c.).  From  vv.  29,  30,  this  seems  the 
true  opinion.  The  word  for  ‘ wrestle”  {abak) 
is  derived  from  abak^  “ dust,”  from  the  rolling 
of  athletes  in  the  dust  when  wrestling  with 
each  other. 

until  the  breaking  of  the  day\  lit.  “till  the 
rising  of  the  dawn.” 

25.  <when  he  saw  that  he  prevailed  not 
against  him\  There  must  have  been  some 
deep  significance  in  this  wrestling,  in  which 
an  Angel,  or  more  probably  the  God  of 
angels.  Himself  “the  Angel  of  the  Lord,” 
prevailed  not  against  a man.  The  difficulty 
of  Ix'lieving  that  man  could  prevail  against 
God  led  to  some  forced  interpretations,  such 
as  that  of  Origen  (‘ De  Principiis,’  Lib.  iii.), 
and  Jerome  (‘  in  Epist.  ad  Ephes.’c.  vi.),  that 
Jacob  wrestled  against  evil  spirits,  ai^d  that 
the  “ Man”  is  said  to  have  v/restled  with  him 
in  the  sense  of  assisting  him,  wrestling  on  his 
side ; an  interpretation  refuted  by  the  words 
of  the  “ Man”  Himself  in  v.  28.  The  mys- 
tical meaning  of  the  whole  transaction  seems 
probably  to  be  of  this  kind.  The  time  was 
an  important  epoch  in  Jacob’s  history.  It 
was  a turning-point  in  his  life.  There  had 
been  much  most  faulty  in  his  character; 
which  had  led  him  to  much  trouble,  and  sub- 
jected him  to  a long  penitential  and  reforma- 
* tory  discipline.  He  was  now  returning  after  an 
exile,  of  20  or  more  probably  40  years,  to  the 
land  of  his  birth,  which  had  been  promised  to 
him  for  his  inheritance.  It  was  a great  crisis. 
Should  he  fall  under  the  power  of  Esau  and 
80  suffer  to  the  utmost  for  his  former  sins  ? 01 


should  he  obtain  mercy  and  be  received  back 
to  his  father’s  house  as  the  heir  of  the  pro- 
mises? This  eventful  niglit,  this  passage  of 
the  Jabbok,  was  to  decide ; and  the  mys- 
terious conflict,  in  which  by  Divine  mercy 
and  strength  he  is  permitted  to  prevail,  is 
vouchsafed  to  him  as  an  indication  that  his 
repentance,  matured  by  long  schooling  and 
discipline  and  manifested  in  fervent  and  hum- 
ble prayer,  is  accepted  with  God  and  blessed 
by  the  Son  of  God,  whose  ancestor  in  the 
flesh  he  is  now  once  more  formally  constituted. 

the  hollow  of  the  thigh']  The  socket  of  the 
hip-joint,  the  hollow  place  like  the  palm  of  a 
hand  (Heb.  Caph)  into  which  the  neck-bone  of 
the  thigh  is  inserted.  The  reason  of  this  act 
of  the  ."^ngel  w'as  very  probably  lest  Jacob 
should  be  puffed  up  by  the  “abundance  of  the 
revelations;”  he  might  think  that  by  his  own 
strength  and  not  by  grace  he  had  prevailed 
with  God;  as  St  Paul  had  the  thorn  in  the 
flesh  sent  to  him  lest  he  “should  be  exalted 
above  measure,”  2 Cor.  xii.  7.  (So  Theodoret 
in  loc.). 

26.  Let  me  go,  for  the  day  breaketh] 
Lit.  “ for  the  dawn  ariseth.”  The  contest  had 
taken  place  during  the  later  hours  of  the  night. 
It  was  now  right  that  it  should  be  ended:  for 
the  time  had  arrived,  the  breaking  of  the  day, 
when  Jacob  must  prepare  to  meet  Esau  and  to 
appease  his  anger.  It  was  for  Jacob’s  sake, 
not  for  His  own  convenience,  that  the  Divine 
wrestler  desired  to  go.  (So  Abarbanel,  Hei- 
degger, &c.  &c.). 

except  thou  bias  we]  Jacob  had  plainly 
discovered  that  his  antagonist  was  a heavenly 
Visitor.  Though  he  had  been  permitted  to 
pi'evail  in  the  contest,  he  still  desired  blessing 
for  the  future. 

23.  Israel:  for  as  a prince  hast  thou  power], 
The  verb  Sarah  and  its  cognate  Sur  sig- 
nify “to  contend  with,”  and  also  “to  be  a 
prince  or  leader.”  See  Judg.  ix.  %z ; Hos.  xii.  4 
(Ges.  pp.  1326,  1338,  Ros.  in  loc.).  It  is 
quite  possible  that  both  senses  are  conveyed 
by  the  word,  and  it  might  be  rendered  either, 
“thou  hast  contended  with  God,”  or  “thou 
hast  been  a prince  with  God.”  The  Author- 
ised Version  combines  both.  The  best  Vss., 
LXX.,  Vulg.,  render,  “Thou  hast  had  power 
with  God,  and  how  much  more  wilt  thou 
prevail  with  men,”  which  has  been  followed 
by  many  moderns,  as  Heidegger,  Rosenm., 
&c.  The  sense  is  thus  rendered  more  perspi- 
cuous, as  implying  a promise  of  safety  from* 


i82 


GENESIS.  XXXII.  XXXIII.  [y.  27-8. 


27  And  he  said  unto  him,  What  is 
thy  name?  And  he  said,  Jacob. 

-chap. 35.  28  And  he  said,  “^Thy  name  shall 

be  called  no  more  Jacob,  but  Israel: 
for  as  a prince  hast  thou  power  with 
God  and  with  men,  and  hast  pre- 
vailed. 

29  And  Jacob  asked  him^  ana  said. 
Tell  me^  I pray  thee,  thy  name.  And 
he  said.  Wherefore  is  it  that  thou 
dost  ask  after  my  name?  And  he 
blessed  him  there. 

30  And  Jacob  called  the  name  of 
I That  is,  the  place  ^ Peniel : for  I have  seen 
J;^/^^‘^God  face  to  face,  and  my  life  is  pre- 
served. 

31  And  as  he  passed  over  Penuel 
the  sun  rose  upon  him,  and  he  halted 
upon  his  thigh. 

32  Therefore  the  children  of  Israel 
eat  not  oj'  the  sinew  v/hich  shrank, 
which  is  upon  the  hollow  of  the 
thigh,  unto  this  day : because  he 
touched  the  hollow  of  Jacob’s  thigh 
in  the  sinew  that  shrank. 

CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

I The  kindness  of  facob  and  Esmi  at  their 
meeting.  17  Jacob  cometh  to  Snccoth.  18 
At  Shalem  he  biiyeth  a field,  and  bnildcth  an 
altar  called  El-elohe-Is7'ael. 


AND  Jacob  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and 
£\^  looked,  and,  behold,  Esau  came, 
and  with  him  four  hundred  men.  And 
he  divided  the  children  unto  Leah, 
and  unto  Rachel,  and  unto  the  two 
handmaids. 

2 And  he  put  the  handmaids  and 
their  children  foremost,  and  Leah  and 
her  children  after,  and  Rachel  and 
Joseph  hindermost. 

3 And  he  passed  over  before  them, 
and  bowed  himself  to  the  ground 
seven  times,  until  he  -came  near  to 
his  brother. 

4 And  Esau  ran  to  meet  him,  and 
embraced  him,  and  fell  on  his  neck, 
and  kissed  him : and  they  wept. 

5 And  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and 
saw  the  women  and  the  children; 

and  said.  Who  are  those  ^ with  thee  ? t Heb. 
And  he  said.  The  children  which  God 
hath  graciously  given  thy  servant. 

6 Then  the  handmaidens  came 
near,  they  and  their  children,  and 
they  bowed  themselves. 

7 And  Leah  also  with  her  children 
came  near,  and  bowed  themselves: 
and  after  came  Joseph  near  and  Ra- 
chel,  and  they  bowed  themselves.  a/ttAis 

8 And  he  said,  ^ What  tneanest  thou 


Esau.  The  difficulty,  however,  of  thus  ex- 
plaining the  particle  Fau  before  “hast  pre- 
vailed” is  great. 

29.  Wherefoi'e  is  it  that  thou  dost  ask 
after  my  name?']  Comp.  Judg.  xiii.  18,  “And 
the  Angel  of  the  Lord  said  unto  him  (/.  e. 
Manoah),  Why  askest  thou  after  my  name 
seeing  it  is  secret?”  lit.  “wonderful.”  In  the 
present  instance  perhaps  the  words  mean, 
“ Why  dost  thou  ask  my  name  ? as  it  may  be 
plain  to  you  who  I am.” 

30.  Peniel]  /.  e.  “ the  face  of  God.”  Else- 
where it  is  always  Penuel,  and  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  and  the  Vulg.  have  Penuel  here. 
The  LXX.  docs  not  give  this  name  itself, 
but  translates  it  both  here  and  in  v.  31.  Jose- 
phus has  Phanuel  only.  The  words  only  dif- 
fer by  a single  line  in  one 'letter,  and  have  no 
difference  of  meaning.  Strabo  (‘  Geogr.’  L. 
XVI.  c.  2,  §§  15,  18)  mentions  a town  among 
the  Phccnician  cities  with  a Greek  name  of  the 
same  meaning,  viz.  Thcou  prosopon. 

32.  the  sine<iu  ajuhicb  shrank]  This  is 
the  rendering  of  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Onk.  Many 
Jewish  and  Ch.nstian  commentators  have  rcn- 
.dercd  it  “the  nerve  of  contraction”  or  “the 


nerve  of  oblivion.”  Whatever  be  the  literal 
sense  of  the  words,  they  doubtless  mean  the 
“ sciatic  nerve,”  the  nerojus  ischiadicus,  which 
is  one  of  the  largest  in  the  body,  and  extends 
down  the  thigh  and  leg  to  the  ankle.  The 
Arabs  still  use  this  same  word  {Nasheh  or 
Naselj)  to  designate  the  sciatic  nerve  (see  Ros. 
in  loc.,  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  924).  The  cus- 
tom prevailing  among  the  Jews  to  this  day  of 
abstaining  religiously  from  eating  this  sinew 
seems  a lasting  monument  of  the  historical 
truth  of  this  wonderful  event  in  the  life  of 
Jacob. 

Chap.  XXXIII.  3.  bowed  himself  to  the 
ground]  A deep  oriental  bow,  not  probably 
such  profound  prostration  as  is  expressed  in  ch. 
xix.  i:  “he  bowed  himself  with  his  face  to 
the  ground.” 

5.  IVho  are  those  with  thee?]  Lit.  “to 
thee ; ” i.  e.  that  thou  hast. 

8.  What  tneanest  thou  by  all  this  drove] 
Lit.  “ What  to  thee  is  all  this  camp?”  The 
sheep  with  their  shepherds  assumed  the  ap- 
pearance of  a band  or  troop,  hence  called 
“ camp.” 


V.  9 — iS.] 


GENESIS.  XXXIII. 


183 


by  all  this  drove  which  I met  ? And 
he  said,  These  are  to  find  grace  in  the 
sight  of  my  lord. 

9 And  Esau  said,  I have  enough, 
fHeb.  mv  brother;  ^keep  that  thou  hast 

be  that  to  \ 1 i r 

thee  that  unto  thyselt. 

thine.  jQ  Jacob  said.  Nay,  I pray 

thee,  if  now  I have  found  grace  in 
thy  sight,  then  receive  my  present  at 
my  hand:  for  therefore  I have  seen 
thy  face,  as  though  I had  seen  the 
face  of  God,  and  thou  wast  pleased 
with  me.  • 

11  Take,  I pray  thee,  my  blessing 
that  is  brought  to  thee ; because  God 
hath  dealt  graciously  with  me,  and 
because  I have  enough.  And  he 
urged  him,  and  he  took  it. 

12  And  he  said.  Let  us  take  our 
journey,  and  let  us  go,  and  I will  go 
before  thee. 

13  And  he  said  unto  him.  My 

. lord  knoweth  that  the  children  are 


tender,  and  the  flocks  and  herds  with 
young  are  with  me : and  if  men  should 
overdrive  them  one  day,  all  the  flock 
will  die. 

14  Let  my  lord,  I pray  thee,  pass 
over  before  his  servant : and  I will 
lead  on  softly,  ^ according  as  the  cattle 
that  goeth  before  me  and  the  children 
be  able  to  endure,  until  I come  unto 
my  lord  unto  Seir. 

15  And  Esau  said.  Let  me  now 
Ueave  with  thee  some  of  the  folk  that 
are  with  me.  And  he  said,  ^What 
needeth  it.?  let  me  find  grace  in  the 
sight  of  my  lord. 

16  ^ So  Esau  returned  that  day  on 
his  way  unto  Seir. 

17  And  Jacob  journeyed  to  Suc- 
coth,  and  built  him  an  house,  and 
made  booths  for  his  cattle : therefore 
the  name  of  the  place  is  called  “ Suc- 
coth. 

18  ^ And  Jacob  came  to  Shalem, 


tHeb. 
according 
to  the  foot 
of  the 
•work,  «5r’C'. 
and  ac- 
cording to 
the foot  of 
tile  chil- 
dren. 

t Heb.  set, 
or,  place. 
t Heb. 
Wherefore 
is  this  f 


B That  is, 
booths. 


10.  for  therefore  I have  seen  thy  face., 
&c.]  Rather  “for  I have  seen  thy  face,  as 
though  I had  seen  the  face  of  God.”  The  same 
particles  are  rendered  “because,”  Gen.  xxxviii. 
26;  “forasmuch  as,”  Num.  x.  31;  “because,” 
Num.  xiv.  43  (see  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  682).  Ja- 
cob pleads  as  a reason  why  Esau  should  accept 
his  present,  that  Esau’s  face  had  seemed  as 
gracious  and  favourable  to  him  as  though  it 
had  been  God’s  face.  It  is  highly  probable 
that  Jacob  here  refers  to  his  vision  of  God  in 
the  night  past  at  Peniel.  The  words  he  uses 
are  “for  I have  seen  thy  face,  like  a vision 
oi  Peney  El-ohimf  i.e.  “the  face  of  God.”  It 
might  have  seemed  likely  that  Jacob  on  his 
meeting  with  Esau  would  use  the  special  name 
of  their  father’s  God,  Jehovah;  but  this,  in 
addition  to  the  reason  given  above,  would  have 
been  like  claiming  to  be  the  heir  of  the  pro- 
mises and  under  the  peculiar  care  of  Jeho- 
vah, which  would  have  been  very  offensive  to 
Esaii. 

11.  my  hlessing\  That  is,  “this  gift 
which  is  meant  to  express  good  will  and  affec- 
tion, offered  with  prayers  for  blessing  on  the 
recipient”  (cp.  Judg.  i.  15 ; i S.  xxv.  32,  xxx. 
26;  2 K.  V.  15). 

1 have  enouglo]  Lit.  “ I have  all.” 

13.  vjith young]  In  milk. 

if  men  should  overdrive  them  one  day]  Esau’s 
400  horsemen  would  be  likely  to  move  too 
rapidly  for  the  milch  cattle. 

14.  according  as  the  cattle  that  goeth 


before  me  and  the  children  he  able  to  endure] 
According  to  the  pace  (lit.  “the  foot”) 
of  the  cattle  that  is  before  me,  and  ac- 
cording to  the  pace  of  the  children. 
The  word  for  cattle  is  literally  “work;”  thence 
anything  acquired  by  labour,  property,  and 
hence  cattle,  the  chief  possession  of  a pastoral 
people. 

until  I come  unto  my  lord  unto  Seir]  It  is 
probable  that  Jacob  here  intimated  a hope  that 
he  might  one  day  visit  Esau  at  Seir.  It  does 
not  necessarily  mean  that  he  was  directly  on 
his  way  thither;  his  course  being  evidently  to- 
wards Shechem. 

17.  booths]  Perhaps  only  wattled  en- 
closures, or  very  possibly  some  simple  con- 
trivance of  branches  and  leaves  made  for 
sheltering  the  milch  cattle  from  the  heat  of 
the  sun. 

Succoth]  “Booths,”  from  saccac.,  to  entwine, 
to  shelter.  Jacob  could  easily  visit  his  father 
from  this  place.  Jerome  (‘Qu.  Heb.’  ad  h.l.) 
says  that  “ Sochoth  is  to  this  day  a city  beyond 
Jordan  in  Scythopolis.”  According  to  Josh, 
xiii.  27,  Judg.  viii.  4,  5,  Succoth  was  in  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan,  “on  the  other  side  of  the 
Jordan  eastward,”  and  was  allotted  to  the 
tribe  of  Gad. 

18.  to  Shalem]  Or  “in  peace.”  The 
LXX.,  Vulg.,  Syr.  render  “ Shalem.”  Robin- 
son (‘  B.  R.’  HI.  322)  and  Wilson  (‘Lands  of 
the  Bible,’  ii.  72)  mentidh  a place  still  called 
Salim  to  the  east  of  Nablus.  On  the  other 
hand  the  Sam.  Pent,  has  Shalom^  i.e.  “ safe.” 


[v.  19—7. 


184  GENESIS.  XXXIII.  XXXIV. 


I Called, 
Acts  7.  16, 
Sychern 


» Called, 
Acts  7.  16 
Emmor. 
UOr, 
lambs. 

Il  That  is. 
Cod  the 
God  of 
Israeli 


a city  of  “Shechem,  which  is  in  the 
land  of  Canaan,  when  he  came  from 
Padan-aram ; and  pitched  his  tent 
before  the  city. 

19  And  he  bought  a parcel  of  a 
field,  where  he  had  spread  his  tent, 
at  the  hand  of  the  children  of  "Ha- 
rnor,  Shechem’s  father,  for  an  hundred 
“ pieces  of  money. 

20  And  he  erected  there  an  altar, 
and  called  it  " El-elohe-Israel. 

CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

I Dinah  is  ravished  by  Shcchem.  4 He  sueth 
to  rna)‘ry  her.  13  The  sons  of  Jacob  offer  the 
condition  of  circumcision  to  the  Shechemites. 
10  Hamor  and  Shechetn  persuade  them  to 
accept  it.  75  The  sons  of  Jacob  ttpon  that 
advantage  slay  thetn,  27  and  spoil  their  city. 
30  Jacob  reproveth  Simeon  and  Levi. 

AND  Dinah  the  daughter  of  Leah, 
which  she  bare  unto  Jacob,  went 
out  to  see  the  daughters  of  the  land. 

2 And  when  Shechem  the  son  of 


Hamor  the  Hivite,  prince  of  the 
country,  saw  her,  he  took  her,  and 
lay  with  her,  and  Mefiled  her. 

3 And  his  soul  clave  unto  Dinah  her.  ^ 
the  daughter  of  Jacob,  and  he  loved 

the  damsel,  and  spake  ^kindly  unto 
the  damsel. 

4 And  Shechem  spake  unto  his  fa- 
ther Hamor,  saying.  Get  me  this  dam- 
sel to  wife. 

5 And  Jacob  heard  that  he  had  de- 
filed Dinah  his  daughter  : now  his 
sons  were  with  his  cattle  in  the  field : 
and  Jacob  held  his  peace  until  they 
were  come. 

6 H And  Hamor  the  father  of  She- 
chem went  out  unto  Jacob  to  com- 
mune with  him. 

7 And  the  sons  of  Jacob  came  out 
of  the  field  when  they  heard  it:  and 
the  men  were  grieved,  and  they  were 
very  wroth,  because  .he  had  wrought 


Onkelos  renders  “in  peace,”  and  he  is  follow- 
ed by  Saadias,  Rashi  and  most  Jewish  com- 
mentators,. by  Rosenm.,  Schum,  Gesen., 
Tuch,  Del.,  Knobel,  Keil. 

a city  of  Shechenf]  If  instead  of  “ to  Sha- 
lem”  we  adopt  the  rendering  “ in  peace,”  or 
“in  safety;”  then  we  must  render  here  “to 
the  city  of  Shechem.”  It  was  perhaps  called 
after  Shechem  the  son  of  Hamor  (v.  19).  In 
ch.  xii.  6 (where  see  note),  we  read  of  “the 
place  of  Sichem,”  i.e.  perhaps  the  site  on 
which  Sichem  or  Shechem  was  afterwards  built. 
It  was  the  first  place  in  which  God  appeared 
to  Abraham,  and  it  is  the  place  at  which 
Jacob  re-enters  the  promised  land;  for  Suc- 
coth,  whence  he  came  to  it,  was  on  the  other 
side  of  Jordan.  Abraham  only-  purchased  a 
burial-place,  Jacob  purchases  a dwelling-place. 
Perhaps  the  country  had  now  become  more 
fully  inhabited,  and  therefore  land  must  be 
secured  before  it  could  be  safely  lived  upon. 

19.  an  hundred  pieces  of  money']  “A  hun- 
dred Kesita.”  All  the  ancient  Versions  (except 
Targg.  Jems,  and  Jonath.)  render  “a  hun- 
tlred  lambs,”  whence  it  has  been  inferred  that 
the  Kesita  was  a piece  of  money  bearing  the 
impression  of  a lamb.  It  appears  however  to 
have  been  either  an  ingot  or  bar  of  silver  of 
certain  weight,  or  perhaps  merely  a certain 
weight  of  silver;  a word  of  the  same  root  in 
Arabic  signifying  “a  balance,”  “a  pair,  of 
scales.”  (See  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1241.  Lee,  ‘Lex.’ 
in  voc.). 

20.  El-elohe-JsraeV]  The  name  Israel 
contains  in  it  the  syllable  £/,  one  of  the  names 


of  God.  Jacob  therefore  calls  El  the  God  of 
Israel,  and  gives  this  title  to  the  altar,  which 
he  built  on  the  spot  which  had  already  been 
consecrated  by  Abraham  (ch.  xii.  7).  Jacob 
had  hitherto  always  spoken  of  Jehovah  as 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God,  or  the 
Fear,  of  his  father  Isaac.  Now  on  his  gra- 
cious acceptance  by  Him,  his  change  of  name 
by  His  appointment,  his  return  to  Canaan  as 
the  heir  of  the  land,  he  calls  Him  his  own 
God,  El,  the  God  of  Israel. 

Chap.  XXXIV.  1.  Dinah  the  daughter 
of  Leah]  Her  birth  is  mentioned  (ch.  xxx. 
21)  before  the  birth  of  Joseph  (vv.  22,  23). 
If  Jacob’s  sojourn  in  Padan-aram  was  40 
years  long  and  not  20  only  (see  note  at  the 
end  of  ch.  xxxi.),  it  is  quite  possible  that  Dinah 
may  have  been  some  years  older  than  Joseph, 
who  was  17  at  the  beginning  of  the  history 
related  in  ch.  xxxvii.  (see  v.  2),  i.e.  probably 
about  a year  or  two  after  the  events  related  in 
this  present  chapter.  In  any  case  therefore 
she  was  not  less  than  15  years  old  at  this  time, 
supposing  her  to  have  been  no  older  than 
Joseph;  so  that  the  objection  urged  by  Tuch 
and  others  that  at  this  time  she  vvas  but  6 or  7 
years  old  cannot  be  maintained. 

^ent  out  to  see  the  daughters  of  the  land] 
Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  i.  21)  states  that  a feast 
among  the  Shechemites  was  the  occasion  of 
this  visit. 

3.  spake  kindly  unto  the  damsel]  Lit. 
“ Spake  to  the  heart  of  the  damsel.”  So  ch.  1. 
21;  Judg.  xix.  3;  Isa.  xl.  2;  Hos.  ii.  14,  &c. 

7.  he  had  <vor ought  folly  in  Israel... 'which 


GENESIS.  XXXIV. 


185 


V.  8— 2S0 

folly  in  Israel  in  lying  with  Jacob’s 
daughter;  which  thing  ought  not  to 
be  done. 

8 And  Hamor  communed  with 
them,  saying,  The  soul  of  my  son 
Shechem  longeth  for  your  daughter: 
I pray  you  give  her  him  to  wife. 

9 And  make  ye  marriages  with  us, 
and  give  your  daughters  unto  us,  and 
take  our  daughters  unto  you. 

10  And  ye  shall  dwell  with  us: 
and  the  land  shall  be  before  you ; dwell 
and  trade  ye  therein,  and  get  you  pos- 
sessions therein. 

11  And  Shechem  said  unto  her  fa- 
ther and  unto  her  brethren.  Let  me 
find  grace  in  your  eyes,  and  what  ye 
shall  say  unto  me  I will  give. 

12  Ask  me  never  so  much  dowry 
and  gift,  and  I will  give  according  as 
ye  shall  say  unto  me : but  give  ine 
the  damsel  to  wife. 

13  And  the  sons  of  Jacob  answered 
Shechem  and  Hamor  his  father  de- 
ceitfully, and  said,  because  he  had 
defiled  Dinah  their  sister : 

14  And  they  said  unto  them.  We 
cannot  do  this  thing,  to  give  our  sister 
to  one  that  is  uncircumcised;  for  that 
were  a reproach  unto  us : 

15  But  in  this  will  we  consent  un- 
to you : If  ye  will  be  as  we  be^  that 
every  male  of  yoy  be  circumcised ; 

16  Then  will  we  give  our  daugh- 
ters unto  you,  and  we  will  take  your 
daughters  to  us,  and  we  will  dwell 
with  you,  and  we  will  become  one 
people. 


17  But  if  ye  will  not  hearken  un- 
to us,  to  be  circumcised;  then  will 
we  take  our  daughter,  and  we  will  be 
gone. 

1 8 And*  their  words  pleased  Hamor, 
and  Shechem  Hamor’s  son. 

19  And  the  young  man  deferred 
not  to  do  the  thing,  because  he  had 
delight  in  Jacob’s  daughter:  and  he 
was  more  honourable  than  all  the 
house  of  his  father. 

20  ^ And  Hamor  and  Shechem  his 
son  came  unto  the  gate  of  their  city, 
and  communed  with  the  men  of  their 
city,  saying, 

21  These  men  are  peaceable  with 
us;  therefore  let  them  dwell  in  the 
land,  and  trade  therein  ; for  the  land, 
behold,  it  is  large  enough  for  them ; 
let  us  take  their  daughters  to  us  for 
wives,  and  let  us  give  them  our 
daughters. 

22  Only  herein  will  the  men  con- 
sent unto  us  for  to  dwell  with  us,  to 
be  one  people,  if  every  male  among 
us  be  circumcised,  as  they  are  cir- 
cumcised. 

23  Shall  not  their  cattle  and  their 
substance  and  every  beast  of  theirs  be 
ours  ? only  let  us  consent  unto  them, 
and  they  will  dwell  with  us. 

24  And  unto  Hamor  and  unto  She- 
chem his  son  hearkened  all  that  went 
out  of  the  gate  of  his  city ; and  every 
male  was  circumcised,  all  that  went 
out  of  the  gate  of  his  city. 

25  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
third  day,  when  they  were  sore,  that 


thing  ought  not  to  he  done~\  Lit.  “ and  so 
it  is  not  done.”  These  are  not  the  words 
of  the  sons  of  Jacob,  but  of  the  sacred  histo- 
rian. It  is  not  likely  that  the  family  of  Jacob 
should  by  this  time  have  acquired  the  generic 
name  of  Israel;  but  Moses  uses  the  designa- 
tion which  had  becom.e  familiar  in  his  own 
day.  The  words  of  this  verse  seem  to  have 
become  proverbial,  they  are  almost  repeated 
in  a S.  xiii.  12.  But  this  is  no  reason  for 
supposing  that  the  words  of  this  present  verse 
should  be  ascribed  to  a later  hand  than  that  of 
Moses. 

13.  and  said]  Schultens,  Gesen.  (p.  315), 
Knobel,  Del.,  &c.  translate  here  “and  plotted” 
or  “ laid  snares:”  others  repeat  the  word  “ de- 


ceitfully” from  the  fonner  clause,  rendering 
and  “spoke  deceitfully:”  but  the  rendering 
of  the  Authorised  Version  seems  preferable. 

18.  their  (uj^rds  pleased  Hamor^  &c.] 
The  readiness  of  the  Shechemites  to  submit  to 
circumcision  may  be  accounted  for,  if  circum- 
cision had  by  this  time  become  a rite  known 
to  others  besides  the  descendants  of  Abraham 
(Herod.  Ii.  104).  At  all  events,  it  was  now 
practised  not  only  by  the  sons  of  Jacob  and 
his  household,  but  by  the  Ishmaelites,  and 
the  family  and  household  of  Esau,  all  growing 
into  important  tribes  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
the  Shechemites. 

25.  Simeon  and  Le'vi^  Dinah's  brethren^ 
took  each  man  his  s^asord']  i.e.  sons  of  the  same 


i86 


« chap. 
6. 

t Heb. 
mouth. 


GENESIS.  XXXIV.  XXXV.  [v.  26-3. 


two  of  the  sons  of  Jacob,  Simeon  and 
Levi,  Dinah’s  brethren,  took  each  man 
his  sword,  and  came  upon  the  city 
49-  boldly,  and  ^slew  all  the  males. 

26  And  they  slew  Hamor  and  She- 
chem  his  son  with  the  ^edge  of  the 
sword,  and  took  Dinah  out  of  She- 
chem’s  house,  and  went  out. 

27  The  sons  of  Jacob  came  upon 
the  slain,  and  spoiled  the  city,  because 
they  had  defiled  their  sister. 

28  They  took  their  sheep,  and  their 
oxen,  and  their  asses,  and  that  which 
was  in  the  city,  and  that  which  was 
in  the  field, 

29  And  all  their  wealth,  and  all 
their  little  ones,  and  their  wives  took 
they  captive,  and  spoiled  even  all  that 
was  in  the  house. 

30  And  Jacob  said  to  Simeon  and 
Levi,  Ye  have  troubled  me  to  make 
me  to  stink  among  the  inhabitants  of 
the  land,  among  the  Canaanites  and 
the  Perizzites : and  I being  fev/  in 
number,  they  shall  gather  themselves 


together  against  me,  and  slay  me ; and 
I shall  be  destroyed,  I and  my  house. 

31  And  they  said.  Should  he  deal 
with  our  sister  as  with  an  harlot? 

CHAPTER  XXXV. 

I God  seoidcth  Jacoh  to  Beth-el.  2 He  purgeth 
his  house  of  idols.  6 He  biiildeth  an  altar  at 
Beth- el.  8 Deborah  dieth  at  Allon-bacJmth. 

9 God  blesseth  Jacob  at  Beth-el.  16  Rachel 
travaileth  of  Ben jamm,  and  dieth  in  the  way 
to  Edar.  22  Reuben  lieth  with  Bilhah.  23 
The  so7ts  of  Jacob.  27  Jacob  cometh  to  Isaac 
at  Hebron.  28  The  age,  death,  and  burial  of 
Isaac. 

AND  God  said  unto  Jacob,  Arise, 

±\,  go  up  to  Beth-el,  and  dwell  there : 
and  make  there  an  altar  unto  God, 
that  appeared  unto  thee  when  thou  « chap.  27. 
fleddest  from  the  face  of  Esau  thy  "^3- 
brother. 

2 Then  Jacob  said  unto  his  house- 
hold, and  to  all  that  were  with  him, 

Pkit  away  the  strange  gods  that  are 
among  you,  and  be  clean,  and  change 
your  garments : 

3 And  let  us  arise,  and  go  up  to 


mother,  Leah,  as  well  as  of  the  same  father, 
Jacob,  In  ch.  xxiv.  50,  55,  &c.  we  saw  La- 
ban taking  a principal  part  in  giving  his  sister 
in  marriage  iVIichaelis  (in  loc.)  mentions  it  as 
a prevalent  opinion  in  the  East  that  a man  is 
more  alfected  by  the  dishonour  of  his  sister 
than  even  by  the  dishonour  of  his  wife,  as  he 
may  divorce  his  wife  but  can  never  cease  to  be 
Lis  sister’s  brother.  We  are  not  to  suppose 
that  Simeon  and  Levi  without  help  from  others 
attacked  and  slew  all  the  males;  they  had  no 
doubt  a retinue  from  their  fathead’s  household 
with  them,  and  perhaps  were  accompanied  by 
some  of  their  brothers,  though  they  only  are 
specially  mentioned,  as  having  taken  the  lead 
in  the  assault,  and  as  most  strongly  actuated 
by  the  spirit  of  revenge. 

27.  the  sorts  of  Jacob']  i.  e.  others  be- 
side Simeon  and  Levi,  for  all  appear  to  have 
joined  in  the  original  stratagem  (see  v.  13), 
and  probably  all  assisted  in  spoiling  the  city. 

30.  I being  fe^  in  number]  Lit.  “ I 
being  men  of  number.”  That  is,  I and  my 
family  and  followers  (compare  “ I am  become 
two  bands,”  ch.  xxxii.  10)  are  men  so  few 
that  we  can  easily  be  numbered.  A common 
idiom:  see  Deut,  iv.  27;  i Chr.  xvi.  19;  Ps. 
cv.  12;  Isa.  X..  19;  Jcr.  xliv.  28. 

It  seems  strange  that  Jacob  should  have 
reproached  his  sons  as  having  brought  him 
into  danger,  not  as  having  been  guilty  of 


treachery  and  murder.  This  is  only  another 
instance  of  Jacob’s  weak  character,  and  of  the 
fidelity  of  the  historian.  Jacob’s  own  fault 
was  want  of  straightforward  honesty.  It  is 
reproduced  with  grievous  aggravations  in  his 
sons.  The  timidity  of  his  disposition,  a kin- 
dred defect  with  untruthfulness,  shews  itself 
now  in  his  exclamation  of  fear  rather  than  of 
moral  horror.  His  more  righteous  indigna- 
tion, the  result  of  calmer  thought,  is  expressed 
in  his  final  judgment  on  the  fierceness  of  their 
anger  and  the  cruelty  of  their  wrath  (ch.  xlix. 
5,  6,  7). 

Chap.  XXXV.  1.  Beth-el]  See  on  ch. 
xxviii.  19. 

2.  strange  gods]  Not  only  had  Rachel 
stolen  her  father’s  teraphim,  but  probably 
others  of  Jacob’s  company  had  secreted  in- 
struments of  idolatrous  worship  in  the  camp. 
As  they  had  just  spoiled  a heathen  city  (ch. 
xxxiv.  27),  it  is  not  unlikely  that  they  brought 
such  instruments  from  that  also. 

be  clean]  “Purify  yourselves.”  The  same 
word  is  frequently  used  under  the  Law  for 
purification  from  legal  uncleanness  before 
access  to  sacred  ordinances  (Lev.  xiv.  4 ; Num. 
viii.  7;  2 Chr.  xxx.  18;  Ezra  vi.  20;  NTh.  xii. 
30;  xiii.  22).  Such  purification  was  proba- 
bly in  the  patriarchal  times,  as  often  even 
under  the  law,  by  washing  merely,  all  such 


V.  4— ”•] 


GENESIS.  XXXV. 


Beth-el;  and  I will  make  there  an 
altar  unto  God,  who  answered  me  in 
the  day  of  my  distress,  and  was  with 
me  in  the  way  which  I went. 

4 And  they  gave  unto  Jacob  all  the 
strange  gods  which  were  in  their  hand, 
and  all  their  earrings  which  were  in 
their  ears;  and  Jacob  hid  them  under 
the  oak  which  was  by  Shechem. 

5 And  they  journeyed : and  the 
terror  of  God  was  upon  the  cities  that 
were  round  about  them,  and  they  did 
not  pursue  after  the  sons  of  Jacob. 

6 ^1  So  Jacob  came  to  Luz,  which 
is  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  that  /r, 
Beth-el,  he  and  all  the  people  that 
were  with  him. 

7 And  he  built  there  an  altar,  and 


“^called  the  place  " El-beth-el : because  *chap.  28. 
there  God  appeared  unto  him,  when  11  Thai  is, 
he  fled  from  the  face  of  his  brother. 

8 But  Deborah  Rebekah’s  nurse 
died,  and  she  was  buried  beneath 
Beth-el  under  an  oak : and  the  name 

of  it  was  called  " Allon-bachuth.  n That  is, 

9 ^ And  God  appeared  ui%to  Jacob  ^weeping{ 
again,  when  he  came  out  of  Padan- 
aram,  and  blessed  him. 

10  And  God  said  unto  him.  Thy 
name  is  Jacob  : thy  name  shall  not  be 
called  any  more  Jacob,  “^but  IsraeDchap.  32. 
shall  be  thy  name : and  he  called  his 
name  Israel. 

1 1 And  God  said  unto  him,  I am 
God  Almighty : be  fruitful  and  mul- 
tiply ; a nation  and  a company  of  na- 


ceremonial  washings  being  the  prototypes  of 
baptism,  by  which,  false  religions  being  re- 
jected, men  are  brought  into  the  Church  of 
the  living  God. 

4.  ear-rings^  perhaps  talismans  or  idola- 

trous symbols  worn  in  the  ear.  Augus- 
tine ad  h.  1.)  call|  them  “idolatrous 

phylacteries,”  idolorum phylacteria^  and  (‘  Epist.’ 
CCXLV.)  he  mentions  a superstitious  use  of  ear- 
rings even  in  his  own  day  among  the  African 
Christians  “not  to  please  men  but  to  serve 
demons.” 

the  oak  rjohich  njoas  by  Shechem]  See 
note  on  ch.  xii.  6.  It  may  have  been  under 
the  very  oak,  or  oak-grove,  where  Abraham 
pitched  his  tent,  and  which  seems  to  have 
been  sacred  even  in  Joshua’s  time  (Josh.  xxiv. 
26). 

5.  the  terror  of  God]  God  inspired 
into  the  minds  of  the  neighbouring  tribes  a 
sense  of  fear,  so  that  they  did  not  pursue 
Jacob  in  order  to  avenge  the  slaughter  of  the 
Shechemites. 

6.  Lu^]  See  ch.  xxviii.  19. 

7.  El-beth-eF]  i.e.  “the  God  of  Beth- 
el,” or  “the  God  of  the  House  of  God.” 
At  Bethel  God  first  appeared  to  him.  Then 
he  devoted  himself  to  God’s  service  and  re- 
ceived the  promises  of  God’s  protection.  He 
accordingly  called  the  place  Bethel,  which 
name  he  now  renew^s  with  addition  of  El. 

God  appeared  unto  him]  The  word  for 
God,  “Elohim,”  being  here  as  generally  in  the 
plural,  the  verb  is  by  a kind  of  attraction  put 
in  the  plural  also.  Some  have  discovered  in 
this  a relic  of  polytheism,  and  Onkelos  h^is 
rendered  angels,  a most  unwarrantable  trans- 
lation. The  Samaritan  Pentateuch  and  the 


LXX.  and  Vulg.  Versions  have  the  verb  in 
the  singular,  which  may  be  the  true  reading; 
but  see  on  ch.  xx.  13. 

8.  AUon-bachuth]  “The  oak  of  v/eeping.” 

9.  God  appeared  unto  facob  again,  ^tvhen 
he  came  out  of  Padan-aram]  He  was  now  at 
Bethel,  the  place  from  which  he  may  be  con- 
sidered to  have  set  out  for  Padan-aram,  and 
where  he  made  his  vow  that  if  God  would 
be  with  him  and  be  his  God,  he  would  make 
that  place  the  house  of  God.  He  had  now 
come  back  again  to  the  same  spot;  he  had 
fulfilled  his  vow  by  consecrating  Bethel  as  the 
temple  of  God ; this  might  then  well  be  con- 
sidered as  the  accomplishment  of  his  return 
from  Padan-aram.  Accordingly  God  ap- 
pears. to  him  here  once  more,  promises  him 
again,  and  more  emphatically,  protection, 
blessing,  inheritance,  confii*ms  the  name  of 
Israel  to  him,  a name  given  by  the  angel  at 
the  ford  of  the  brook  Jabbok,  but  now^  fixed 
and  ratified,  and  assures  him  that  his  posterity 
shall  be  numerous,  powerful  and  blessed 
Accordingly  Jacob,  recognizing  the  fulfilment 
of  all  that  had  been  promised  him  wfiien  he 
fled  from  Esau,  and  of  all  that  his  vows  had 
pointed  to,  rears  again  a stone  pillar  as  he  had 
done  forty  years  before,  and  again  solemnly 
names  the  place  Bethel.  The  wfiiole  of  this 
history  thoroughly  fits  in  to  all  that  has  gone 
before,  there  being  nothing  whatever  to  sup- 
port the  notion  that  it  is  a mere  legendary 
repetition  of  the  previous  vision. 

11.  I am  God  Almighty]  El-Shaddai. 
It  was  by  this  name  that  God  revealed  Him- 
self to  Abram,  w^hen  he  changed  his  name  to 
Abraham,  and  promised  him  the  land  of 
Canaan  for  an  everlasting  possession  (see  ch. 
xvii.  8).  The  use  of  the  same  name  here  is 


i88 


GENESIS.  XXXV.  [v.  12-27. 


tions  shall  be  of  thee,  and  kings  shall 
come  out  of  thy  loins ; 

12  And  the  land  v/hich  I gave 
Abraham  and  Isaac,  to  thee  I will 
give  it,  and  to  thy  seed  after  thee  will 
I give  the  land. 

13  And  God  went  up  from  him  in- 
the  place#where  he  talked  with  him. 

14  And  Jacob  set  up  a pillar  in  the 
place  where  he  talked  with  him,  even 
a pillar  of  stone : and  he  poured  a 
drink  offering  thereon,  and  he  poured 
oil  thereon. 

15  And  Jacob  called  the  name  of 
the  place  where  God  spake  with  him, 
Beth-el. 

16  And  they  journeyed  from 
fHeb.  Beth-el;  and  there  was  but  ^a  little 

way  to  come  to  Ephrath  : and  Rachel 
ground,  travailed,  and  she  had  hard  labour. 

17  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  she 
was  in  hard  labour,  that  the  midwife 
said  unto  her.  Fear  not;  thou  shalt 
have  this  son  also. 

II  That  is,  18  And  it  came  to  pass,  as«her  soul 
uiy7or-  departing,  (for  she  died)  that 

w.  ^ she  called  his  name  “Ben-oni:  but 
tiu-'scmof  his  father  called  him  "Benjamin. 
kaud'‘^  19  Rachel  died,  and  was  bu- 


ried in  the  way  to  Ephrath,  which  is 
Beth-lehem. 

20  And  Jacob  set  a pillar  upon  her  . 
grave : that  is  the  pillar  of  Rachel’s 
grave  unto  this  day. 

21  ^ And  Israel  journeyed,  and 
spread  his  tent  beyond  the  tower  of 
Edar. 

22  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Is- 
rael dwelt  in  that  land,  that  Reuben 
went  and  ‘^lay  v/ith  Bilhah  his  fa- chap, 
ther’s  concubine  : and  Israel  heard  it. 

Nov/  the  sons  of  Jacob  were  twelve: 

23  The  sons  of  Leah ; Reuben, 
Jacob’s  firstborn,  and  Simeon,  and 
Levi,  and  Judah,  and  Issachar,  and 
Zebulun : 

24  The  sons  of  Rachel;  Joseph, 
and  Benjamin : 

25  And  the  sons  of  Bilhah,  Rachel’s 
handmaid;  Dan,  and  Naphtali: 

26  And  the  sons  of  Zilpah,  Leah’s 
handmaid;  Gad,  and  Asher:  these 
are  the  sons  of  Jacob,  which  were 
born  to  him  in  Padan-aram. 

27  ^ And  Jacob  came  unto  Isaac 
his  father  unto  Mamre,  unto  the  city 
of  Arbah,  which  is  Hebron,  where 
Abraham  and  Isaac  sojourned. 


therefore  singularly  appropriate,  and  Jacob 
refers  to  it  with  evident  comfort  and  satisfac- 
tion at  the  close  of  his  life  (see  ch.  xlviii.  3). 

16.  a little  ^aj]  These  words  pro- 
bal-ly  in  the  original  denote  a definite  space. 
The  LXX.  does  riot  translate  the  principal 
word.  The  Vulg.  impi-operly  i-enders  “in  the 
Spring  time.”  Onk.  has  “an  aci'e  of  land;” 
the  Syi*.  “a  parasang;”  S.iad.  and  Arab. 
Erpen.  “a  mile.”  The  Jews  generally  incline 
to  understand  “a  mile,”  because  of  the  tra- 
ditions that  Rachel’s  tomb  was  a mile  from 
Bethlehem  or  Ephrath  (v.  19). 

18.  Ben-oni\  /.f-.  “son  of  my  sorrow.” 

Benjamin']  i.e.  “son  of  the  right  hand,”  a 
name  of  good  significance,  the  right  hand 
being  connected  with  prospei'ity,  as  the  left 
hand  was  with  calamity.  Some  ancient  vei'- 
sions  (favoured  by  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch) 
interpnt  Benjamin  as  “son  of  days,”  i.e. 
“son  of  old  age.”  There  is  evidently,  how- 
evcT,  an  antithesis  between  Benoni,  “son  of 
sorrow,”  and  Benjamin,  “son  of  prosperity.” 
It  might  possibly  be  interpreted  “son  of 
strength,”  from  the  “strong  right  hand.” 

20.  unto  this  day']  i.e.  till  Moses  wrote. 
It  was  worthy  of  notice  that  the  pillar  still 


stood  after  the  land  had  been  so  long  inhabit- 
ed by  unfriendly  tribes.  On  the  knowledge 
of  the  geography  of  Palestine  by  Moses,  see 
Introduction  to  the  Pentateuch,  p.  17. 

21.  tower  of  Edar]  i.e.  “tower  of  the 
flock.”  It  was  apparently  a watch-tower  for 
the  protection  of  flocks  against  robbers  and 
wild  beasts.  (Gp.  % K.  xviii.  8 ; % Chr.  xxvi. 
10,  xxvii.  4.) 

22.  Reuben]  The  incest  of  Reuben  is 
punished  by  his  being  deprived  of  his  right  of 
primogeniture,  ch.  xlix.  3,  4;  i Chr.  v.  i. 

and  Israel  heard  it]  The  LXX.  adds 
“and  it  was  evil  in  his  sight.”  The  silence 
of  the  Hebrew  expresses  more  eloquently  the 
indignation  of  the  offended  patriarch. 

26.  in  Padan-aram]  i.e.  except  Ben- 
jamin, whose  birth  has  just  been  recorded  in 
Canaan  (v.  18). 

27.  Jacob  came  unto  Isaac  his  father] 
Whether  this  was  just  before  Isaac’s  death, 
or  whether  Jacol)  spent  some  time  at  Mamre 
with  his  father,  we  do  not  read.  If  this  were 
only  just  before  his  death  it  is  very  probable 
that  Jacob  had  visited  him  from  time  to  time 
before. 


189 


V.  28-13.]  GENESIS.  XXXV.  XXXVI. 


28  And  the  days  of  Isaac  were  an 
hundred  and  fourscore  years. 

29  And  Isaac  gave  up  the  ghost, 
^ckap.  25.  and  died,  and  ""was  gathered  unto  his 

people,  being  old  and  full  of  days  : and 
his  sons  Esau  and  Jacob  buried  him. 

CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

1 Esau's  three  wives.  6 His  removing  to  mount 
Seir.  9 His  sons.  15  The  dukes  7ohich  de- 
scended of  his  sons.  20  •The  so?is  and  dukes  of 
Seir.  2 \ Allah findeth  mules,  The  kings 
of  Edom.  40  The  dukes  that  descended  of 
Esau. 

NOW  these  are  the  generations 
of  Esau,  who  is  Edom. 

2 Esau  took  his  wives  of  the  daugh- 
ters of  Canaan;  Adah  the  daughter 
of  Elon  the  Hittite,  and  Aholibamah 
the  daughter  of  Anah  the  daughter 
of  Zibeon  the  Hivite ; 

3 And  Bashemath  IshmaePs  daugh- 
ter, sister  of  Nebajoth. 

«iChron.  4 And  "Adah  bare  to  Esau  Eli- 
phaz ; and  Bashemath  bare  Reuel ; 

5  And  Aholibamah  bare  Jeush,  and 
Jaalam,  and  Korah:  these  are  the 
sons  of  Esau,  which  were  born  unto 
him  in  the  land  of  Canaan. 

6  And  Esau  took  his  wives,  and 


his  sons,  and  his  da*Lighters,  and  all 
the  ^ persons  of  his  house,  and  his  cat-  t Heb. 
tie,  and  all  his  beasts,  and  all  his 
substance,  which  he  had  got  in  the 
land  of  Canaan;  and  went  into  the 
country  from  the  face  of  his  brother 
Jacob. 

7 For  their  riches  were  more  than 
that  they  might  dwell  together;  and 
the  land  wherein  they  were  strangers 
could  not  bear  them  because  of  their 
cattle. 

8 Thus  dwelt  Esau  in  mount  Seir:  <5  josh.  24. 
Esau  is  Edom. 

9 ^ And  these  are  the  generations 

of  Esau  the  father  of  ^ the  Edomites  t Heb. 
in  mount  Seir : Edom. 

10  These  are  the  names  of  Esau’s 

sons;  ‘^Eliphaz  the  son  of  Adah  the^^iChroD, 
wife  of  Esau,  Reuel  the  son  of  Bashe- 
math  the  wife  of  Esau. 

11  And  the  sons  of  Eliphaz  were 
Teman,  Omar,.  Zepho,  and  Gatam, 
and  Kenaz. 

12  And  Timna  was  concubine  to 
Eliphaz  Esau’s  son ; and  she  bare  to 
Eliphaz  Amalek:  these  were  the  sons 
of  Adah  Esau’s  wife. 

1 3 And  these  are  the  sons  of  Reu- 


Ghap.  XXXVI.  2,  3.  Adah,  &c.]  See 
note  A at  the  end  of  the  Chapter. 

6.  nuent  into  the  countrj\  Lit.  “into 
a land.”  Onk.  and  Vulg.  has  “into  another 
land.”  The  Sam.  Pen  tat.  has  “from  the  land 
of  Canaan.”  The  LXX.  “from  the  land.” 
The  Syr.  reads  “ into  the  land  of  Seir,”  which 
is  adopted  by  Ewald,  Knobel,  Delitzsch,  Keil, 
&c.  In  ch.  xxxii.  3,  Esau  is  mentioned  as  in 
the  land  of  Seir,  but  then  probably  he  was 
only  there  for  a time,  perhaps  engaged  in  its 
conquest,  now  he  finally  takes  up  his  abode 
there.  See  note  on  xxxii.  3. 

7.  the  land  nvherein  they  nvere  strangers 
could  not  bear  them  because  of  their  cattle'^ 
They  were  not  settled  inhabitants,  but  only 
sojourners  in  the  land;  and  though  they  were 
allowed  to  pasture  their  flocks  in  the  land,  yet 
it  was  not  to  be  expected  that  the  settled  in- 
habitants would  tolerate  more  than  a reason- 
able number  of  cattle  from  one  family  to  eat 
up  the  produce  of  their  fields. 

8.  mount  Mount  Seir  was  the 

mountainous  country  between  the  Dead  Sea 
and  the  Elamitic  Gulf,  the  northern  part  of 
which  is  called  i.e.  “the  hill  country,” 

by  the  Arabs.  So  the  Targums  of  Jerusalem 


and  Pseudo- Jonathan  put  here  Gabala  for 
Seir.  The  southern  part  is  called  Sherah. 

9.  the  father  of  the  Edomites']  Lit.  “the 
father  of  Edom,”  i.e.  either  “ the  father  of  the 
Edomites,”  or  “ the  founder  of  Idumaea.” 

11.  Teman]  We  read  elsewhere  of  a dis- 
trict in  Idumaea  called  Teman,  famous  for  its 
wisdom  (Jer.  xlix.  7,  20;  Amos  i.  12;  Hab. 
hi.  3);  and  in  Job  we  meet  with  Eliphaz  the 
Temanite,  probably  descended  from  this  Te- 
man, the  son  of  Eliphaz,  the  son  of  Esau. 
Pliny  (‘  H.  N.’  vi.  32)  speaks  of  the  Thima- 
naei  in  connection  with  Petra. 

Omar]  is  compared  by  Knobel  with  the 
Beni  Ammer  in  Southern  Palestine  and  Nor- 
thern Idumaea,  and  with  the  Amarin  Arabs 
and  the  Amir  Arabs,  all  mentioned  by  Seet- 
zen,  Burckhardt,  and  Robinson. 

Zepho]  Compare  Zaphia,  a place  to  the 
south  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Knobel). 

Kenaz]  Compare  Aneizeh,  the  name  of  an 
Arab  tribe,  and  of  a fortress  to  the  north-east 
of  Petra  (Knobel). 

12.  Amalek]  The  ancestor  of  the  Ama- 
lekites,  who  probably  at  an  early  period  sepa- 
rated themselves  from  the  rest  of  the  Edom- 


GENESIS.  XXXVI. 


[v.  14—24. 


190 


el;  Nahath,  and  Zerah,  Shammah, 
and  Mizzah : these  were  the  sons  of 
Bashemath  Esau’s  wife. 

14  And  these  were  the  sons  of 
Aholibamah,  the  daughter  of  Anah 
the  daughter  of  Zibeon,  Esau’s  wife: 
and  she  bare  to  Esau  Jeush,  and 
Jaalam,  and  Korah. 

15  ^ I'hese  were  dukes  of  the  sons 
of  Esau : the  sons  of  Eliphaz  the  first- 
born ion  of  Esau;  duke  Teman,  duke 
Omar,  duke  Zepho,  duke  Kenaz, 

16  Duke  Korah,  duke  Gatam,  and 
duke  Amalek : these  are  the  dukes 
that  came  of  Eliphaz  in  the  land  of 
Edom;  these  were  the  sons  of  Adah. 

17  ^ And  these  are  the  sons  of 
Reuel  Esau’s  son ; duke  Nahath,  duke 
Zerah,  duke  Shammah,  duke  Mizzah  : 
these  are  the  dukes  that  came  of  Reuel 
in  the  land  of  Edom ; these  are  the 
sons  of  Bashemath  Esau’s  wife. 


18  ^ And  these  are  the  sons  of 
Aholibamah  Esau’s  wife;  duke  Jeush, 
duke  Jaalam,  duke  Korah  : these  were 
the  dukes  that  came  of  Aholibamah 
the  daughter  of  Anah,  Esau’s  wife. 

19  These  are  the  sons  of  Esau,  v/ho 
is  Edom,  and  these  are  their  dukes. 

20  These  the  sons  of  Seir«^i  Chron. 
the  Horite,  who  inhabited  the  land ; 

Lotan,  and  Shobal,  and  Zibeon,  and 
Anah, 

21  And  Dishon,  and  Ezer,  and  Di- 
shan  : these  are  the  dukes  of  the  Elor- 
ites,  the  children  of  Seir  in  the  land 
of  Edom. 

22  And  the  children  of  Lotan  were 
Hori  and  Hemam;  and  Lotan’s  sister 
was  Timna. 

23  And  the  children  of  Shobal 
were  these ; Alvan,  and  Manahath, 
and  Ebal,  Shepho,  and  Onam. 

24  And  these  are  the  children  of 


itcs,  and  formed  a distinct  and  powerful  tribe. 
The  Arabs  have  a legend  concerning  an  abo- 
riginal tribe  of  Amalek,  with  whom  it  has 
been  thought  that  the  Eiomitish  Amalekites 
were  fused,  Noldeke  has  a monograph  on 
the  Amalekites,  in  which  he  shews  that  the 
Arabian  legends  concerning  them  are  drawn 
directly  or  indirectly  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  are  utterly  valueless  when  they  de- 
part from  that  only  historical  source.  There 
is  no  authority  in  the  Old  Testament  for  the 
existence  of  this  aboriginal  tribe,  except  the 
mention  in  ch.  xiv.  7 of  “ the  country  of  the 
Amalekites.”  This  name,  however,  is  pro- 
bably given  by  anticipation,  not  because  the 
country  was  so  called  in  Abraham’s  time,  but 
because  it  had  become  known  by  that  title 
before  the  time  of  Moses  and  the  Exodus. 
I'he  Amalekites,  having  their  chief  seat  to  the 
south  of  the  mountains  of  Judah,  as  far  as 
Kadesh  (Num.  xiii.  29,  xiv.  43,  45),  spread 
over  the  whole  of  the  northern  part  of  Arabia 
(Y’trasa,  from  Havilah  to  Shur  on  the  border 
of  Egypt  (i  S.  XV.  3,  7,  xxvii.  8);  whilst  one 
branch  penetrated  into  the  heart  of  Canaan 
(Judg.  xii.  15). 

13.  Nri/mt/y]  “ A descent.”  Cp.  with 
the  valley  of  Akaba  of  like  significance 
(Knob.). 

Sbammah\  Cp.  the  Samcni,  a tribe  of  No- 
mad Arabs  mentioned  by  Steph.  Byzant. 
(Knob.) 

14.  Aholibamah']  Sec  note  A on  vv.  z, 
3 below. 

Korah]  Perhaps  perpetuated  in  the  mo- 
dem tribe  of  Kurayeh  (Knobel). 


15.  dukes]  i.e.  duces ^ leaders  of  tribes, 
phylarchs.  I'he  Hebrew  alluph  is  connected 
with  eleph^  which  signifies  either  “ a thousand” 
or  “a  family.”  Hence  Bochart  and  others 
understand  here  chiliarchs,  leaders  of  thou- 
sands; whilst  others,  with  more  probability, 
understand  phylarchs^  heads  of  tribes  or  fami- 
lies, (see  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  pp.  10.^,  106).  Ro- 
senmiiller  thinks  that  the  word  is  used  meto- 
nymically  for  a family,  and  would  render 
“ These  are  the  families  (or  tribes)  of  the  sons 
of  Esau.”  This  interpretation  would  apply 
well  throughout  the  catalogue,  but  does  not 
so  v/cll  correspond  with  the  etymology  and 
formation  of  the  word. 

16.  Duke  Korah]  These  words  are 
omitted  in  one  MS.  in  the  Sam.  Pent,  and 
Version.  They  are  considered  as  having 
crept  in  through  a clerical  error  from  v.  18, 
by  Kennicott,  Tuch,  Knobel,  Delitzsch, 
Keil,  &c. 

20.  sons  of  Seir  the  Horite]  The  in- 
habitants of  the  country  previously  to  the 
Edomitish  invasion.  The  Horites  (i.e.  Trog. 
lodytes  or  dwellers  in  caves),  mentioned  ch. 
xiv.  6 as  an  independent  people,  were  partly 
exterminated  and  partly  subdued  by  Esau  and 
his  descendants  (Deut.  ii.  12,  22). 

Lotan]  is  compared  with  Leyathan.,  the 
name  of  a fierce  tribe  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Petra  (Knobel). 

22.  Hemam]  Cp.  Homaima,  a place  to 
the  south  of  Petra  (Knoliel). 

23.  AHan]  Cp.  the  Alabin.,  a tribe  of 
Arabs  of  evil  notoriety  to  the  north  of  Akaba 
(Knobel) 


V.  25— 33-] 


GENESIS.  XXXVI. 


191 


Zibeon ; both  Ajah,  and  Anah : this 
was  that  Anah  that  found  the  mules 
in  the  wilderness,  as  he  fed  the  asses 
of  Zibeon  his  father. 

25  And  the  children  of  Anah  were 
these;  Dishon,  and  Aholibamah  the 
daughter  of  Anah. 

26  And  these  are  the  children  of 
Dishon;  Hemdan,  and  Eshban,  and 
Ithran,  and  Cheran. 

27  The  children  of  Ezer  are 
these;  Bilhan,  and  Zaavan,  and  A- 
kan. 

28  The  children  of  Dishan  are 
these;  Uz,  and  Aran. 


29  These  are  the  dukes  that  came 
of  the  Horites;  duke  Lotan,  duke 
Shobal,  duke  Zibeon,  duke  Anah, 

30  Duke  Dishon,  duke  Ezer,  duke 
Dishan:  these  are  the  dukes  that  came 
of  Hori,  among  their  dukes  in  the 
land  of  Seir. 

31  ^ And  these  are  the  kings  that 
reigned  in  the  land  of  Edom,  before 
there  reigned  any  king  over  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel. 

32  And  Bela  the  son  of  Beor 
reigned  in  Edom : and  the  name  of 
his  city  was  Dinhabah. 

33  And  Bela  died,  and  Jobab  the 


Manahath']  Ptolemy,  v.  17,  3,  mentions 
Manycbiates  west  of  Petra  (Knobel). 

Shepho]  Cp.  the  hill  Shafeh  north  of  Akaba 
(Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  i.  256;  Knobel). 

24.  Anah  that  found  the  mules\  Anah  that 
fonndthe  hot  springs.  (Seenoteon  vv.  2,  3 
below.)  The  Greek  Versions  do  not  translate 
the  word  yemim  (the  LXX.  has  rov  ’la^teiV). 
The  Samaritan  text  has  “the  Emim,”  a gigan- 
tic ptx^ple,  with  which  agrees  the  Targum  of 
Onkelos,  “the  giants.”  This  is  followed  by 
Bochart,  Patrick,  and  others.  The  Targum 
of  Pseudo- Jonathan  renders  “mules,”  being 
followed  herein  by  Saad.,  Kimchi,  and  many 
Rabbins,  by  Luther,  and  the  Authorised  Ver- 
sion. The  Vulgate  renders  “warm  waters,” 
aqtias  calldas^  and  the  Syriac  has  “waters,” 
a rendering  adopted  by  Gesen.  (see  ‘Thes.’ 
p.  586),  Rosenm.,  Schumann,  and  most  mo- 
dern interpreters.  There  were  many  warm 
springs  in  this  region,  the  most  famous  being 
Callirrhoe,  in  the  Wady  Zerka  Maein,  which 
some  suppose  to  have  been  the  very  springs 
discovered  by  Anah. 

31.  And  these  are  the  kings  that  reigned 
in  the  land  of  Edom^  before  there  reigned  any 
king  o'ver  the  children  of  Israel]  These  words 
have  led  many  to  suppose  that  this  and  the 
follov/ing  verses  were  a late  interpolation,  as, 
it  is  thought,  they  must  have  been  written 
after  kings  had  reigned  in  Israel.  Spinoza 
argued  from  them  that  it  was  clearer  than 
midday  that  the  whole  Pentateuch  was  written 
centuries  after  the  time  of  Moses;  a most  il- 
logical conclusion,  for  the  utmost  that  could 
be  inferred  Avould  be  that  (as  Kennicott  sup- 
posed) these  verses  were  taken  from  i Chron. 
i.  43 — 54,  and  having  been  inserted  in  the 
margin  of  a very  ancient  MS.  of  Genesis,  had 
crept  into  the  text. 

There  is  however  nothing  inconsistent  with 
the  Mosaic  origin  of  the  whole  passage.  In 
the  last  chapter  (ch.  xxxv.  ii)  there  had  been 


an  emphatic  promise  from  God  Almighty 
(El-Shaddai)  to  Jacob  that  “kings  should 
come  out  of  his  loins.”  The  Israelites,  no 
doubt,  cherished  a constant  hope  of  such  a 
kingdom  and  such  a kingly  race.  Moses  him-, 
self  (Dent,  xxviii.  36)  prophesied  concerning 
the  king  that  the  Israelites  should  set  over 
them;  and  hence  it  was  not  unnatural  that, 
when  recording  the  eight  kings,  who  had 
reigned  in  the  family  of  Esau  up  to  his  own 
time,  he  should  have  noted  that  as  yet  no 
king  had  risen  from  the  family  of  his  brother 
Jacob,  to  whom  a kingly  progeny  had  been 
promised.  The  words  in  the  original  are 
“before  the  reigning  of  a king  to  the  sons  of 
Israel;”  and  might  be  rendered,  “whilst  as 
yet  the  children  of  Israel  have  no  king;”  there 
being  nothing  in  the  words  expressive  of  a 
past  tense,  or  indicating  that  before  the  writ- 
ing of  the  sentence  a king  had  reigned  in 
Israel. 

The  other  difficulty  in  the  passage  is  chro- 
nological, it  being  thought  that  so  many  dukes 
and  kings  could  not  have  succeeded  one  an- 
other in  the  period  which  elapsed  from  Esau 
to  Moses.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  dukes,  mentioned  from  v.  15  to  19, 
reigned  in  succession,  then  the  kings  from  v. 
31  to  39,  and  then  again  the  dukes  mentioned 
from  V.  40  to  43.  On  the  contrary,  a compari- 
son of  Num.  XX.  14  with  Exod.  xv.  15  shews, 
that  a single  king  was  reigning  in  Edom  con- 
temporaneously with  several  dukes  or  phyl- 
archs.  The  dukes  (as  their  title  indicates) 
were  not  sovereigns  of  the  whole  of  Idumaea, 
but  princes  or  rulers  of  tribes  or  provinces: 
moreover  the  kings  do  not  appear  to  have 
succeeded  by  inheritance,  the  son  never  suc- 
ceeding to  his  father,  flence  they  were  pro- 
bably elected  by  the  dukes. 

33.  Jobab]  The  LXX.  and  some  of  the 
fathers  consider  this  to  have  been  the  same 
person  as  Job;  and  the  mention  of  Eliphaz  in 
V.  II  in  connection  with  Teman,  and  of  Eli- 


192 


GENESIS.  XXXVI. 


[v.  34— 43- 


son  of  Zerah  of  Bozrah  reigned  in 
his  stead. 

34  And  Jobab  died,  and  Husham 
of  the  land  of  Temani  reigned  in  his 
stead. 

35  And  Husham  died,  and  Hadad 
the  son  of  Bedad,  who  smote  Midian 
in  the  field  of  Moab,  reigned  in  his 
stead : and  the  name  of  his  city  was 
Avith. 

36  And  Hadad  died,  and  Samlah 
of  Masrekah  reigned  in  his  stead. 

37  And  Samlah  died,  and  Saul  of 
Rehoboth  hy  the  river  reigned  in  his 
stead. 

38  And  Saul  died,  and  Baal-hanan 
the  son  of  Achbor  reigned  in  his 
stead. 

39  And  Baal-hanan  the  son  of 


Achbor  died,  and  Hadar  reigned  in 
his  stead : and  the  name  of  his  city 
was  Pau;  and  his  wife’s  name  was 
Mehetabel,  the  daughter  of  Matred, 
the  daughter  of  Mezahab. 

40  And  these  are  the  names  of  the 
dukes  that  came  of  Esau,  according 
to  their  families,  after  their  places,  by 
their  names;  duke  Timnah,  duke 
Alvah,  duke  Jetheth, 

41  Duke  Aholibamah,  duke  Elah, 
duke  Pinon, 

42  Duke  Kenaz,  duke  Teman,  duke 
Mibzar, 

43  Duke  Magdiel,-  duke  I ram : 
these  be  the  dukes  of  Edom,  accord- 
ing to  their  habitations  in  the  land  of 
their  possession:  he  is  Esau  the  fa- 
ther of  ^ the  Edomites. 


t Heb. 
Edo^tu 


phaz  the  Temanite  in  the  book  of  Job  favours 
this  belief. 

Bo%rah'\  A famous  city  of  Idumaea  (see 
Isa.  xxxiv.  6,  Ixiii.  i,  &c.),  remains  of  w'hich 
are  still  traced  in  El  Buseireh^  a ruined  village 
in  Jebal.  (Burckhardt,  ‘Syr.’  407;  Robinson, 
II.  167.) 

37.  Rehoboth  by  the  ri^er'\  or  Rehoboth 
Hannahar^  so  distinguished  from  Rehoboth  Ir^ 
ch.  X.  II.  The  river  here  is  probably  the 
Euphrates. 

39.  Hadar]  Called  Hadad  in  i Chr.  i. 
50,  and  here  also  in  the  Samaritan  text.  He 
probably  was  living  when  Moses  wrote,  as  no 
mention  is  made  of  his  death,  an  argument  for 
the  Mosaic  origin  of  this  chapter;  for  Hadad 
could  hardly  have  been  living  after  the  time  of 
the  kings  of  Israel,  to  which  period  those  who 
from  V.  31  consider  it  to  be  an  interpolation 
would  assign  this  genealogy,  or  perhaps  the 
whole  chapter. 

40.  Atid  these  are  the  names  of  the 
dukes ^ &c.]  From  comparing  the  words  in 


this  verse  “ after  their  places,  by  their  names” 
with  those  in  v.  43,  “according  to  their  habi- 
tations in  the  land  of  their  possession,”  it  is 
inferred  with  great  probability,  that  this  se- 
cond catalogue  of  dukes  is,  not  a catalogue  of 
dukes  who  reigned  subsequently  to  the  kings 
of  the  preceding  verses,  nor  a different  version 
of  the  catalogue  given  in  vv.  15  to  19,  but  ra- 
ther a territorial  catalogue,  recounting,  not 
the  names,  but  the  cities  in  which  the  various 
dukes  or  phylarchs  before  named  had  their 
seat  of  government.  If  so,  we  must  render 
“ the  duke  of  Timnah,  the  duke  of  Alvah,  the 
duke  of  Jetheth,  &c.”  Two  of  the  names  in 
this  list  correspond  with  two  in  the  former 
list,  viz.  Timnah  and  Kenaz,  because,  as  it  is 
supposed,  the  dukes  Timnah  and  Kenaz  called 
their  cities  after  their  own  names.  Aholiba- 
mah may  have  been  a city  called  after  the 
Horite  princess  (v.  25).  (So  Schumann,  Kno- 
bel,  Del.,  Keil,  Kalisch,  &c.). 

43.  the  father  of  the  Edomites]  See  on 

V.  9. 


NOTE  A on  Chap,  xxxvi.  vv.  2, 


Adah  the  daughter  of  Elon  the  Hittite^  and 
Aholibamah  the  daughter  of  Atiah^  the  daugh~ 
ter  ofZibeon  the  Hrvite;  and  Bashemath,  Ish- 
maeP s daughter^  sister  of  Nebajoth]  The  dif- 
ficulty of  reconciling  this  with  the  names  of 
the  three  wives  of  Ksau,  as  given  in  ch.  xxvi. 
34,  xxviii.  3,  will  be  seen  by  comparing  the 
two  accounts  as  follows; 

Ch.  xxvi.  34,  xxviii.  9. 

1.  Judith,  daughter  of  Beeri  the  Hittite. 

2.  ikishcmath,  daughter  of  Elon  the  Hittite. 

3.  Mahalath,  daughter  of  Ishmael,  sister 

to  Nebaioth. 


Ch.  xxxvi.  2. 

1.  Aholibamah,  daughter  of  Anah  daugh- 

ter of  Zibeon  the  Hivite. 

2.  Adah,  daughter  of  Elon  the  Hittite. 

3.  Bashemath,  daughter  of  Ishmael,  sister 

to  Nebaioth. 

F rom  this  table  it  appears  that  every  one  of 
the  three  wives  is  designated  by  a different 
name  in  the  earlier  history  from  that  in  the 
later  genealogy.  Yet  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  2 Bashemath  the  daughter  of  Elon  = Adah 
the  daughter  of  Elon,  nor  that  3 Mahalath  = 
Bashemath,  both  being  described  as  daughter 


GENESIS.  XXXVII. 


193* 


V.  1,  2.] 

of  Ishmael,  and  sister  of  Nebaioth.  We  may 
therefore  conclude  also  that  1 Judith  — A holi- 
bamah.  This  excludes  the  explanation  sug- 
gested by  several  commentators,  that  the  wives 
of  Esau,  named  in  ch.  xxvi.  34  had  died  with- 
out offspring,  and  that  Esau  had  married 
others.  It  seems  far  more  probable  that  the 
one  set  of  names  were  those  which  they  bore  in 
their  father’s  house,  the  other  set  having  been 
given  to  them  by  Esau,  or  by  the  Edomites, 
after  they  had  become  mothers  of  tribes. 

1.  The  identity  of  Judith  and  Aholibamah 
may  appear  thus.  J udith  is  called  the  daugh- 
ter of  Beeri  the  Hittite,  whilst  Aholibamah  is 
called  “the  daughter  of  Anah,  the  daughter 
of  Zibeon  the  Hivite.”  Anah  was  probably 
not  the  mother,  but  the  father  of  Aholibamah, 
the  second  “daughter”  being  referrible  back 
to  Aholibamah,  and  not  attributable  to  Anah 
(unless  the  reading  of  the  Samaritan,  LXX., 
and  Syriac,  “ the  son  of  Zibeon,”  be  the  right 
reading);  for  in  v.  24  we  find  that  Anah  was 
the  son  of  Zibeon,  and  the  grandson  of  Seir 
the  Horite.  The  reason  why  the  same  person 
has  been  called  Anah  and  Beeri  has  been  de- 
rived by  Hengstenberg  and  others  from  the 
fact  that  Anah  is  said,  in  v.  24,  to  have  dis- 
covered the  hot  springs,  from  which  very  pro- 
bably he  acquired  the  name  of  Beeri,  Le.  font- 
anus^  “ the  well-finder.”  A greater  difficulty 
is  apparent  in  his  being  called  a “Hittite” 
(xxvi.  34),  a “Hivite”  (xxxvi.  2),  and  a 
“ Horite”  (xxxvi.  20).  It  is  observed  that 
these  three  words  “ Hittite,”  “ Hivite,”  and 
“ Horite,”  differ  in  Hebrew  by  one  letter 
only,  and  that  they  were  easily  interchanged 
in  transcription.  It  is,  however,  clear  (from 
xxvii.  46)  that  Rebekah  calls  Judith  a daugh- 
ter of  Heth.  And  from  xxxvi.  20,  24,  25, 
that  Aholibamah,  the  daughter  of  Anah,  was 
a Horite.  The  difficulty  seems  therefore  rather 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 

2 foseph  is  hated  of  his  brethren.  5 Plis  tivo 
dreams.  13  facob  sendeth  him  to  visit  his 
brethren.  1 8 His  brethren  co7ispire  hii  death. 
21  Reuben  saveth  him.  26  They  sell  hhn  to 
the  Ishmeelites.  31  His  father,  deceived  'by 
the  bloody  coat,  momnieth  for  him.  36  He  is 
sold  to  Potiphar  in  Egypt. 


to  admit  of  solution  by  saying  that  Hittite 
(like  Amorite)  was  a generic  name  for  a large 
portion  of  the  Ganaaaitish  people,  compre- 
hending both  Hivites  and  Horites.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  Hivite  in  v.  2 may  be  an 
error  of  transcription  for  Horite  ('in  for  'in), 
in  which  case  we  have  only  to  conclude  that 
the  Horites  of  Mount  Seir  were  reckoned  by 
Isaac  and  Rebecca  as  among  the  Hittite  in- 
habitants of  Canaan.  If,  however,  the  read- 
ing Hivite  be  correct,  it  is  not  impossible  that 
the  Hivites,  a southern  people,  may  originally 
have  come  from  Mount  Seir,  and  have  been 
dwellers  in  its  rocky  fastnesses,  which  is  the 
meaning  of  the  word  Horite  (troglodyte, 
dweller  in  caves).  If  this  be  correct,  then 
we  must  conclude  that  Judith  the  daughter 
of  Anah,  called  Beeri,  from  his  fiiiding  the 
hot  springs,  and  the  granddaughter  of  Zibeon 
the  Horite,  one  of  the  tribes  reckoned  in  the 
great  Hittite  family,  when  she  married  Esau, 
assumed  the  name  of  Aholibamah  (“the  tent 
of  the  height”). 

2.  Bashemath  is  described  exactly  as  Adah 
is,  i.e.  as  the  daughter  of  Elon  the  Hittite. 
There  is  no  difficulty  here  except  in  the 
change  of  name  into  Adah,  “ornament,”  a 
change  not  improbable  for  Esau  to  have  made. 

3.  In  the  same  manner  Mahalath  is  the 
daughter  of  Ishmael  the  sister  of  Nebaioth, 
and  Bashemath  is  the  daughter  of  Ishmael  the 
sister  of  Nebaioth.  There  would  be  no  diffi- 
culty in  this,  except  that  Bashemath,  the  se- 
cond name  of  the  daughter  of  Ishmael,  is  the 
same  with  the  first  name  of  the  daughter  of 
Elon  the  Hittite.  If  this  seems  to  some  irre- 
concileable  with  probability,  it  may  be  ascribed 
to  an  error  of  transcription,  likely  enough  to 
occur  in  the  writing  out  of  genealogies,  and 
the  Samaritan  text  reads  Mahalath  in  the  ge- 
nealogy as  well  as  in  the  history. 


And  Jacob  dwelt  in  the  land 

Wherein  his  father  was  a stranger,  + Heb. 
in  the  land  of  Canaan.  fhel^/so- 

2 These  are  the  generations  of 
cob.  Joseph,  being  seventeen  years 
old,  was  feeding  the  flock  with  his 
brethren;  and  the  lad  was  with  the 


Chap.  XXXVII.  1.  And  Jacob  dwelt  in 
the  land,  &c.]  Ch.  xxxv.  concluded  the  his- 
tory of  Isaac.  Ch.  xxxvi.  disposed  of  the 
history  of  Esau  and  his  descendants  down  to 
the  very  time  of  the  Exodus.  (See  on  ch. 
xxxvi.  39.)  This  first  verse  of  ch.  xxxvii. 
now  lands  us  in  the  time  and  place,  from 
whence  the  succeeding  history  is  to  begin. 
Jacob  dwelt  in  the  land  of  his  father’s 
sojournings,  in  the  land  of  Canaan. 
Esau  had  left  Canaan  to  Jacob,  who  after 
their  father’s  death  became  the  sojourner  in  the 
land,  which  his  posterity  were  to  possess. 

VoL.  I. 


2.  These  are  the  generations  of  Jacob.'] 
The  Toledoth,  or  genealogical  history  of  Isaac 
began  (ch.  xxv.  19)  after  the  death  of  his 
father  Abraham,  a few  verses  having  been 
allotted  (w.  12 — 18)  to  dispose  of  the  his- 
tory of  his  brother  Ishmael.  In  the  same 
manner,  the  Toledoth  of  Jacob  are  given  in  this 
chapter  after  the  death  of  his  father  Isaac, 
ch.  xxxvi.  having  intei*vened  to  account  for 
Esau  and  his  family.  Many  of  the  preceding 
chapters  had  been  occupied  with  the  histoi*y 
of  Jacob  and  his  sons,  but  Jacob’s  Toledoth 
begin  at  this  point,  because  now  he  has  become 

N 


194 


GENESIS.  XXXVII 


[v.  3—10. 


H Or, 
pieces. 


sons  ofBi]hah,and  with  the  sons  of  Zil- 
pah,  his  father’s  wives:  and  Joseph 
brought  unto  his  father  their  evil  report. 

3 Now  Israel  loved  Joseph  more 
than  all  his  children,  because  he  was 
the  son  of  his  old  age : and  he  made 
him  a coat  of  many  “ colours. 

4 And  when  his  brethren  saw  that 
their  father  loved  him  more  than  all 
his  brethren,  they  hated  him,  and 
could  not  speak  peaceably  unto  him. 

5 ^ And  Joseph  dreamed  a dream, 
and  he  told  it  his  brethren : and  they 
hated  him  yet  the  more. 

6 And  he  said  unto  them.  Hear,  I 
pray  you,  this  dream  which  I have 
dreamed : 

7 For,  behold,  we  were  binding 


sheaves  in  the  field,  and,  lo,  my  sheaf 
arose,  and  also  stood  upright ; and,  be- 
hold, your  sheaves  stood  round  about, 
and  made  obeisance  to  my  sheaf. 

8 And  his  brethren  said  to  him, 
Shalt  thou  indeed  reign  over  us.?  or 
shalt  thou  indeed  have  dominion  over 
us?  And  they  hated  him  yet  the 
more  for  his  dreams,  and  for  his 
words. 

9 ^ And  he  dreamed  yet  another 
dream,  and  told  it  his  brethren,  and 
said.  Behold,  I have  dreamed  a dream 
more ; and,  behold,  the  sun  and  the 
moon  and  the  eleven  stars  made  obei- 
sance to  me. 

10  And  he  told  it  to  his  father, 
and  to  his  brethren:  and  his  father 


the  sole  head  and  father  of  the  chosen  seed. 
Th^Toledoth,  or  family  history,  of  Jacob  con- 
tinues now  till  his  death  ch.  1. 

2.  Joseph.,  being  seventeen  years  old.']  This 
history  goes  back  a few  years;  for  Isaac  must 
have  been  living  when  Joseph  was  seven- 
teen. (See  note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xxxi.) 
But  the  historian  had  fully  wound  up  the 
history  of  Isaac,  before  commencing  the  Tole~ 
doth  of  Jacob;  and  he  now  gives  unity  to  the 
history  of  the  descent  into  Egypt  by  beginning 
with  the  adolescence  of  Joseph,  his  father’s 
fondness  for  him,  and  his  brothers’  jealousy 
of  him. 

3.  the  son  of  his  old  age]  It  is  not  im- 
possible that  the  greater  part  of  this  narrative 
may  have  been  chronologically  before  the  birth 
of  Benjamin  and  the  death  of  Rachel,  related 

in  ch.  XXXV.  i8. 

coat  of  many  colours]  (i).  The  LXX. 
Vulg.  and  most  modern  versions  render  a 
garment  made  of  different  pieces,  of  patch- 
work,  and  so  of  many  colours.  In  the  well- 
known  scene  from  the  tomb  of  Chnoumhotep 
at  Beni  Hassan,  a tomb  of  the  X I Ith  dynasty, 
the  Semitic  visitors  who  are  offering  presents 
to  the  Governor  are  dressed  in  robes  of  rich 
colouring,  apparently  fomaed  of  separate  small 
pieces  or  patches  sewn  together.  There  is  an 
excellent  engraving  and  explanation  in  Brugsch, 
‘Histoire  d’Egypte,’  p.  63. 

(2).  The  versions  ot  Aquila,  Symm.,  Syr. 
render  a tunic  with  sleeves  or  fringes  extending 
to  both  hands  and  feet,  tunica  manicata  et 
talaris  (see  Hieron,  ‘ Qu.’  ad  h.  1.),  which  is 
the  interpretation  adopted  by  most  modern 
Hebraists  (see  Ges.  ‘d'hes.’  p.  1 1 1 7).  We  find 
Thamar,  the  daughter  of  David,  wearing  this 
same  dress  (2  S.  xiii.  18):  and  Josephus 
(‘Ant.’  vii.  8.  i)  speaks  of  long  garments  reach- 


ing to  the  hands  and  ankles  as  worn  by  Jewish 
maidens.  But  the  engraving  at  Beni  Hassan 
just  mentioned  makes  the  former  interpreta- 
tion (i)  the  more  probable. 

It  has  been  thought  by  some  that  Jacob, 
in  his  anger  at  thje  sins  of  his  elder  sons, 
especially  of  Reuben  his  firstborn,  and  in  his 
partiality  for  Joseph,  the  firstborn  of  Rachel, 
designed  to  give  him  the  right  of  primogeniture, 
that  this  robe  was  the  token  of  birthright,  and 
perhaps  even  designating  the  priestly  office  of 
the  head  of  the  family.  (See  Heidegger,  Tom.  ii. 
p.  581.  Braunius  ‘de  Vestitu  sacerdotali,’ pp. 
473  sqq.,  Kurtz,  Vol.i.  p.378,  Clark’s  transla- 
tion, Blunt,  ‘Undesigned  Coincidences,’ p.  15.) 

7.  we  were  binding  sheaves  in  the  field] 
It  appears  from  this,  that  Jacob  was  not  a 
mere  nomad,  but,  like  his  father  Isaac  (ch. 
xxvi.  12),  had  adopted  agricultural  as  well  as 
pastoral  employments. 

10.  his  father  rebuked  him]  Joseph 
may  have  told  the  dream  in  the  simplicity 
of  his  heart,  or  perhaps  he  may  have  been 
elated  by  his  father’s  partiality  and  by  “the 
abundance  of  the  revelations”  (2  Cor.  xii.  7). 

thy  mother]  It  is  possible  that  Rachel 
may  have  been  living  now,  for  neither  the  date 
of  the  dream  nor  of  Rachel’s  death  are  clearly 
given.  The  dream  may  have  been  some  time 
before  the  selling  of  Joseph,  and  is  only  re- 
lated here  as  one  of  the  reasons  which  caused 
his  brethren  to  hate  him.  If,  however,  Ra- 
chel was  dead,  we  must  then  understand  Jacob 
to  mean  by  “thy  mother”  either  Leah,  who 
would  be  his  step-mother,  or  perhaps  more 
likely  Bilhah,  who  was  Rachel’s  handmaid, 
and  at  once  nurse  and  step-mother  to  Jo- 
seph; and  it  is  not  impossible  that  in  either 
Leah  or  Bilhah  the  dream  may  have  been  ful- 
filled; for  we  do  not  know  whether  they  were- 


V.  II — 24.] 


GENESIS.  XXXVII. 


195 


rebuked  him,  and  said  unto  him, 
What  is  this  dream  that  thou  hast 
dreamed?  Shall  I and  thy  mother 
and  thy  brethren  indeed  come  to  bow- 
down  ourselves  to  thee  to  the  earth  ? 

1 1 And  his  brethren  envied  him  ; 
but  his  father  observed’  the  saying. 

12  ^ And  his  brethren  went  to  feed 
their  father’s  flock  in  Shechem. 

13  And  Israel  said  unto  Joseph, 
Do  not  thy  brethren  feed  the  flock 
in  Shechem?  come,  and  I will  send 
thee  unto  them.  And  he  said  to 
him,  Here  am  I. 

14  And  he  said  to  him.  Go,  I pray 
\ Heb.  thee,  ^ see  whether  it  be  well  with  thy 
^flcac^of  brethren,  and  well  with  the  flocks; 
fkren'&^c  bring  me  word  again.  So  he 

sent  him  out  of  the  vale  of  Hebron, 
and  he  came  to  Shechem. 

15  ^ And  a certain  man  found 
him,  and,  behold,  he  was  wandering 
in  the  field:  and  the  man  asked  him, 
saying.  What  seekest  thou  ? 

16  And  he  said,  I seek  my  bre- 
thren : tell  me,  I pray  thee,  where 
they  feed  their  flocks. 

17  And  the  man  said.  They  are 
departed  hence ; for  I heard  them  say. 
Let  us  go  to  Dothan.  And  Joseph 


went  after  his  brethren,  and  found 
them  in  Dothan. 

18  And  v/hen  they  saw  him  afar 
off,  even  before  he  came  near  unto 
them,  they  conspired  against  him  to 
slay  him. 

19  And  they  said  one  to  another, 

Behold,  this  ^ dreamer  cometh.  t Heb. 

20  Come  now  therefore,  and  let 
us  slay  him,  and  cast  him  into  some 
pit,  and  we  will  say.  Some  evil  beast 
hath  devoured  him : and  we  shall  see 
what  will  become  of  his  dreams. 

21  And  "Reuben  heard  /V,  and  he  chap.  42. 
delivered  him  out  of  their  hands;  and 

said.  Let  us  not  kill  him. 

22  And  Reuben  said  unto  them. 

Shed  no  blood,  but  cast  him  into  this 
pit  that  is  in  the  wilderness,  and  lay 
no  hand  upon  him;  that  he  might  rid 
him  out  of  their  hands,  to  deliver  him 
to  his  father  again. 

23  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
Joseph  was  come  unto  his  brethren, 
that  they  stript  Joseph  out  of  his 
coat,  hii  coat  of  many  ” colours  that  “ Or, 

1 . pieces. 

was  on  him ; 

24  And  they  took  him,  and  cast 
him  into  a pit:  and  the  pit  was  empty, 
there  was  no  water  in  it. 


alive  or  not  when  Jacob  went  down  into 
Egypt. 

14.  out  of  the  'vale  of  Hebron,  and  he 
came  to  Shechem']  It  appears  from  this  that 
Jacob  was  now  dwelling  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Hebron  where  his  father  Isaac  was  still 
living  (see  on  v.  3).  After  the  slaughter  of 
the  Shechemites  (see  ch.  xxxiv.)  Jacob  jour- 
neyed southward;  but  from  the  fact  that  his 
sons  were  sent  to  feed  sheep  in  Shechem,  it  is 
not  impossible  that  he  may  have  left  some  of 
his  cattle  still  in  their  old  pastures,  and  his 
anxiety  here  about  his  sons,  who  were  thus 
feeding  in  Shechem,  may  have  arisen  in  part 
from  the  enmity  excited  against  them  in  that 
neighbourhood  by  their  violence.  In  ch.  xxxv. 
we  trace  Jacob’s  southward  joumeyings  from 
Shechem  lirst  to  Bethel,  v.  6 ; then  to  Bethle- 
hem, vv.  16,  19;  then  to  the  tower  of  Edar, 
V.  21;  and  finally  to  Hebron,  v.  27,  where 
Isaac  died,  v.  29.  But  from  this  verse,  ch. 
xxxvii,  14,  we  infer  that  Jacob  must  have 
ai  rived  at  Hebron  several  years  before  his 
father’s  death. 

17.  Dothan']  or  Dothaln,  the  two  wells  or 
cisterns.  They  may  have  gone  there  because 


of  the  water  in  these  wells.  Dothan  is  said 
(Euseb.  ‘ Onomasticon’)  to  have  been  twelve 
Roman  miles  north  of  Sebaste  {i.e.  Shechem 
or  Samaria)  towards  the  plain  of  Jezreel.  It 
still  retains  its  ancient  name  (Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’ 
III.  122). 

20.  some  pit]  A cistern,  or  well,  dug  by 
the  shepherds  of  the  country,  to  catch  and 
preserve  the  rain-water.  Some  of  these  cis- 
terns were  very  deep,  and  a lad  thrown  into 
one  of  them  would  have  been  unable  to  escape. 

24.  the  pit  rivas  empty,  there  avas  no 
riuater  in  it]  Apparently  referred  to  by  Zech. 
ix.  II,  in  a prophecy  of  the  Messiah.  Joseph 
has  been  recognised  by  most  Christian  inter- 
preters as  a type  of  Christ;  in  his  father’s  love 
for  him,  in  his  being  sent  to  his  brethren,  re- 
jected by  them,  sold  to  the  Gentiles,  delivered 
to  death,  in  the  sanctity  of  his  life,  in  his  hu- 
miliation, in  his  exaltation  to  be  a Prince  and 
a Saviour,  in  that  his  father  and  mother  and 
brethren  all  came  and  bowed  down  to  him. 
We  may  notice  here,  that  the  counsels  of  his 
brethren  to  prevent  the  fulfilment  of  his  dreams, 
like  the  counsels  of  Herod  and  the  Jews  to 
prevent  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies  con- 

N 2 


''i 


GENESIS.  XXXVII. 


[v-  25—35- 


196 

25  And  they  sat  down  to  eat 
bread:  and  they  lifted  up  their. eyes 
and  looked,  and,  behold,  a company 
of  Ishmeelites  came  from  Gilead  with 
their  camels  bearing  spicery  and  balm 
and  myrrh,  going  to  carry  it  down  to 
Egypt. 

26  And  Judah  said  unto  his  bre- 
thren, What  profit  is  it  if  we  slay 
our  brother,  and  conceal  his  blood  ? 

27  Come,  and  let  us  sell  him  to 
the  Ishmeelites,  and  let  not  our  hand 
be  upon  him;  for  he  is  our  brother 

1 Heb.  andouv  fiesh.  And  his  brethren  Were 

hearke^iea, 

content. 

28  Then  there  passed  by  Midian- 
ites  merchantmen ; and  they  drew  and 

* Psai.  105.  lifted  up  Joseph  out  of  the  pit,  ^and 

'Vvisd.  10.  sold  Joseph  to  the  Ishmeelites  for 

A^its  7. 9.  twenty  pieces  of  silver : and  they 
brought  Joseph  into  Egypt. 

29  ^ And  Reuben  returned  unto 
the  pit;  and,  behold,  Joseph  was  not 
in  the  pit;  and  he  rent  his  clothes. 


30  And  he  returned  unto  his  bre- 
thren, and  said,  The  child  is  not; 
and  I,  whither  shall  I go? 

31  And  they  took  Joseph’s  coat, 
and  killed  a kid  of  the  goats,  and 
dipped  the  coat  in  the  blood; 

32  And  they  sent  the  coat  of  many 
colours,  and  they  brought  it  to  their 
father ; and  said.  This  have  we  found : 
know  now  whether  it  be  thy  son’s 
coat  or  no. 

33  And  he  knew  it,  and  said.  It  is 
my  son’s  coat;  an  “^evil  beast  hath  de- 
voured  him;- Joseph  is  without  doubt 
rent  in  pieces. 

34  And  Jacob  rent  his  clothes,  and 
put  sackcloth  upon  his  loins,  and 
mourned  for  his  son  many  days. 

35  And  all  his  sons  and  all  his 
daughters  rose  up  to  comfort  him ; 
but  he  refused  to  be  comforted;  and 
he. said.  For  I will  go  down  into  the 
grave  unto  my  son  mourning.  Thus 
his  father  wept  for  him. 


ccrning  Jesus,  only  served  to  bring  about 
God's  counsels,  which  were  wrought  out  by 
the  very  means  taken  to  defeat  them.  If 
Joseph  had  not  been  sold  to  the  Midianites, 
he  would  never  have  been  exalted  to  be  gover- 
nor in  Egypt.  If  Christ  had  not  been  perse- 
cuted and  at  last  crucified,  He  would  not 
have  worked  out  redemption  for  us,  have  risen 
from  the  dead,  and  ascended  up  into  His 
glory. 

25.  they  sat  donvn  to  eat  bread]  In 
this  heartless  meal  Reuben  can  have  taken 
no  part.  It  appears  from  verse  29,  that 
he  must  have  left  his  brethren,  perhaps  with 
the  very  purpose  of  seeking  means  to  rescue 
Joseph.  I'he  simplicity  and  truthfulness  of 
the  narrative  are  all  the  more  apparent  by 
the  indifference  of  the  writer  to  the  ques- 
tion how  and  why  it  was  that  Reuben  was 
absent  at  this  point  of  the  history.  A forger 
would  have  been  likely  to  tell  all  about  it,  and 
make  it  all  plain.  Yet  strangely  enough,  this 
vc‘ry  artlessness  has  been  made  an  argument 
against  the  historical  truth  of  the  narrative,  as 
Ixing  clumsily  arranged,  and  inconsistent  in 
these  details. 

25.  a company  of  Ishyiieelitts]  “A  tra- 
velling company”  or  “caravan.”  Ishmaelites 
afterwards  called  Midianites  in  v.  28,  and 
.Medanim  in  v.  36.  See  note  on  ch.  xxv.  2. 
Medan  and  Mifiian  were  sons  of  .Abraham 
by  Keturah;  Ishmael  his  son  by  Hagar.  The 
Ishmaelites  and  Midianites  were  near  neigh- 


bours, and  ver)'  probably  joined  together  in 
caravans  and  commercial  enterprizes.  Very 
probably  too  the  Ishmaelites,  being  the  more 
powerful  tribe,  may  have  by  this  time  become 
a general  name  for  several  smaller  and  asso- 
ciated tribes. 

spicery]  probably  “storax,”  the  gum  of  the 
styrax-tree.  So  Aqu.  followed  by  Bochart, 
‘Hieroz.’ II.  p.  532,  Gesen.  ‘Thes.’ p-883,  &c. 
The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  give  only  “perfumes.” 

balm]  Probably  the  gum  of  the  opobalsam 
or  balsam-tree,  which  grew  abundantly  in 
Gilead,  and  was  especially  used  for  healing 
wounds.  This  is  the  interpretation  commonly 
given  by  the  Jews,  and  adopted  by  Bochart 
(‘Hieroz.’  1.  628) ; Celsius (‘ Hierob.’ ii.  180) ; 
Ges.  ‘Thes.’  1185,  &c.).  Lee  (Lex.  in  loc.) 
contends  for  “mastich”  as  the  right  rendering. 

ynyrrh]  According  to  almost  all  modern 
interpreters  Ladanum,  an  odoriferous  gum 
found  on  the  leaves  of  the  cistus  creticus  or 
cistus  ladanifera.  (See  Celsius,  ‘Hierob.’  I. 
280 — 288,  Gesen.  ‘Thes.’ p. 748,  Smith,  ‘ Diet, 
of  Bible,’  s.v.  Myrrh.) 

27.  '^vere  content]  hearkened. 

35.  his  daughters]  See  on  ch.  xxx.  21. 
hito  the  gra've]  To  sheol.  He  thought 
his  son  devoured  by  wild  Ix'asts,  therefore  the 
word  Sheol  translated  “grave”  must  here  mean 
the  place  of  the  departed.  The  word  appears 
to  signify  a hollow  subterraneous  place  (comp. 
hell  hole^  See.).  (See  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1348.) 


).  44. 


v.36-6.]  genesis.  XXXVII.  XXXVIII. 


197 


IHeb. 
eunuch. 
But  the 
word  doth 
signify  not 
only  e7i- 
nuchs,  blit 
also  cham- 
ber lains, 
courtiers, 
and  o£i- 
cers. 
t Heb. 
chief  rf  the 
slaughter- 
men, or, 
execution- 
ers. 

I Or, 

chief  7uar- 
shal. 


36  And  the  Midianites  sold  him 
into  Egypt  unto  Potiphar,  an*^ officer 
of  Pharaoh’s,  and  ^ “ captain  of  the 
guard. 

CHAPTER  XXXVIII. 

I yiidah  begetteth  Er,  Onan,  and  Shelah.  6 
Ennai'rieth  Tamar.  8 The  trespass  of  Onan. 
II  Tamar  stayeth  for  Shelah.  13  She  de- 
ceiveth  fiidah.  27  She  beareth  twins,  Pharez 
and  Zarah. 


K 


ND  it  came  to  pass  at  that  time, 
that  Judah  went  down  from  his 
brethren,  and  turned  in  to  a certain 
Adullamite,  whose  name  was  Hirah. 


2 And  Judah  saw  there  a daughter 
of  a certain  Canaanite,  whose  name 

was  " Shuah  ; and  he  took  her,  and  i Chron. 
went  in  unto  her. 

3 And  she  conceived,  and  bare  a 
son ; and  he  called  his  name  Er. 

4 ^ And  she  conceived  again,  and 
bare  a son ; and  she  called  his  name 
Onan. 

5 And  she  yet  again  conceived, 

and  bare  a son;  and  called  his  name 
Shelah : and  he  was  at  Chezib,  when 
she  bare  him.  ' 

6 And  Judah  took  a wife  for  Er 


36.  Potiphar']  Generally  supposed  to  be 
the  same  as  Potiphera,  i.e.  “devoted  to  Ra,” 
the  Sun-God.  (See  Ges.  ‘Thes.,’  p.  1094.) 
It  is  far  more  probably  “devoted  to  Par  or 
Phar,”  i.e.  to  the  Royal  House  or  Palace. 
(See  ‘Excursus  on  Egyptian  Words’ at  the 
end  of  this  volume.) 

an  officer  of  Pharaoh's]  Heb.  ‘ ‘ an  eunuch ; ” 
but  used  also  of  chamberlains  and  other  offi- 
cers about  the  court.  The  immediate  prede- 
cessor in  Manetho  of  Sesostris,  who  was  of 
the  same  dynasty  with  Joseph’s  Pharaoh,  was 
slain  by  his  eunuchs. 

captain  of  the  guar  cT]  Chief  of  the  execu- 
tioners, or  “commander  of  the  body  guard,” 
who  executed  the  sentences  of  the  king,  (Cp. 
2 K.  XXV.  8;  Jer.  xxxix.  9,  lii.  12.)  Herod. 
( 1 1. 168)  tells  us  that  “a  thousand  Calasirians 
and  the  same  number  of  Hermotybians  form- 
ed in  alternate  years  the  body-guard  of  the 
king”  of  Egypt. 


exception  of  that  which  was  involved  in  the 
history  of  Joseph.  There  is  also  a remark- 
able contrast  brought  vividly  out  by  this 
juxtaposition  of  the  impure  line,  of  Judah  and 
his  children  with  the  chastity  and  moral  in- 
tegrity of  Joseph  as  seen  in  the  succeeding 
chapter. 

at  that  time]  It  is  by  no  means  certain 
that  this  note  of  time  is  to  be  immediately 
connected  with  the  events  in  the  last  chapter. 
The  strict  chronological  sequence  in  these 
Toledoth  is  not  always  followed.  Episodes, 
like  the  genealogies  of  I shmael  and  Esau  above 
referred  to,  are  introduced  here  and  there,  in 
order  to  avoid  interrupting  the  general  order 
of  another  narrative,  and  so  this  episode  of  the 
history  of  Judah  is  brought  in  to  prevent  an 
interruption  in  the  history  of  Joseph.  If  the 
chronology  in  note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xxxi.  be 
adopted,  Judah'  would  have  been  at  least  26 
at  the  time  of  Jacob’s  flight  from  Padan- 
aram,  and  from  that  time  to  the  going  down 
to  Egypt  there  would  be  an  interval  of  33 
years. 

civent  doewn  from  his  brethren]  i.  e.  went 
southward  (Abenezra,  Rosenm.  &c.). 

Adullamite]  Adullam,  a place  afterwards 
famous  in  the  history  of  David,  i S.  xxii.  i 
(see  also  Josh.  xii.  15;  2 S.  xxiii.  13;  i Chr. 
xi.  15;  2 Chr.  xi.  7;  Micah  i.  15),  is  men- 
tioned by  Jerome  as  existing  in  his  day,  then 
a small  village  to  the  east  of  Eleutheropolis. 
It  must  have  lain  in  the  southeni  part  of  the 
plain  of  Judah,  but  its  site  has  not  been  dis- 
covered by  modern  travellers. 

2.  a certain  Canaanite,  nvhose  name  <voas 
Shuah]  Shuah  was  the  name  of  the  father 
of  Judah’s  wife,  not  of  the  wife  herself, 
as  appears  from  the  Hebrew  and  from  v. 
12.  This  marriage  of  Judah  with  one  of  the 
daughters  of  the  land  was  the  fruitful  source 
of  sin  and  misery  in,  his  family. 

5.  at  Chezib]  Probably  the  same  3s  Achzib 
mentioned  with  Adullam,  Mic.  i.  14,  15. 


Chap.  XXXVIII.  1.  it  came  to  pass  at 
that  time]  This  chapter  may  appear  to  be 
an  useless  digression  inserted  at  an  incon- 
venient time;  but  in  reality  it  supplies  a very 
important  link,  and  this  was  probably  the 
best  place  for  its  introduction.  In  the  Tb/e- 
doth,  or  family  history,  of  Jacob,  the  two 
chief  persons  were  Joseph  and  Judah;  Joseph 
from  his  high  character,  his  personal  import- 
ance, his  influence  in  the  future  destinies  of 
the  race,  and  his  typical  foreshadowing  of  the 
Messiah;  Judah,  from  his  obtaining  the  vir- 
tual right  of  primogeniture,  and  from  his 
being  the  ancestor  of  David  and  of  the  Son  of 
David.  Hence,  at  a natural  pause  in  the 
history  of  Joseph,  viz.  when  he  had  been 
now  sold  into  Egypt  and  settled  in  Potiphar’ s 
house,  the  historian  recurs  to  the  events  in 
the  family  of  Judah,  which  he  carries  down 
to  the  birth  of  Pharez,  the  next  link  in  the 
ancestry  of  the  Saviour.  Thus  he  clears 
away  all  that  was  necessary  to  be  told  of 
the  history  of  the  twelve  patriarchs,  with  the 


[V.  7—17. 


198 


GENESIS.  XXXVIII. 


his  firstborn,  whose  name  was  Ta- 
mar. 

fNumb.  7 And  ^ Er,  Judah’s  firstborn,  was 
wicked  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  ; and 
the  Lord  slew  him. 

8 And  Judah  said  unto  Onan,  Go 
in  unto  thy  brother’s  wife,  and  marry 
her,  and  raise  up  seed  to  thy  brother. 

9 And  Onan  knew  that  the  seed 
should  not  be  his;  and  it  came  to 
pass,  when  he  went  in  unto  his  bro- 
ther’s wife,  that  he  spilled  it  on  the 
ground,  lest  that*  he  should  give  seed 
to  his  brother. 

10  And  the  thing  which  he  did 
t Heb.  ^ displeased  the  Lord  : wherefore  he 

mas  evil  . * , . . 

m the  eyes  SleW  him  alSO. 

11  Then  said  Judah  to  Tamar  his 
daughter  in  law.  Remain  a widow  at 
thy  father’s  house,  till  Shelah  my  son 
be  grown : for  he  said.  Lest  perad- 
venture  he  die  also,  as  his  brethren 
did.  And  Tamar  went  and  dwelt  in 
her  father’s  house. 

12  And  Mn  process  of  time  the 

^meri"^mui-  daughter  of  Shuah  Judah’s  wife  died; 
tipued.  Judah  was  comforted,  and  went 


of  tne 
Lord. 


Heb. 


up  unto  his  sheepshearers  to  Tim- 
nath,  he  and  his  friend  Hirah  the 
Adullamite. 

13  And  it  was  told  Tamar,  saying. 
Behold  thy  father  in  law  goeth  up  to 
Timnath  to  shear  his  sheep. 

14  And  she  put  her  widow’s  gar- 
ments off  from  her,  and  covered  her 
with  a vail,  and  wrapped  herself,  and 

sat  in  ^ an  open  place,  which  is  by  the  f Heb. 
way  to  Timnath;  for  she  saw 
Shelah  was  grown,  and  she  was  not 
given  unto  him  to  wife. 

1 5 When  J udah  saw  her,  he  thought 
her  to  be  an  harlot;  because  she  had 
covered  her  face. 

16  And  he  turned  unto  her  by  the 
way,  and  said.  Go  to,  I pray  thee, 
let  me  come  in  unto  thee;  (for  he 
knew  not  that  she  was  his  daughter 
in  law.)  And  she  said.  What  wilt 
thou  give  me,  that  thou  mayest  come 
in  unto  me.? 

17  And  he  said,  I will  send  thee 

^ a kid  from  the  flock.  And  she  said,  t Heb. 
Wilt  thou  give  me  a pledge,  till  thou 
send  itP 


8.  Tamar]  /.£■.“  a palm-tree.” 

8.  raise  up  seed  to  thy  brother']  As  this 
was  before  the  law  of  Moses,  it  would  appear 
probable  that  this  lex  k'viratus^  law  of  mar- 
riage with  a brother’s  widow,  rested  on  some 
traditional  custom,  very  probably  among  the 
Chaldees.  The  law  of  Moses  did  not  abo- 
lish it,  but  gave  rules  concerning  it  (Deut. 
XXV.  5),  as  was  the  case  as  regards  many 
other  ancient  practices.  This  law  of  levirate 
marriage  prevailed  among  Indian,  Persian, 
African,  and  some  Italian  races  (Diod.  Sic. 
XII.  18). 

11.  Then  said  Judah  to  Tamar]  Judah 
perhaps  superstitiously  seems  to  have  thought 
Tamar  in  some  way  the  cause  of  his  son’s 
death  (cp.  Tobit  iii.  7);  or  he  may  have 
thought  Shelah  too  young  to  marry. 

12,  Timnath]  Probably  not  the  border  town 
of  Dan  and  Judah,  between  Ekron  and  Beth 
Shemesh  (Josh.  xv.  10),  but  Timnah  in  the 
mountains  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  57). 

his  friemf]  The  LXX.,  and  Vulg.  have 
“ his  shepherd,”  but  Onkelos,  Syr.,  Arab,  and 
most  modern  interpreters,  render  as  the  Au- 
thorised Version,  which  is  probably  right. 

14.  in  an  open  place]  In  the  gate  of 
Enaim.  So  the  LXX.,  Jerome  (in  ‘Loc. 


Heb.’),  Gesen.,  Winer  and  most  modem  in- 
terpreters. Enaim  is  probably  the  same  as 
Enam,  Josh.  xv.  34.  Enam  is  a place  in  the 
plain  which  lay  on  the  road  from  Judah’s 
dwelling-place  to  Timnath  (Knobel).  Other 
possible  renderings  are  “at  the  opening  of  the 
eyes,”  i.e.  in  a public  place,  such  as  “the 
crossing  of  two  roads,”  (so  Vulg.,  Syr.,  and 
many  Jewish  interpreters);  and  “at  the  break- 
ing forth  of  two  fountains”  (so  Abenezra, 
Rosenm.  and  others):  but  the  first  is  pretty 
certainly  the  true. 

15.  an  harlot'^  because  she  had  covered  her 
face]  Probably  Judah  thought  her  to  be 
a woman  having  a vow.  In  v.  21,  he  calls 
her  by  a title  translated  “harlot,”  meaning 
literally  “consecrated,”  i.e.  to  the  impure 
worship  of  Astarte,  as  was  the  custom  of 
Babylon  in  the  worship  of  Mylitta  (Herod.  I. 
199).  This  abominable  worship  was  very 
early  introduced  into  Canaan  and  Egypt.  So 
Kedeshah.^  “a  consecrated  woman,”  appears  to 
have  come  into  use  as  a kind  of  euphemism. 
The  veil  probably  led  Judah  to  think  her  thus 
under  a vow ; for  there  is  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  mere  profligates  so  covered  their 
faces  (see  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1197).  The  worship 
of  the  Dea  Syr  a at  Byblos  is  recorded  at  a 
very  early  age.  In  the  time  of  Rameses  II.  it 
was  already  very  ancient. 


199 


V.  i8-i.]  GENESIS.  XXXVIII.  XXXIX. 


1 8 And  he  said,  What  pledge  shall 
I give  thee  ? And  she  said,  Thy  sig- 
net, and  thy  bracelets,  and  thy  stalF 
that  h in  thine  hand.  And  he  gave 
it  her,  and  came  in  unto  her,  and  she 
conceived  by  him. 

19  And  she  arose,  and  went  away, 
and  laid  by  her  vail  from  her,  and 
put  on  the  garments  of  her  widow- 
hood. 

20  And  Judah  sent  the  kid  by  the 
hand  of  his  friend  the  Adullamite,  to 
receive  his  pledge  from  the  woman’s 
hand : but  he  found  her  not. 

21  Then  he  asked  the  men  of  that 
place,  saying.  Where  is  the  harlot, 

ii  Or,  in  that  was  ” openly  by  the  way  side  ? 
.nnjm,.  There  was  no  harlot 

in  this  place. 

22  And  he  returned  to  Judah,  and 
said,  I cannot  find  her;  and  also  the 
men  of  the  place  said,  that  there  was 
no  harlot  in  this  place. 

23  And  Judah  said.  Let  her  take 
tHeb.  it  to  her,  lest  we  Te  shamed:  be- 

hold,  I sent  this  kid,  and  thou  hast 
* not  found  her. 

24  f And  it  came  to  pass  about 
three  months  after,  that  it  was  told 
Judah,  saying,  I'amar  thy  daughter 
in  law  hath  played  the  harlot;  and 
also,  behold,  she  is  with  child  by 
whoredom.  And  Judah  said.  Bring 
her  forth,  and  let  her  be  burnt. 

25  When  she  was  brought  forth, 
she  sent  to  her  father  in  law,  saying. 


By  the  man,  whose  these  are^  am  I 
with  child:  and  she  said.  Discern,  I 
pray  thee,  whose  are  these,  the  signet, 
and  bracelets,  and  staff. 

26  And  Judah  acknowledged  them., 
and  said.  She  hath  been  more  righteous 
than  I ; because  that  I gave  her  not 
to  Shelah  my  son.  And  he  knew  her 
again  no  more. 

27  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the 
time  of  her  travail,  that,  behold,  twins 
were  in  her  womb. 

28  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  she 
travailed,  that  the  one  put  out  his  hand  : 
and  the  midwife  took  and  bound  upon 
his  hand  a scarlet  thread,  saying.  This 
came  out  first. 

29  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  he  drew 
back  his  hand,  that,  behold,  his  brother 
came  out : and  she  said,  “ How  hast  ii  Or, 
thou  broken  forth?  this  breach  he  up- 

on  thee  : therefore  his  name  was  called 

, this  breach 

*^rharez.  agaUst 

30  And  afterward  came  out  his  11  tLi  is, 
brother,  that  ‘ had  the  scarlet  thread  " j’Jhfon 
upon  his  hand : and  his  name  was  2 4. 
called  Zarah. 


CHAPTER  XXXIX. 

I Joseph  advanced  in  Poiiphars  house.  7 He 
resisteth  his  7nistress's  tetnptatioit.  1 3 He  is 
falsely  accused.  •20  He  is  cast  in  prison.  2 1 
God  is.  ivith  him  the^-e. 


And  Joseph  was  brought  down  to 
L Egypt ; and  Potiphar,  an  officer 
of  Pharaoh,  captain  of  the  guard,  an 
Egyptian,  bought  him  of  the  hands 


18.  Thy  signet\  A seal  or  signet-ring. 
The  ancients  wore  it  sometimes,  not  as  a ring 
on  the  finger,  but  hanging  round  the  neck  by 
a cord  or  chain  (Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  534). 

thy  bracelets']  Thy  cord;  the  cord  or  string 
by  which  the  seal  was  suspended  (so  Ges., 
Rosenm.,  Schum.,  Lee). 

staff]  It  was  probably  of -considerable 
value,  as  among  the  Babylonians,  and  on 
Egyptian  monuments. 

21.  openly]  At  Enaim.  See  on  v.  14. 

26.  She  has  been  more  righteous  than  i] 
Judah  acknowledges  that  he  had  done  wrong 
to  Tamar  in  not  giving  her  his  son  Shelah, 
according  to  the  lex  le-viratus.,  that  the  bro- 
ther should  raise  up  seed  to  his  brother. 
It  appears  further  from  Ruth  ch.  iii.  iv.  that, 
according  to  the  patriarchal  custom,  the 


nearest  of  kin  was  to  take  the  widow  to  wife, 
hence  when  Shelah  does  not  take  her,  she 
considers  Judah  the  right  person  with  whom 
to  form  such  an  alliance. 

29.  //o-w  hast  thou  broken  forth?  this  breach 
be  upon  thee]  Or,  “why  hast  thou  made 
A rent  for  thyself?”  or  “hast  rent  a rent  for 
thy.self?” 

Pharez.]  i.e.  “breach”  or  “breaking  forth.” 

30.  Zarah]  i.e.  “I'ising.” 

Chap.  XXXIX.  1.  And  Joseph  ^vas 
brought  donvn  to  Egypt,  &c.]  A recapitula- 
tion of  the  nan'ative  in  ch.  xxxvii.  36,  which 
had  been  interrupted  by  the  history  of  Judah’s 
family  in  ch.  xxxviii. 

Ishmeelites]  5be  on  ch.  xxxvii.  25. 


200 


GENESIS.  XXXIX. 


[v.  2—13. 


of  the  Ishmeelites,  which  had  brought 
him  down  thither. 

2 And  the  Lord  was  with  Joseph, 
and  he  was  a prosperous  man ; and  he 
was  in  the  house  of  his  master  the 
Egyptian. 

3 And  his  master  saw  that  the 
Lord  was  with  him,  and  that  the 
Lord  made  all  that  he  did  to  prospei 
in  his  hand. 

4 And  Joseph  found  grace  in  his 
sight,  and  he  served  him : and  he 
made  him  overseer  over  his  house, 
and  all  that  he  had  he  put  into  his 
hand. 

5 And  it  came  to  pass  from  the 
time  that  he  had  made  him  overseer 
in  his  house,  and  over  all  that  he  had, 
that  the  Lord  blessed  the  Egyptian’s 
house  for  Joseph’s  sake ; and  the  bless- 
ing of  the  Lord  was  upon  all  that  he 
had  in  the  house,  and  in  the  field. 

6 And  he  left  all  that  he  had  in 
Joseph’s  hand;  and’  he  knew  not 
ought  he  had,  save  the  bre^td  which 
he  did  eat.  And  Joseph  was  a goodly 
person^  and  well  favoured. 


7 ^1  And  it  came  to  pass  after  these 
things,  that  his  master’s  wife  cast  her 
eyes  upon  Joseph ; and  she  said,  Lie 
with  me. 

8 But  he  refused,  and  said  unto 
his  master’s  wife.  Behold,  my  master 
wotteth  not  what  is  with  me  in  the 
house,  and  he  hath  committed  ail  that 
he  hath  to  my  hand ; 

9 There  is  none  greater  in  this  house 
than  I ; neither  hath  he  kept  back  any 
thing  from  me  but  thee,  because  thou 
art  his  wife : how  then  can  I do  this 
great  wickedness,  and  sin  against  God  ? 

10  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  she 
spake  to  Joseph  day  by  day,  that  he 
hearkened  not  unto  her,  to  lie  by  her, 
or  to  be  with  her. 

1 1 And  it  came  to  pass  about  this 
time,  that  yoseph  went  into  the  house 
to  do  his  business ; and  there  was  none 
of  the  men  of  the  house  there  within. 

12  And  she  caught  him  by  his  gar- 
ment, saying.  Lie  with  me : and  he 
left  his  garment  in  her  hand,  and  fled, 
and  got  him  out. 

13  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  she 


2.  the  Lord  <vjas  'with  Joseph']  The 
variety  in  the  use  of  the  Divine  names  in  the 
history  of  Joseph  is  very  observable.  The 
name  Jehovah  occurs  only  where  the 
narrator  is  speaking  in  his  own  person;  until 
we  come  to  ch.  xlix.  where  Jacob  uses  it  in 
the  midst  of  his  blessing  on  Dan,  ch.  xlix.  18. 
In  all  other  speeches  in  the  history  we  have 
Elohim,  sometimes  Ha-Elohim  with  the  arti- 
cle, and  sometimes  El,  or  Ha-El.  The  rea- 
son of  this  is  generally  apparent.  The  whole 
history,  though  given  by  an  inspired  writer 
to  whom  the  name  Jehovah  was  familiar, 
concerns  the  history  of  Joseph  and  his  kindred 
in  contact  with  a heathen  people.  It  is  there- 
fore on  all  accounts  natural  that  the  general 
name  Elohim,  and  not  the  specially  revealed 
name  Jehovah,  should  be  used  in  dialo- 
gue. Even  the  narrative,  as  in  ch.  xlvi..  is 
most  naturally  carried  on  in  a so-called  Elo- 
histic  form,  the  name  Elohim  being  of  com- 
mon use  to  both  Hebrews  and  Egyptians. 
The  adoption  of  the  name  El  (or  Ha- El)  in 
xlvi.  3,  is  probably  with  marked  reference  to 
the  blessing  on  Abraham  pronounced  in  die 
name  of  El-Shaddai  in  ch.  xvii.  i. 

4.  o'v^rseer]  'I'he  Egyptian  sculptures 
represent  the  property  of  rich  men  as  super- 
intended by  scribes  or  stewards,  who  are 
exhibited  as  carelully  registering  all  the  opera- 


tions of  the  household,  the  garden,  the  field, 
&c. 

6.  Joseph  was  a goodly  person^  and  well 
favoured]  Lit.  “was  fair  of  form  and  fair  of 
aspect,”  or  “appearance.” 

7.  his  masters  wife]  The  licentious- 
ness of  the  Egyptian  women  has  always  been 
complained  of  (see  Herod,  ii.  in;  Diod.  i. 
59).  The  same  appears  from  the  monuments, 
which  prove  also  that  women  did  not  live  so* 
retired  a life  in  Egypt  as  in  other  ancient  and 
especially  Eastern  countries  (Wilkinson,  Vol. 
II.  p.  389,  Hengstenb.  ‘ Egypt.’  p.  26).  There 
is  a very  remarkable  resemblance  between  this 
passage  in  the  history  of  Joseph  and  a very 
ancient  Egyptian  Romance  in  the  Papyrus 
d’Orbiney  in  the  British  Museum,  called 
“d'he  Two  Brothers,”  in  which  the  wife  of 
the  elder  brother  acts  in  the  same  manner 
and  uses  almost  the  same  words  towards 
the  younger  brother  as  Potiphar’s  wife  uses 
towards  Joseph  (see  Ebers,  ‘jEgypten,’ 

P-  311)- 

9.  sin  against  God]  The  direct  sin 
would  have  been  against  his  master;  but 
Joseph  clearly  recognized  that  the  true  guilt 
of  all  sin  consists  in  its  breach  of  the  law,  and 
disobedience  to  the  will  of  God. 


V.  14— 3-] 


GENESIS.  XXXIX.  XL. 


201 


tHeb. 

great. 


saw  that  he  had  left  his  garment  in 
her  hand,  and  was  fled  forth, 

14  That  she  called  unto  the  men 
of  her  house,  and  spake  unco  them, 
saying.  See,  he  hath  brought  in  an 
Hebrew  unto  us  to  mock  us ; he  came 
in  unto  me  to  lie  with  me,  and  I cried 
with  a Moud  voice : 

15  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  he 
heard  that  I lifted  up  my  voice  and 
cried,  that  he  left  his  garment  with 
me,  and  fled,  and  got  him  out. 

16  And  she  laid  up  his  garment 
by  her,  until  his  lord  came  home. 

1 7 And  she  spake  unto  him  accord- 
ing to  these  words,  saying,  I'he  He- 
brew servant,  which  thou  hast  brought 
• unto  us,  came  in  unto  me  to  mock  me  : 

18  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  I lifted 
up  my  voice  and  cried,  that  he  left  his 
garment  v/ith  me,  and  fled  out. 

19  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  his 
master  heard  the  words  of  his  wife,- 
which  she  spake  unto  him,  saying. 
After  this  manner  did  thy  servant  to 
me ; that  his  wrath  was  kindled. 

20  And  Joseph’s  master  took  him, 
and  put  him  into  the  prison,  a place 
where  the  king’s  prisoners  bound  : 
and  he  was  there  in  the  prison. 

21  ^ But  the  Lord  was  with  Jo- 


seph, and  Lhewed  him  mercy,  and^Heb. 
gave  him  favour  in  the  sight  of  the  %luhfesi 
keeper  of  the  prison.  unto  him. 

22  And  the  keeper  of  the  prison 
committed  to  Joseph’s  hand  all  the 
prisoners  that  were  in  the  prison  ; and 
whatsoever  they  did  there,  he  was  the 
doer  of  it. 

23  The  keeper  of  the  prison  looked 
not  to  anything  that  was  under  his 
hand;  because  the  Lord  was  with 
him,  and  that  which  he  did,  the  Lord 
made  it  to  prosper. 


CHAPTER  XL. 

I The  butler  and  baker  of  Pharaoh  -in  prison. 
4 Joseph  hath  charge  f them.  5 He  inter- 
preteth  their  dreams.  20  They  come  to  pass 
according  to  his  interpretation.  23  The  in- 
gratitude of  the  butler. 

And  it  came  to  pass  after  these 
things,  that  the  butler  of  the 
king  of  Egypt  and  his  baker  had  of- 
fended their  lotd  the  king  of  Egypt. 

2 And  Pharaoh  was  wroth  against 
two  of  his  officers,  against  the  chief 
of  the  butlers,  and  against  the  chief 
of  the  bakers. 

3 And  he  put  them  in  ward  in  the 
house  of  the  captain  of  the  guard, 
into  the  prison,  the  place  where  Jo- 
seph was  bound. 


20.  prison~\  The  word  here  used  oc- 
curs only  here  and  in  ch.  xl.  It  probably 
means  a turret  or  rounded  (perhaps  arched) 
building  or  apartment,  arched  or  rounded  for 
strength,  used  as  a prison  or  dungeon.  It 
♦appears  from  ch.  xl.  3,  to  have  been  a part  of 
the  house  of  the  captain  of  the  guard  or  chief 
of  the  executioners,  in  which  the  state  pri- 
soners were  kept,  and  to  have  had  a special 
jailer  or  keeper  of  the  pri.son,  an  officer  of  the 
chief  of  the  executioners,  placed  over  it.  In 
ch.  xl.  15,  Joseph  speaks  of  it  as  “a  dungeon” 
or  pit,  which  would  quite  correspond  with 
the  character  of  an  arched  or  vaulted  room. 
In  Ps.  cv.  17,  18,  the  imprisonment  of  Joseph 
is  represented  as  having  been  very  severe, 
“whose  feet  they  afflicted  with  the  fetters, 
the  iron  entered  into  his  soul.”  It  is  most 
probable  that  at  first  Joseph’s  treatment  may 
have  been  of  this  character,  the  crime  with 
which  he  was  charged  having  been  such  that 
a slave  would  m.ost  likely  have  been  instantly 
put  to  death  for  it.  By  degrees,  however,  he 
gained,  under  God’s  Providence,  the  confi- 
dence of  the  jailer  (v.  22),  when  the  rigour 


of  his  confinement  was  mitigated,  and  at 
length  the  chief  of  the  executioners  himself 
(either  Potiphar,  or,  as  some  think,  his  suc- 
cessor) intrusts  him  with  the  care  of  im- 
portant state  prisoners.  The  fact  that  Joseph 
was  not  put  to  death,  and  by  degrees  treated 
kindly  in  prison,  has  given  rise  to  the  conjec- 
ture, that  Potiphar  did  not  wholly  believe  his 
wife’s  story,  though  he  to  a certain  extent  acted 
on  it  (Cleric  in  loc.,  Keil,  &c.). 

Chap.  XL.  2.  the  chief  of  the  butlers'] 
The  chief  of  the  cupbearers.  The  office 
of  cupbearer  to  the  sovereign  was  one  of  im- 
portance and  high  honour  in  the  East.  See 
Herod,  iii.  34. 

chief  of  the  bakers]  or  “confectioners.” 
The  Targum  of  Pseudo- Jonathan  adds  that 
“they  had  taken  counsel  to  throw  the  poison 
of  death  into  his  food  and  into  his  drink,  to 
kill  their  master,  the  king  of  Mi'/raim.”  This 
is  probably  only  a conjecture  from  the  fact 
that  the  two  offending  persons  were  im- 
mediately concerned  with  the  food  and  the 
drink  of  the  king. 


202 


GENESIS.  XL. 


[v.  4— 1 6. 


4 And  the  captain  of  the  guard 
charged  Joseph  with  them,  and  he 
served  them : and  they  continued  a 
season  in  ward. 

5 H And  they  dreamed  a dream 
both  of  them,  each  man  his  dream  in 
one  night,  each  man  according  to  the 
interpretation  of  his  dream,  the  butler 
and  the  baker  of  the  king  of  Egypt, 
which bound  in  the  prison. 

6 And  Joseph  came  in  unto  them 
in  the  morning,  and  looked  upon  them, 
and,  behold,  they  were  sad. 

7 And  he  asked  Pharaoh’s  officers 
that  were  with  him  in  the  ward  of  his 

+ Heb.  lord’s  house,  saying.  Wherefore  Uook 
/aJZviir  ye  " sadly  to  day 

8 And  they  said  unto  him,  We 
have  dreamed  a dream,  and  there  is 
no  interpreter  of  it.  And  Joseph  said 
unto  them.  Do  not  interpretations  be- 
long to  God  ? tell  me  them^  I pray  you. 

9 And  the  chief  butler  told  his 
dream  to  Joseph,  and  said  to  him.  In 
my  dream,  behold,  a vine  was  before 
me ; 

10  And  in  the  vine  were  three 


branches  : and  it  was  as  though  it 
budded,  a7id  her  blossoms  shot  forth ; 
and  the  clusters  thereof  brought  forth 
ripe  grapes : 

1 1 And  Pharaoh’s  cup  was  in  my 
hand : and  I took  the  grapes,  and 
pressed  them  into  Pharaoh’s  cup,  and 
I gave  the  cup  into  Pharaoh’s  hand. 

12  And  Joseph  said  unto  him.  This 
is  the  interpretation  of  it:  The  three 
branches  are  three  days : 

13  Yet  within  three  days  shall 
Pharaoh  “ lift  up  thine  head,  and  re- « Or, 
store  thee  unto  thy  place:  and  thou 
shalt  deliver  Pharaoh’s  cup  into  his 
hand,  after  the  former  manner  when 
thou  wast  his  butler. 

14  But  Yhink  on  me  when  it  shall  tHeb. 
be  well  with  thee,  and  shew  kindness, 

I pray  thee,  unto  me,  and  make  men- 
tion  of  me  unto  Pharaoh,  and  bring 
me  out  of  this  house : 

15  For  indeed  I was  stolen  away 
out  of  the  land  of  the  Hebrews : and 
here  also  have  I done  nothing  that 
they  should  put  me  into  the  dungeon. 

16  When  the  chief  baker  saw  that 


4.  they  continued  a season']  Lit.  “days,” 
by  which  the  Jews  very  generally  understand 
a year. 

9.  a 'vine]  Herodotus  denies  the  ex- 
istence of  vines  in  ancient  Egypt,  and  says 
that  the  Egyptian  wine  was  made  of  barley 
(ii.  77).  Yet  Herodotus  himself  (ii.  4a,  48, 
144)  and  Diodorus  (l.  ii)  identify  Osiris 
with  the  Greek  Bacchus,  the  discoverer  of  the 
vine,  and  Diodorus  (l.  15)  expressly  ascribes 
to  Osiris  the  first  cultivation  of  the  vine.  But, 
moreover,  it  now  appears  from  the  monu- 
ments that  both  the  cultivation  of  grapes  and 
the  art  of  making  wine  w^ere  well  known  in 
Egypt  from  the  time  of  the  Pyramids.  Wine 
was  universally  used  by  the  rich  throughout 
Egypt,  and  beer  supplied  its  place  at  the  tables 
of  the  poor,  not  because  “they  had  no  vines 
in  the  country,  but  because  it  was  cheaper.” 
(Sir  G.  Wilkinson’s  note  in  Rawlinson’s 
Herod,  ii.  77.  See  also  Rosellini,  Vol.  Ii. 
PP-  365,  373,  377;  Wilkinson,  Vol.  Ii.  143; 
Hengstenberg,  ‘ Egypt,’ &:c.  p.  16;  Havcrnick, 

‘ Introd.  to  Pentateuch,’  in  h.l. ; Ebers,  ‘Tgyp- 

ten,’p.323-) 

11.  I took  the  grapes^  and  pressed  them] 
Some  have  thought  that  this  indicates  that  the 
Egyptians  did  not  at  this  time  practise  the 
fermentation  of  the  grape,  but  merely  drank 


the  fresh  juice,  which  would  accord  with  the 
statement  of  Plutarch  (‘Is.  et  Osir.’  § 6)  that 
the  Egyptians  before  the  time  of  Psam.metichus 
neither  drank  wine  nor  made  libations  thereof, 
as  esteeming  it  to  have  sprung  from  the  blood 
of  those  w'ho  made  war  with  the  gods ; but 
the  monuments  represent  the  process  of  fer- 
menting wine  in  very  early  times.  See  last 
note. 

13.  shall  Pharaoh  lift  up  thine  head]  Some 
think  this  expression  merely  means  “wfill  take 
count  of  thee,”  “wall  remember  thee.”  Cp. 
Ex.  xxx.  12;  Num.  i.  49;  where  the  marginal 
reading  is  “reckon.”  More  probably  the 
meaning  is,  “will  take  thee  out  of  prison” 
(see  Ges.  p.  914). 

15.  the  land  of  the  Hebreavs]  Though 
the  patriarchs  had  been  strangers  and  pilgrims, 
yet  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob  had  effected 
something  like  permanent  settlements  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Mamre,  Hebron,  Shechem, 
&c.  Probably  too  the  visit  of  Abraham  to 
Egypt  and  the  intercourse  of  the  Egyptians 
with  the  Hittites  and  other  Canaanitish  tribes, 
had  made  the  name  of  Hebrew  known  to  the 
Egyptians.  Joseph  does  not  say  “ the  land  of 
Canaan,”  lest  he  should  be  confounded  with 
the  Canaanites,  who  were  odious  to  himself  as 
being  idolaters. 


« 


V.  17—6.] 


GENESIS.  XL.  XLI. 


203 


, the  interpretation  was  good,  he  said 
unto  Joseph,  I also  was  in  my  dream, 
i Or, full  and,  behold,  / had  three  "white  bas- 

0/ holes.  . 

17  And  in  the  uppermost  basket 
t Heb.  thef'e  was  of  all  manner  of  ^ bakemeats 
Thdrfoh,  lor  Pharaoh;  and  the  birds  did  eat 
dfdddker  ^^^^n  out  of  the  basket  upon  my  head, 
or,  cook.  18  And  Joseph  answered  and  said. 
This  is  the  interpretation  thereof : 

^ The  three  baskets  are xhroo  days: 

19  Yet  within  three  days  shall 
«Or,  Pharaoh  ‘lift  up  thy  head  from  off 
7kde%n^  thee,  and  shall  hang  thee  on  a tree; 
Sfice/^>wz  ^rid  the  birds  shall  eat  thy  flesh  from 
off  thee. 

. 20  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  the  third 
day,  which  was  Pharaoh’s  birthday, 
that  he  made  a feast  unto  all  his  ser- 
DOr,  vants : and  he  "lifted  up  the  head  of 
reckoned.  chief  butler  and  of  the  chief  baker 
among  his  servants. 

21  And  he  restored  the  chief  but- 
ler unto  his  butlership  again ; and  he 
gave  the  cup  into  Pharaoh’s  hand: 

22  But  he  hanged  the  chief  baker: 
as  Joseph  had  interpreted  to  them. 

23  Yet  did  not  the  chief  butler  re- 
member Joseph,  but  forgat  him. 


16.  three  white  baskets']  Probably  “baskets 
of  white  bread so  LXX.,  Aq.,  Vulg.,  Syr., 
Onk.  Some  prefer  “ baskets  full  of  holes,” 
“ perforated,”  or  “ wicker  baskets.” 

on  my  head]  See  Herod.  II.  35,  of  the  men 
bearing  burdens  on  their  heads. 

17.  bakemeats  for  Pharaoh]  Lit.  “food 
for  Pharaoh,  the  work  of  a baker.”  The 
Egyptians  appear  to  have  been  very  luxurious 
in  the  preparation  of  different  kinds  of  bread 
and  pastry.  (See  Rosellini,  Vol.  ii.  264;  Wil- 
Idnson,  ii.  384;  Hengstenberg,  p.  27.) 

19.  shall  Pharaoh  lift  up  thy  head  from  off 
thee]  The  same  words  as  those  used  in  v.  13, 
with  the  addition  of  “from  off  thee,”  making 
the  most  vital  difference.  The  mode  of  pu- 
nishment was  probably  decapitation,  the  most 
common  form  of  execution  in  Egypt  (Ges. 
p.  915);  though  some  have  thought  hanging 
or  crucifixion,  as  Onkelos  in  loc.  Possibly 
the  words  may  only  indicate  capital  punish- 
ment, like  the  capite  plecti  of  the  Latins. 

Chap.  XLI.  1.  the  ri'ver]  The*“yeor,” 
an  Egyptian  word  signifying  “great  river,” 
or  “canal,”  used  in  Scripture  for  the  Nile. 


CHAPTER  XLI. 

1 Pharaoh'' s two  dreams.  25  Joseph  inter- 
p7'eteth  thefu.  33  He  giveth  Pharaoh  coimseL 
38  Joseph  is  advanced.  50  He  begettetk 
Manasseh  and  Ephraim.  54  The  famme 
heghineth, 

AND  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end 
±\,  of  two  full  years,  that  Pharaoh 
dreamed:  and,  behold,  he  stood  by 
the  river. 

2 And,  behold,  there  came  up  out 
of  the  river  seven  well  favoured  kine 
and  fatfleshed ; and  they  fed  in  a 
meadow. 

3 And,  behold,  seven  other  kine 
came  up  after  them  out  of  the  river, 
ill  favoured  and  leanfleshed ; and  stood 
by  the  other  kine  upon  the  brink  of 
the  river. 

4 And  the  ill  favoured  and  lean- 
fleshed kine  did  eat  up  the  seven  well 
favoured  and  fat  kine.  So  Pharaoh 
awoke. 

5 And  he  slept  and  dreamed  the 
second  time:  and,  behold,  seven  ears 
of  corn  came  up  upon  one  stalk, 

^ rank  and  good.  ♦ Heb. /a/. 

6 And,  behold,  seven  thin  ears  and 
blasted  with  the  east  wind  sprung  up 
after  them. 


The  Nile  had  a sacred  and  a profane 
name.  The  sacred  name  was  Hapi.,  i.e.  Apis. 
The  profane  name  was  jiur.,  with  the 
epithet  aa  great.  The  Coptic  forms  IA.pO, 
lApCJO,  correspond  exactly  to  the  Hebrew 
year. 

2.  k'me]  The  Egyptians  esteemed  the 
cow  above  all  other  animals.  It  was  sacred 
to  Isis  (Herod,  ii.  41),  or  rather  to  Athor, 
the  Venus  Genetrix  of  Egypt,  and  was  looked 
on  as  “ a symbol  of  the  Earth  and  its  cultiva- 
tion and  food”  (Clem.  Alex.  ‘Strom.’  v.  p. 
671).  Hence  it  was  very  natural  that  in  Pha- 
raoh’s dream  the  fruitful  and  unfruitful  years 
should  be  typified  by  well-favoured  and  -ill- 
favoured  kine  (see  Hengstenb.  ‘ Egypt,’  p.  28). 

in  a meadow]  In  the  reed  grass.  The 
word  (Achu)  is  of  Egyptian  origin.  It  is 
not  common,  but  occurs  in  a papyrus  of  early 
date  {akh-akh.,  green,  verdant).  Jerome  (on 
Isai.  xix.  7)  says  that  “when  he  enquired  of 
the  learned  what  the  word  meant,  he  was  told 
by  the  Egyptians  that  in  their  tongue  every 
thing  green  that  grows  in  marshes  is  called  by 
this  name.”  It  probably  therefore  means  the 
sedge,  reed,  or  rank  gi'ass  by  the  river's  side. 


204 


GENESIS.  XLI.  [v.  7-18. 


7 And  the  seven  thin  ears  devour- 
ed the  seven  rank  and  full  ears.  And 
Pharaoh  awoke,  and,  behold,  it  was  a 
dream. 

8 And  it  came  to  pass  in  the 
morning  that  his  spirit  was  trou- 
bled ; and  he  sent  and  called  for 
all  the  magicians  of  Egypt,  and  all 
the  wise  men  thereof : and  Pharaoh 
told  them  his  dream;  but  there  was 
none  that  could  interpret  them  unto 
Pharaoh. 

9 ^ Th&n  spake  the  chief  butler 
unto  Pharaoh,  saying,  I do  remem- 
ber my  faults  this  day : 

10  Pharaoh  was  wroth  with  his 
servants,  and  put  me  in  ward  in  the 
captain  of  the  guard’s  house,  both  me 
and  the  chief  baker: 

11  And  we  dreamed  a dream  in 
one  night,  I and  he;  we  dreamed 
each  man  according  to  the  interpreta- 
tion of  his  dream. 

12  And  there  was  there  with  us  a 
young  man,  an  Hebrew,  servant  to 
the  captain  of  the  guard ; and  we  told 

TiSc.’  him,  and  he  interpreted  to  us  our 


dreams;  to  each  man  according  to  * 
his  dream  he  did  interpret. 

13  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  he  in- 
terpreted to  us,  so  it  was;  me  he 
restored  unto  mine  office,  and  him 
he  hanged. 

14  ^ “^Then  Pharaoh  sent  and  Psai.  105. 
called  Joseph,  and  they  ' brought  him  ' 
hastily  out  of  the  dungeon : and  he 
shaved  himself^  and  changed  his  rai- 
ment, and  came  in  unto  Pharaoh. 

15  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Joseph, 

I have  dreamed  a dream,  and  there 
is  none  that  can  interpret  it:  and 

I have  heard  say  of  thee,  that  " thou  11  Or, 
canst  understand  a dream  to  inter- 
pret  it.' 

16  And  Joseph  answered  Pharaoh,  interpret 
saying.  It  is  not  in  me : God  shall 

give  Pharaoh  an  answer  of  peace. 

17  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Joseph, 

In  my  dream,  behold,  I stood  upon 
the  bank  of  the  river: 

18  And,  behold,  there  came  up 
out  of  the  river  seven  kine,  fatfleshed 
and  well  favoured;  and  they  fed  in  a 
meadow : 


6.  east  (wind'\  Probably  put  for  the 
S.  E.  wind  (Chamsin),  which  blows  from  the 
desert  of  Arabia.  The  East  wind  of  Egypt  is 
not  the  scorching  wind,  and  indeed  seldom 
blows;  but  the  South-east  wind  is  so  parching 
as  to  destroy  the  grass  entirely,  if  it  blows 
very  long  (see  Hengstenberg,  p.  10). 

7.  behold^  it  (was  a dream]  The  impression 
on  Pharaoh’s  mind  was  so  strong  and  vivid, 
that  he  could  hardly  believe  it  was  not  real. 
The  particulars  of  the  dream  are  all  singu- 
larly appropriate.  The  scene  is  by  the  Nile, 
on  which  depends  all  the  plenty  of  Egypt. 
The  kine  and  the  corn  respectively  denote  the 
animal  and  the  vegetable  products  of  the 
country.  The  cattle  feeding  in  the  reed  grass 
shewed  that  the  Nile  was  fertilizing  the  land 
and  supporting  the  life  of  the  beasts.  The  lean 
cattle  and  the  scorched-up  corn  foreshadowed 
a time  when  the  Nile,  for  some  reason,  ceased 
to  irrigate  the  land.  The  swallowing  up  of 
the  fat  by  the  lean  signified  that  the  produce 
of  the  seven  years  of  plenty  would  be  all  con- 
sumed in  the  seven  years  of  scarcity. 

8.  magicians]  Apparently  “ sacred  scribes 
the  name,  if  Hebrew,  Ixbig  composed  of 
two  words  signifying  respectively  a style  and 
sacred.  Some  have  thought  the  word  to  be 
of  Egyptian  origin,  or  perhaps  a Hebrew 


compound  imitating  an  Egyptian  name  (see 
Ges.  ‘ Thes.’  p.  521).  There  has,  however, 
no  Egyptian  name  been  found  like  it.  The 
magicians  appear  to  have  been  a regular  order 
of  persons  among  the  Egyptians,  learned 
priests,  who  devoted  themselves  to  magic  and 
astrology  (see  Hengstenberg,  p.  28,  and  Poole 
in  Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of  the  Bible,’  art.  Magic). 

13.  me  he  restored]  Joseph  prophesied 
that  I should  be  restored,  and,  as  he  prophe- 
sied, so  it  came  to  pass. 

14.  s hawed  himself]  The  Hebrews  che- 
rished long  beards,  but  the  Egyptians  cut  both 
hair  and  beard  close,  except  in  mourning  for 
relations,  when  they  let  both  grow  long  (Herod, 
ir.  36).  On  the  monuments  when  it  was 
“ intended  to  convey  the  idea  of  a man  of  low 
condition  or  a slovenly  person,  the  artists 
represented  him  with  a beard”  (Wilkinson, 
Vol.  III.  p.  357;  Hengstenberg,  p.  30).  Jo- 
seph, therefore,  when  about  to  appear  be- 
fore Pharaoh,  was  careful  to  adapt  himself  to 
the  manners  of  the  Egyptians. 

15.  that  thou  canst  understand  a dream 
to  interpret  it]  Lit.  tliat  tLou  Nearest  a 
dream  to.  interpret  it. 

13.  in  a mccdowd]  In  the  reed  grass. 
See  on  v.  2. 


V.  19—40-] 


205 


GENESIS.  XLI. 


19  And,  behold,  seven  other  kine 
came  up  after  them,  poor  and  very 
ill  favoured  and  leanfleshed,  such  as 
I never  saw  in  all  the  land  of  Egypt 
for  badness : 

20  And  the  lean  and  the  ill  fa- 
voured kine  did  eat  up  the  first  seven 
fat  kine : 

had  ^ eaten 

inward^  them  up,  it  could  not  be  known  that 
them.  ^ they  had  eaten  them;  but  they  were 
still  ill  favoured,  as  at  the  beginning. 
So  I awoke. 

22  And  I saw  in  rriy  dream,  and, 
behold,  seven  ears  came  up  in  one 
stalk,  full  and  good: 

23  And,  behold,  seven  ears,  ■■  wi- 
thered, thin,  and  blasted  with  the 
east  wind,  sprung  up  after  them : 

24  And  the  thin  ears  devoured  the 
seven  good  ears:  and  I told  this  unto 
the  magicians ; but  there  was  none 
that  could  declare  it  to  me. 

25  ^ And  Joseph  said  unto  Pha- 
raoh, The  dream  of  Pharaoh  is  one: 
God  hath  shewed  Pharaoh  what  he  is 
about  to  do. 

26  The  seven  good  kine  are  seven 
years;  and  the  seven  good  ears  are 
seven  years : the  dream  is  one. 

27  And  the  seven  thin  and  ill 
favoured  kine  that  came  up  after 
them  are  seven  years;  and  the  seven 
empty  ears  blasted  with  the  east  wind 
shall  be  seven  years  of  famine. 

28  This  is  the  thing  which  I have 
spoken  unto  Pharaoh:  What  God  is 
about  to  do  he  sheweth  unto  Pharaoh. 

29  Behold,  there  come  seven  years 
of  great  plenty  throughout  all  the 
land  of  Egypt: 

30  And  there  shall  arise  after  them 
seven  years  of  famine;  and  all  the 
plenty  shall  be  forgotten  in  the  land 


of  Egypt;  and  the  famine  shall  con- 
sume the  land ; 

31  And  the  plenty  shall  not  be 

known  in  the  -land  by  reason  of  that 
famine  following;  for  it  shall  be  very 
^grievous.  tHeb. 

32  And  for  that  the  dream  was 
doubled  unto  Pharaoh  twice ; it  is 
because  the  thing  is  “ established  by  'J  Or, 
God,  and  God  will  shortly  bring 

to  pass. 

33  Now  therefore  let  Pharaoh  look 
out  a man  discreet  and  wise,  and  set 
him  over  the  land  of  Egypt. 

34  Let  Pharaoh  do  this^  and  let 
him  appoint  “ officers  over  the  land,  ti  Or, 
and  take  up  the  fifth  part  of  the 
land  of  Egypt  in  the  seven  plenteous 
years. 

35  And  let  them  gather  all  the 
food  of  those  good  years  that  come, 
and  lay  up  corn  under  the  hand  of 
Pharaoh,  and  let  them  keep  food  in 
the  cities. 

36  And  that  food  shall  be  for  store 
to  the  land  against  the  seven  years  of 
famine,  which  shall  be  in  the  land  of 
Egypt ; that  the  land  ^ perish  not  t Heb. 
through-  the  famine. 

37  ^ And  the  thing  was  good  in 
the  eyes  of  Pharaoh,  and  in  the  eyes 
of  all  his  servants. 

38  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  his  ser- 
vants, Can  we  find  such  a one  as 
this  A,  a man  in  whom  the  Spirit  of 
God  is? 

39  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Joseph, 
Forasmuch  as  God  hath  shewed  thee 
all  this,  there  is  none  so  discreet  and 

wise  as  thou  art:  ^Psai.  105. 

40  ^ Thou  shalt  be  over  my  house, 
and  according  unto  thy  word  shall  all 
my  people  be  ^ ruled : only  in  the  t He 
throne  will  I be  greater  than  thou. 


S4.  take  up  the  ffth  part  of  the  land] 
i.  e.  Let  him  exact  a fifth  of  the  produce  of 
the  land.  The  Hebrew  is  literally  “let  him 
fifth  the  land.”  (Compare  our  phrase  “ to 
tithe  the  land.”)  It  has  been  questioned  whe- 
ther the  advice  was  to  purchase  a fifth  of  all 
the  produce,  or  rather  to  impose  a tax  amount- 
ing to  one  fifth  of  the.  produce  of  the  land. 
It  has  been  not  improbably  conjectured  that 


the  Egyptian  kings  usually  imposed  a tribute 
of  one  tenth,  and  that  in  this  season  of  un- 
usual abundance  Joseph  advises  Pharaoh  to 
double  the  impost,  with  the  benevolent  inten- 
tion of  afterwards  selling  the  corn  so  collected 
in  the  time  of  famine  (Cleric,  in  loc.).  On 
the  large  storehouses  and  granaries  of  Egypt, 
see  Hengstenb.,  p.  36,  A^'Vlkinson,  ii.  135. 

40.  according  unto  thj  civord  shall  all  mj 


2o6 


GENESIS.  XLI. 


[v.  41—45- 


41  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Joseph, 
See,  I have  set  thee  over  all  the  land 
of  Egypt. 

42  And  Pharaoh  took  off  his  ring 
from  his  hand,  and  put  it  upon  Jo- 
seph’s hand,  and  arrayed  him  in  ves- 

Or,  silk,  tures  of  " fine  linen,  and  put  a gold 
chain  about  his  neck; 

43  And  he  made  him  to  ride  in 
the  second  chariot  which  he  had ; and 


they  cried  before  him,  *^Bow  the" Or, 
knee : and  he  made  him  ruler  over /at/ffr. 
all  the  land  of  Egypt.  _ 

44  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Joseph, 

I am  Pharaoh,  and  without  thee  shall 
no  man  lift  up  his  hand  or  foot  in  all 
the  land  of  Egypt. 

45  And  Pharaoh  called  Joseph’s 
name  Zaphnath-paaneah ; and  he  gave 
him  to  wife  Asenath  the  daughter 


people  be  rulel\  So,  or  nearly  so,  (“at  thy 
word  shall  all  my  people  arm  themselves,  or 
dispose  themselves,”)  the  Versions,  Targg,  and 
most  commentators.  But  Kimchi,  Gesenius, 
Knobel,  &c.,  render  “and  all  my  people  shall 
kiss  thy  mouth,”  as  a token  of  reverence  and 
obedience.  The  objections  to  the  latter  in- 
terpretation are  that  the  kiss  of  reverence  was 
on  the  hand  or  the  foot,  not  on  the  mouth, 
which  was  the  kiss  of  love,  and  that  the  con- 
struction here  is  with  a preposition  never  used 
with  the  verb  signifying  “to  kiss.” 

42.  ring]  The  signet-ring  was  the 
special  symbol  of  office  and  authority.  The 
seal  to  this  day  in  the  East  is  the  common 
mode  of  attestation,  and  therefore  when  Pha- 
raoh gave  Joseph  his  ring  he  delegated  to  him 
his  whole  authority. 

Jine  linen]  The  byssus  or  fine  linen  of  the 
Egyptians.  The  word  used  for  it  is  Shes.^  a 
well-ascertained  Egyptian  word.  It  is  men- 
tioned in  Ezek.  xxvii.  as  imported  into  Tyre 
from  Egypt.  It  was  the  peculiar  dress  of  the 
Egyptian  priests. 

a gold  chain]  Probably  “ a simple  gold 
chain  in  imitation  of  string,  to  which  a stone 
scarabseus  set  in  the  same  precious  metal  was 
appended.”  (Wilkinson,  ill.  376.  See  also 
Hengstenberg,  p.  31.) 

43.  jBo-xy  the  knee]  Abrech.  If  the 
word  be  Hebrew,  the  rendering  of  the  Au- 
thorised Version  is  probably  correct.  The 
Targums  all  give  “father  of  the  king”  (cp,  ch. 
xlv.  8),  deriving  from  the  Hebrew  a father, 
and  the  Chaldee  Kech.,  a king,  which,  how- 
ever, is  thought,  to  be  a corruption  of  the 
Latin  Rex.  It  is  generally  thought  to  be  an 
Egyptian  word  signifying  “Bow  the  head,” 
having  some  resemblance  in  form  to  the 
Hebrew  (He  Rossi,  ‘ Etymol.  Egypt.’  p.  i. 
So  Gesen.  ‘Thes.,’  p.  19,  and  most  of  the 
Germans).  A more  probable  interpretation 
is  that  which  is  given  in  the  Excursus  on 
Egyptian  Words  at  the  end  of  this  volume, 
viz.  “Rejoice”  or  “Rejoice  thou!” 

45.  Jjaphnaih-paaneah]  In  the  LXX. 
Psonthomphanek.  The  V'ulg.  renders 
Mundi.,  “Saviour  of  the  World.”  Several  learn- 
ed in  the  language  and  anticpiities  of  Egypt, 
Bernard  (in  Joseph,  ‘Ant.’  11.  6);  Jablonski 


(‘Opusc.’  I.  207);  Rosellini  (‘Monuments,’ i. 
p.  185),  have  so  interpreted  it.  They  are 
followed  in  the  main  by  Gesenius  (p.  1181, 
“the  supporter  or  preserver  of  the  age”)  and 
a majority  of  modern  commentators.  The  true 
meaning  appears  to  be  “the  food  of  life,”  or 
“of  the  living.”  (See  Excursus  on  Egyptian 
Words  at  the  end  of  this  volume.)  The 
Targg.,  Syr.,  Arab,  and  Hebrew  interpp.  ren- 
der “a  revealer  of  secrets,”  referring  to  a 
Hebrew  original,  which  is  on  every  account 
improbable.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
Pharaoh  would  have  given  his  Grand  Vizier 
an  Egyptian  name,  not  a Hebrew  name,  just 
as  the  name  of  Daniel  was  changed  to  Belte- 
shazzar,  and  asHananiah,  Azariah  and  Mishael, 
were  called  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  Shadrach, 
Meshach,  and  Abednego. 

Asenath]  either  “ devoted  to  Neith,”  the 
Egyptian  Minerva  (Ges.  ‘Thes.’ p.  130),  or 
perhaps  compounded  of  the  two  names  Isis 
and  Neith,  such  a form  of  combination  of  two 
names  in  one  being  not  unknown  in  Egypt. 
(See  Excursus  on  Egyptian  Words  at  the  end 
of  this  volume.) 

Poti~pherab]  i.e.  “belonging”  or  “devoted 
to  Ra,”  i.e.  the  Sun,  a most  appropriate 
designation  for  a priest  of  On  or  Heliopolis, 
the  great  seat  of  the  Sun-worship.  (See  Ex- 
cursus on  Egyptian  Words  at  the  end  of  this 
volume.) 

On]  Heliopolis  (LXX),  called,  Jer.  xliii. 
13,  Beth-shemesh,  the  city  of  the  Sun.  Cy- 
ril (ad.  Hos.  V.  8),  says,  “On  is  with  them 
the  Sun.”  The  city  stood  on  the  Eastern 
bank  of  the  Nile  a few  miles  north  of  Mem- 
l^his,  and  was  famous  for  the  worship  of  Ra, 
the  Sun,  as  also  for  the  learning  and  wisdom 
of  its  priests  (Herod,  ii.  3).  There  still  re- 
mains an  obelisk  of  red  granite,  part  of  the 
Temple  of  the  Sun,  with  a dedication  sculp- 
tured by  Osirtasen  or  Sesortasen  1.  It  is  the 
oldest  and  one  of  the  finest  in  lEgypt ; of  the 
12th  dynasty.  (Ges.  p.  52,  Wilkinson,  Vol. 
1.  p.  44;  also  Rawlinson’s  Herod.  II.  8, 
Brugsch,  ‘H.  E.’  p.  254.) 

The  difficulty  of  supposing  that  the  daugh- 
ter of  a priest  of  On  should  have  been  married 
to  Joseph,  a worshipper  of  J eiiovaii,  has  been 
unduly  magnified.  Neither  the  Egyptians  nor 
the  Hebrews  were  at  this  time  as  exclusive  as 


V.  4^ — 2.] 


GENESIS.  XLI.  XLII. 


207 


II Or,  of  Poti-pherah  "priest  of  On.  iVnd 

pince.  jQseph  went  out  over  all  the  land  of 

Egypt. 

46  ^ And  Joseph  was  thir'^y  years 
old  when  he  stood  before  Pharaoh 
king  of  Egypt.  And  Joseph  went 
out  from  the  presence  of  Pharaoh, 
and  went  throughout  all  the  land  of 
Egypt. 

47  And  in  the  seven  plenteous 
years  the  earth  brought  forth  by 
handfuls. 

48  And  he  gathered  up  all  the 
food  of  the  seven  years,  which  were 
in  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  laid  up 
the  food  in  the  cities:  the  food  of 
the  field,  which  was  round  about 
every  city,  laid  he  up  in  the  same. 

49  And  Joseph  gathered  corn  as 
the  sand  of  the  sea,  very  much,  until 
he  left  numbering;  for  it  was  with- 
out number. 

rf  chap.  46.  5^  ^And  unto  Joseph  were  born 

g two  sons  before  the  years  of  famine 
' came,  which  Asenath  the  daughter 

B Or,  of  Poti-pherah  " priest  of  On  bare 

unto  him. 

51  And  Joseph  called  the  name  of 
« That  is,  the  firstborn  “Manasseh:  For  God, 
Yefims,  ^^id  he^  hath  made  me  forget  all  my 

toil,  and  all  my  father’s  house. 

52  And  the  name  of  the  second 

tThatis,  called  he  "Ephraim:  For  God  hath 
Fruitful.  fruitful  in  the  land 

of  my  affliction. 


they  became  afterwards.  The  Semitic  races 
were  treated  with  respect  in  Egypt.  Joseph 
had  become  thoroughly  naturalized  (see 
V.  51  andch.  xliii.  3a),  with  an  Egyptian  name 
and  the  rank  of  Viceroy  or  Grand  Vizier. 
Abraham  had  before  this  taken  Hagar,  an 
Egyptian,  to  wife,  which  would  make  such 
an  alliance  less  strange  to  Joseph.  Whether 
Asenath  adopted  Joseph’s  faith  we  are  not  told, 
but,  in  the  end  at  least,  she  probably  did.  (See 
also  Excursus  on  Egyptian  Words,  on  “Ase- 
nath wife  of  Joseph,”  at  the  end  of  this  volume.) 

46.  thirty  years  old]  He  must  therefore 
have  been  thirteen  years  in  Egypt,  either  in  Poti- 
phar’s  house  or  in-  prison.  (See  ch.  xxxvii.  a.) 

51.  Manasseh]  i.e.  “causing  to  forget.” 
He  was  comforted  by  all  his  prosperity,  so 
that  he  no  longer  mourned  over  his  exile.  It 
does  not  follow  that  he  was  ungratefully  for- 
getful of  his  home. 


53  11  And  the  seven  years  of  plen- 
teousness, that  was  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  were  ended. 

54  ^And  the  seven  years  of  dearth  ‘•Psai.  105. 
began  to  come,  according  as  Joseph 

had  said:  and  the  dearth  was  in  all 
lands;  but  in  all  the  land  of  Egypt 
there  was  bread. 

55  And  when  all  the  land  of  Egypt 
was  famished,  the  people  cried  to  Pha- 
raoh for  bread : and  Pharaoh  said  un- 
to all  the  Egyptians,  Go  unto  Joseph; 
what  he  saith  to  you,  do. 

56  And  the  famine  was  over  all 
the  face  of  the  earth : And  Joseph 
opened  ^ all  the  storehouses,  and  sold  t Heb. 
unto  the  Egyptians ; and  the  famine 
waxed  sore  in  the  land  of  Egypt. 

57  And  all  countries  came  into 
Egypt  to  Joseph  for  to  buy  corn; 
because  that  the  famine  was  so  sore 
in  all  lands. 

CHAPTER  XLII. 

I yacob  senckth  his  ten  sons  to  bny  corn  in 
Egypt.  16  They  are  imprisotted  by  yoseph 
for  spies.  18  T hey  are  set  at  liberty on  con- 
dition to  bring  Betijamin.  n They  have 
remorse  for  yoseph.  •24  Simeon  is  kept  for  a 
pledge.  25  They  return  with  corn,  and  their 
money.  29  Their  relation  to  yacob.  36 
yacob  refuseth  to  send  Benjamin. 

NOW  when  Jacob  saw  that® Acts 7 
there  was  corn  in  Egypt,  Ja- 
cob  said  unto  his  sons.  Why  do  ye 
look  one  upon  another? 

2 And  he  said.  Behold,  I have 


52.  Ephraim]  i.e.  “doubly  fruitful,”  a 
dual  form. 

54.  the  dearth]  Notwithstanding  the 
fertility  generally  produced  in  Egypt  by  the 
overflowing  or  the  Nile,  yet  the  swelling  of  the 
Nile  a few  feet  above  or  below  what  is  neces- 
sary, has  in  many  instances  produced  destruc- 
tive and  protracted  famines,  such  that  the 
people  have  been  reduced  to  the  horrible  ne- 
cessity of  eating  human  flesh,  and  have  been 
almost  swept  away  by  death.  (See  Hengsten- 
berg,  ‘Egypt,’  &c.,  pp.  37,  38;  Havernick, 
Int.  to  Pentateuch,  p.  218  ; also  Smith’s  ‘Diet, 
of  Bible,’  art.  Famine.^ 

in  all  lands]  The  drought  which  affected 
Egypt  reached  the  neighbouring  countries  also. 
Ethiopia,  Arabia,  Palestine,  and  Syria,  would 
be  especially  affected  by  it ; and  the  Egyptians, 
and  Hebrews  also,  would  look  on  these  lands 
as  comprehending  the  whole  known  world. 


2o8 


GENESIS.  XLIL  [v.  3-19. 


heard  that  there  is  corn  in  Egypt: 
get  you  down  thither,  and  buy  for 
us  from  thence ; that  we  may  live, 
and  not  die. 

3 ^ And  Joseph’s  ten  brethren 
went  down  to  buy  corn  in  Egypt. 

4 But  Benjamin,  Joseph’s  brother, 
Jacob  sent  not  with  his  brethren;  for 
he  said.  Lest  peradventure  mischief 
behill  him. 

5 And  the  sons  of  Israel  came  to 
buy  corn  among  those  that  came:  for 
the  famine  was  in  the  land  of  Canaan. 

6 And  Joseph  was  the  governor 
over  the  land,  and  he  it  was  that 
sold  to  all  the  people  of  the  land : and 
Joseph’s  brethren  came,  and  bowed 
down  themselves  before  him  with 
their  faces  to  the  earth. 

7 And  Joseph  saw  his  brethren, 
and  he  knew  them,  but  made  him- 
self strange  unto  them,  and  spake 

f Heb.  ^ roughly  unto  them ; and  he  said  un- 
^thhf^s  them.  Whence  come  ye?  And 

with  them.  Said,  From  the  land  of  Canaan 
to  buy  food. 

8 And  Joseph  knew  his  brethren, 
but  they  knew  not  him. 

* chap.  37.  9 And  Joseph  ^remembered  the 

5-  dreams  which  he  dreamed  of  them, 

and  said  unto  them,  Y e are  spies ; to 
see  the  nakedness  of  the  land  ye  are 
come. 

10  And  they  said  unto  him.  Nay, 


my  lord,  but  to  buy  food  are  thy 
servants  come. 

11  We  are  all  one  man’s  sons;  we 
are  true  men^  thy  servants  are  no  spies. 

12  And  he  said  unto  them.  Nay, 
but  to  see  the  nakedness  of  the  land 
ye  are  come. 

13  And  they  said.  Thy  servants 
are  twelve  brethren,  the  sons  of  one 
man  in  the  land  of  Canaan;  and, 
behold,  the  youngest  is  this  day  with 
our  father,  and  one  is  not. 

14  And  Joseph  said  unto  them. 
That  is  it  that  I spake  unto  you, 
saying.  Ye  are  spies: 

15  Hereby  ye  shall  be  proved:  By 
the  life  of  Pharaoh  ye  shall  not  go 
forth  hence,  except  your  youngest 
brother  come  hither. 

16  Send  one  of  you,  and  let  him 
fetch  your  brother,  and  ye  shall  be 
^ kept  in  prison,  that  your  words  may 
be  proved,  whether  there  be  any  truth 
in  you : or  else  by  the  life  of  Pharaoh 
surely  ye  are  spies. 

1 7 And  he  ^ put  them  all  together 
into  ward  three  days. 

18  And  Joseph  said  unto  them  the 
third  day,  This  do,  and  live;  for  1 
fear  God: 

19  If  ye  be  true  men^  let  one  of 
your  brethren  be  bound  in  the  house 
of  your  prison : go  ye,  carry  corn  for 
the  famine  of  your  houses ; 


Chap.  XLII.  6.  he  it  that  sold 

to  all  the  people  of  the  lancP^  ^ e are  not 
to  suppose  that  Joseph  personally  sold  the 
corn  to  all  buyers,  but  that  he  ordered  the 
selling  of  it,  and  set  the  price  upon  it ; and 
very  probably,  when  a company  of  foreigners 
came  to  purchase  in  large  quantities,  they 
were  introduced  personally  to  Joseph,  that 
he  might  enquire  concerning  them  and  give 
directions  as  to  the  sale  of  corn  to  them. 

7.  spoke  roughly  unto  theni\  Lit,  “spake 
hard  things  with  them,”  as  the  margin.  This 
did  not  arise  from  a vindictive  spirit.  It  was 
partly  that  he  might  iK)t  he  recognized  by 
them,  and  j)artly  that  he  might  prove  them 
and  see  whether  they  were  penitent  for  what 
they  had  done  to  him. 

8.  they  kne^ju  not  him']  He  was  only  17 
when  they  sold  him ; he  was  now  at  least  37, 
and  had  adopted  all  the  habits  and  man- 
ners of  tlie  Egyptians;  probably  even  his  com- 


plexion had  been  much  darkened  by  living  so 
long  in  a southern  climate. 

9.  the  nakedness  of  the  land]  i.  e.  the  de- 
fenceless and  assailable  points  of  the  country; 
like  the  Latin  phrases,  nuda  urbs  pra:sidio^  nu^ 
data  castra,  nudi  defensoribus  muri  (Ros. ; Cp. 
Horn.  ‘ II.’  XTI.  399,  Tei;fOf  eyvixvdOr]').  The 
Egyptians  were  always  most  liable  to  be  as- 
sailed from  the  East  and  North-east.  (See 
Herod.  11 1.  5.)  The  various  Arab  and 
Canaanitish  tribes  seem  to  have  constantly 
made  incursions  into  the  more  settled  and 
civilized  land  of  Egypt.  Particularly  the 
Hittites  were  at  constant  feud  with  the  Egyp- 
tians. Moreover  the  famous  Hyesos  invasion 
and  domination  may  have  been  very  nearly 
impending  at  this  period. 

15.  By  the  life  of  Pharaoh]  Cp.  similar 
phrases  (i  S.  i.  26;  xvii.  55;  a S.  xiv.  19  ; 
2 R.  ii.  2,  4,  6).  Not  distinctly  an  oath,  but 
a strong  asseveration. 


V.  20—35-] 


GENESIS.  XLII. 


209 


‘^chap.  43.  20  But  bring  your  youngest  bro- 

ther  unto  me ; so  shall  your  words  be 
verified,  and  ye  shall  not  die.  And 
they  did  so. 

21  ^ And  they  said-  one  to  an- 
other, We  a7'e  verily  guilty  concern- 
ing our  brother,  in  that  we  saw  the 
anguish  of  his  soul,  when  he  be- 
sought us,  and  we  would  not  hear; 
therefore  is  this  distress  come  upon  us. 

22  And  Reuben  answered  them, 
chap.  37.  saying,  Spake  I not  unto  you,  say- 
ing, Do  not  sin  against  the  child; 
and  ye  would  not  hear?  therefore, 
behold,  also  his  blood  is  required. 

23  And  they  knew  not  that  Joseph 
tHeb  * understood  them;  for  ^ he  spake  unto 

them  by  an  interpreter. 

^4  turned  himself  about 

from  them,  and  wept;  and  returned 
to  them  again,  and  communed  with 
them,  and  took  from  them  Simeon, 
' and  bound  him  before  their  eyes. 

25  ^ Then  Joseph  commanded  to 
fill  their  sacks  with  corn,  and  to 
restore  every  man’s  money  into  his 
sack,  and  to  give  them  provision  for 
the  way : and  th-us  did  he  unto  them. 

26  And  they  laded  their  asses  with 
the  corn,  and  departed  thence. 

27  And  as  one  of  them  opened  his 
sack  to  give  his  ass  provender  in  the 
inn,  he  espied  his  money;  for,  behold, 
it  was  in  his  sack’s  mouth. 


28  And  he  said  unto  his  brethren. 

My  money  is  restored;  and,  lo.  It 
Is  even  in  my  sack:  and  their  heart 

^ failed  them^  and  they  were  afraid,  f Heb. 
saying  one  to  another.  What  Is  this/^^/j. 
that  God  hath  done  unto  us  ? 

29  ^ And  they  came  unto  Jacob 
their  father  unto  the  land  of  Canaan, 
and  told  him  all  that  befell  unto 
them;  saying, 

30  The  man,  who  Is  the  lord  of 

the  land,  spake  ^ roughly  to  us,  and  f Heb. 
took  us  for  spies  of  the  country. 

31  And  we  said  unto  him.  We  are 
true  men;  we  are  no  spies; 

32  We  be  twelve  brethren,  sons  of 
our  father;  one  Is  not,  and  the  young- 
est Is  this  day  with  our  father  in  the 
land  of  Canaan. 

33  And  the  man,  the  lord  of  the 
country,  said  unto  us.  Hereby  shall 
I know  that  ye  are  true  men;  leave 
one  of  your  brethren  here  with  me, 
and  take  food  for  the  famine  of  your 
households,  and  be  gone : 

34  And  bring  your  youngest  bro- 
ther unto  me:  then  shall  I know 
that  ye  are  no  spies,  but  that  ye 
are  true  men:  so  will  I deliver  you 
your  brother,  and  ye  shall  traffick  in 
the  land. 

35  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  as  they 
emptied  their  sacks,  that,  behold, 
every  man’s  bundle  of  mon^y  was  in 


20.  bring  your  youngest  brother  unto  me'\ 
There  seems  some  needless  severity  here  on 
the  part  of  Joseph  in  causing  so  much  anxiety 
to  his  father.  We  may  account  for  it  per- 
haps in  the  follovring  ways,  ist,  Joseph  felt 
that  it  was  necessary  to  test  the  repentance  of 
his  brethren  and  to  subject  them  to  that  kind 
of  discipline  which  makes  repentance  sound 
and  lasting,  andly,  He  niay  have  thought 
that  the  best  mode  of  persuading  his  father  to 
go  down  to  him  in  Egypt  was  first  of  all  to 
bring  Benjamin  thither.  3rdly,  He  was  mani- 
festly following  a Divine  impulse  and  guiding, 
that  so  his  dreams  should  be  fulfilled,  and 
his  race  brought  into  their  house  of  bondage 
and  education. 

24.  Simeon\  It  has  been  thought  that 
he  took  Simeon,  either  because  he  was  the 
next  in  age  to  Reuben,  whom  he  would  not 
bind  as  having  been  the  brother  that  soug-ht 
tv.  .save  him,  or  perhaps  because  Simeon  had 

VOL.  I. 


been  one  of  the  most , unfeeling  and  cruel 
towards  himself,  according  to  the  savage  tem- 
per which  he  shewed  in  the  case  of  the  She- 
chemites.  See  ch.  xxxiv,  xlix.  5. 

25.  their  sacks']  Rather,  their  vessels; 
the  word  is  different  from  that  elsewhere  used 
for  sacks,  and  apparently  indicates  that  they 
had  some  kind  of  vessel  for  corn  which  they 
carried  within  their  sacks. 

27.  in  the  inn]  The  khan,  or  caravan- 
serai, in  the  East  was,  and  is  still,  a place, 
where  men  and  cattle  can  find  room  to  rest, 
but  which  provides  neither  food  for  man  nor 
fodder  for  cattle.  It  is  doubtful,  however, 
whether  anything  of  this  kind  existed  so  early 
as  the  time  of  Joseph.  The  word  means  only 
“a  resting  place  for  the  night,”  and  very 
probably  was  only  a station,  at  which  cara- 
vans were  wont  to  rest,  near  to  a well,  to 
trees,  and  to  pasture,  where  the  tents  were 
pitched  and  the  cattle  wei'e  tethered. 


O 


210 


GENESIS.  XLII.  XLIII. 


his  sack:  and  when  both  they  and 
their  father  sav/  the  bundles  of  money, 
they  v/ere  afraid. 

36  And  Jacob  their  father  said 
unto  them,  Me  have  ye  bereaved  of 
my  children:  Joseph  is  not,  and  Simeon 
is  not,  and  ye  will  take  Benjamin 
away:  all  these  things  are  against  me. 

37  And  Reuben  spake  unto  his 
father,  saying.  Slay  my  two  sons,  if 
I bring  him  not  to  thee : deliver  him 
into  my  hand,  and  I will  bring  him 
U)  thee  again. 

38  And  he  said,  My  son  shall  not 
go  down  with  you;  for  his  brother 
is  dead,  and  he  is  left  alone : if  mis- 
chief befall  him  by  the  way  in  the 
which  ye  go,  then  shall  ye  bring 
down  my  gray  hairs  with  sorrow  to 
the  grave. 


CHAPTER  XLIII. 


I Jacob  is  hardly  pe'rsnaded  to  send  Benjamin. 
15  Joseph  entertaineth  his  brethrefi.  31  He 
inaketh  them  a feast. 


K 


ND  the  famine  was  sore  in 
land. 


the 


2 And  it  came  to  pass,  when  they 
had  eaten  up  the  corn  which  they 
had  brought  out  of  Egypt,  their  fa- 
ther said  unto  them.  Go  again,  buy 
us  a little  food. 

3 And  Judah  spake  unto  him,  say- 
f Hei).  ing.  The  man  ^ did  solemnly  protest 

unto  us,  saying.  Ye  shall  not  see  my 
"chap  42  hice,  except  your  ^brother  with  you. 
20.  4 If  thou  wilt  send  our  brother 


[v.  36—11. 

with  us,  we  will  go  down  and  buy 
thee  food : 

5 But  if  thou  wilt  not  send  him.^ 
we  will  not  go  down:  for  the  man 
said  unto  ue.  Ye  shall  not  see  my 
face,  except  your  brother  be  with  you. 

6 And  Israel  said.  Wherefore  dealt 
ye  so  ill  with  me,  as  to  tell  the  man 
whether  ye  had  yet  a brother  ? 

7 And  they  said,  .The  man  ^ asked  ^ , 

' . , / ' I r askins: 

US  straitly  or  our  state,  and  or  our  asked 7(s. 
kindred,  saying.  Is  your  father  yet 
alive?  have  ye  another  brother?  and 
we  told  him  according  to  the  ^ tenor 
of  these  words  : ^ could  we  certainly  t Heb.’ 
know  that  he  would  say.  Bring  your  ZTtd7£ 
brother  down  ? 

8 And  Judah  said  unto  Israel  his 
father,  Send  the  lad  with  me,  and 
we  will  arise  and  go;  that  we  may 
live,  and  not  die,  both  we,  and  thou, 
and  also  our  little  ones. 

9 I will  be  surety  for  him ; of  my  ' 
hand  shalt  thou  require  him:  ^if  I* chap.  44. 
bring  him  not  unto  thee,  and  set  him 
before  thee,  then  let  me  bear  the 
blame  for  ever : 

10  For  except  we  had  lingerM, 
surely  now  we  had  returned  “ this  " Or, 

•'  1 . tiuice  by 

second  time.  this. 

1 1 And  their  father  Israel  said  un- 
to them,  If  it  must  be  so  now,  do 
this;  take  of  the  best  fruits  in  the 
land  in  your  vessels,  and  carry  down 
the  man  a present,  a little  balm,  and 
a little  honey,  spices,  and  myrrh, 
nuts,  and  almonds : 


36.  Me  have  ye  bereaved'\  Jacob  sus- 
pects that  they  had  been  in  some  way  the 
cause  of  Joseph’s  supposed  death  and  of 
Simeon’s  captivity. 

against  me']  Lit.  “upon  me,”  i.e.  upon  me 
as  a burden  too  heavy  for  me  to  bear. 

CliAl’.  XLIII.  11.  of  the  best  fruits  in 
the  land]  Lit.  “of  the  song  of  the  land,” 
i.e.  the  most  prai.sed  produce,  the  fruits  cele- 
brated in  song. 

balm]  See  xxxvii.  25. 

honey]  So  rendered  in  all  the  Versions, 
though  some  think  th.it  it  was  composed  of  the 
juice  of  grapes  boiled  down  to  a syrup  of  the 
consistency  of  honey,  called  in  Arabic  Dihs; 
which  even  in  modern  times  has  been  im- 


ported into  Egypt  annually  from  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Hebron  (see  Ros.  and  Ges. 
P-  319)- 

spices]  Probably  Storax.  See  on  xxxvii. 
25- 

myrrh]  L a dan  u in.  See  on  xxxvii.  25. 

nuts]  Pistachio  nuts.  So  Bochart  (‘Hie- 
roz.’  II.  iv.  12)  ; Cels.  (‘  Hierobot.’  Tom.  i.  p. 
24);  Ges.  (p.  202).  The  LX X.,  followed  by 
Onk.,  Syr.,  Arab.,  renders  terebinth.^  probably 
because  the  pistachio  nut  tree  was  considered  as 
a species  of  terebinth.  All  these  fruits  may 
have  grown  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  though  the 
corn-harvest  may  have  utterly  failed.  Thus 
also  may  we  account  for  the  fact,  that  the 
small  supjily,  which  could  be  carried  from 
Egypt  by  ten  asses,  sufheed  for  a time  to  sup- 


V.  12— 29.J 


GENESIS.  XLIII. 


2 1 1 


la  And  take  double  money  in  your 
hand ; and  the  money  that  was  brought 
again  in  the  mouth  of  your  sacks, 
carry  /V  again  in  your  hand;  perad- 
venture  it  was  an  oversight ; 

13  Take  also  your  brother,  and 
arise,  go  again  unto  the  man ; 

14  And  God  Almighty  give  you 
mercy  before  the  man,  that  he  may 
send  away  your  other  brother,  and 

Wr,A»d  Benjamin.  “If  I be  bereaved  ^ my 
iaveieen,  children^  I am  bereaved. 

15  ^ And  the  men  took  that  pre- 
sent, and  they  took  double  money  in 
their  hand,  and  Benjamin;  and  rose 
up,  and  went  down  to  Egypt,  and 
stood  before  Joseph. 

16  And  when  Joseph  saw  Benja- 
min with  them,  he  said  to  the  ruler  of 
his  house.  Bring  these  men  home,  and 

tHeb.  ^slay,  and  make  ready;  for  these  men 
tiifc.  shall  ^dine  with  me  at  noon. 

17  And  the  man  did  as  Joseph 
bade;  and  the  man  brought  the  men 
into  Joseph’s  house. 

18  And  the  men  were  afraid,  be- 
cause they  were  brought  into  Joseph’s 
house;  and  they  said,  Because  of  the 
money  that  was  returned  in  our  sacks 
at  the  first  time  are  we  brought  in ; 

tiieb.  that  he  may  ^seek  occasion  against  us, 
7e\fupon  and  fiill  upon  US,  and  take  us  for  bond- 
men,  and  our  asses. 

19  And  they  came  near  to  the 

^cbap.  42.  Qf  Joseph’s  house,  and  they 

tHeb.  communed  with  him  at  the  door  of 

coining 

downivg  the  house, 

'doZi.  20  And  said,  O sir,  ‘^^we  came  in- 


deed down  at  the  first  time  to  buy 
food : 

21  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  we 
came  to  the  inn,  that  we  opened  our 
sacks,  and,  behold,  every  man’s  money 
was  in  the  mouth  of  his  sack,  our 
money  in  full  weight:  and  we  have 
brought  it  again  in  our  hand. 

22  And  other  money  have  we 
•brought  down  in  our  hands  to  buy 
food  : we  cannot  tell  who  put  our 
money  in  our  sacks. 

23  And  he  said.  Peace  he  to  you, 
fear  not : your  God,  and  the  God  of 
your  father,  hath  given  you  treasure 

in  your  sacks : ^ I had  your  money.  ^ Heb. 
And  he  brought  Simeon  out  unto  them  » 'money 

24  And  the  man  brought  the  men 

into  Joseph’s  house,  and  ^gave  is. 

water,  and  they  washed  their  feet ; & 24. 32. 
and  he  gave  their  asses  provender. 

25  And  they  made  ready  the  pre- 
sent against  Joseph  came  at  noon : 
for  they  heard  that  they  should  eat 
bread  there. 

26  ^ And  when  Joseph  came  home, 
they  brought  him  the  present  which 
was  in  their  hand  into  the  house,  and 
bowed  themselves  to  him  to  the  earth. 

27  And  he  asked  them  of  their 
^welfare,  and  said,  ^ Is  your  father  well,  t Heb. 
the  old  man  of  whom  ye  spake.?  AfnS 
he  yet  alive  ? "pcZZil 

28  And  they  answered.  Thy  sqy- yonr /.i- 
vant  our  father  is  in  good  health,  he 

is  yet  alive.  And  they  bowed  down 
their  heads,  and  made  obeisance. 

29  And  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and 


ply  Jacob’s  household.  There  was  a griev- 
ous famine,  but  still  all  the  fruits  of  the  earth 
had  not  failed.  Corn  was  needed ; but  life 
can  be  supported,  especially  in  a warm  climate, 
with  but  a moderate  amount  of  the  more  solid 
kinds  of  food. 

14.  God  Almighty]  El  Shaddai.  Jacob 
here  uses  that  name  of  the  Most  High,  by 
which  He  made  Himself  known  to  Abraham, 
and  afterwards  renewed  His  covenant  with 
Jacob  himself  (ch.  xvii.  i,  xxxv.  ii;  where 
see  note).  Hereby  he  calls  to  mind  the  pro- 
mise of  protection  to  himself  and  his  house,  as 
well  as  the  power  of  Him  who  had  pro- 
mised. 

If  1 be  herea'ved  of  my  children^  I am  be- 


reanjed.]  Cp.  Esth.  iv.  16;  2 K.vii.  4.  The 
expression  seems  partly  of  sorrow  and  partly 
of  submission  and  resignation. 

18.  that  he  may  seek  occasion  against  us] 
Lit.  “that  he  may  roll  himself  upon  us,”  that 
is,  probably,  “ that  he  may  rush  out  upon  us.” 

20.  O Sir]  “Pray,  my  lord,”  or  “Hear, 
my  lord,”  the  word  translated  0 is  a particle 
of  earnest  entreaty. 

26.  and  bonved  themselves]  Joseph’s 
first  dream  is  nov/  fulfilled.  The  eleven 
sheaves  make  obeisance  to  Joseph’s  sheaf.  It 
is  observable,  that  Joseph’s  dream,  like  Pha- 
raoh’s, had  reference  to  sheaves  of  corn,  evi- 
dently pointing  to  the  supply  of  food  sought 
by  the  brethren. 

02 


212 


GENESIS.  XLIII.  XLIV. 


[v.  30—5- 


saw  his  brother  Benjamin,  his  mother’s 
son,  and  said.  Is  this  your  younger 
brother,  of  whom  ye  spake  unto  me  ? 
And  he  said,  God  be  gracious  unto 
thee,  my  son. 

30  And  Joseph  made  haste,  for 
his  bowels  did  yearn  upon  his  brother : 
and  he  sought  where  to  weep ; and  he 
entered  into  his  chamber,  and  wept 
there. 

31  And  he  washed  his  face,  and 
went  out,  and  refrained  himself,  and 
said.  Set  on  bread. 

32  And  they  set  on  for  him  by 
himself,  and  for  them  by  themselves, 
and  for  the  Egyptians,  which  did  eat 
with  him,  by  themselves  : because  the 
Egyptians  might  not  eat  bread  with 
the  Hebrews ; for  that  is  an  abomina- 
tion unto  the  Egyptians. 

33  And  they  sat  before  him,  the 
firstborn  according  to  his  birthright, 
and  the  youngest  according  to  his 
youth : and  the  men  marvelled  one 
at  another. 

34  And  he  took  and  sent  messes 
unto  them  from  before  him  : but 
Benjamin’s  mess  was  five  times  so 


much  as  any  of  theirs.  And  they 
drank,  and  ^ were  merry  with  him.  t Heb. 

they  drank 
largely. 

CHAPTER  XLIV. 

I Joseph's  policy  to  stay  his  breLlcren.  14  Ju- 
dahs hunibk  supphcatioyi  to  Joseph. 

And  he  commanded  Hhe  steward  t Heb. 

L of  his  house,  saying.  Fill 
men’s  sacks  with  food,  as  much 
they  can  carry,  and  put  every  man’s 
money  in  his  sack’s  mouth. 

2  And  put  my  cup,  the  silver  cup, 
in  the  sack’s  mouth  of  the  youngest, 
and  his  corn  money.  And  he  did 
according  to  the  word  that  Joseph  had 
spoken. 

3  As  soon  as  the  morning  was  light, 
the  men  were  sent  away,  they  and 
their  asses. 

4  Jnd  when  they  were  gone  out 
of  the  city,  and  not  yet  far  off,  Joseph 
said  unto  his  steward.  Up,  follow  after 
the  men;  and  when  thou  dost  over- 
take them,  say  unto  them.  Wherefore 
have  ye  rewarded  evil  for  good  ? 

5  Is  not  this  it  in  which  my  lord 
drinketh,  and  whereby  indeed  he  ” di-  " 
vineth  ? ye  have  done  evil  in  so  doing,  trian 


29.  my  son]  Joseph  addresses  Benjamin 
his  younger  brother  with  this  paternal  saluta- 
tion, not  only  from  the  difference  in  their 
ages,  but  as  being  a governor  he  speaks  with 
the  authority  and  dignity  of  his  position. 

32.  the  Egyptians  might  not  eat  bread 
<voith  the  Hebreavs]  The  Egyptians  feared  to 
eat  with  foreigners,  chiefly  because  they 
dreaded  pollution  from  such  as  killed  and  ate 
cows,  which  animals  were  held  in  the  highest 
veneration  in  Egypt.  Hence  Herodotus  says, 
that  an  Egyptian  would  not  kiss  a Greek,  nor 
use  a knife  or  a spit  belonging  to  a Greek, 
nor  eat  any  meat  that  had  been  cut  with  a 
Greek  knife  (Her.  ii.  45).  Joseph  probably 
dined  alone  from  his  high  rank,  the  distinc- 
tions of  rank  and  caste  being  carefully  ob- 
sened ; but,  as  he  was  naturalized  in  Egypt, 
and  had,  no  doubt,  conformed  to  their  do- 
mestic customs,  he  would  probably  not  have 
needed  to  separate  himself  at  meals  from  the 
native  Egyptians,  as  would  his  brethren  from 
the  land  of  the  Hebrews. 

33.  they  sat  before  him]  The  Egyp- 
tians sat  at  their  meals,  though  most  of  the 
ancients,  and,  in  later  times  at  least,  the  He- 
brews, reclined. 

the  men  maraoelled  otw  at  another]  They 


marvelled  that  strangers  should  have  seated 
them  exactly  according  to  their  ages. 

34.  sent  messes  unto  them]  The  custom 
is  met  with  elsewhere,  as  a mark  of  respect 
to  distinguished  guests  (see  i S.  ix.  23,  24). 

f’ve  times  so  much]  Herodotus  mentions 
the  custom  of  giving  double  portions  as  a 
mark  of  honour.  The  Spartan  kings  “are 
given  the  first  seat  at  the  banquet,  they  are 
served  before  the  other  guests,  and  have  a 
double  portion  of  everything”  (vi.  57;  cp. 
also  Horn.  ‘II.’  vii.  321,  viii.  162). 

<vjere  merry]  Drank  freely.  The  word  is 
chiefly  used  of  drinking  to  excess,  but  not 
always;  see  for  instance  Hagg.  i.  6. 

Chap.  XLIV.  2.  my  cup]  or  rather 
bowl.  In  Jer.  xxxv.  5 the  word  is  rendered 
“pots.”  In  Ex.  XXV.  31,  xxxvii.  17,  it  is 
used  of  the  “ bowl”  or  calix  of  the  sculptured 
flowers.  It  was  evidently  a larger  vessel, 
flagon  or  bowl,  from  which  the  wine  was 
poured  into  the  smaller  cups. 

5.  dianneth]  Divination  by  cups  was 
frecjuent  in  ancient  times.  Jamblichus  (‘  Dc 
Myst.’  III.  14)  mentions  it,  so  Varro  (ap. 
August.  ‘Civ.  Dei,’  vii.  35),  Pliny  (‘ H.  N.’ 
xx.wii.  73,  &c.).  The  latter  says  that  “in 


V.  6— 18.] 


GENESIS.  XLIV. 


21 


6 11  And  he  overtook  them,  and  he 
spake  unto  them  these  same  words. 

7 And  they  said  unto  him,  Where- 
fore saith  my  lord  these  words  ? God 
.forbid  that  thy  servants  should  do 
according  to  this  thing: 

8 Behold,  the  money,  which  we 
found  in  our  sacks’ mouths,  we  brought 
again  unto  thee  out  of  the  land  of 
Canaan : how  then  should  we  steal 
out  of  thy  lord’s  house  silver  or  gold 

9 With  whomsoever  of  thy  servants 
it  be  found,  both  let  him  die,  and  we 
also  will  be  my  lord’s  bondmen. 

10  And  he  said.  Now  also  let  it  he 
according  unto  your  words : he  with 
whom  it  is  found  shall  be  my  servant; 
and  ye  shall  be  blameless. 

1 1 Then  they  speedily  took  down 
every  man  his  sack  to  the  ground,  and 
opened  every  man  his  sack. 

12  And  he  searched,  and  began  at 
the  eldest,  and  left  at  the  youngest: 
and  the  cup  was  found  in  Benjamin’s 
sack. 


13  Then  they  rent  their  clothes, 
and  laded  every  man  his  ass,  and  re- 
turned to  the  city. 

14  ^ And  Judah  and  his  brethren 
came  to  Joseph’s  house;  for  he  was 
yet  there : and  they  fell  before  him 
on  the  ground. 

15  And  Joseph  said  unto  them. 

What  deed  is  this  that  ye  have  done 
wot  ye  not  that  such  a man  as  I can 
certainly  "divine.?  li  Or, 

16  And  Judah  said.  What  shall  we  ’trith 
say  unto  my  lord .?  what  shall  we 
speak.?  or  how  shall  we  clear  our- 
selves .?  God  hath  found  out  the  ini- 
quity of  thy  servants  : behold,  we  are 

my  lord’s  servants,  both  we,  and  he 
also  with  whom  the  cup  is  found. 

17  And  he  said,  God  forbid  that 
I should  do  so  : but  the  man  in  whose 
hand  the  cup  is  found,  he  shall  be  my 
servant;  and  as  for  you,  get  yoiuup 
in  peace  unto  your  father. 

18  11  Then  Judah  came  near  unto 
him,  and  said.  Oh  my  lord,  let  thy 


this  hydromantia  images  of  the  gods  were 
called  up.”  It  was  practised  either  by  drop- 
ping gold,  silver,  or  jewels,  into  the  water, 
and  then  examining  their  appearance;  or  sim- 
ply by  looking  into  the  water  as  into  a mirror, 
somewhat  probably  as  the  famous  Egyptian 
magician  did  into  the  mirror  of  ink,  as  men- 
tioned by  the  duke  of  Northumberland  and 
others  in  the  present  day.  (See  Lane,  ‘ Mod. 
Egypt.’  II.  362.) 

The  sacred  cup  is  a symbol  of  the  Nile, 
into  whose  waters  a golden  and  silver  patera 
were  annually  thrown.  The  Nile  itself,  both 
the  source  and  the  river,  was  called  ‘ ‘ the  cup 
of  Egypt”  (Plin.  ‘ H.  N.’  viii.  71).  This 
cup  of  Joseph  was  of  silver,  while  in  ordinary 
cases  the  Egyptians  drank  from  vessels  of 
brass  (Hecatseus  in  ‘ Athen.’  xi.  6;  Herod. 
II.  37 ; see  Havernick,  ‘ Introd.  to  Pentateuch,’ 
ad  h.  1.). 

15.  ivot  ye  not  that  such  a man  as  I can 
certainly  di'vinef]  Joseph  here  adapts  him- 
self and  his  language  to  his  character  as  it 
would  naturally  appear  in  the  eyes  of  his  bre- 
thren. We  are  not  to  assume  that  he  actually 
used  magical  arts.  This  would  be  quite  in- 
consistent with  what  he  said  to  Pharaoh,  ch. 
xli.  16,  disclaiming  all  knowledge  of  the  fu- 
ture, save  as  revealed  by  God.  It  has  been 
questioned  how  far  Joseph  was  justified  in  the 
kind  of  dissimulation  which  he  thus  used  to 
his  brethren.  That  he  was  perfectly  justified 


in  not  declaring  hirriself  to  them  until  he  had 
tested  their  repentance  and  had  brought  his 
schemes  concerning  his  father  to  a point,  there 
can  be  little  doubt.  He  was  never  tempted 
to  deny  that  he  was  Joseph,  for  no  one  sus- 
pected that  he  was.  In  fact  he  simply  pre- 
served his  disguise.  But  in  the  present  pas- 
sage he  seems  to  have  used  words  which, 
though  not  affi lining  that  he  could  divine,  yet 
nearly  implied  as  much.  It  is  to  be  observed, 
however,  that  whatever  may  be  thought  on 
this  head,  Joseph  is  not  held  up  to  us  as 
absolutely  perfect.  As  it  was  in  the  case  of 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  the  history  is 
simply  told  of  the  events  as  they  occurred. 
Joseph  was  a man  of  singular  piety,  purity, 
and  integrity,  in  high  favour  with  Heaven, 
and  even  at  times  inspired  to  declare  the  will 
of  God.  It  does  not  follow  that  he  was  perfect. 
If  inspired  apostles  were  sometimes  to  be 
blamed  (Gal.  ii.  ii,  13),  the  holiest  patriarchs 
are  not  likely  to  have  been  incapable  of  error. 
If  the  act  was  wrong,  we  must  not  consider 
it  as  the  result  of  Divine  guidance,  but  as 
the  error  of  a good  but  fallible  man,  whilst  in 
the  main  carrying  out  the  designs  of  Provi- 
dence. Making  the  worst  that  can  be  made 
of  it,  it  is  difficult  to  say  that  any  character  in 
Scripture,  save  One,  (of  which  at  least  we  have 
any  detailed  account)  comes  out  more  purely 
and  brightly  in  the  whole  course  of  its  history 
than  the  character  of  Joseph. 


214 


" chap. 


* chap. 
33- 


GENESIS.  XLIV.  XLV.  [v.  19-4- 


servant,  I pray  thee,  speak  a word  in 
my  lord’s  ears,  and  let  not  thine  anger 
burn  against  thy  servant : for  thou  art 
even  as  Pharaoh. 

19  My  lord  asked  his  servants,  say- 
ing, Have  ye  a father,  or  a brother? 

20  And  we  said  unto  my  lord,  We 
have  a father,  an  old  man,  and  a child 
of  his  old  age,  a little  one;  and  his 
brother*  is  dead,  and  he  alone  is  left  of 
his  mother,  and  his  father  loveth  him. 

21  And  thou  saidst  unto  thy  ser- 
vants, Bring  him  down  unto  me,  that 
I may  set  mine  eyes  upon  him. 

22  And  we  said  unto  my  lord.  The 
lad  cannot  leave  his  father : for  if  he 
should  leave  his  father, father  would 
die. 

23  And  thou  saidst  unto  thy  ser- 
43.  vants,  "Except  your  youngest  brother 

come  down  with  you,  ye  shall  see  my 
facg  no  more. 

24  And  it  came  to  pass  when  we 
came  up  unto  thy  servant  my  father, 
we  told  him  the  words  of  my  lord. 

25  And  our  father  said.  Go  again, 
and  buy  us  a little  food. 

26  And  we  said.  We  cannot  go 
down : if  our  youngest  brother  be 
with  us,  then  will  we  go  down  : for 
we  may  not  see  the  man’s  face,  except 
our  youngest  brother  be  with  us. 

27  And  thy  servant  my  father  said 
unto  us.  Ye  know  that  my  wife  bare 
me  two  sons: 

28  And  the  one  went  out  from  me, 
37.  and  I said,  '^Surely  he  is  torn  in  pieces ; 

and  I saw  him  not  since ; 

29  And  if  ye  take  this  also  from 
me,  and  mischief  befall  him,  ye  shall 
bring  down  my  gray  hairs  with  sorrow 
to  the  grave. 

30  Now  therefore  when  I come  to 
thy  servant  my  father,  and  the  lad  be 


not  with  us;  seeing  that  his  life  is 
bound  up  in  the  lad’s  life; 

31  It  shall  come  to  pass,  when  he 
seeth  that  the  lad  is  not  with  us^  that 
he  will  die : and  thy  servants  shall 
bring  down  the  gray  hairs  of  thy 
servant  our  father  with  sorrow  to  the 
grave. 

32  For  thy  servant  became  surety 
for  the  lad  unto  my  father,  saying, 

‘^If  I bring  him  not  unto  thee,  then  I ^ chap.  43. 
shall  bear  the  blame  to  my  father  for 
ever. 

33  Now  therefore,  I pray  thee,  let 
thy  servant  abide  instead  of  the  lad  a 
bondman  to  my  lord ; and  let  the  lad 
go  up  with  his  brethren. 

34  For  how  shall  I go  up  to  my 
father,  and  the  lad  be  not  with  me? 
lest  peradventure  I see  the  evil  that 
shall  Tome  on  my  father. 

Jinf  my 

fatlie'^, 

CHAPTER  XLV. 


I yoseph  viakeih  himself  htown  to  his  brethren, 
5 He  comforteth  them  in  God's  providence. 
9 He  sendeth  for  his  father.  16  Pharaoh 
confirmeth  it.  2 1 foseph  furnisheth  the7}i  for 
their  jonimey,  afid  exhorteth  them  to  concord. 
25  facob  is  revived  unth  the  news. 


Then  Joseph  could  not  refrain 
himself  before  all  them  that 
stood  by  him;  and  he  cried,  Cause 
every  man  to  go  out  from  me.  And 
there  stood  no  man  with  him,  while 
Joseph  made  himself  known  unto  his 
brethren. 

2  And  he  ^ wept  aloud ; and  the 
Egyptians  and  the  house  of  Pharaoh 

1 ^ 1 voire  in 

weepvzg, 

3  And  Joseph  said  unto  his  bre- 
thren, am  Joseph;  doth  my  father  « Acts  7. 
yet  live  ? And  his  brethren  could  not 
answer  him  ; for  they  were  “ troubled  i'  Or, 
at  his  presence. 

4  And  Joseph  said  unto  his  bre- 


terri/ied. 


28.  Surely  he  is  torn  in  pieces'^  From 
these  words  probably  for  tlie  first  time  Joseph 
learns  what  had  been  Jacob’s  belief  as  to  his 
son’s  fate. 

34.  ho<vo  should  I fro  up  to  my  f ext  her'] 
The  character  of  Judah  comes  out  most  fa- 
vourably in  this  speech.  He  had,  in  the  first 
instance,  saved  Joseph  from  death,  but  yet  he 
had  propesed  the  alternative  of  selling  him  as 


a slave.  He  is  evidently  now  much  softened; 
has  witnessed  Jacob’s  affliction  with  deep  sym- 
pathy and  sorrow,  and  so  has  been  brought  to 
contrition  and  repentance.  The  sight  of  his 
repentance  finally  moves  Joseph  at  once  to 
make  himself  known  to  his  brethren. 

Chap.  XLV.  2.  <wept  aloud]  Lit.,  as  the 
margin,  “ gave  forth  his  voice  in  weeping.” 


V.  5->5]  GENESIS.  XLV. 


IHeb. 
neither  let 
ihe7-e  be 
aiie;er  in 
yo7{r  eyes. 

chap.  50. 
20. 


' Heb. 
tc  f>ut for 
; on  a rem- 
I,  lint. 


thren,  Come  near  to  me,  I pray  you. 
And  they  came  near.  And  he  said, 
I am  Joseph  your  brother,  whom  ye 
sold  into  Egypt. 

5 Now  therefore  be  not  grieved, 
^nor  angry  with  yourselves,  that  ye 
sold  me  hither : '^for  God  did  send 
me  before  you  to  preserve  life. 

6 For  these  two  years  hath  the 
famine  been  in  the  land  : and  yet  there 
are  five  years,  in  the  which  there  shall 
neither  be  earing  nor  harvest. 

7 And  God  sent  me  before  you  ^ to 
preserve  you  a posterity  in  the  earth, 
and  to  save  your  lives  by  a great  de- 
liverance. 

8 So  now  it  was  not  you  that  sent 
me  hither,  but  God  : and  he  hath 
made  me  a father  to  Pharaoh,  and  lord 
of  all  his  house,  and  a ruler  through- 
out all  the  land  of  Egypt. 

9 Haste  ye,  and  go  up  to  my  father, 
and  say  unto  him.  Thus  saith  thy  son 
Joseph,  God  hath  made  me  lord  of 


all  Egypt : come  down  unto  me,  tarry 
not ; 

10  And  thou  shalt  dwell  in  the 
land  of  Goshen,  and  thou  shalt  be 
near  unto  me,  thou,  and  thy  children, 
and  thy  children’s  children,  and  thy 
flocks,  and  thy  herds,  and  all  that  thou 
hast : 

1 1 And  there  will  I nourish  thee ; 
for  yet  there  are  five  years  of  famine ; 
lest  thou,  and  thy  household,  and  all 
that  thou  hast,  come  to  poverty. 

12  And,  behold,  your  eyes  see,  and 
the  eyes  of  my  brother  Benjamin,  that 
it  is  my  mouth  that  speaketh  unto 
you. 

13  And  ye  shall  tell  my  father  of 
all  my  glory  in  Egypt,  and  of  all  that 
ye  have  seen ; and  ye  shall  haste  and 
bring  down  my  father  hither. 

14  And  he  fell  upon  his  brother 
Benjamin’s  neck,  and  wept;  and 
Benjamin  wept  upon  his  neck. 

15  Moreover  he  kissed  all  his  bre- 


6.  earing^  i.  e.  “ ploughing.”  To 
“ear”  is  an  old  English  word  from  the  An- 
glo-Saxon root  erian,  “to  plough,”  cognate 
with  the  Latin  arare.  (See  Bosworth,  ‘ An- 
glo-Saxon Diet.’  25  k.)  It  occurs  in  the  Au- 
thorised Version;  Ex.  xxxiv.  21 ; Deut.  xxi.  4 ; 

I S.  viii.  12;  Isa.  xxx.  24. 

7.  to  preserve  you  a posterity  in  the  earth., 
and  to  save  your  lives  by  a great  deliverance'^ 
To  make  you  a remnant  in  tlie  earth 
(that  is,  to  secure  you  from  utter  destruction), 
and  to  preserve  your  lives  to  a great 
deliverance  {i.e.  to  preserve  life  to  you,  so 
that  your  deliverance  should  be  great  and 
signal). 

8.  but  God~\  Lit.  “The  God.”  That 
great  Personal  God,  who  had  led  and  guard- 
ed Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  who  still 
watched  over  the  house  of  Israel. 

a father  to  Pharaoh']  i.e.  a wise  and  confi- 
dential friend  and  counsellor.  The  Caliphs 
and  the  Sultan  of  Turkey  appear  to  have 
given  the  same  title  to  their  Grand  Viziers. 
(See  Burder,  ‘Oriental  Customs,’  ad  h.  1. ; 
Gesen.  p.  7 ; Ros.  in  loc.). 

10.  the  land  of  Goshen]  The  land  of 
Goshen  was  evidently  a region  lying  to  the 
north-east  of  lower  Egypt,  bounded  appa- 
rently by  the  Mediterranean  on  the  north,  by 
the  desert  on  the  east,  by  the  Tanitic  branch 
of  the  Nile  on  the  west  (hence  called  “the 


field  of  Zoan”  or  Tanis,  Ps.  Ixxviii.  12,  43), 
and  probably  extending  south  as  far  as  to  the 
head  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  nearly  to  Memphis. 
It  appears,  in  Gen.  xlvii.  ii,  to  be  called  the 
land  of  Rameses,  and  the  Israelites,  before  the 
Exodus,  are  said  to  have  built  in  it  the  cities 
of  Raamses  and  Pithom  (Exod.  i.  ii).  It 
was  probably,  though  under  the  dominion  of 
the  Pharaohs,  only  on  the  confines  of  Egypt. 
Hence  the  LXX.  here  renders  “.Gesen  of 
Arabia.”  In  ch.  xlvi.  28,  where  Goshen  oc- 
curs twice,  the  LXX.  call  it  “ the  city  of 
Heroopolis  in  the  land  of  Ramasses.”  Joseph 
placed  his  brethren  naturally  on  the  confines 
of  Egypt,  nearest  to  Palestine,  and  yet  near 
himself.  It  is  probable,  that  either  Memphis 
or  Tanis  was  then  the  metropolis  of  Egypt, 
both  of  which  are  in  the  immediate  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  region  thus  marked  out. 
(See  Ges.  p.  307;  Poole,  in  Smith,  ‘Diet, 
of  Bible’  Art.  Goshen]  Hengstenb.  ‘Egypt,’ 
&;c.  p.  42  sq.). 

11.  and  thy  household]  The  household  of 
Abraham  and  of  Isaac  consisted  of  many 
servants  and  dependents,  besides  their  own 
families.  So  Jacob,  when  he  came  from  Pa- 
dan-aram,  had  become  “two  bands.”  It  is 
probable  that  some  hundreds  of  dependents 
accompanied  Jacob  in  his  descent  into  Egypt, 
and  settled  with  him  in  Goshen.  So  again  in 
V.  18,  Joseph’s  brethren  are  bidden  to  take 
their  “ father  and  their  households.^"' 


C/l 


2I6 


GENESIS.  XLV.  XLVI. 


[v.  1 6 2. 


tHeb. 

7i'ns  good 
in  ike  eyes 
of  Pha- 
raoh. 


' TTeb. 
let  not 
your  eye 
spare,  ^c. 


t lieb. 
month. 


I Tfeb. 
carrying. 


thren,  and  wept  upon  them  : and  after 
that  his  brethren  talked  with  him. 

16  ^ And  the  fame  thereof  was 
heard  in  Pharaoh’s  house,  saying, 
Joseph’s  brethren  are  come:  and  it 
^ pleased  Pharaoh  well,  and  his  servants. 

17  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Joseph, 
Say  unto  thy  brethren.  This  do  ye; 
lade  your  beasts,  and  go,  get  you  unto 
the  land  of  Canaan ; 

18  And  take  your  father  and  your 
households,  and  come  unto  me : and 
I will  give  you  the  good  of  the  land 
of  Egypt,  and  ye  shall  eat  the  fat  of 
the  land. 

19  Now  thou  art  commanded,  this 
do  ye ; take  you  wagons  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt  for  your  little  ones, 
and  for  your  wives,  and  bring  your 
hither,  and  come. 

20  Also  ^ regard  not  your  stuff;  for 
the  good  of  all  the  land  of  Egypt  is 
yours. 

21  And  the  children  of  Israel  did 
so:  and  Joseph  gave_  them  wagons, 
according  to  the  Commandment  of 
Pharaoh,  and  gave  them  provision  for 
the  way. 

22  'Eo  all  of  them  he  gave  each 
man  changes  of  raiment;  but  to  Ben- 
jamin he  gave  three  hundred  pieces  of 
silver,  and  five  changes  of  raiment. 

23  And  to  his  fiither  he  sent  after 
this  manner I ten  asses  Uadenwith  the 


good  things  of  Egypt,  and  ten  she  asses 
laden  with  corn  and  bread  and  meat 
for  his  father  by  the  way. 

24  So  he  sent  his  brethren  away, 
and  they  departed : and  he  said  unto 
them,.  See  that  ye  fall  not  out  by  the 
way. 

25  ^ And  they  went  up  out  of 
Egypt,  and  came  into  the  land  of 
Canaan  unto  Jacob  their  father, 

26  And  told  him,  saying,  Joseph 
is  yet  alive,  and  he  is  governor  over 

all  the  land  of  Egypt.  And  ^Jacob’s  t Heb. 
heart  fainted,  for  he  believed  them  not. 

27  And  they  told  him  all  the  words 
of  Joseph,  which  he  had  said  unto 
them  : and  when  he  saw  the  wagons 
which  Joseph  had  sent  to  carry  him, 
the  spirit  of  Jacob  their  father  revived  : 

28  And  Israel  said.  It  is  enough ; 
Joseph  my  son  is  yet  alive : I will  go 
and  see  him  before  I die. 

CHAPTER  XLVI. 

I yacob  is  comforted  by  God  at  Beer-sheba:  5 
Thence  he  ivith  his  company  goeth  into  Egypt. 

8 The  number  of  his  family  that  went  into 
Egypt.  29  foseph  ineeteth  facob.  31  Pie 
instructeth  his  brethren  henu  to  ansvoer  to 
Pharaoh. 

AND  Israel  took  his  journey  with 
jlf\_  all  that  he  had,  and  came  to 
Beer-sheba,  and  offered  sacrifices  unto 
the  God  of  his  father  Isaac. 

2 And  God  spake  unto  Israel  in 
the  visions  of  the  night,  and  said. 


24.  See  that  ye  fall  not  out  by  the  ‘zvay^ 
So  all  the  Versions;  but  as  the  word  rendered 
“fall  out”  expresses  any  violent  emotion  as 
of  fear  or  anger,  some  prefer  to  render,  “ Be 
not  afraid  in  the  journey;”  so  Tuch,  Baumg., 
Gesen.,  and  many  moderns.  The  ancient  in- 
terpretation is  more  probable.  They  had  al- 
ready travelled  on  that  journey  several  times 
■without  meeting  with  any  evil  accident;  but 
there  was  some  danger  that  they  might  (juar- 
rel  among  themselves,  now  that  they  wen*  re- 
conciled to  Joseph,  perhaps  each  one  being 
n'ady  to  throw  the  blame  of  former  miscon- 
duct on  the  others  (Calvin). 

27.  (zvagons^  Carts  and  wagons  were 
known  early  in  Egypt,  which  was  a flat  coun- 
try and  highly  cultivated;  but  they  were  pro- 
bably unknown  at  this  time  in  Palestine  and 
Syria.  The  Egyptian  carts,  as  dej)icted  on 
the  monuments,  are  of  two  \\'heels  only,  when 
•used  for  carrying  agricultural  produce.  The 


four-wheeled  car,  mentioned  by  Herodotus, 
was  used  for  carrying  the  shrine  and  image 
of  a deity.  (See  Sir  G.  Wilkinson’s  note  to 
Rawlinson’s  Herodotus,  ii.  63,  and  the  en- 
graving there.)  When  Jacob  saw  the  wagons, 
he  knew  that  they  had  come  from  Egypt,  and 
so  he  believed  his  sons’  report,  and  was  com- 
forted. 

Cll.^P.  XLVI.  1.  to  Beer-sheba.,  and 
offered  sacrifices,  &;c.]  Here  Abraham  and 
Isaac,  built  altars  (ch.  xxi.  33,  xxvi.  25),  and 
worshipped.  Jacob  naturally  felt  it  to  be  a 
place  hallowed  by  sacred  memories,  and  being 
anxious  as  to  the  propriety  of  leaving  the  land 
of  promise  and  going  down  into  Egypt,  he  here 
sacrificed  to  the  God  of  his  fathers,  and  no 
doubt  sought  guidance  from  Him.  Beer- 
sheba  was  South  of  Hebron  on  the  road 
bv  which  facob  would  naturally  travel  into 
Egypt. 


V.  3—12-] 


GENESIS.  XLVL 


217 


Jacob,  Jacob.  And  he  said,  Here 
am  I. 

3 And  he  said,  I am  God,  the  God 
of  thy  father : fear  not  to  go  down 
into  Egypt;  for  I will  there  make  of 
thee  a great  nation  : 

4 I will  go  down  with  thee  into 
Egypt;  and  I will  also  surely  bring 
thee  up  again:  and  Joseph  shall  put 
his  hand  upon  thine  eyes. 

5 And  Jacob  rose  up  from  Beer- 
sheba:  and  the  sons  of  Israel  carried 
Jacob  their  father,  and  their  little  ones, 

‘ and  their  wives,  in  the  wagons  which 
Pharaoh  had  sent  to  carry  him. 

6 And  they  took  their  cattle,  and 
their  goods,  which  they  had  gotten  in 

a Josh.  24.  qP  Canaan,  and  came  into 

Psai.  105.  Egypt,  Jacob,  and  all  his  seed  with 

li  52. 4.  him  : 


7 His  sons,  and  his  sons’  sons  with 
him,  his  daughters,  and  his  sons’ 
daughters,  and  all  his  seed  brought 
he  with  him  into  Egypt. 

8 ^ And  these  are  the  names  of^-Exod.  i. 
the  children  of  Israel,  which  came  into 
Egypt,  Jacob  and  his  sons  : ‘^Reuben, 

Jacob’s  firstborn.  iChron.  5. 

9 And  the  sons  of  Reuben ; Ha- 
noch,  and  Phallu,  and  Hezron,  and 
Carmi. 

10  ^ ^And  the  sons  of  Simeon ; 

Jemuel,  and  Jamin,  and  Ohad,  and  tChron. 4, 
Jachin,  and  Zohar,  and  Shaul  the 

son  of  a Canaanitish  woman. 

1 1 And  the  sons  of  ^Levi ; Ger- 
shon,  Kohath,  and  Merari. 

12  ^ And  the  sons  of /Judah  ; Er,-^^Chron. 
and  Onan,  and  Shelah,  and  Pharez,  & 1 2t. 
and  Zarah  : but  Er  and  Onan  died  in  3. 


3.  I am  God^  the  God  of  thy  father]  “I 
am  EP'' — a reference  again  to  the  name  “El- 
Shaddai,”  by  which  the  Most  High  so  specially 
made  covenant  with  the  patriarchs.  See  on 
ch.  xliii.  14. 

fear  not  to  go  donun  into  Egypt]  Abraham 
had  gone  down  there  and  been  in  great  danger. 
Isaac  had  been  forbidden  to  go  thither  (ch. 
xxvi.  a).  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob  had  all  been 
placed  and  settled  in  Canaan  with  a promise 
that  they  should  in  future  possess  the  land. 
Moreover,  Egypt  was,  not  only  a heathen  land, 
but  one  in  which  heathenism  was  specially  de- 
veloped and  systematized.  Jacob  might  there- 
fore naturally  fear  to  find  in  it  dangers  both 
worldly  and  spiritual.  Hence  the  promise  of 
God’s  presence  and  protection  was  signally 
needed. 

4.  Joseph  shall  put  his  hand  upon  thine 
eyes]  The  ancients,  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews, 
desired  that  their  dearest  relatives  should  close 
their  eyes  in  death  (Horn.  ‘II.’  xi.  453;  ‘Od.’ 
XXIV.  296;  Eurip.  ‘Hec.’  430;  ‘Phoen.’  1465; 
Virg.  ‘Ain.’  ix.  487;  Ov.  ‘Heroid.’  I.  i6a). 

5.  the  sons  of  Israel  carried  Jacob  their 
father]  The  scene  depicted  on  the  tomb  of 

Chnoumhotep  at  Beni  Hassan  cannot  be  the 
Egyptian  version  of  the  arrival  of  the  Israelites 
in  Egypt;  but  it  is  strikingly  illustrative  of  the 
history  of  that  event.  The  date  of  the  inscrip- 
tion is  that  of  the  rath  dynasty,  which  was 
probably  the  dynasty  under  which  Joseph  lived; 
a number  of  strangers,  with  beards  (which  the 
Egyptians  never  wore,  but  which  in  the  sculp- 
tures indicate  uncivilized  foreigners),  and  with 
dress  and  physical  characteristics  belonging  to 
tht"  Semitic  nomads,  appear  before  tlie  governor 
offering  him  gifts.  They  carry  their  goods 


with  them  on  asses,  have  women  and  children 
with  them,  and  are  anned  with  bows  and  clubs. 
They  are  described  as  Absha  and  his  family, 
and  the  number  37  is  written  over  in  hiero- 
glyphics. The  signs,  which  accompany  the 
picture,  indicate  that  they  were  either  captives 
or  tributaries.  Sir  G.  Wilkinson,  however, 
has  suggested  that  possibly  this  indication  may 
result  from  the  contemptuous  way  in  which 
the  Egyptians  spoke  of  all  foreigners,  and  the 
superiority  which  they  claimed  over  them. 
Moreover,  they  are  anned,  one  of  them  is  play- 
ing on  a lyre,  and  others  bring  presents;  which 
things  point  rather  to  an  immigration  than  to 
a captivity.  (See  Wilkinson,  Vol.  ii.  p.  296, 
and  plate.  Brugsch,  ‘H.  E.’  p.  63,  where  the 
scene  is  well  engraved,  and  a good  description 
annexed.) 

7.  his  daughters]  Only  one  daughter 
is  named  and  one  granddaughter.  This  verse 
implies  that  there  were  more.  Mai  rietl  women 
would  not  be  mentioned  in  a Hebrew  gene- 
alogy; hence  Jacob’s  sons’  wives  are  not  re- 
counted among  the  seventy  souls  that  camie  into 
Egypt.  See  v.  26.  Dinah  remained  unmar- 
ried. Hence  she  only  of  Jacob's  daughters  is 
named. 

10.  JemueP^  Called  Nemuel,  Num.  xxvi. 
12;  I Chron.  iv.  24. 

Ohad]  Not  named  in  Num.  xxvi.  12 ; i Chr. 
iv.  24- 

Jachin]  “ Jarib,”  i Chr.  iv,  24. 

7johar]  “Zerah,”  Num.  xxvi.  13;  i Chr. 
iv.  24. 

11.  Gershon]  ‘ Gershom,’  i Chr.  vi.  16. 

12.  And  the  sons  of  Pharez  ‘^vere  Hezron 
and  Haniul]  The  difficulties  in  the  chro- 


2i8 


GENESIS.  XLVI. 


[v.  13—21. 


the  land  of  Canaan.  And  the  sons  of 
Pharez  were  Hezron  and  Hamul. 

/ri  Chron.  13^  -S' And  the  sons  of  Issachar; 
Tola,  and  Phuvah,  and  Job,  and 
Shimron. 

14  ^ And  the  sons  of  Zebulun; 
Sered,  and  Elon,  and  Jahleel. 

15  These  be  the  sons  of  Leah, 
which  she  bare  unto  Jacob  in  Padan- 
aram,  with  his  daughter  Dinah  : all 
the  souls  of  his  sons  and  his  daughters 
were  thirty  and  three. 

16  ^ And  the  sons  of  Gad;  Zi- 
phion,  and  Haggi,  Shuni,  and  Ezbon, 
Eri,  and  Arodi,  and  Areli. 

ji^Chron.  And  the  sons  of  Asher;  Jim- 


nah,  and  Ishuah,  and  Isui,  and  Beriah, 
and  Serah  their  sister : and  the  sons  of 
Beriah  ; Heber,  and  Malchiei. 

18  These  are  the  sons  of  Zilpah, 
whom  Laban  gave  to  Leah  his  daugh- 
ter, and  these  she  bare  unto  Jacob, 
even  sixteen  souls. 

19  The  sons  of  Rachel  Jacob’s 
wife;  Joseph,  and  Benjamin. 

20  *11  ' And  unto  Joseph  in  the  land  4^- 
of  Egypt  were  bor-n  Manasseh  and 
Ephraim,  which  Asenath  the  daughter 

of  Poti-pherah  " priest  of  On  bare  unto  " 

, . * * prince. 

him. 

21  ^ -^'And  the  sons  of  Benjamin  ^ 
were  Belah,  and  Becher,  and  Ashbel,  ’ 


nology  of  this  catalogue  have  suggested  the 
thought  that  it  did  not  foi*m  a part  of  the 
original  history  of  Genesis.  The  difficul- 
ties are  really  no  greater  than  v^e  might  expect 
to  find  in  a document  so  ancient,  and  where 
names  and  numbers  are  concerned,  which  of 
all  things  are  most  likely  to  puz/le  us.  In  this 
verse  it  appears  that  Er  and  Onan  having  died  in 
Canaan,  two  of  Judah’s  grandchildren  are  sub- 
stituted for  them.  It  has  been  said  that  Hezron 
and  Hamul  could  not  have  been  born  before 
the  descent  into  Egypt,  as  the  events  related 
in  ch.  xxxviii.  took  place  after  the  selling  of 
Joseph,  and  that,  therefore,  Pharez  could  not 
have  been  old  enough  to  have  two  sons  at  the 
time  of  that  descent.  Moreover,  it  is  argued, 
that  Judah  himself  could  not  have  been  more 
than  4z  at  this  time,  which  is  inconsistent  with 
the  apparent  statement  that  his  third  son,  Pha- 
rez. no't  born  till  after  the  marriage  and  death 
of  his  two  elder  brothers,  Er  and  Onan,  should 
himself  have  had  two  sons.  To  this  it  may  be 
replied,  (i),  that  we  must  not  assum.e  that  the 
events  in  chap,  xxxviii.  necessarily  took  place 
after  those  in  ch.  xxxvii.  It  is  most  likely  that 
ch.  xxxviii.  was  introduced  episodically  at  a 
convenient  point  in  the  history,  to  avoid  break- 
ing the  continuity  of  the  story.  (See  note  on 
xxxviii.  I.)  (2)  Again,  if  the  chronology  of 

the  life  of  Jacob  proposed  in  the  note  at  the 
end  of  eh.  xxxi.  be  correct,  Judah  was,  not  42, 
but  62,  at  the  descent  into  Egypt,  in  which  case 
the  two  sons  of  Pharez  may  easily  have  been 
born  then.  (3)  Moreover,  it  is  quite  possible 
tliat  the  names  in  this  catalogue  may  have 
comprised,  not  only  those  that  were  actually 
of  the  company,  which  went  down  into  Egypt, 
but  also  all  the  grandchildren  or  great  grand- 
children of  Jacob  born  before  Jacob’s  death. 
'I'his  would  not  be  inconsistent  with  the  com- 
mon usage  of  Scripture  language,  and  it  would 
allow  17  years  more  for  the  birth  of  those  two 
grandsons  of  Judah  and  for  the  ten  sons  of 


Benjamin.  Now  Judah  was  probably  79  at 
Jacob’s  death,  at  which  age  his  son  Pharez 
may  easily  have  had  two  sons.  Indeed,  the 
statement  immediately  coupled  with  the  names 
of  Hezron  and  Hamul,  viz.  that  Er  and  Onan 
had  died  in  Canaan,  seems  introduced  on  pur- 
pose to  accoimt  for  the  reckoning  of  these 
grandchildren  of  Judah,  born  in  Egypt,  with 
others  who  had  been  born  in  Canaan. 

13.  Joh\  Called  ‘Jashub’  Num.  xxvi.  24; 
I Chr.  vii.  i. 

15.  thirty  and  three]  that  is,  including 
Jacob  himself,  but  not  Er,  or  Onan,  who 
were  dead,  nor  perhaps  Leah. 

16.  7Jphion]  ‘Zephon’  in  Num.  xxvi.  15. 

Ezbo7i]  ‘Oziii,’  Num.  xxvi.  16. 

Arodi]  ‘A rod,’  Num.  xxvi.  17. 

17.  Ishuah]  Not  mentioned  in  Numbers. 
Probably  lie  had  not  left  descendants  and 
founded  families. 

20.  And  unto  Joseph,  &:c.]  At  the  end 
of  this  verse  the  LXX.  insert  the  names  of 
Machir  the  son  of  Manasseh,  and  Galaad  the 
son  of  Machir,  and  Sutalaam  and  Taam  the 
sons  of  Ephraim,  and  Edem  the  son  of  Suta- 
laam. (See  Numb.  xxvi.  28 — 37;  i Chr.  vii. 
14.)  Thus  the  whole  number  of  persons  be- 
comes 75.  The  passage  however  is  not  in  the 
Samaritan,  with  which  the  LXX. mostly  agrees. 

21.  the  sons  of  Benjamin]  These  are 
ten  in  number.  According  to  Numb.  xxvi.  40 
two  of  them,  Naaman  and  Ard,  were  grand- 
sons of  Benjamin.  According  to  the  common 
chronology  Benjamin  was  only  23  at  the  com- 
ing into  Egypt;  an  age  at  which  he  could 
hardly  have  had  ten  sons,  or  eight  sons  and 
two  grandsons,  even  if  he  had  two  wives  and 
some  of  the  children  had  been  twins.  The 
considerations  alluded  to  at  v.  12,  however,  will 
allow  us  to  calculate  that  Benjamin  was  32  at 


V.  2 2—34-] 


GENESIS.  XLVI. 


i Dent, 

< Heb. 
thi^h. 


219 


Gera,  and  Naaman,  Ehi,  and  Rosh, 
Muppim,  and  Huppim,  and  Ard. 

22  These  are  the  sons  of  Rachel, 
which  were  born  to  Jacob:  all  the 
souls  were  fourteen. 

23  11  And  the  sons  of  Dan;  Hu- 
shirn. 

24  H And  the  sons  of  Naphtali; 
Jahzeel,  and  Guni,  and  Jezer,  and 
Shillem. 

25  These  are  the  sons  of  Bilhah, 
which  Laban  gave  unto  Rachel  his 
daughter,  and  she  bare  these  unto 
Jacob:  all  the  souls  were  seven. 

26  '^All  the  souls  that  came  with 
Jacob  into  Egypt,  which  came  out 
of  his  Moins,  besides  Jacob’s  sons’ 
wives,  all  the  souls  were  threescore 
and  six; 

27  And  the  sons  of  Joseph,  which 
were  born  him  in  Egypt,  were  two 
souls : all  the  souls  of  the  house  of 
Jacob,  which  came  into  Egypt,  were 
threescore  and  ten. 

28  H And  he  sent  Judah  before 
him  unto  Joseph,  to  direct  his  face 
unto  Goshen ; and  they  came  into 
the  land  of  Goshen. 

29  And  Joseph  made  ready  his 


chariot,  and  went  up  to  meet  Israel 
his  father,  to  Goshen,  and  presented 
himself  unto  him ; and  he  fell  on  his 
neck,  and  wept  on  his  neck  a good 
while. 

30  And  Israel  said  unto  Joseph, 
Now  let  me  die,  since  I have  seen 
thy, face,  because  thou  art  yet  alive. 

31  And  Joseph  said  unto  his  bre- 
thren, and  unto  his  father’s  house, 

I will  go  up,  and  shew  Pharaoh,  and 
say  unto  him.  My  brethren,  and  my 
father’s  house,  which  were  in  the 
land  of  Canaan,  are  come  unto  me ; 

32  And  the  men  are  shepherds, 

for  ^ their  trade  hath  been  to  feed  t He’-, 
cattle;  and  they  have  brought  their 
flocks,  and  their  herds,  and  all  that 
they  have. 

33  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when 
Pharaoh  shall  call  you,  and  shall  say. 
What  Is  your  occupation  ? 

34  7Tat  ye  shall  say.  Thy  servants’ 
trade  hath  been  about  cattle  from  our 
youth  even  until  now,  both  we,  and 
also  our  fathers : that  ye  may  dwejl 
in  the  land  of  Goshen;  for  every 
shepherd  is  an  abomination  unto  the 
Egyptians. 


the  going  down  to  Egypt  (see  note  at  the  end 
of  ch.  xxxi.),  and  therefore  forty-nine  at  the 
death  of  Jacob,  by  which  age  he  might  easily 
have  been  the  father  of  ten  sons. 

Three  of  Benjamin’s  sons,  Becher,  Gera  and 
Rosh,  are  wanting  in  the  table  given  in  Num. 
xxvi.,  probably  because  they  had  not  left  chil- 
dren enough  to  form  independent  families. 

Ehi^  Muppim^  and  Huppim\  Called  ‘ Shup- 
ham,  Hupham,  and  Ahiram,’  in  Num.  xxvi. 38, 
39- 

27.  all  the  souls  of  the  house  of  Jacoby 
tiuhich  came  into  Egypt^  'were  threescore  and 
teii\  The  number  is  made  up  of  the  66  men- 
tioned in  the  last  verse,  Jacob  himself,  Joseph, 
and  the  two  sons  of  Joseph.  The  LXX. 
reads  here  “ The  sons  of  Joseph,  which  were 
born  to  him  in  Egypt,  were  nine  souls.  All 
the  souls  of  the  house  of  Jacob,  who  came  with 
Jacob  into  Egypt,  were  seventy-five.”  See 
above  note  on  verse  20.  St  Stephen  (Acts  vii. 
14)  adopts  the  number  75,  probably  because 
he,  or  St  Luke,  quotes  the  LXX.  version,  as 
all  Greek-speaking  Jews  would  naturally  have 
done;  and  it  may  be  fairly  said,  that  both 
numbers  were  equally  correct,  and  that  the 
variation  depends  on  the  different  mode  of 


reckoning.  The  genealogical  tables  of  the  Jews 
were  drawn  up  on  principles  unlike  those  of 
modern  calculation.  And  there  would  be  no 
impropriety,  on  these  principles,  in  reckoning 
the  children  of  Joseph  only,  or  in  adding  to 
them  his  grandchildren  also,  especially  if  the 
latter  became  founders  of  important  families 
in  Israel. 

28.  he  sent  Judah  before  him  unto  Joseph^ 
to  direct  his  face  unto  Goshen\  i.e.  He  sent 
Judah  before  himself  (Jacob)  to  Joseph,  that 
Joseph  might  direct  him  to  Goshen. 

34.  e'very  shepherd  is  an  abomination  unto 
the  Egyptians']  Herodotus  speaks  of  the 
aversion  of  the  Egyptians  for  swineherds  (ii. 
47).  The  monuments  indicate  their  con- 
tempt for  shepherds  and  goatherds  by  the 
mean  appearance  always  given  to  them.  Nei- 
ther mutton  nor  the  flesh  of  goats  was  ever 
eaten  or  offered.  Even  woollen  garments, 
though  sometimes  worn  over  linen,  were  es- 
teemed unclean.  No  priest  would  wear  them. 
They  were  never  worn  in  temples,  nor  were 
the  dead  buried  in  them.  To  this  day,  sheep- 
feeding is  esteemed  the  office  of  women  and 
slaves.  The  fact  that  the  Egyptians  themselves 
were  great  agriculturists,  tillers  of  land,  and 


220 


GENESIS.  XLVII. 


[''•  •— 9- 


CHAPTER  XLVII. 

I Joseph  presenteth  five  of  his  brethren^  7 and 
his  father^  before  Pharaoh.  1 1 He  giveth 
them  habitation  and  maintenance.  13  He 
getteth  all  the  Egyptians'  money,  16  their 
cattle,  18  their  lands  to  Pharaoh.  22  The 
priests'  land  was  not  bought.  23  He  letteth 
the  land  to  them  for  a fifth  part.  28  Jacob's  age. 
29  He  sweareth  Joseph  to  bury  him  with  his 
fathers. 

Then  Joseph  came  and  told 
Pharaoh,  and  said,  My  father 
and  my  brethren,  and  their  flocks, 
and  their  herds,  and  all  that  they 
have,  are  come  out  of  the  land  of 
Canaan ; and.,  behold,  they  are  in  the 
land  of  Goshen. 

2 And  he  took  some  of  his  bre- 
thren, even  five  men,  and  presented 
them  unto  Pharaoh. 

3 And  Pharaoh  said  unto  his  bre- 
thren, What  is  your  occupation  ? 
And  they  said  unto  Pharaoh,  Thy 
servants  are  shepherds,  both  we,  and 
also  our  fathers. 

4 They  said  moreover  unto  Pha- 
raoh, For  to  sojourn  in  the  land  are 


we  come;  for  thy  servants  have  no 
pasture  for  their  flocks;  for  the  fa- 
mine is  sore  in  the  land  of  Canaan : 
now  therefore,  we  pray  thee,  let  thy 
servants  dwell  in  the  land  of  Goshen. 

5 And  Pharaoh  spake  unto  Joseph, 
saying.  Thy  father  and  thy  brethren 
are  come  unto  thee : 

6 The  land  of  Egypt  is  before 
thee ; in  the  best  of  the  land  make 
thy  father  and  brethren  to  dwell;  in 
the  land  of  Goshen  let  them  dwell : 
and  if  thou  knowest  any  men  of  acti- 
vity among  them,  then  make  them 
rulers  over  my  cattle. 

7 And  Joseph  brought  in  Jacob 
his  father,  and  set  him  before  Pha- 
raoh : and  Jacob  blessed  Pharaoh. 

8 And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Jacob, 

^ How  old  art  thou?  t Heb. 

9 And  Jacob  said  unto  Pharaoh, 

" The  days  of  the  years  of  my  pil-  thHdays 
grimage  are  an  hundred  and  thirty of 
years:  few  and  evil  have  the  days  off'Hetf'L. 
the  years  of  my  life  been,  and  have  ^3- 


that  their  neighbours  the  Arab  tribes  of  the 
desert,  with  whom  they  were  continually  at 
feud,  were  nomads  only,  may  have  been  suffi- 
cient to  cause  this  feeling.  The  Egyptians 
looked  on  all  the  people  of  Egypt  as  of  noble 
race(Diod.  v.  58),  and  on  all  foreigners  as  low- 
born. Hence  they  would  naturally  esteem 
a nomadic  people  in  close  proximity  to  them- 
selves, and  with  a much  lower  civilization 
than  their  own,  as  barbarous  and  despicable. 
A\’hatever  be  the  historical  foundation  for  the 
existence  of  three  dynasties  of  Hyesos  or  Shep- 
herd-kings extending  over  a period  of  from 
500  to  I coo  years,  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  the  Egyptians  were  frequently  harassed 
by  incui-sions  from  the  nomadic  tribes  in  their 
neighbourhood.  Some  of  these  tribes  appear 
to  have  subdued  portions  of  Lower  Egypt  and 
to  have  fixed  their  seat  of  govemment  at 
I'anis  (Zoan),  or  even  at  Memphis.  The 
great  Hyesos  invasion  was  after  the  time  of 
Joseph,  who  probably  lived  under  a Pharaoh 
of  the  twelfth  dynasty  (see  Excursus);  but 
the  hostility  lietween  the  Egyptians  and  the 
nomad  trilx.*s  of  Asia  had  no  doubt  been  of 
long  duration. 

Chap.  XLVII.  6.  in  the  best  of  the  land~\ 
The  modern  province  of  Es-Shnrkiveh.  u hich 
appears  nearly  to  correspond  with  the  land  of 
Goshen,  is  said  to  bear  the  highest  valuation 
and  to  yield  the  largest  revenue”  of  any 


in  Egypt.  (Robinson,  ‘B.  R.’  i.  p.  78,  79; 
Kurtz,  Vol.  II.  p.  15.)  M.  Chabas  has  collected 
notices  of  great  interest  showing  the  riches 
and  beauty  of  the  district  under  the  19th 
dynasty  (‘Mel.  Egypt.’  ii.) 

7.  and  Jacob  blessed  Pharaoh']  Some 
here  render  “ Jacob  saluted  Pharaoh,”  a pos- 
sible translation,  as  the  Eastern  salutation  is 
often  with  words  of  blessing:  but  the  natural 
sense  of  the  word  is  “to  bless;”  and  if  Jacob 
had  bowed  himself  to  the  ground  before  Pha- 
raoh according  to  a familiar  Eastern  custom, 
it  would  probably  have  been  so  related  in  the 
history.  More  probably  the  aged  patriarch, 
with  the  conscious  dignity  of  a prophet  and 
the  heir  of  the  promises,  prayed  for  blessings 
upon  Pharaoh. 

8.  Ho^  old  art  thou?]  How  many  are 
the  day.s  of  the  years  of  thy  life? 

9.  my  pilgrimage]  Lit.  “ my  sojourn- 
ings.”  Pharaoli  asked  of  the  days  of  the  years 
of  his  life,  he  replies  by  speaking  of  the  days 
of  the  years  of  his  pilgrimage.  Some  have 
thought  that  he  called  his  life  a pilgrimage, 
because  he  was  a nomad,  a wanderer  in  lands 
not  his  own:  but  in  reality  the  patriarchs 
spoke  of  life  as  a pilgrimage  or  sojourning, 
because  they  sought  another  country,  that  is  a 
heavenly  (Heb.  xi.  9,  13).  Earth  was  not 
their  home,  but  their  journey  homewards. 

fe^jo  and  evil]  The  Jews  speak  of  Jacob’s 


221 


V.  10— 21.]  GEN  ESI 

not  attained  unto  the  days  of  the 
years  of  the  life  of  my  fathers  in  the 
days  of  their  pilgrimage. 

10  And  Jacob  blessed  Pharaoh,  and 
went  out  from  before  Pharaoh. 

11  ^ And  Joseph  placed  his  father 
and  his  brethren,  and  gave  them  a 
possession  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  in 
the  best  of  the  land,  in  the  land  of 
Rameses,  as  Pharaoh  had  commanded. 

12  And  Joseph  nourished  his  fa- 
ther, and  his  brethren,  and  all  his 

J Or,  father’s  household,  with  bread,  “ ^ ac- 
cording  to  their  families. 

13  ^ And  there  was  no  bread  in 
all  the  land ; for  the  famine  was  very 

little  ones,  sore,  SO  that  the  land  of  Egypt  and 
all  the  land  of  Canaan  fainted  by  rea- 
son of  the  famine. 

14  And  Joseph  gathered  up  all  the 
money  that  was  found  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  in  the  land  of  Canaan, 
for  the  corn  which  they  bought:  and 
Joseph  brought  the  money  into  Pha- 
raoh’s house. 

15  And  when  money  failed  in  the 
land  of  Egypt,  and  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,  all  the  Egyptians  came  unto 
Joseph,  and  said.  Give  us  bread:  for 
why  should  we  die  in  thy  presence  ? 
for  the  money  faileth. 


seven  afflictions:  (i)  the  persecution  of  Esau; 
(2)  the  injustice  of  Laban  ; (3)  the  result  of 
his  wrestling  with  the  Angel;  (4)  the  viola- 
tion of  DiUah;  (5)  the  loss  of  Joseph;  (6) 
the  imprisjnment  of  Simeon;  (7)  the  depar- 
ture of  Benjamin  for  Egypt.  They  might 
well  have  added  the  death  of  Rachel  and  the 
incest  of  Reuben  (Schumann). 

11.  the^  land  of  Rameses']  In  Ex.  i.  ii, 
the  Israelites  are  said  to  have  built  treasure 
cities  for  Pharaoh,  Pithom  and  Raamses.  It 
is  possible  that  Goshen  is  here  called  the  land 
of  Rameses  by  anticipation,  as  it  may  have 
become  familiarly  known  to  the  Israelites  by 
the  name  “ land  of  Rameses”  after  they  had 
built  the  city  Rameses  in  it.  Very  probably, 
however,  the  Israelites  in  the  captivity  only 
fortified  and  strengthened  the  city  of  Rameses 
then  already  existing,  and  so  fitted  it  to  be  a 
strong  treasure-city.  The  name  Rameses  be- 
came famous  in  after  times  from  the  exploits 
of  Rameses  II.,  a king  of  the  19th  dynasty : 
but  he  was  of  too  late  a date  to  have  given 
name  to  a city,  either  in  the  time  of  Joseph, 
or  even  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus.  Rameses, 


S.  XLVII. 

16  And  Joseph  said.  Give  your 
cattle ; and  I will  give  you  for  your 
cattle,  if  money  fail. 

17  And  they  brought  their  cattle 
unto  Joseph:  and  Joseph  gave  them 
bread  in  exchange  for  horses,  and  for 
the  flocks,  and  for  the  cattle  of  the 
herds,  and  for  the  asses:  and  he  ^fed  ^ 
them  v/ith  bread  for  all  their  cattle 
for  that  year. 

18  When  that  year  was  ended, 
they  came  unto  him  the  second  year, 
and  said  unto  him,  We  will  not  hide 
it  from  my  lord,  how  that  our  money 
is  spent;  my  lord  also  hath  our  herds 
of  cattle;  there  is  not  ought  left  in 
the  sight  of  my  lord,  but  our  bodies, 
and  our  lands : 

19  Wherefore  shall  we  die  before 
thine  eyes,  both  we  and  our  land  ? 
buy  us  and  our  land  for  bread,  and 
we  and  our  land  will  be  servants  unto 
Pharaoh  : and  give  ns  seed,  that  we 
may  live,  and  not  die,  that  the  land 
be  not  desolate. 

20  And  Joseph  bought  all  the  land 
of  Egypt  for  Pharaoh ; for  the  Egyp- 
tians sold  every  man  his  field,  because 
the  famine  prevailed  over  them : so 
the  land  became  Pharaoh’s. 

21  And  as  for  the  people,  he  re- 


according to  the  LXX.  corresponded  with  the 
Heroopolis  of  after  times.  (See  on  this  city 
Hengstenberg,  ‘ Egypt,’  p.  51,  and  Excursus 
at  the  end  of  the  volume.) 

12.  according  to  their  families]  Lit.  “to 
the  mouth  of  their  children;”  meaning  very 
probably,  “ even  to  the  food  for  their  chil- 
dren.” 

20.  Joseph  bought  all  the  land  of  Egypt 
for  Pharaoh]  All  the  main  points  in  ""the 
statements  of  this  chapter  are  confirmed  by 
Herodotus,  Diodorus,  Strabo,  and  the  monu- 
ments. Herodotus  (ii.  109)  says  that  Sesos- 
tris  divided  the  soil  among  the  inhabitants, 
assigning  square  plots  of  land  of ‘equal  size 
to  all,  and  obtained  his  revenue  from  a rent 
paid  annually  by  the  holders.  Diodorus  (1.54) 
says  that  Sesoosis  divided  the  whole  country 
into  36  nomes  and  set  nomarchs  over  each  to 
take  care  of  the  royal  revenue  and  administer 
their  respective  provinces.  Strabo  (xvii.  p. 
787)  tells  us  that  the  occupiers  of  land  held 
it  subject  to  a rent.  Again,  Diodorus  (i.  73, 
74)  represents  the  land  as  possessed  only  by 
the  priests,  the  king,  and  the  warriors,  which 


2 2 2 


GENESIS.  XLVII. 


1 Or, 
princes. 


/ 

[V.  2 2 26. 


moved  them  to  cities  from  oyie  end 
of  the  borders  of  Egypt  even  to  the 
other  end  thereof. 

22  Only  the  land  of  the  ^ priests 
bought  he  not;  for  the  priests  had 
a portion  assigned  them  of  Pharaoh, 
and  did  eat  their  portion  which  Pha- 
raoh gave  them:  wherefore  they  sold 
not  their  lands. 

23  Then  Joseph  said  unto  the  peo- 
ple, Behold,  I have  bought  you  this 
day  and  your  land  for  Pharaoh : lo, 
here  is  seed  for  you,  and  ye  shall  sow 
the  land. 


testimony  is  confirmed  by  the  sculptures 
(Wilkinson,  i.  p.  263).  The  discrepancy  of 
this  from  the  account  in  Genesis  is  apparent 
in  the  silence  of  the  latter  concerning  the 
lands  assigned  to  the  warrior  caste.  The  re- 
servation of  their  lands  to  the  priests  is  ex- 
pressly mentioned  in  v.  ; but  nothing  is 
said  of  the  warriors.  There  was,  however, 
a marked  difference  in  the  tenure  of  land  by 
the  warriors  from  that  by  the  priests.  Hero- 
dotus (II.  168)  says  that  each  warrior  had 
assigned  to  him  twelve  arura  of  land  (each 
arura  being  a square  of  100  Egyptian  cu- 
bits); that  is  to  say,  there  were  no  landed 
possessions  vested  in  the  caste,  but  certain 
fixed  portions  assigned  to  each  person : and 
these,  as  given  by  the  sovereign’s  will,  so 
apparently  were  liable  to  be  withheld  or 
taken  away  by  the  same  will ; for  we  find 
that  Sethos,  the  contemporary  ot  Sennacherib 
and  therefore  of  Hezekiah  and  Isaiah,  actu- 
ally deprived  the  warriors  of  these  lands, 
wliich  former  kings  had  conceded  to  them 
(Herod,  ii.  141).  It  is  therefore,  as  Knobel 
remarks,  highly  probable  that  the  original 
reseiwation  of  their  lands  was  only  to  the 
priests,  and  that  the  warrior  caste  did  not 
come  into  possession  of  their  twelve  arurte 
each,  till  after  the  time  of  Joseph.  In  the 
other  important  particulars  the  sacred  and 
profane  accounts  entirely  tally,  viz.  that,  by 
royal  appointment,  the  original  proprietors  of 
the  land  became  crown  tenants,  holding  their 
land  by  payment  of  a rent  or  tribute ; whilst 
the  priests  only  were  left  in  full  possession  of 
their  fornier  lands  and  revenues.  As  to  the 
particular  king  to  whom  this  is  attributed  by 
I lerodotus  and  Diodorus,  Lepsius  (‘  Chronol. 
Egypt.’  I.  p.  304)  supposes  that  this  was  not 
the  Sesostris  of  Manetho’s  12th  dynasty 
(Osirtasen  of  the  Monuments),  but  a Sethos 
or  Sethosis  of  the  19th  dynasty,  whom  he 
considers  to  be  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph.  The 
19th  dynasty  is,  however,  certainly  much  too 
late  a date  for  Joseph.  It  may  be  a (juestion 
whether  the  division  of  the  land  into  36 


24  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in 
the  increase,  that  ye  shall  give  the 
fifth  part  unto  Pharaoh,  and  four 
parts  shall  be  your  own,  for  seed  of 
the  field,  and  for  your  food,  and  for 
them  of  your  households,  and  for  food 
for  your  little  ones. 

25  And  they  said,  Thou  hast  saved 
our  lives:  let  us  find  grace  in  the 
sight  of  rny  lord,  and  we  will  be 
Pharaoh’s  servants. 

26  And  Joseph  made  it  a law  over 
the  land  of  Egypt  unto  this  day,  that 
Pharaoh  should  have  the  fifth  part; 


nomes  and  into  square  plots  of  equal  size  by 
Sesostris  be  the  same  transaction  as  the  pur- 
chasing and  restoring  of  the  land  by  Joseph. 
The  people  were  already  in  possession  of 
their  property  when  Joseph  bought  it,  and 
they  received  it  again  on  condition  of  paying 
a fifth  of  the  produce  as  a rent.  But  whetly^r 
or  not  this  act  of  Sesostris  be  identified  with 
that  of  Joseph  (or  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph), 
the  profane  historians  and  the  monuments  com- 
pletely bear  out  the  testimony  of  the  author 
of  Genesis  as  to  the  condition  of  land  ten  me 
and  its  origin  in  an  exercise  of  the  sovereign’s 
authority. 

21.  he  remo’ved  them  to  citles'\  He  had 
collected  all  the  corn,  which  he  had  stored 
up  for  the  fiimine,  into  the  various  cities  of 
Egypt,  and  so  he  removed  the  people  into  the 
cities  and  their  neighbourhood,  that  he  might 
the  better  provide  them  with  food  (Schum.). 

22.  Only  the  land  of  the  priests  bought  he 
not\  See  on  v.  20. 

the  priests  had  a portion  assigned  them  of 
Pharaoh,  and  did  eat  their  portion  cwhich  Pha- 
raoh ga-ve  theni]  This  does  not  mean  that 
the  priests  were  Pharaoh’s  stipendiaries,  vyhich 
would  be  inconsistent  with  the  immediately 
preceding  wmrds,  as  wHl  as  with  the  statement 
of  profane  authors  as  to  the  landed  possessions 
of  the  priests.  On  the  contrary,  it  means, 
that  Pharaoh  had  such  respect  for  the  minis- 
ters of  religion,  that,  instead  of  suffering 
Joseph  to  sell  corn  to  them  and  so  to  buy  up 
their  land,  he  ordered  a portion  of  corn  to 
be  regularly  distributed  to  them  during  the 
famine,  and  so  they  were  not  reduced  to  the 
necessity  of  selling  their  lands.  This  regard 
for  the  priests  is  expressly  assigned  to  Pha- 
raoh, not  to  Joseph,  and  so  there  can  be  no 
need  to  apologize  for  Joseph’s  respect  to  an 
idolatrous  priesthood. 

20.  Joseph  made  it  a la^']  The  finsl 
result  of  Joseph’s  policy  was  that  the  land 
was  restored  to  the  Egyptians,  w'ith  an  obli- 
gation to  pa\-  one  fifth  of  it  to  Pharaoh  for  the 


V.  =7-^-]  GENESIS.  XLVII.  XLVIIi. 


cor,  except  the  land  of  the  "priests  only, 
fnnccs.  became  not  Pharaoh’s. 

2/  And  Israel  dwelt  in  the  land 
of  Egypt,  in  the  country  of  Goshen  ; 
and  they  had  possessions  therein,  and 
grew,  and  multiplied  exceedingly. 

28  And  Jacob  lived  in  the  land  of 
t Hci..  Egypt  seventeen  years  : so  ^ the  whole 

age  of  Jacob  was  an  hundred  forty 
seven  years. 

29  And  the  time  drew  nigh  that 
Israel  must  die;  and  he  called  his  son 
Joseph,  and  said  unto  him.  If  now 
I have  found  grace  in  thy  sight, 

I'  rhap.  24.  ^ put,  I pray  thee,  thy  hand  under 
my  thigh,  and  deal  kindly  and  truly 
with  me;  bury  me  not,  I pray  thee, 
in  Egypt; 

30  But  I will  lie  with  my  fathers. 


and  thou  shalt  carry  me  out  of  Egypt, 
and  bury  me  in  their  buryingplace. 

And  he  said,  I will  do  as  thou  hast 
said. 

31  And  he  said.  Swear  unto  me. 

And  he  sware  unto  him.  And  ‘^Is-'^Heb. 
rael  bowed  himself  upon  the  bed’s 
head. 

CHAPTER  XLVIII. 

I yoseph  with  his  so7ts  visiteth  his  sick  father, 

2 Jacob  strengtheiieth  hunself  to  bless  them.  3 
He  repeateth  the  promise.  5 He  taketh 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh  as  his  own.  7 He 
telleth  Joseph  of  his  mother  s grave.  9 He 
blesseth  Ephraim  and  MaJiassch.  17  He 
preferreth^  the  younger  before  the  elder.  21 
He prophesieth  their  return  to  Canaan. 

AND  it  came  to  pass  after  these 
Jf\^  things,  that  one  told  Joseph, 
Behold,  thy  father  is  sick ; and  he 


purpose  of  maintaining  the  revenues  of  the 
state.  Much  has  been  written  in  condemna- 
tion, and  again  in  vindication  of  theiie  pro- 
ceedings. Was  Joseph  a mere  creature  of 
Pharaoh’s,  desirous  only  of  his  master’s  ag~ 
grandi'/ement  ? or  was  he  bent  on  establishing 
a tyrannical  absolutism  in  violation  of  the 
rights  and  liberties  of  the  subject  ? The  bre- 
vity, of  the  narrative  and  our  imperfect  ac- 
quaintance with  the  condition  of  the  people 
and  the  state  of  agriculture  in  ancient  Egypt 
make  it  impossible  fully  to  judge  of  the  wis- 
dom and  equity  of  Joseph’s  laws.  This  much, 
however,  is  quite  evident.  The  land  in  favour- 
able years  was  very  productive.  In  the  plente- 
ous years  it  brought  forth  by  handfuls  (ch. 
xli.  47).  Even  the  fifth  part  of  the  revenue  of 
corn  (v.  34)  was  so  abundant  that  it  is  de- 
scribed as  like  “the  sand  of  the  sea,”  and 
“ without  number”  (v.  49).  Yet  there  was  a 
liability  to  great  depression,  as  shewn  by  the 
seven  years  of  famine : the  monuments  too  in- 
dicate the  frequent  occurrence  of  scarcity,  and 
there  was  evidently  no  provision  against  this 
in  the  habits  of  the  people  or  the  management 
of  the  tillage.  If  Pharaoh  had  not  been  moved 
to  store  up  corn  against  the  famine  years,  the 
population  would  most  probably  have  perished. 
The  peculiar  nature  of  the  land,  its  dependence 
on  the  overflow  of  the  Nile,  and  the  unthrifty 
habits  of  the  cultivators,  made  it  desirable  to 
establish  a system  of  centralization,  perhaps  to 
introduce  some  general  principle  of  irrigation, 
in  modem  phraseology,  to  promote  the  pros- 
perity of  the  country  by  great  government 
works,  in  preference  to  leaving  all  to  the  uncer- 
tainty of  individual  enterprize.  If  this  was  so, 
then  the  saying,  “Thou  hast  saved  our  lives,” 
was  no  language  of  Eastern  adulation,  but  the 
verdict  of  a grateful  people. 


The  “ fifth  part”  which  was  paid  to  Pha- 
raoh for  the  revenues  of  the  state,  and  perhaps 
for  public  works  of  all  kinds,  agricultural 
and  others,  was  not  an  exorbitant  impost. 
The  Egyptians  appear  to  have  made  no  diffi- 
culty in  paying  one-fifth  of  the  produce  of 
their  land  to  Pharaoh  during  the  years  of 
plenty ; and  hence  we  may  infer  that  it  would 
not  have  been  a burdensome  rent  when  the 
system  of  agriculture  was  put  on  a better 
footing. 

28.  the  ^vhole  age  of  Jacob']  Lit.  the 
days  of  Jacob,  even  the  years  of  his  life. 

29.  bury  me  not. ..in  Egypt]  Jacob  had 
a firm  faith  that  his  descendants  should  innerit 
the  land  of  Canaan,  and  therefore  desired  to 
be  buried  there.  Moreover,  he  very  probably 
wished  to  direct  the  minds  of  his  children  to 
that  as  their  future  home,  that  they  might  be 
kept  from  setting  up  their  rest  in  Egypt. 

31.  bonved  himself  upon  the  bed's  head] 
So  the  Masorites  point  it.  So  the  Targg., 
Symm.,  Aquila,  Vulg.,  but  the  LXX.,  Syr., 
and  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (xi.  21),  read  “ on 
the  top  of  his  staff.”  The  Hebrew  word  with- 
out the  vowel  points  means  either  “bed”  or 
“ staff.”  The  only  distinction  is  in  the  vowel 
points,  which  do  not  exist  in  the  more  ancient 
MSS.  It  is  therefore  impossible  to  decide 
with  certainty  which  was  the  original  sense  of 
the  word.  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  mean- 
ing is,  as  the  Apostle  quotes  the  passage,  that 
after  Joseph  had  sworn  to  bury  him  in  Ca- 
naan, Jacob  bowed  himself  upon  the  staff 
which  had  gone  with  him  through  all  his  wan- 
derings (Gen.  xxxii.  10),  and  so  worshipped 
God.  And  this  seems  the  more  likely  from 
the  fact  that  it  is  not  till  after  these  things 
that  one  told  Joseph,  “ Behold,  thy  father  is 


1 


224 

took  with  him  his  two  sons,  Manas- 
seh  and  Ephraim. 

2 And  otie  told  Jacob,  and  said, 
Behold,  thy  son  Joseph  cometh  unto 
thee : and  Israel  strengthened  himself, 
and  sat  upon  the  bed. 

3 And  Jacob  said  unto  Joseph, 
God  Almighty  appeared  unto  me  at 

« chap.  28.  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  and 

&  35-  6.  blessed  me, 

4 And  said  unto  me.  Behold,  I 
will  make  thee  fruitful,  and  multiply 
thee,  and  I will  make  of  thee  a mul- 
titude of  people  ; and  will  give  this 
land  to  thy  seed  after  thee  for  an 
everlasting  possession. 

f chap.  41.  5 ^ And  now  thy  ^'two  sons,  Eph- 

Tosh.  13.  raim  and  Manasseh,  which  were  born 
7-  unto  thee  in  the  land  of  Egypt  before 

I came  unto  thee  into  Egypt,  are 
mine;  as  Reuben  and  Simeon,  they 
shall  be  mine. 

6 And  thy  issue,  which  thou  be- 
gettest  after  them,  shall  be  thine,  and 
Shall  be  called  after  the  name  of  their 
brethren  in  their  inheritance. 


[v.  2 — 12. 

7 And  as  for  me,  when  I came 

from  Padan, ‘^Rachel  died  by  me  in  c chap.  35. 
the  land  of  Canaan  in  the  way,  when 
yet  there  was  but  a little  way  to  come 
unto  Ephrath  : and  I buried  her  there 
in  the  way  of  Ephrath  ; the  sam>e  is 
Beth-lehem. 

8 And  Israel  beheld  Joseph’s  sons, 
and  said,  Who  are  these? 

9 And  Joseph  said  unto  his  father. 

They  are  my  sons,  whom  God  hath 
given  me  in  this  place.  And  he  said. 

Bring  them,  I pray  thee,  unto  me, 
and  I will  bless  them. 

10  Now  the  eyes  of  Israel  were 
Mim  for  age,  so  that  he  could  not  see.  t Heb. 
And  he  brought  them  near  unto  him ; 
and  he  kissed  them,  and  embraced 
them. 

11  And  Israel  said  unto  Joseph,  I 
had  not  thought  to  see  thy  face : and, 
lo,  God  hath  shewed  me  also  thy 
seed. 

12  And  Joseph  brought  them  out 
from  between  his. knees,  and  he  bowed 
himself  with  his  face  to  the  earth. 


GENESIS.  XLVIII. 


sick”  (ch.  xlviii.  i),  so  that  Jacob  probably 
had  not  as  yet  taken  to  his  bed.  At  the  same 
time  we  must  not  always  press  the  quotations 
in  the  New  Testament  as  proof  of  the  true 
sense  of  the  Hebrew  original,  for  it  is  natu- 
ral for  the  Apostles  to  quote  the  LXX.  as 
being  the  Authonsed  Version,  just  as  modern 
divines  quote  m.odern  versions  in  the  vernacu- 
lar languages  without  suggesting  a correction 
of  tf.eir  language,  v.  hen  such  correction  is  un- 
neces.sary  for  their  a.igument. 

Chap.  XLVIII.  3.  God  Almighty^  “ El- 
Shaddai.”  See  on  ch.  xliii.  14. 

at  Luz]  i.e.  Bethel.  See  ch.  xxviii.  17,  19, 

XXXV.  6,  7. 

5.  as  Reuben  and  Simeon^  they  shall  be 
mine'\  Thy  two  sons  shall  be  as  much  count- 
ed to  be  my  sons,  as  Reuben  and  Simeon,  my 
own  two  eldest  sons,  are  counted  to  be  mine  ; 
accordingly  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  became 
patriarchs,  eponymi,  heads  of  tribes.  Some 
think  that,  as  Reuben  was  deprived  of  his 
birthright,  so  here  the  birthright  is  given  to 
Ephraim,  the  elder  son  of  the  firstborn  of 
Rachel.  But  the  birthright  seems  rather  to 
have  lx?en  trans^rred  to  Judah,  his  three 
elder  brothers  being  disinherited,  the  first  for 
incest,  the  other  Iwo  for  cruelty  (see  ch.  xlix. 
8-10)  Accordingly,  Judah  became  the  royal 
tribe,  from  whom  as  conceniing  the  flesh 


Christ  came,  who  is  over  all  God  blessed  for 
ever.  There  was,  however,  a kind  of  se- 
condary birthright  given  to  Ephraim  (see  xlix. 
22  sq,),  who  became  ancestor  of  the  royal 
tribe  among  the  ten  tribes  of  Israel. 

6.  shall  be  tailed  after  the  name  of  their 
brethren']  Shall  not  give  names  to  separate 
tribes,  but  shall  be  numbered  with  the  tribes 
of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh.  We  hear  nothing 
of  any  younger  sons  of  Joseph,  and  do  not 
know  for  certain  that  any  were  born  to  him; 
but  it  has  been  thought  that  they  may  be  men- 
tioned in  Num.  xxvi.  28 — 37,  i Chr.  vii. 

14—29- 

7.  Rachel  died  by  me]  When  adopting 
the  sons  of  Joseph,  Jacob  turns  his  thoughts 
back  to  his  beloved  Rachel,  for  whose  sake 
especially  he  had  so  dearly  loved  Joseph.  Ro- 
senm,,  Gesenius  and  some  others  propose  to 
translate  here  “Rachel  died  to  my  sorrov.q” 
lit.  “upon  me,”  and  therefore  as  a heavy 
burden  to  me;  but. the  received  translation  is 
supported  by  the  Versions,  and  by  the  frequent 
use  of  the  preposition  in  the  sense  of  “near 
me,”  “by  my  side.” 

12.  Joseph  brought  them  out  from  be- 
tween his  knees]  Joseph  brought  them  out 
from  betwet'n  Jacob’s  knees,  where  they  had 
gone  that  he  might  embrace  them,  and  pro- 
bably placed  them  in  a reverent  attitude  to 
receive  the  patriarch’s  blessing 


V.  T3 2 2.] 


GENESIS.  XLVIII. 


22 


13  And  Joseph  took  them  both, 
Ephraim  in  his  right  hand  toward 
Israel’s  left  hand,  and  Manasseh  in 
his  left  hand  toward  Israel’s  right 
hand,  and  brought  them  near  unto  him. 

14  And  Israel  stretched  out  his 
right  hand,  and  laid  it  upon  Eph- 
raim’s head,  who  wj.s  the  younger, 
and  his  left  hand  upon  Manasseh’s 
head,  guiding  his  hands  wittingly;  for 
Manasseh  was  the  firstborn. 

^Heb.  ir.  ^5  ^ And  ^hc  blessed  Joseph,  and 
said,  God,  before  whom  my  fathers 
Abraham  and  Isaac  did  walk,  the  God 
which  fed  me  all  my  life  long  unto 
this  day, 

16  The  Angel  which  redeemed  me 
from  all  evil,  bless  the  lads;  and  let 
my  name  be  named  on  them,  and  the 
name  of  my  fathers  Abraham  and 
iHeb.  Isaac;  and  let  them  ^grow  into  a 
multitude  in  the  midst  of  the  earth. 
crease.  jy  when  Joseph  saw  that  his 
father  laid  his  right  hand  upon  the 
head  of  Ephraim,  it  displeased  him : 
and  he  held  up  his  father’s  hand,  to 


remove  it  from  Ephraim’s  head  unto 
Manasseh’s  head. 

18  And  Joseph  said  unto  his  fa- 

ther, Not  so,  my  father:  for  this  is 
the  firstborn ; put  thy  right  hand  upon 
his  head.  » 

19  And  his  father  refused,  and  said, 

I know  /V,  my  son,  I know  it:  he 
also  shall  become  a people,  and  he 
also  shall  be  great : but  truly  his 
younger  brother  shall  be  greater  than 

he,  and  his  seed  shall  become  a ^mul-  t Heb. 
titude  of  nations.  /uIhcss. 

20  And  he  blessed  them  that  day, 
saying.  In  thee  shall  Israel  bless,  say- 
ing, God  make  thee  as  Ephraim  and 
as  Manasseh  : and  he  set  Ephraim 
before  Manasseh. 

21  And  Israel  said  unto  Joseph, 
Behold,  I die:  but  God  shall  be  with 
you,  and  bring  you  again  unto  the 
land  of  your  fathers. 

22  Moreover  I have  given  to  thee 
one  portion  above  thy  brethren,  which 
I took  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Amorite 
with  my  sword  and  with  my  bow. 


and  he  bonued  himself  <u)lth  his  face  to  the 
eart/j]  i.e.  Joseph  bowed  down  respectfully 
and  solemnly  before  his  father.  The  LXX. 
has  “They  bowed  themselves,”  which  differs 
but  by  the  repetition  of  one  letter  from  the 
received  reading. 

14.  guiding  his  hands  nvittingly^  So  Ge- 
sen.,  Rosenm.,  and  most  modern  interpreters; 
but  the  LXX.  Vulg.  &c.  “putting  his  hands 
crosswise.”  This  has  been  defended  by  some, 
comparing  an  Arabic  root,  which  has  the 
sense  “to  bind,  to  twist,”  but  it  cannot  be 
shewn  ever  to  have  had  the  sense  “to  cross.” 

16.  Tihe  Angel  (which  redeemed  me  from 
all  e'vif]  There  is  here  a triple  blessing: 

“The  God,  before  whom  my  fathers  walked, 

“The  God,  which  fed  me  like  a shepherd,  all 
my  life  long, 

“The  Angel,  which  redeemed  (or  redeemeth 
. me)  from  all  evil.” 

It  is  impossible  that  the  Angel  thus  identified 
with  God  can  he  a created  Angel.  Jacob, 
no  doubt,  alludes  to  the  Angel  who  wrestled 
with  him  and  whom  he  called  God  (ch.  xxxii. 
24 — 30),  the  same  as  the  Angel  of  the  Cove- 
nant, Mai.  lii.  I.  Luther  observes  that  the 
verb  “bless,”  which  thus  refers  to  the  God  of 
his  fathers,  to  the  God  who  had  been  his 
Shepherd,  and  to  the  Angel  who  redeemed 
him,  is  in  the  singular,  not  in  the  plural, 
VOL.  I. 


showing  that  these  three  are  but  one  God,  and 
that  the  Angel  is  one  with  the  fathers’  God 
and  with  the  God  who  fed  Jacob  like  a sheep. 

22.  Moreon^er  I hawe  ginjen  to  thee  one 
portio7i\  There  is  little  doubt  but  that  this 
rendering  is  correct.  The  past  tense  is  used 
by  prophetic  anticipation,  and  the  meaning  is, 
“I  have  assigned  to  thee  one  portion  of  that 
land,  which  my  descendants  are  destined  to 
take  out  of  the  hands  of  the  Amorites.”  The 
word  rendered  portion  is  Shechem.^  meaning 
literally  “a  shoulder,”  thence  probably  a ridge 
or  neck  of  land,  hence  here  rendered  by  most 
versions  and  commentators  “portion.”  She- 
chem,  the  city  of  Samaria,  was  probably  named 
from  the  fact  of  its  standing  thus  on  a ridge 
or  shoulder  of  ground.  (See  on  Gen.  xii.  6.) 
Accordingly  here  the  LXX.,  Targ.  of  Pseudo- 
Jonath.,  as  also  Calvin,  Rosenm.,  and  some 
moderns,  have  rendered  not  “portion,”  but 
“Shechem,”  a proper  name.  The  history  of 
Shechem  is  doubtless  much  mixed  up  with  the 
history  of  the  Patriarchs,  and  was  intimately 
connected  with  all  their  blessings.  It  was 
Abraham’s  first  settlement  in  Palestine,  and 
there  he  first  built  an  altar  (ch.  xii.  6).  There 
too  Jacob  purchased  a piece  of  ground  from 
Hamor  the  father  of  Shechem,  and  built  an 
altar  (xxxiii.  18 — 20).  This  was,  however, 
not  “taken  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Amorite 
with  sword  and  bow,”  but  obtained  peaceably 

P 


to 


226 


GENESIS.  XLIX. 


[v.  1—5- 


chapter  XLIX. 

I Jacob  calleth  his  sons  to  bless  them.  3 Their 
blessing  in  particular.  2g  He  chargeth  them 
about  his  burial.  33  He  dicth. 


AND  Jacob  called  unto  his  sons, 
£\_  and  said,  Gather  yourselves  to- 
gether, that  I may  tell  you  that  which 
shall  befall  you  in  the  last  days. 

2  Gather  yourselves  together,  and 
hear,  ye  sons  of  Jacob;  and  hearken 
unto  Israel  your  father. 


3 Reuben,  thou  art  my  firstborn, 
my  might,  and  the  beginning  of  my 
strength,  the  excellency  of  dignity, 
and  the  excellency  of  power: 

4 Unstable  as  water,  ^thou  shalt 
not  excel;  because  thou  '^wentest  up 
to  thy  father’s  bed ; then  defiledst 
thou  it:  “he  went  up  to  my  couch. 

5 Simeon  and  Levi  brethren ; 
“instruments  of  cruelty  are  in  their 
habitations. 


t Heb. 
dofibtthou 
excel, 
a chap.  35. 
22. 

I Chror..  5. 
ilbr, 

wy  couch 
is  y:o7te. 

II  Or,  their 
swords  are 
weapons  oj 
violence. 


by  purchase.  Some  have  thought  therefore 
that  the  allusion  is  to  the  victory  over  the 
Shechemites  by  Simeon  and  Levi  related  in 
ch.  xxxiv.,  the  Shechemites  being  here  called 
Amorites,  though  there  Hivites,  because  Am- 
orite  was  a generic  name,  like  Canaanite:  but 
it  is  hardly  likely  that  Jacob  should  boast  of  a 
conquest  by  his  sons,  as  though  it  were  his 
own,  when  he  strongly  reprobated  their  action 
in  it,  and  even  “cursed  their  anger,  for  it  was 
tierce,  and  their  wrath,  for  it  was  cruel"  (ch. 
xlix.  7).  Though,  therefore,  it  is  undoubtedly 
told  us,  that  Jacob  gave  Shechem  to  Joseph, 
and  that  Joseph  was  therefore  buried  there 
(Josh.  xxiv.  3a;  John  iv.  5.  See  also  Je- 
rome, ‘Qu.  in  Gen.’  xlix.);  and  though  there 
may  be  some  allusion  to  this  gift  in  the  words 
here  made  use  of,  by  a paronomasia  so  com- 
mon in  Hebrew,  it  is  most  likely  that  the 
rendering  of  the  Authorised  Version  is  correct. 
The  addition  of  “one”  to  “ portion ” seems  to 
decide  for  this  interpretation.  “I  have  given 
thee  one  Shechem,”  would  be  very  hard  to 
interpret. 

Chap.  XLIX.  1.  in  the  last  da}y'\  The 
future  generally,  but  with  special  reference  to 
the  times  of  Messiah.  The  Rabbi  Nachmani- 
des  says,  “ According  to  the  words  of  all,  the 
last  days  denote  the  days  of  Messiah.”  The 
passages  in  which  it  occurs  are  mostly  Messi- 
anic predictions  (see  Num.  xxiv.  14 ; Isa.  ii.  2 ; 
Jer.  X.XX.  24;  E'/ek.  xxxviii.  16;  Dan.  x.  14; 
Hcs.  iii.  5;  Mic.  iv.  i).  The  exact  words  of 
the  LXX.  are  usi'd  in  Heb.  i.  i,  and  virtually 
the  same  in  Acts  ii.  17 ; 2 Tim.  iii.  i ; i Pet.  i. 
20;  2 Pet.  iii.  3,  where  the  reference  is  to  the 
times  of  Christ.  (See  Heidegger,  Vol.  ii. 
XX 1 1 1.  6;  Gesen.  ‘Thes.’  p.  73.)  The  pro- 
phecy of  Jacob  does  not  refer  exclusively  to 
the  days  of  Messiah,  but  rather  sketches  gene- 
rally the  fortunes  of  his  family;  but  all  is 
leading  up  to  that  which  was  to  be  the  great 
consummation,  when  the  promised  Set'd  should 
come  and  extend  the  blessings  of  the  Spiritual 
Israel  throughout  all  the  world.  It  is  to  be 
caiefully  noted,  that  the  occupation  of  Canaan 
by  the  twelve  triD  s under  Joshua  was  not  the 
point  to  which  his  expectations  pointed  as  an 


end,  but  rather  that  from  which  his  predic- 
tions took  their  beginning.  It  was  not  the 
terminus  ad  quern.,  but  the  terminus  a quo. 
The  return  to  Canaan  was  a fact  established  in 
the  decrees  of  Providence,  the  certainty  of 
which  rested  on  promises  given  and  repeated 
to  the  Patriarchs.  Jacob  therefore  does  not 
repeat  this,  farther  than  by  the  injunction,  in 
the  last  chapter,  and  again  at  the  end  of  this, 
that  he  should  be  buried,  not  in  Egypt,  but 
at  Machpelah,  the  buryingplace  of  his  fathers. 

3.  the  beginning  of  my  strength^  Some 
important  Versions  (Aquila,  Symm.,  Vulg.) 
render  “the  beginning  of  my  sorrow,”  a pos- 
sible translation,  but  not  suited  to  the  parallel- 
isms. For  the  expression,  as  applied  to  first- 
born sons,  comp.  Deut.  xxi.  17;  Ps.  Ixxviii. 
51,  cv.  36. 

4.  Unstable  as  ciuater~\  or  “boiling  over 
like  water.”  The  meaning  of  the  word  is 
uncertain.  The  same  root  in  Syriac  expresses 
“wantonness;”  in  Arabic,  “pride,”  “swelling 
arrogance.”  In  this  passage  it  is  clearly  con- 
nected with  water.  The  Vulgate  translates, 
“Thou  art  poured  out  like  water.”  Symma- 
chus  renders  “Thou  hast  boiled  over  like 
water.”  The  translation  of  the  LXX.  is  pecu- 
liar, but  it  also  seems  to  point  to  boiling  as 
well  as  to  the  insolence  of  pride  {i^v^picras  cos 
vdcop,  pq  (Kj(rT]s).  Modem  lexicographers 
(as  Gesen.,  Ltv,  &;c.)  generally  give  “boiling 
over.” 

thou  shall  not  exceP^  Perhaps,  though, 
through  thy  swelling  wantonness,  thou  risest 
up  like  water  when  it  boils,  yet  it  shall  not  be 
so  as  to  excel  and  surpass  thy  brethren.  Not 
one  great  action,  not  one  judge,  prophet,  or 
leader  from  the  tribe  of  Reuben  is  ever  men- 
tioned in  history. 

then  defiledst  thou  it]  “Thou  hast  polluted” 
or  “ desecrated  it.” 

5.  instruments  of  cruelty  are  in  their  ha~ 
bitations]  Probably,  “Their  swords  are  in- 
struments of  violence;”  so  the  Vulg.,  several 
Rabbins,  and  the  most  eminent  moderns.  The 
word  occurs  only  here,  is  very  variously  ren- 
dered by  the  Versions,  and  is  of  doubtful  deri- 
vation. 


GENESIS.  XLIX. 


227 


BOr, 

IiOHghed 

oxen. 


V.  6 — 10.] 

6 O my  soul,  come  not  thou  into 
their  secret  ; unto  their  assembly, 
mine  honour,  be  not  thou  united : 
for  in  their  anger  they  slew  a man, 
and  in  their  selfwill  they  "digged  down 
a wall. 

7 Cursed  be  their  anger,  for  it  was 
fierce ; and  their  wrath,  for  it  was 
cruel : I will  divide  them  in  Jacob, 
and  scatter  them  in  Israel. 

8 ^ Judiih,  thou  art  he  whom  thy 


brethren  shall  praise:  thy  hand  shall 
be  in  the  neck  of  thine  enemies;  thy 
father’s  children  shall  bow  down  be- 
fore thee. 

9 Judah  is  a lion’s  whelp:  from 
the  prey,  my  son,  thou  art  gone  up: 
he  stooped  down,  he  couched  as  a 
lion,  and  as  an  old  lion  ; who  shall 
rouse  him  up? 

10  The  sceptre  shall  not  depart 
from  Judah,  nor  a lawgiver  from  be- 


6.  mine  honour]  Probably  a synonym 
for  “my  soul”  in  the  first  clause  of  the  paral- 
lelism. The  soul  as  being  the  noblest  part  of 
man  is  called  his  glory.  See  Ps.  viii.  5 (6 
Heb.),  xvi.  9,  xxx.  12  (13  Heb.),  Ivii.  8 (9 
Heb.),  cviii.  i (2  Heb.);  (Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  655). 

digged  do^'n  a nvalT]  Hamstrung  an  ox. 
So  the  margin  “ houghed  oxen.”  The  singu- 
lar “ an  ox”  must  be  used  to  retain  the  paral- 
lelism with  “a  man”  in  the  former  clause, 
both  have  a collective  intention.  This  is  the 
rendering  of  the  LXX.  and  gives  the  com- 
moner sense  of  the  verb.  It  is  therefore  adopt- 
ed by  most  recent  commentators.  The  same 
flebr-ew  word,  with  a distinction  only  in  the 
vowel  point,  means  “ox”  and  “wall.” 

7.  / w/7/  divide  them  in  Jacob.,  and  scat- 
ter them  in  Israel]  This  was  most  literally 
fulfilled,  for  when  Canaan  was  conquered,  on 
the  second  numbering  under  Moses,  the  tribe 
of  Simeon  had  become  the  weakest  of  all  the 
tribes  (Numb.  xxvi.  14);  in  Moses’  blessing 
(Deut.  xxxiii.)  it  is  entirely  passed  over;  and 
in  the  assignment  of  territory  it  was  merely 
mingled  or  scattered  among  the  tribe  of  Ju- 
dah, having  certain  cities  assigned  it  within  the 
limits  of  Judah’s  possession  (Josh.  xix.  i — 9); 
whilst  the  Levites  had  no  separate  inheritance, 
but 'merely  a number  of  cities  to  dwell  in,  scat- 
tered throughout  the  possessions  of  their  bre- 
thren (Josh.  xxi.  1—40).  With  regard  to 
the  latter,  though  by  being  made  dependent  on 
the  tithes  and  also  on  the  liberality  of  their  fel- 
low countrymen,  they  were  punished,  yet  in 
process  of  time  the  curse  was  turned  into  a 
blessing.  (See  Mede,  ‘ Works,’  Bk.  i.  Disc. 
XXXV.)  Of  this  transformation  of  the  curse 
into  a blessing  there  is  not  the  slightest  intima- 
tion in  Jacob’s  address:  and  in  this  we  have  a 
strong  proof  of  its  genuineness.  After  this 
honourable  change  in  the  time  of  Moses  (due 
in  great  part  to  the  faithfulness  of  Moses  him- 
self and  of  the  Levites  with  him),  it  would 
never  have  occurred  to  the  forger  of  a pro- 
phecy to  cast  such  a reproach,  and  to  foretell 
such  a judgment  on  the  forefather  of  the  Le- 
vites. In  fact,  how  different  is  the  blessing 
pronounced  by  Moses,  himself  upon  the  tribe 
of  Levi  in  Deut,  xxxiii.  8 sqq.  (See  Keil.) 


8.  Judah.,  thou  art  he  vahom  thy  brethren 
shall  praise]  Judah,  thou,  thy  brethren 
shall  praise  thee.  The  word  “thou”  is 
emphatic,  probably,  like  “ Judah,”  in  the  voca- 
tive, not,  as  some  would  render  it,  “Thou  art 
Judah,”  which  is  far  tamer.  The  reference  is 
to  the  meaning  of  the  name.  Leah  said,  “ Now 
will  I praise  the  Lord,  therefore  she  called  his 
name  Judald''  (ch.  xxix.  35).  Judah,  not- 
withstanding the  sad  history  of  him  and  his 
house  in  ch.  xxxviii.,  shewed  on  the  whole 
more  nobleness  than  any  of  the  elder  sons  of 
Jacob.  He  and  Reuben  were  the  only  two 
who  desired  to  save  the  life  of  Joseph  (ch. 
xxxvii.  22,  26);  and  his  conduct  before  Jo- 
seph in  Egypt  is  truly  noble  and  touching  (see 
ch.  xliv.  18 — 34).  Hence,  when  Reuben  is 
deprived  of  his  birthright  for  incest,  Simeon 
and  Levi  for  manslaughter,  Judah,  who  is 
next  in  age,  naturally  and  rightly  succeeds 
to  it. 

thy  hand  shall  be  in  the  neck  of  thine  ene 
mies  ,■  thy  fatheds  children  shall  bovo  dovon 
before  thee]  He  was  to  be  victorious  in  war, 
and  the  leading  tribe  in  Israel;  the  former 
promise  being  signally  fulfilled  in  the  victories 
of  David  and  Solomon,  the  latter  in  the  eleva- 
tion of  Judah  to  be  the  royal  tribe;  but  both 
most  fully  in  the  victory  and  royalty  of  Da- 
vid's Son  and  David’s  Lord. 

9.  Judah  is  a lions  <ivhelp:  from  the  prey., 
my  son.,  thou  art  gone  up]  Judah  is  com- 
pared to  the  most  royal  and  the  most  powerful 
of  beasts.  The  image  is  from  the  lion  retiring 
to  the  mountains  after  having  devoured  his 
prey:  not  probably,  as  Gesenius  and  others, 
“thou  hast  grown  up  from  feeding  upon  the 
prey.” 

as  an  old  lion]  As  a lioness  (Bochart, 
‘Hieroz.’  i.  p.  719;  Ges.  ‘Thes.'  p.  738). 
The  standard  of  Judah  v/as  a lion,  very  pro- 
bably derived  from  these  words  of  Jacob. 

10.  The  sceptre  shall  not  depart  from 
Judah,  &c.]  Render 

A sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah 

Nor  a lawgiver  from  between  his  feet, 
Until  that  Shiloh  come. 

And  to  him  shall  be  the  obedience  of 


228 


GENESIS.  XLIX. 


[v.  II— 13. 


tween  his  feet,  until  Shiloh  come; 
and  unto  him  shall  the  gathering  of 
the  people  be. 

II  Binding  his  foal  unto  the  vine, 
and  his  ass’s  colt  unto  the  choice  vine ; 


A remarkable  prophecy  of  the  Messiah,  and 
so  acknowledged  by  all  Jewish,  as  well  as 
Christian,  antiquity.  The  meaning  of  the 
verse  appears  to  be  “The  Sceptre  (either  of 
royal,  or  perhaps  only  of  tribal,  authority) 
shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a lawgiver 
(senator  or  scribe)  from  before  him,  until  Shi- 
loh (i.e.  either  ‘the  Prince  of  peace,’  or  ‘he 
whose  right  it  is’)  shall  come,  and  to  him 
shall  the  nations  be  obedient.”  There  are 
some  obscure  expressions,  but  we  may  confi- 
dently hold  that  the  above  paraphrase  conveys 
the  true  sense  of  the  passage. 

1.  The  word  sceptre,  originally  denoting  a 
staff  of  wood,  a strong  rod  taken  from  a tree 
and  peeled  as  a wand,  is  used  (i)  for  “ the  rod 
of  correction,  (2)  for  “the  staff  of  a shep- 
herd,” (3)  lor  “the  sceptre  of  royalty”  (as 
Ps.  xlv.  7;  cp.  Horn.  ‘II.’  II.  46,  loi),  (4) 
for  “a  tribe,”  which  may  be  because  the 
sceptre  denoted  tribal  as  well  as  regal  au- 
thority, or  because  tribes  were  considered  as 
twigs  or  branches  from  a central  stem.  (See 
Ges.  p.  1353.)  It  is  probable  that  the  sceptre 
in  Balaam’s  prophecy  (Num.  xxiv.  17)  has  a 
reference  to  these  words  of  Jacob. 

2.  “A  lawgiver,”  so,  more  or  less,  all  the 
Ancient  Versions.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  ren- 
der “a  leader,”  the  Targums  paraphrasing  by 
“ scribe  or  interpreter  of  the  law.”  The  word 
certainly  means  “a  lawgiver”  in  Deut.  xxxiii. 
21;  Isa.  xxxiii.  22;  and  all  ancient  interpreta- 
tion was  in  favour  of  understanding  it  of  a 
pei-son.  The  R.  Lipmann,  however,  proposed 
the  sense  of  “a  rod  or  staff”  answering  to 
“the  sceptre”  in  the  former  clause,  in  which 
he  has  been  followed  by  eminent  critics,  such 
as  Gesenius,  Tuch,  Knobel,  who  think  that 
this  sense  is  more  pertinent  here,  and  in  Num. 
xxi.  18;  Ps.  lx.  7 (see  Heidegger,  Vol.  ii.  p. 
738;  Ges.  p.  514);  but  it  requires  proof  that 
the  word,  naturally  signifying  “ lawgiver,” 
sometimes  undoubtedly  meaning  “lawgiver,” 
and  always  so  rendered  in  the  Versions,  can 
mean  lawgiver's  staff'  or  sceptre. 

3.  “ From  between  his  feet”  is  rendered 
by  the  Versions,  and  generally  by  commenta- 
tors “ from  among  his  posterity.  (See  Ges. 
p.  204.) 

4.  “ Until  Shiloh  come.”  F'or  fuller  con- 
sideration of  the  name  “Shiloh,”  stv  Note  A at 
the  end  of  the  Chapter.  'Phe  only  two  admis- 
sible interpretations  are  that  the  word  is  (i) 
a proper  name,  meaning  “the  Peace-maker,” 
“the  Prince  of  peace,’’  or,  (2)  according  to 
the  almost  unanimous  consent  of  the  Versions 
and  Targums,  “He,  whose  right  it  is.”  All 


he  washed  his  garments  in  wine, 
and  his  clothes  in  the  blood  of  grapes : 

12  His  eyes  shall  be  red  with  wine, 
and  his  teeth  white  with  milk.  ^ 

13  ^ Zebulun  shall  dwell  at  the 


the  Targums  add  the  name  of  Messiah,  and 
all  the  more  ancient  Jews  held  it  to  be  an 
undoubted  prophecy  of  Messiah. 

5.  “Unto  him  shall  the  gathering  of  the 
people  be.”  Rather,  “Unto  him  shall  be  the 
obedience  of  the  nations.”  The  word  for  obe- 
dience occurs  only  once  besides,  in  Prov.  xxx. 
1 7 ; but,  if  the  I'eading  be  correct,  there  is  little 
doubt  of  its  significance.  (See  Ges.  pp.  620, 
1200;  Heidegger,  Tom.  ii.  p.  748.) 

As  regards  the  fulfilment  of  this  prophecy, 
it  is  undoubted  that  the  tribal  authority  and 
the  highest  place  in  the  nation  continued  with 
Judah  until  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  It 
is  true  that  after  the  Babylonish  Captivity  the 
royalty  was  not  in  the  house  of  Judah;  but 
the  prophecy  is  not  express  as  to  the  possession 
of  absolute  royalty.  Israel  never  ceased  to  be 
a nation,  Judah  never  ceased  to  be  a tribe  with 
at  least  a tribal  sceptre  and  lawgivers,  or  ex- 
positors of  the  law.  Sanhedrim  or  Senators,  and 
with  a general  pre-em.inence  in  the  land,  nor 
was  there  a foreign  ruler  of  the  people,  till  at 
least  the  time  of  Herod  the  Great,  just  before 
the  birth  of  the  Saviour;  and  even  the  Herods, 
though  of  Idumasan  extraction,  were  consi- 
dered as  exercising  a native  sovereignty  in 
Judah,  which  did  not  quite  pass  away  till  a 
Roman  procurator  was  sent  thither  after  the 
reign  of  Archelaus,  the  son  of  Herod  the 
Great : and  at  that  very  time  the  Shiloh  came, 
the  Prince  of  peace,  to  whom  of  right  the 
kingdom  belonged.  (On  the  meaning  of  the 
name  Shiloh.,  see  Note  A at  the  end  of  the 
Chapter.) 

11.  Binding  his  foal  unto  the  •vine.,  &c.j 
Many  think  that  the  patriarch,  having  spoken 
of  the  endurance  of  the  reign  of  Judah  till  the 
coming  of  Christ,  returns  to  speak  of  Judah’s 
temporal  prosperity  during  all  that  period; 
but  the  Targums  of  Jerusalem  and  Pseudo- 
Jonathan  refer  this  verse  to  the  Messiah.  So 
also  several  Christian  fathers  {e.g.  Chrysos- 
tom, in  loc.,  Theodoret,  ‘ Qii.  in  Gen.’);  in- 
terpreting the  vine  of  the  Jewish  people,  and 
the  wild  ass  of  the  gentile  converts  brought 
into  the  vineyard  of  the  Church.  The  wash- 
ing ot  the  garments  in  wine  they  consider  an 
allusion  to  Christ  as  the  true  vine  (John  xv.  1), 
to  His  treading  “the  winepress  alone”  (Isa. 
Ixiii.  I — 3),  and  empurpling  His  garments  with 
His  own  Blood.  (See  Heidegger,  ii.  pp.  752, 
sqq.) 

12.  His  eyes  shall  be  red  r^jith  -xvine,'^  See. 
Or  perhaps  (as  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Targg.  Je- 
ms., and  Pseudo-Jon.),  “His  eyes  shall  be 


V.  14— 1 9-] 


GENESIS.  XLIX. 


229 


haven  of  the  sea ; and  he  shall  be 
for  an  haven  of  ships ; and  his  border 
shall  be  unto  Zidon. 

14  ^ Issachar  is  a strong  ass  couch- 
ing down  between  two  burdens : 

15  And  he  saw  that  rest  was  good, 
and  the  land  that  it  was  pleasant; 
and  bowed  his  shoulder  to  bear,  and 
became  a servant  unto  tribute. 


16  ^ Dan  shall  judge  his  people, 
as  one  of  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

17  Dan  shall  be  a serpent  by  the 
way,  ^an  adder  in  the  path,  that  biteth  tHeb. 
the  horse  heels,  so  that  his  rider  shall  snake. 
fall  backward. 

18  I have  waited  for  thy  salvation, 

O Lord. 

19  ^ Gad,  a troop  shall  overcome 


redder  than  wine,  and  His  teeth  whiter  than 
milk.”  This  is  generally  supposed  to  refer  to 
the  land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  and 
abounding  in  vineyards;  but  the  fathers  ap- 
plied it  to  the  Messiah’s  kingdom  in  the  same 
manner  with  the  last  verse,  e.g.  “That  His 
eyes  shine  as  with  wine  know  all  those  mem- 
bers of  His  Body  mystical,  to  whom  it  is 
given  with  a sort  of  sacred  inebriation  of  mind, 
alienated  from  the  fleeting  things  of  time,  to 
behold  the  eternal  brightness  of  wisdom.” 
(Augustin.  ‘ C.  Faust.’  xii.  42,  Tom.  viii. 
p.  24). 

13.  7,ebulun  shall  d^zvell  at  the  ha'ven  of 
the  sea''\  “Zebulun  shall  dwell  on  the  shore  of 
the  sea,  and  he  shall  be  for  a shore  of  ships,” 
(/.<?.  suited  for  ships  to  land  on),  “and  his 
border”  (or  farthest  extremity)  “ shall  be  by 
Zidon.”  As  far  as  we  knoAv  of  the  limits  of 
Zebulun,  after  the  occupation  of  Canaan,  it 
reached  from  the  sea  of  Gennesareth  to  Mount 
Carmel,  and  so  nearly  to  the  Mediterranean. 
It  did  not  reach  to  the  city  of  Zidon.  but  its 
most  western  point  reaching  to  Mount  Car- 
mel brought  it  into  close  proximity  to  Zido- 
nia,  or  the  territory  of  Tyre  and  Sidon.  The 
language  here  used,  though  in  all  material 
points  fulfilled  in  the  subsequent  history,  is 
just  what  would  not  have  bwn  written  by  a 
forger  in  after  times.  Zebulun  had  not  pro- 
perly a maritime  territory;  yet  its  possessions 
reached  very  nearly  to  both  seas.  It  was  far 
from  the  city  of  Zidon ; and  yet,  as  approxi- 
mating very  closely  to  the  land  of  the  Syrians, 
might  well  be  said  to  have  its  border  by  or  to- 
wards Zidon.  T'yre  probably  was  not  built 
at  this  time,  and  therefore  is  not  named  in  tlie 
prophecy. 

14.  Issachar  is  a strong  ass  couching 
do^jisn  bet'ween  two  burdens')^  Probably  “Issa- 
char is  a strong-boned  ass,  couching  down 
between  the  cattle  pens,”  or  “ sheepfolds.” 
The  last  word  occurs  only  here  and  in  Judg. 
V.  16,  where  it  is  rendered  sheepfolds  (see 
Rcediger  in  Ges.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1470).  The 
prediction  all  points  to  the  habits  of  an  in- 
dolent agricultural  people,  and  to  what  is 
likely  to  accompany  such  habits,  an  endur- 
ance of  oppression  in  preference  to  a war  of 
independence. 

16.  Dan  shall  judge  his  people,  &c.] 


A paronomasia  on  Dan  (i.e.  a judge).  The 
Avords  may  mean  that,  though  he  was  only  a 
son  of  Bilhah,  he  shall  yet  have  tribal  autho- 
rity in  his  own  people.  The  word  translated 
“tribe”  is  the  same  as  that  translated  “ scep- 
tre” in  V.  10.  Onkelos  and  others  after  him 
suppose  the  allusion  to  be  to  the  judgeship  of 
Samson,  who  was  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  (Judg. 
XV.  20). 

17.  Dan  shall  be  a serpent  by  the  way, 
an  adder  in  the  pails']  The  word  for  adder, 
Shephiphon,  is  translated  by  the  V ulg.  cerastes 
the  homed  snake,  the  coluber  cerastes  of  Lin- 
nffius,  a small  snake  about  14  inches  long  and 
one  inch  thick,  lurking  in  the  sand  and  by  the 
way  side,  very  poisonous  and  dangerous. 
(Bochart,  ‘ Hieroz.’  Pt.  ii.  Lib.  iii.  c.  12.) 
The  people  of  Dan  in  Judges  xviii.  27,  shewed 
the  kind  of  subtlety  here  ascribed  to  them. 
Perhaps  the  local  position  of  the  tribe  is 
alluded  to.  It  was  placed  originally  on  the 
outskirts  of  the  royal  tribe  of  Judah,  and 
might  in  times  of  war  have  to  watch  stealthily 
for  the  enemy  and  fall  on  him  by  subtlety  as 
he  was  approaching.  The  comparison  of 
Dan  to  a serpent  lying  in  wait  and  biting  the 
heel  seems  to  imply  some  condemnation. 
It  is  certainly  observable  that  the  first  intro- 
duction of  Idolatry  in  Israel  is  ascribed  to  the 
tribe  of  Dan  (Judg.  xviii.),  and  that  in  the 
numbering  of  the  tribes  in  Rev.  vii.,  the  name 
of  Dan  is  omitted.  From  these  or  other 
causes  many  of  the  fathers  were  led  to  believe 
that  antichrist  should  spring  from  the  tribe  of 
Dan  (Iren.  v.  30,  32;  Ambros.  ‘De  Bene- 
dict. Patriarch.’  c.  7;  Augustin.  ‘ In  Josuam,’ 
Quasst.  22  ; Theodoret,  ‘ In  Genes.’  Quaest. 
109  ; Prosper,  ‘De  Promiss.  et  Praedict.’  p.  4; 
Gregorius,  ‘Moral.’  c.  18,  &c.). 

18.  / ha've  waited  for  thy  salivation,  O 
Lord]  This  ejaculation  immediately  follow- 
ing the  blessing  on  Dan  is  very  remarkable, 
but  not  easy  to  interpret.  The  Targg.  Jerus. 
and  Pseudo-Jonath.  (and  according  to  the 
Complutensian  Polyglot  Onkelos  also,  though 
the  pas'sage  is  probably  spurious)  paraphrase 
the  words  by  saying  that  Jacob  looked  not 
for  temporal  redemption,  such  as  that 
vrrought  by  Gideon  or  Samson,  but  for  the 
eternal  redemption  promised  by  Messiah.  Is 
it  not  possible,  that  Jacob,  having  been  moved 


230 


GENESIS.  XLIX. 


[v.  20—25. 


him:  but  he  shall  overcome  at  the 
last. 

20  ^ Out  of  Asher  his  bread  shall 
be  fat,  and  he  shall  yield  royal  dainties. 

21  ^ Naphtali  is  a hind  let  loose; 
he  givcth  goodly  words. 

22  ^ Joseph  is  a fruitful  bough, 

f Heb  ^ fruitful  bough  by  a well ; whose 

daughters.  ^ braiichcs  run  over  the  wall : 


23  The  ardicrs  have  sorely  grieved 
him,  and  shot  at  him.^  and  hated 
him ; 

24  But  his  bow  abode  in  strength, 
and  the  arms  of  his  hands  were  made 
strong  by  the  hands  of  the  mighty 
God  of  Jacob  ; (from  thence  is  the 
shepherd,  the  stone  of  Israel;) 

25  Even  by  the  God  of  thy  father, 


by  the  Spirit  of  God  to  speak  of  the  serpent 
biting  the  heel,  may  have  had  his  thoughts 
called  back  to  the  primal  promiise  made  to 
Eve,  the  Protevangelium,  where  the  sentence 
that  the  serpent  should  bruise  the  heel  was 
succeeded  by  the  promise  that  the  serpent’s 
head  should  be  crushed  by  the  coming  Seed  ? 
This  combination  of  thoughts  may  easily  have 
elicited  the  e>:ciamation  of  this  verse. 

19.  Gad.,  a troop  shall  overcome  him: 
hut  be  shall  overcome  at  the  last\  Perhaps 
“ Gad,  troops  shall  press  on  him,  but  he 
shall  press  upon  their  rear”  (so  Gesen.  p. 
271 ; Ros.,  Schum.);  the  allusion  being  to  the 
Arab  tribes  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Gad, 
who  would  invade  him,  and  then  retire.  Gad 
following  them  and  harassing  their  retreat. 
Every  word  but  two  in  the  verse  is  some 
form  of  the  same  root,  there  being  a play 
of  words  on  the  name  Gad  and  Gediid.,  i.  e.  a 
troop;  we  might  express  it,  “Gad,  troops 
shall  troop  against  him,  but  he  shall  troop  on 
their  retreat.”  (See  on  ch.  xxx.  ii.) 

20.  Out  of  Asher  his  bread  shall  he  fat., 
a7id  he  shall  yield  royal  dainties^  The  trans- 
lation may  be  a little  doubtful ; but  the  sense 
is  probably  that  expressed  by  the  Authorised 
Version.  The  allusion  is  to  the  fertility  of 
the  territory  of  Asher  extending  from  Mount 
Carmel  along  the  coast  of  Sidonia  nearly  to 
Mount  Lebanon.  It  was  specially  rich  in 
corn,  wine  and  oil  (Heidegger),  containing 
some  of  the  most  fertile  land  in  Palestine 
(Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’  p.  265). 

21.  Naphtali  is  a hind  let  loose ; he  giv~ 
eth  goodly  vjords']  The  Targg.  Pseudo- Jon. 
and  Jems,  explain  this  that  “ Naphtali  is  a 
swift  messenger,  like  a hind  that  runneth  on 
the  mountains,  bringing  good  tidings.”  So 
virtually  the  Syr.  and  Sam.  Versions.  The 
allusion  is  obscure,  as  wc  know  so  little  of 
the  history  of  Naphtali.  The  Targums 
above  cited  say  that  Naphtali  first  declared 
to  Jacob  that  Joseph  was  yet  alive.  As  the 
tribe  of  Naphtali  occupied  part  of  that  re- 
gion which  afterwards  became  Galilee,  some 
have  supposed  that  there  was  contained  in 
these  words  a projihecy  of  the  Apostles  (in 
Hebrew  Hheluchmi,  the  same  word  with  She- 
luchn  here  rendered  “let  loose”),  who  were 
Galileans  and  of  whom  it  was  said,  “ How 


beautiful  upon  the  mountains  are  the  feet  of 
him  that  iDringeth  good  tidings.” 

Bochart,  after  whom  Michaelis,  Schulz, 
Dathe,  Ewald  and  others,  follow  the  LXX. 
.altering  the  vowel  points,  and  render,  “ Naph- 
tali is  a spreading  tree,  which  puts  forth 
goodly  branches.” 

22.  Joseph  is  a fruitful  houglP^  Per- 
haps “Joseph  is  the  son,”  or  branch,  “of  a 
fruitful  tree,  the  son  of  a fruitful  tree  by  a 
well,  as  for  the  branches”  (lit.  the  daughters) 
“each  one  of  them  runneth  over  the  wall” 
(see  Ges.  218,  220).  The  construction  is 
difficult  and  the  difference  of  translations  very 
considerable ; but  so,  or  nearly  so,  Gesen., 
Tuch,  Knobel,  Delitzsch,  &c.  The  pro- 
phecy probably  refers  to  the  general  pros- 
perity of  the  house  of  Joseph.  The  fruitful 
tree  is  by  some  supposed  to  be  Rachel.  The 
luxuriance  of  the  tendrils  running  over  the 
wall  may  point  to  Joseph’s  growing  into  two 
tribes,  whilst  none  of  his  brethren  formed 
more  than  one:  so  Onkelos. 

23.  'The  ai'chers  have  sorely  grieved 
him~]  Though  the  Targums  and  others  have 
referred  this  to  Joseph's  trials  in  Egypt,  the 
])rophetic  character  of  the  whol.'^  chapter 
shows  that  they  point  rather  to  the  future 
wars  of  his  tribes  and  the  strength  which  he 
received  from  the  hands  of  the  mighty  God 
of  Jacob. 

24.  from  thenee  is  the  shepherd,  the  stone 
of  Israel^  “ From  thence,”  referring  to  “the 
mighty  one  of  Jacob  ” in  the  last  clause.  Some 
understand  here  that  Joseph,  having  been 
defended  from  the  malice  of  his  enemies, 
was  raised  uj).  by  God  to  be  a Shepherd  or 
Guardian  both  to  the  Egyptians  and  to  his 
own  family,  and  a stone  or  rock  of  support 
to  the  house  of  Israel.  Others  see  in  this 
a prophecy  of  Joshua,  the  great  captain 
of  his  people,  who  came  of  the  tribe  of 
Ephraim,  and  led  the  Israelites  to  the  .pro- 
mised land.  Others  again  have  thought  that, 
when  Jacob  was  speaking  of  the  sufferings 
and  subsequent  exaltation  of  his  son  Joseph, 
his  visions  were  directed  forward  to  that 
greater  Son,  of  whom  Josej>h  was  a type, 
whom  the  archers  vexed,  but  who  was  vic- 
torious over  all  enemies,  and  that  of  Him  he 
says  “ From  God  cometh  the  Shepherd,  the 


V.  26—33-] 


GENESIS.  XLIX. 


231 


who  shall  help  thee ; and  by  the  AI- 
mighty,  who  shall  bless  thee  with 
blessings  of  heaven  above,  blessings 
of  the  deep  that  lieth  under,  blessings 
of  the  breasts,  and  of  the  womb  : 

26  The  blessings  of  thy  father  have 
prevailed  above  the  blessings  of  my 
progenitors  unto  the  utmost  bound 
of  the  everlasting  hills:  they  shall  be 
on  the  head  of  Joseph,  and  on  the 
crown  of  the  head  of  him  that  was 
separate  from  his  brethren. 

27  ^ Benjamin  shall  ravin  as  a 
wolf : in  the  morning  he  shall  devour 
the  prey,  and  at  night  he  shall  divide 
the  spoil. 

28  *^1  All  these  are  the  twelve  tribes 
of  I srael : and  this  is  it  that  their  father 
spake  unto  them,  and  blessed  them; 
every  one  according  to  his  blessing  he 
blessed  them. 

29  And  he  charged  them,  and  said 


unto  them,  I am  to  be  gathered  unto 
my  people : “^bury  me  with  my  fathers  *chap.  47. 
in  the  cave  that  is  in  the  field  of  Eph- 
ron  the  Hittite, 

30  In  the  cave  that  is  in  the  field  of 
Machpelah,  which  is  before  Mamre, 

in  the  land  of  Canaan,  which  Abra-  <’chap.  23. 
ham  bought  with  the  field  of  Eph-  * ' 
ron  the  Hittite  for  a possession  of  a 
buryingplace. 

31  There  they  buried  Abraham 
and  Sarah  his  wife ; there  they  buried 
Isaac  and  Rebekah  his  wife ; and  there 
I buried  Leah. 

32  The  purchase  of  the  field  and 
of  the  cave  that  is  therein  was  from 
the  children  of  Heth. 

33  And  when  Jacob  had  made  an 
end  of  commanding  his  sons,  he  ga- 
thered up  his  feet  into  the  bed,  and 
yielded  up  the  ghost,  and  was  gather- 
ed unto  his  people. 


Rock  of  Israel.”  As  both  Joseph  and  Joshua 
were  eminent  shadows  and  forerunners  of  the 
Saviour,  it  is  quite  possible  that  all  these 
senses,  more  or  less,  belong  to  the  words, 
though  perhaps  with  special  reference  to  the 
last.  The  translation  advocated  by  many 
recent  commentators,  “From  thence — from 
the  Shepherd  —the  Rock  of  Israel  ” is  against 
tlie  original  and  the  Versions. 

25.  E-ven  by  the  God  of  thy  father^  ^uho 
shall  help  thee,  &c.]  Rather  “ From  the  God 
of  thy  father  and  He  shall  help  thee,  and  with 
(the  aid  of)  the  Almighty,  even  He  shall  bless 
thee.” 

26.  The  blessings  of  thy  father  ha've 
prevailed  above  the  blessings  of  my  progenitors 
unto  the  utmost  hound  of  the  everlasting  hills'] 
If  this  be  the  right  rendering  of  a very  obscure 
passage  in  the  original,  the  meaning  obviously 
is,  that  the  blessings  of  Jacob  on  the  head  of 
Joseph  and  his  offspring  are  greater  than  those 
which  Abraham  had  pronounced  on  Isaac 
and  Isaac  on  Jacob,  and  that  they  should 
last  as  long  as  the  everlasting  hills.  This  is 
more  or  leSs  the  interpretation  of  all  the 
Jewish  com.mentators  following  the  Targums 
and  the  Vulg.  The  LXX  (with  which 
agrees  the  reading  of  the  Samaritan  Penta- 
teuch) has  a rendering  which  is  adopted  by 
Michaelis,  Dathe,  Vater,  Tuch,  Winer, 
Maurer,  Schumann,  Knobel,  and  Gesen. 
(see  Ges.  pp.  38,  391),  “The  blessings  of  thy 
father  prevail  over  the  blessings  of  the  eternal 
mountains,  even  the  glory  of  the  everlasting 
hills.”  By  this  the  parallelism  of  the  two 


clauses  is  preseiwed,  and  the  violence  done  to 
the  two  words  translated  in  Authorised  Ver- 
sion “progenitors”  and  “utmost  bounds” 
is  avoided. 

separate  from  his  brethren]  So  Onkelos. 
The  V ulg.  and  Saad.  have  ‘ ‘ the  Nazarite 
among  his  brethren.”  Either  of  these  transla- 
tions would  allude  to  the  separation  of  Joseph 
from  his  fam.il y,  first  by  his  captivity  and 
afterwards  by  his  elevation.  The  word  for 
“separate”  means  “one  set  apart,”  “conse- 
crated,” especiallv  used  of  a Nazarite  like 
Samson  (Judg.  xiii.,  xvi.  17),  and  of  the  Naza- 
rite under  the  law  (Num.  vi.  2).  It  is  possi- 
ble that  this  consecration  may  apply  also  to 
princes  who  are  separated  to  higher  rank  in 
dignity,  just  as  the  word  ne%er,  “ consecra- 
tion,” signifies  a royal  or  high-priestly  diadem. 
Accordingly,  the  LXX.,  Syr.,  Targg.  Jerus., 
Pseudo- Jon.  and  many  recent  interpreters,  ren- 
der “a  prince  or  leader  of  his  brethren”  (see 
Ges.  p.  871). 

27.  Benjamin  shall  ravin  as  a vuof 
&:c.]  The  reference  is,  no  doubt,  to  the  war- 
like character  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  Ex- 
amples of  this  may  be  seen  Judg.  v.  14,  xx. 
16;  I Chron.  vii.  7,  xii.  17;  2 Chron.  xiv.  S, 
xvii.  17.  Also  Ehud  the  Judge  (Judg.  iii.  15) 
and  Saul  the  king,  with  his  son  Jonathan,  were 
Benjamites.  The  fathers  (Tei*tul.,  Ambrose, 
August.,  Jerom.)  think  that  there  is  a refer- 
ence also  to  St  Paul,  who  before  his  conver- 
sion devastated  the  Church  and  in  later  life 
brought  home  the  spoils  of  the  Gentiles. 


22,2 


GENESIS.  XLIX. 


NOTE  A on  Chap.  xlix.  v.  io.  Shiloh. 

i.  Different  renderings  of  word.  i.  “ He  who  shall  be  sent.”  2.  “His  son.”  3.  “Until  he 
come  to  Shiloh.”  4.  “The  Peace- Maker.”  5.  “He,  whose  right  it  is.”  ii.  Choice 

of  renderings,  either  4 or  5.  iii.  Messianic,  by  consent  of  Jewish  and  Christian 
antiquity.  iv.  Answer  to  objections. 


Shiloh.  A word  of  acknowledged  difficulty. 

1.  The  Vulgate  renders  “ He,  who  shall  be 
sent”  (comp.  Shiloah,  Isai.  viii.  6;  John  ix.  7 
— ii).  This  would  correspond  with  a title  of 
the  Messiah,  “He that  should  come”  (Matt.xi. 
3).  Such  a translation  is  unsupported  from 
other  sources  and  rests  on  a different  reading 
of  the  original,  the  letter  il  (cheth)  being  sub- 
stituted for  n (he)  of  the  received  text. 

2.  The  Targum  of  Pseudo- Jonathan  and 
some  rabbins  render  “ his  son.”  So  Kimchi, 
Pagninus,  Calvin  and  others:  but  it  requires 
proof  that  the  word  jhilj  “a  son,”  has  any 
existence  in  Hebrew. 

3.  The  Rabbi  Lipmann,  in  his  book  called 
“Nizzachon,”  suggests  that  it  was  the  name  of 
the  city  Shiloh,  and  that  we  should  render 
“until  he  (Judah)  shall  come  to  Shiloh.”  A 
similar  construction  occurs  i S.  iv.  12  (he 
“ came  to  Shiloh”),  and  it  is  said  that  Judah, 
in  the  march  to  the  encampments  in  the  wil- 
derness, always  took  the  first  place  (Num.  ii. 
3 — 9,  X.  14),  but  that,  when  the  Israelites  came 
to  Shiloh,  they  pitched  the  talx^rnacle  there 
(Josh,  xviii.  i — 10),  and,  the  other  tribes  de- 
parting from  Judah,  his  principality  closed. 

It  seems  fatal  to  this  theory,  that  every 
ancient  Version,  paraphrase  and. commentator 
make  Shiloli,  not  the  objective  case  after  the 
verb,  but  the  subject  or  nominative  case  before 
the  verb.  Moreover,  whether  it  were  a pro- 
phecy by  Jacob,  or,  as  many  who  adopt  this 
theory  will  have  it,  a forgery  of  after  date, 
nothing  could  be  less  pertinent  than  the  sense 
to  be  elicited  from  the  words,  “ till  he  come  to 
Shiloh.”  Probably  the  town  of  Shiloh  did 
not  exist  in  Jacob’s  time,  and  Judah  neither 
lost  nor  acquired  the  pre-eminence  at  Shiloh. 
He  was  not  markedly  the  leader  in  the  wilder- 
ness, for  the  people  were  led  by  Moses  and 
Aaron;  nor  did  he  cease  to  have  whatever 
pre-eminence  he  may  have  had  when  they 
came  to  Shiloh.  This  has  induced  some  to 
vary  the  words,  by  translating,  ^johen  he 
comes  to  Shiloh,”  a translation  utterly  inad- 
missible; but  it  will  give  no  help  to  the  solu- 
tion of  the  passage,  for  Judah  did  not  acquire 
any  fresh  authority  at  Shiloh.  It  was  the 
place  of  the  rest  of  the  tabernacle  and  there- 
fore perhaps  was  named  Shiloh,  “Rest:”  but 
it  was  no  turning  point  in  the  history  of 
Judah.  Notwithstanding  therefore  the  autho- 
rity of  Teller,  Eichhorn,  Bk'ek,  Hitzig,  Tuch, 
Ewald,  Delitzsch,  Kalisch,  &c.,  we  may  pro- 
nounce with  Hofmann,  that  the  rendering  is 
utterly  impossible. 


4.  Far  more  probable  is  the  rendering 
which  makes  Shiloh  a proper  name,  and  the 
subject  of  the  verb,  signifying  “Peace,”  or 
rather,  “the  Peace-maker,”  the  “Prince  of 
peace.”  So,  with  slight  variations,  Luther, 
Vater,  Gesenius,  Rosenmiiller,  Hengstenberg, 
Knobel,  Keil  and  others  of  the  highest  authori- 
ty. The  title  is  one  most  appropriate  to  Messiah 
(see  Isai.  ix.  6).  The  word  is  legitimately 
formed  from  the  verb  Shalah.,  to  rest,  to  be  at 
peace;  and  if  the  received  reading  be  the  true 
reading,  there  need  be  little  doubt  that  this  is 
its  meaning.  It  has  been  thought  by  some 
that  Solomon  received  his-name  Shelomo.,  the 
“ peaceful,”  with  an  express  reference  to  this 
prophecy  of  Shiloh,  and  it  may  be  said  that  in 
Solomon  was  a partial  fulfilment  of  the  pro- 
mise. Solomon  was  very  markedly  a type  of 
the  Messiah,  himself  the  son  of  David,  whose 
dominion  was  from  sea  to  sea,  who  established 
a reign  of  peace  in  the  land  and  who  built  the 
temple  of  the  Lord;  but  Solomon  was  not 
the  true  Shiloh,  any  more  than  he  was  the 
true  “Son  of  David.” 

5.  The  authority  of  the  Ancient  Versions  ■ 
is  all  but  overwhelming  in  favour  of  the 
sense,  “ He,  to  whom  it  belongs,”  or  “ He, 
whose  right  it  is.”  So,  more  or  less, 
LXX.,  Aq.,  Symm.,  Syr.,  Saad.,  Onk., 
Targ.  Jer.,  all,  in  fact,  except  Vulg.  and 
Pseudo- Jonathan. 

The  objections  to  this  are : 

(1)  That  if  the  letter  (expressed  by  the 
i in  Sh/loh)  be  genuine,  the  translation  is  in- 
admissible: but  it  is  replied  that  very  many 
Hebrew  MSS.  and  all  Samaritan  MSS.  are 
without  the  and  that  the  evidence  is  much 
in  favour  of  the  belief  that  the  yod  did  not 
appear  till  the  loth  century  (see  Prof.  Lee,  ‘ Lex.’ 
in  voc.).  It  may  be  added  that,  as  the  reading 
without  the  yod  is  the  harder  and  apparently 
the  less  probable,  the  copyists  were  more  like- 
ly to  have  inserted  it  by  mistake  than  to  have 
omitted  it  by  mistake. 

(2)  It  is  said,  that  by  this  reading  so  inter- 
preted, a form  is  introduced  unknown  to  the 
Pentateuch,  Aramsean  and  of  later  date.  To 
this  it  is  replied,  that  the  forai  occurs  in  the 
Song  of  Deborah  (Judg.  v.  7),  which  is  very 
ancient;  that  Aramcean  forms  were  either  very 
ancient  or  decidedly  modern,  to  be  met  with 
in  Hebrew  when  the  patriarchs  were  in  con- 
tact with  the  Chaldxans  (and  Jacob  had  been 
forty  years  in  Mesopotamia),  or  not  again 
till  the  Jews  were  in  captivity  at  Babylon. 
An  Aramaism  or  Chaldaism  therefore  was  na- 


233 


GENESIS.  L. 


V.  I,  2.] 

tural  in  the  moutli  of  Jacob,  though  not  in 
the  mouth  of  David  or  Solomon. 

This  rendering  of  the  Vss.  is  supported  by  . 
the  early  Christian  writers,  as  Justin  M. 
(‘Dial.’§  i2o)  and  many  others.  It  is  thought 
that  Ezekiel  (xxi.  27)  actually  quotes  the 
words,  “Until  he  come  whose  right  it  is,” 
expanding  them  a little,  and  St  Paul  (in  Gal. 
iii.  19)  is  supposed  to  refer  to  them. 

On  the  whole,  rejecting  confidently  the 
senses  i,  2,  3,  we  may  safely  adopt  either  4 or 
5 ; 4,  if  the  reading  be  correct;  5,  if  the  read- 
ing without  the  yod  be  accepted. 

All  Jewish  antiquity  referred  the  prophecy  to 
Messiah.  Thus  the  Targum  of  Onkelos  has 
“until  the  Messiah  come,  whose  is  the  king- 
dom;” the  Jerusalem  Targum,  “until  the  time 
that  the  king  Messiah  shall  come,  whose  is  the 
kingdom.”  The  T argum  of  Pseudo- J onathan, 
“till  the  king  the  Messiah  shall  come,  the 
youngest  of  his  sons.”  So  the  Babylonian 
Talmud  (‘Sanhedrim,’  cap.  II.  fol.  982), 
“What  is  Messiah^s  name?  His  name  is 
Shiloh,  for  it  is  written.  Until  Shiloh  come.” 
So  likewise  the  Bereshith  Rabba,  Kimchi, 
Aben-ezra,  Rashi,  and  other  ancient  Rabbins. 
The  more  modern  Jews,  pressed  by  the  argu- 
ment, that  the  time  appointed  must  have 
passed,  refer  to  David,  Saul,  Nebuchadnezzar 
and  others  (see  Schoettgen,  ‘Hor.  Heb.’  p.  1264). 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  prophecy  was 
one  important  link  in  the  long  chain  of  predic- 
tions which  produced  that  general  expectation 
of  a Messiah  universally  prevalent  in  Judasa  at 
the  period  of  the  Christian  era,  and  which 
Suetonius,  in  the  well-known  passage  in  his 
life  of  Vespasian,  tells  us  had  long  and 
constantly  pervaded  the  whole  of  the  East. 
V/ith  the  Jewish  interpreters  agreed  the  whole 
body  of  Christian  fathers,  e.g.  Justin  M. 

‘ Apol.’  I.  §§  32,  54;  ‘ Dial.’  §§  52,  20;  Iren. 
IV.  23  ; Origen,  ‘ C.  Cels.’  i.  p.  41,  ‘ Horn.’ 
in  Gen.  17;  Cyprian,  ‘ C.  Jud.’  i.  20;  Cyril. 
Hieros.  ‘Cat.’  xii.;  Euseb.  ‘ H.  E.’  i.  6; 
Chrys.  ‘Horn.  67,  in  Gen.’;  Augustine,  ‘ De 
Civ.  D.’  XVI.  41 ; Theodoret,  ‘ Quasst.  in  Gen.’ 
no;  Hieron.  ‘ C^aest.  in  Gen.’,  &:c. 

The  only  arguments  of  any  weight  against 
the  Messianic  character  of  the  prophecy,  ex- 
cept of  course  a denial  that  prophecy  is  possi- 
ble at  all,  seem  to  be  the  following. 


r.  The  patriarchal  age  had  no  anticipation 
of  a personal  Messiah,  though  there  may  have 
been  some  dim  hope  of  a future  deliverance. 
This  is  simply  a gratuitous  assertion.  Ad- 
mitting even  that  the  promise  to  Adam  may 
have  been  vaguely  Understood,  we  cannot  tell 
how  much  the  rite  of  sacrifice,  the  prophecies 
of  men  like  Enoch  and  Noah,  and  the  pro- 
mises to  Abraham  and  Isaac,  had  taught  the 
faith  of  the  fathers.  There  is  the  highest  of 
all  authority  for  saying  that  “ Abraham  re- 
joiced to  seethe  day  of  Christ;  he  saw  it,  and 
was  glad”  (Joh.  viii.  56).  It  was  not  indeed 
to  be  expected,  that  much  beyond  general  in- 
timations should  be  given  in  very  early  times, 
the  light  gradually  increasing  as  the  Sun-rise 
was  drawing  near : but  there  seems  no  more 
likely  time  for  a special  teaching  on  this  vital 
point  than  the  time  of  Jacob’s  death.  He 
was  the  last  of  the  three  patriarchs  to  whom 
the  promises  were  given.  He  was  leaving,  his 
family  in  a foreign  land,  where  they  were  to 
pass  some  generations  surrounded  by  idolatry 
and  error.  He  was  foretelling  their  future 
fortunes  on  their  promised  return  to  Canaan. 
What  more  natural  than  that  he  should  be 
moved  to  point  their  hopes  yet  farther  forward 
to  that,  of  which  the  deliverance  from  Egypt 
was  to  be  an  emblem  and  type  ? 

2.  The  New  Testament  does  not  cite  this 
as  a prediction  of  Christ. 

Bishop  Patrick  has  well  obseiwed,  that  the 
fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  was  not  till  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  when-  not  only  the 
Sceptre  of  Royalty,  but  even  the  tribal  autho- 
rity, and  the  Sanhedrim  or  council’  of  elders 
(“the  lawgiver”)  wholly  passed  from  Judah. 
Then,  and  not  till  then,  had  the  foretold  for- 
tunes of  Judah’s  house  been  worked  out. 
The  sceptre  and  the  lawgiver  had  departed, 
and  “ He,  whose  right  it  was,”  had  taken  the 
kingdom.  The  “Prince  of  peace”  had  come, 
and  nations  were  coming  into  His  obedience. 
But  it  would  have  been  no  argument  to  the 
Jew  to  cite  this  prophecy,  whilst  the  Jewish 
nation  was  still  standing  and  still  struggling 
for  its  freedom,  still  possessing  at  least  a 
shadow  of  royal  authority  and  judicial 
power.  There  is  therefore  abundant  reason 
why  the  New  Testament  should  not  refer 
to  it. 


CHAPTER  L. 

I The  mourning  for  Jacob.  4 Joseph  getteth 
leave  of  Pharaoh  to  go  to  hny  him.  7 The 
ftneral.  15  Joseph  coinforteth  his  bi-ethren., 
who  craved  his  pardon.  22  Plis  age.  23 
He  seeth  the  third  gi.neration  of  his  sons. 
'i\  He  prophesicth  nnto  his  brethren  of  their 


return.  25  /A  iaheth  an  oath  of  them  for 
his  hones.  26  Pie  dicth,  and  is  chested. 


AND  Joseph  fell  upon  his  father’s 
jf\^  face,  and  wept  upon  him,  and 
kissed  him. 

2 Arid  Joseph  commanded  his  ser- 
vants the  physicians  to  embalm  his 


CiiAr.  L.  2.  his  sernrants  the  physi-  all  places  were  crowded  with  physicians  for 
dans']  Herod,  (ii.  84)  tells  us,  that  in  Egypt  every  different  kind  of  disease.  The  physi- 


234 


GENESIS.  L. 


[v.  3— II. 


father:  and  the  physicians  embalmed 
Israel. 

3 And  forty  days  were  fulfilled  for 
him;  for  so  are  fulfilled  the  days  of 
those  which  are  embalmed : and  the 

tHeb,  Egyptians  ^mourned  for  him  three- 
score  and  ten  days. 

4 And  when  the  days  of  his  mourn- 
ing were  past,  Joseph  spake  unto  the 
house  of  Pharaoh,  saying.  If  now  I 
have  found  grace  in  your  eyes,  speak, 
I pray  you,  in  the  ears  of  Pharaoh.^ 
saying, 

«chap.  47.  5 "My  father  m^ade  me  swear,  say- 

ing,  Lo,  I die : in  my  grave  which 
I have  digged  for  me  in  the  land 

Canaan,  there  shalt  thou  bury  me. 
Now  therefore  let  me  go  up,  I pray 
thee,  and  bury  my  father,  and  I will 
come  again. 

6 And  Pharaoh  said.  Go  up,  and 
bury  thy  father,  according  as  he  made 
thee  swear. 


7 ^ And  Joseph  went  up  to  bury 
his  father:  and  with  him  went  up  all 
the  servants  of  Pharaoh,  the  elders  of 
his  house,  and  all  the  elders  of  the 
land  of  Egypt, 

8 And  all  the  house  of  Joseph, 
and  his  brethren,  and  his  father’s 
house : only  their  little  ones,  and 
their  flocks,  and  their  herds,  they  left 
in  the  land  of  Goshen. 

9 And  there  went  up  with  him 
both  chariots  and  horsemen ; and  it 
was  a very  great  company. 

10  And  they  came  to  the  threshing- 
floor  of  Atad,  which  is  beyond  Jordan, 
and  there  they  mourned  with  a great 
and  very  sore  lamentation : and  he  made 
a mourning  for  his  father  seven  days. 

11  And  when  the  inhabitants  of 
the  land,  the  Canaanites,  saw  the 
mourning  in  the  floor  of  Atad,  they 
said,  I'his  is  a grievous  mourning  to 
the  Egyptians : wherefore  the  name 


cians  of  Egypt  were  famous  in  other  lands 
also  (Herod.  ]ir.  i,  129),  It  is  not  wonder- 
ful therefore  that  Joseph,  with  all  his  state, 
should  have  had  several  physicians  attached  to 
his  establishment.  Physicians,  however,  were 
not  ordinarily  employed  to  embalm,  which 
was  the  work  of  a special  class  of  persons 
(Herod.  II.  85;  Dibdor.  i.  91) ; and  the  cus- 
tom of  embalming  and  the  occupation  of  the 
embalmer  were  probably  anterior  to  Moses 
and  to  Joseph.  Very  probably  the  physicians 
embalmed  Jacob  because  he  was  not  an 
Egyptian,  and  so  could  not  be  subjected  to 
the  ordinary  treatment  of  the  Egyptians,  or 
embalmed  by  their  embalmers. 

3.  ylfid  forty  days  ^Mcre  fulfilled  for 
him']  The  account  given  by  Diodorus  (i.  91) 
is  that  the  embalming  lasted  more  than  30 
days,  and  that  when  a king  died  tliey  mourned 
for  him  72  days.  This  very  nearly  corre- 
sponds with  the  number  in  this  verse.  The 
mourning  of  70  days  probably  included  the 
40  days  of  embalming.  Herodotus  (11.  86), 
who  descrilx's  at  length  three  processes  of  em- 
balming, seems  to  speak  of  a subsequent  steep- 
ing in  natron  {i.e.  subcarbonale  of  soda)  for 
70  days.  He  probably  expresses  himself  with 
some  inaccuracy,  as  both  the  account  in 
Genesis,  which  is  very  much  earlier,*  and  the 
account  in  Diodorus  which  is  later,  give  a 
much  shorter  time  for  the  whole  embalming, 
i.e.  either  30  or  40  days,  and  seem  to  make 
the  w hole  mourning  last  but  70  days.  It  is 
possible,  however,  lo  understand  Herodotus 


as  meaning  the  same  as  the  Scriptural  account 
and  that  of  Diodorus.  His  words  are, 
“Having  done  this  they  embalm  in  natron, 
covering  it  up' for  70  days.  Longer  than  this 
it  is  not  lawful  to  embalm.”  (See  Sir  G.  Wil- 
kinson in  Rawlinson,  ‘ Herod.Ti.  86;  Heng- 
stenb.  ‘ Egypt,’  &c.  p.  68.) 

4.  Joseph  spake  unto  the  house  of  Pha- 
raolS]  He  probably  did  not  go  himself  to 
Pharaoh,  because  in  mourning  for  his  father 
he  had  let  his  hair  and  beard  grow  long,  which 
was  the  custom  in  Egypt  at  the  death  of  rela- 
tions (Herod,  ii.  36)  : and  it  would  have  been 
disrespectful  to  go  into  the  presence  of  Pha- 
raoh without  cutti.ng  the  hair  and  shaving  the 
beard.  (See  on  ch.  xli.  14,  and  Plengstenb. 

‘ t^gypk’  P-  7I-) 

7.  ^ujith  him  ^joent  up  all  the  ser^mnts  of 
PharaolS]  Such  large  funeral  processions  are 
often  seen  on  the  Egyptian  monuments  (Ro- 
sellini,  ii.  p.  395  ; Hengstenb.  p.  71;  Wilkin- 
son, ‘A.;E.’  Vol.  V.  ch.  xvi.  and  plates 
there). 

10.  threshingfoor  of  At ad\  Or  “Goren- 
Atad,”  or  “ the  threshingfloor  of  thorns.” 

beyond  Jordati]  i.e.  to  the  West  of  Jor- 
dan. Moses  wrote  before  the  Israelites  had 
taken  possession  of  the  land  of  Israel,  and 
therefore  wliilst  they  were  on  the  East  of  Jor- 
dan. I'his  accords  with  what  we  hear  of  the 
site  of  Goren^Atad  and  Abel-Mizraim  ; for 
Jerome  (‘  Onom.’  s.  v.  Area- Atad)  identi- 


V.  12  — 25.] 


genesis:  l. 


235 


I That  is,  of  it  was  called  Abel-mizraim,  which 

i/te  mourn-  • 1 1 t 1 

ingofi/ie  IS  beyoiid  Jordan. 

did  unto  him  ac- 
cording as  he  commanded  them : 

* Acts  7.  1 2 For  ^his  sons  carried  him  into 

the  land  of  Canaan,  and  buried  him 
in  the  cave  of  the  field  of  Machpe- 
^chap. 23.  lah,  which  Abraham  '^bought  with 
the  field  for  a possession  of  a buiy- 
ingplace  of  Ephron  the  Hittite,  be- 
fore Mam  re. 

14  ^ And  Joseph  returned  into 
Egypt,  he,  and  his  brethren,  and  all 
that  went  up  with  him  to  bury 
his  father,  after  he  had  buried  his 
father. 

15  5 when  Joseph’s  brethren 
saw  that  their  father  was  dead,  they 
said,  Joseph  will  perad venture  hate 
us,  and  will  certainly  requite  us  all 

, the  evil  which  v/e  did  unto  him. 
tHeb.  16  And  they  ^sent  a messenger 
charged.  Joseph,  Saying,  Thy  father  did 

command  before  he  died,  saying, 

17  So  shall  ye  say  unto  Joseph, 
Forgive,  I pray  thee  now,  the  tres- 
pass of  thy  brethren,  and  their  sin; 
for  they  did  unto  thee  evil : and  now, 
v/e  pray  thee,  forgive  the  trespass  of 
the  servants  of  the  God  of  thy  father. 
And  Joseph  wept  when  they  spake 
unto  him. 


18  And  his  brethren  also  went 
and  fell  down  before  his  face;  and 
they  said,  Behold,  we  be  thy  ser- 
vants. 

19  And  Joseph  said  unto  them, 

^Fear  not;  for  am  I in  the  place  of chap.  45. 
God?  5. 

20  But  as  for  you,  ye  thought  evil 
against  me;  but  God  meant  it  unto 
good,  to  bring  to  pass,  as  it  is  this 
day,  to  save  much  people  alive. 

21  Now  therefore  fear  ye  not:  I 
will  nourish  you,  and  your  little  ones. 

And  he  comforted  them,  and  spake 

^ kindly  unto  them.  t Heb. 

22  % And  Joseph  dv/elt  in  Egypt, 
he,  and  his  father’s  house ; and  Joseph 
lived  an  hundred  and  ten  years. 

23  And  Joseph  saw  Ephraim’s 
children  of  tho,  thirA  generation:  ^the'^^''"^* 
children  also  of  Machir  the  son  of^^’^^ 
Manasseh  were  Trought  up  upon  Jo- 
seph’s  knees. 

24  And  Joseph  said  unto  his  bre- 
thren, I die:  and  -^God  will  surely Heb.  n. 
visit  you,  and  bring  you  out  of  this 

land  unto  the  land  which  he  sware 
to  Abraham,  to  Isaac,  and  to  Jacob. 

25  And  -^Joseph  took  an  oath  of-'Exod.is. 
the  children  of  Israel,  saying,  God 

will  surely  visit  you,  and  ye  shall 
carry  up  my  bones  from  hence. 


ties  it  with  Beth-Hoglah,  which  lay  between 
the  Jordan  and  Jericho,  the  ruins  of  which 
are  probably  still  to  be  seen  (Rob.  i.  544;  see 
Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of  Bible,’  i.  p.  200.) 

11.  Abel-mi%raim\  Means  either  “ the 
field  of  Egypt,”  or  “ the  mourning  of  Egypt,” 
according  to  the  vowel-points.  The  violence 
of  the  I'vgyplian  lamentations  is  described  by 
Herodotus  (ii.  85).  See  also  Wilkinson, 

‘ A.  E.’  ch.  XVI. 

19.  Am  I in  the  place  of  God?']  i.e.  it 
is  God’s  place  to  avenge,  not  mine.  See  Rom. 
xii.  19. 

23.  Were  brought  up  upon  Joseph's  knees] 
Lit.  “were  born  on  Joseph’s  knees.”  Comp, 
the  phrase  ch.  xxx.  3.  It  seems  as  if  they 
were  adopted  by  Joseph  as  his  own  children 
from  the  time  of  their  birth. 

26.  They  embahned  him.^  and  he  <ujas  put  in 
a coffin]  The  word  for  coffin  is  literally 
“ark”  or  “chest;”  a word  used  always  of 
a wooden  chest,  elsewhere  almost  exclusively 


of  “the  ark  of  the  covenant.”  Herodotus, 
after  describing  the  embalming,  says,  “The 
relatives  inclo.se  the  body  in  a wooden  image 
which  they  have  made  in  the  shape  of  a man. 
Then  fastening  the  case,  they  place  it  in  a 
sepulchral  chamber,  upright  against  the  wall. 
This  is  the  most  costly  way  of  embalming  the 
dead”  (ii.  86).  The  description  is  of  that 
which  we  commonly  call  a mummy-case. 
Such  coffins,  made  of  wood,  chiefly  of  syca- 
more wood,  were  the  commonest  in  Egypt ; 
and  though  some  very  rich  people  were  buried 
in  basaltic  coffins,  yet,  both  from  Herodotus’ 
description  above  and  fiom  other  sources,  we 
know  that  wooden  coffins  were  frequent, 
for  great  men,  even  for  kings.  The  coffin 
of  king  Mycerinus,  discovered  a.d.  1837  in 
the  third  Pyramid  of  Memphis,  is  of  syca- 
more wood.  The  command  of  Joseph  and 
the  promise  of  the  Israelites,  that  his  bones  '' 
should  be  carried  back  into  Canaan,  were 
reason  enough  for  preferring  a wooden  to 
a stone  coffin.  (See  Hengstenb.  ‘ Egypt,’  pp. 

71,  72.  Various  coffins  of  wood,  stone,  and 


236 


GENESIS.  L. 


[v.  26. 


26  So  Joseph  died,  being  an  hun-  embalmed  him,  and  he  was  put  in 
dred  and  ten  years  old : and  they  a coffin  in  Egypt. 


earthenware  are  described  and  engraved  in 
Wilkinson’s  ‘A.  E.’  Vol.  v.  p.  479.)  The 
coffin  was,  no  doubt,  deposited  in  some  se- 
pulchral building  (see  Herod,  above)  and 
guarded  by  his  own  immediate  descendants 
till  the  tim.e  of  the  Exodus,  when  it  was  car- 
ried up  out  of  Egypt  and  finally  deposited  in 
Shechem  (Josh.  xxiv.  32).  The  faith  of  Jo- 
seph (Heb.  xi.  22)  must  have  been  a constant 


remembrance  to  his  children  and  his  people, 
that  Egypt  was  not  to  be  their  home.  His 
coffin  laid  up  by  them,  ready  to  be  carried 
away  according  to  his  dying  request  whenever 
God  should  restore  them  to  the  promised  land, 
would  have  taught  them  to  keep  apart  from 
Egypt  and  its  idolatries,  looking  for  a better 
country,  which  God  had  promised  to  their 
fathers. 


EXODUS 


INTROD 

PACp 

Divisions  of  the  Book^  § i • • *237 
Mosaic  Authorships  § i . . *2139 
Miracles  in  Egypt ^ § 3 . .241 

Personal  knovuleclge  of  the  Peninsula  of 

.§  I.  '^HE  Book  of  Exodus  consists 
of  two  distinct  portions.  The 
former  (cc.  i — xix)  gives  a detailed  ac- 
count of  the  circumstances  under  which 
the  deliverance  of  the  Israelites  was  ac- 
complished. The  second  (cc.  xx — xl) 
describes  the  giving  of  the  law,  and  the 
institutions  which  completed  the  organi- 
zation of  the  people  as  “ a kingdom  of 
priests,  and  an  holy  nation^”  c.  xix.  6. 

These  two  portions  are  unlike  in 
style  and  structure,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected from  the  difference  ©f  their  sub- 
ject-matter: but  their  mutual  bearings 
and  interdependence  are  evident,  and 
leave  no  doubt  as  to  the  substantial 
unity  of  the  book.  The  historical  por- 
tion owes  all  its  significance  and  interest 
to  the  promulgation  of  God’s  will  in 
the  law.  The  institutions  of  the  law 
could  not,  humanly  speaking,  have  been 
established  or  permanently  maintained 
but  for  the  deliverance  which  the  his- 
torical portion  records. 

The  name  Exodus,  i.  e,  “ the  going 
forth,”  applies  rather  to  the  former  por- 
tion than  to  the  whole  book.  It  was 
very  naturally  assigned  to  it  by  the 
Alexandrian  Jews,  by  whom  the  most 
ancient  translation  was  written.  Like 
their  forefathers  they  were  exiles  in 
Egypt,  and  looked  forward  to  their  de- 
parture from  that  land  as  the  first  con- 
dition of  the  accomplishment  of  their 


UCTION. 

PACK 

Sinai  shovun  by  the  authors  § 4 *244 

Argument  from  the  account  of  the 

Tabernacles  § 5 • . • -247 

Chronology s § 6 . . . . .248 

hopes.  The  Hebrews  of  Palestine  simply 
designated  the  book  by  its  first  words 
Elleh  Shemoth,  i.  e.  “ these  are  the 
names,”  regarding  it  not  as  a separate 
work,  but  as  a section  of  the  Pentateuch. 

The  narrative,  indeed,  is  so  closely 
connected  with  that  of  Genesis  as  to 
shew  not  only  that  it  was  written  by 
the  same  author,  but  that  it  form.ed 
part  of  one  general  plan.  Still  it  is  a 
distinct  section;  the  first  events  which 
it  relates  are  separated  from  the  last 
chapter  in  Genesis  by  a considerable 
interval,  and  it  presents  the  people  of 
Israel  under  totally  different  circum- 
stances. Its  termination  is  marked  with 
equal  distinctness,  winding  up  with  the 
completion  of  the  tabernacle. 

The  book  is  divided  into  many  smaller 
sections;  each  of  which  has  the  marks 
which  throughout  the  Pentateuch  indi- 
cate a subdivision.  They  are  of  different 
lengths,  and  were  probably  written  on 
separate  parchments  or  papyri,  the  long- 
est not  exceeding  the  dimensions  of  con- 
temporary documents  in  Egypt*.  They 

1 A single  page  of  Egyptian  papyrus  contains 
very  frequently  as  much  subject-matter  as  is 
found  in  any  section  of  the  Pentateucli.  Thus, 
for  instance,  the  17th  chapter  of  the  Ritual  in  a 
papyrus,  of  which  a facsimile  has  been  pub- 
lished by  M.  de  Roug^,  occupies  one  page  of 
49  lines:  each  line  is  equivalent  to  three  lines  of 
Hebrew,  as  may  be  proved  by  transcription  of 
the  two  languages  in  Egyptian  and  Phoenician 


238 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


were  apparently  so  arranged  for  the  con- 
venience of  public  reading.  This  is  a 
point  of  importance,  accounting  to  a great 
extent  for  apparent  breaks  in  the  narra- 
tive, and  for  repetitions,  which  have  been 
attributed  to  the  carelessness  of  the  com- 
piler, who  is  supposed  to  have  brought 
separate  and  unconnected  fragments 
into  a semblance  of  order. 

The  first  seven  verses  are  introduc- 
tory to  the  whole  book.  In  accordance 
with  the  almost  invariable  custom  of 
the  writer,  we  find  a brief  recapitulation 
of' preceding  events,  and  a statement  of 
the  actual  condition  of  affairs.  The 
names  of  the  Patriarchs  and  the  number 
of  distinct  families  at  the  time  of  the 
immigration  into  Egypt  are  stated  in 
six  verses:  a single  paragraph  then  re- 
cords the  rapid  and  continuous  increase 
of  the  Israelites  after  the  death  of  Joseph 
and  his  contemporaries. 

The  narrative  begins  with  the  8th 
verse,  c.  i.  The  subdivision  which  in- 
cludes the  first  two  chapters  relates  very 
briefly  the  events  which  prepared  the 
way  for  the  Exodus : the  accession  of 
a new  king,  followed  by  a change  of 
policy  and  measures  of  extreme  cruelty 
towards  the  Israelites;  and  the  birth 
and  early  history  of  Moses,  destined  to 
be  their  deliverer.  The  second  division, 
from  c.  iii.  i to  vi.  i,  opens  after  an  inter- 
val of  some  forty  years.  From  this  point 
the  narrative  is  full  and  circumstantial. 

letters.  The  longest  section  in  the  Pentateuch 
scarcely  exceeds  150  lines  in  Van  cler  Hooght’s 
edition.  Several  papyri  of  the  i8th  dynasty 
are  of  eonsiderable  length.  Thus,  the  papyrus 
called  Anastasi  I.,  in  the  Ihitish  Museum,  con- 
tains -38  pages,  each  page  of  9 lines,  equal  to 
three  lines  of  ancient  Helirew  characters.  This 
exceeds  the  length  of  any  one  division  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch. The^  papyrus  in  question  is  undoubt- 
edly of  the  age  in  which  the  generality  of  modern 
critics  hold  the  Exodus  to  have  occurred,  d'he 
assertion  that  Moses  probably  used  parchment 
rests  on  the  fact  that  it  was  commonly  em- 
ployed at  an  early  time,  and  more  especially,  as 
it  would  seem,  for  sacred  compositions.  Thus, 
in  an  inscription  of  Thotmes  III.,  either  con- 
temjiorary  with  Moses,  or  much  older,  we  read 
that  an  account  of  his  campaigns  was  written 
on  parchment,  and  hung  up  m the  temple  of 
Ammon.  Sec  Prugsch,  ‘ Dictionnaire  Ilierogly- 
phicpie,’  ]i.  '20(8.  .'V  iar  more  ancient  instance 

of  the  use  of  ]iarchmcnt  in  sacred  writings  is 
given  by  ^[.  Chabas  and  Mr  Goodwin  in  the 
‘Egj'ptischc  Zeit-schrift’  for  Nov.  1S65  and 
June  1867. 


It  describes  the  call  of  Moses;  the  reve- 
lation of  Clod’s  will  and  purpose;  the 
return  of  Moses  to  Egypt,  and  his  first 
application  to  Pharaoh,  of  which  the 
immediate  result  was  a treatment  of  the 
Israelites,  which  materially  advanced  the 
work,  on  the  one  hand  preparing  them 
for  departure  from  their  homes,  and  on 
the  other  attaching 'them  more  cio.sely 
to  their  native  officers  by  the  bonds  of 
common  suffering. 

c.  vi.  2 — 27  forms  a distinct  portion. 
Moses  is  instructed  to  explain  the  bear- 
ings of  the  Divine  name  (of  which  the 
meaning  had  been  previously  intimated, 
see  iii.  14)  upon  the  relations  of  God 
to  the  people.  He  then  receives  a 
renewal  of  his  mission  to  the  Israelites 
alid  to  Pharaoh,  Aaron  being  formally 
appointed  as  his  coadjutor:  the  gene- 
alogy  of  both  is  then  introduced,  mark- 
ing their  position  as  leaders  of  the 
people. 

Idiis  portion  stands  in  its  right  place. 
It  is  necessary  to  the  full  understanding 
of  the  following,  and  is  closely  con- 
nected with  the  preceding,  section;  but 
it  stands  apart  from  both,  it  begins  with 
a solemn  declaration  and  ends  with  a 
distinct  announcement. 

c.  vi.  28  to  the  end  of  c.  xi.  In 
this  division  the  narrative  makes  a 
fresh  start.  It  begins,  as  usual  in  a 
nevv  section,  with  a brief  statement  to 
remind  the  reader  of  the  relative  posi- 
tion of  Moses  and  Aaron  and  of  the 
work  apjDointed  to  them.  Then  follows 
in  unbroken  order  the  history  of  nine 
plagues,  in  three  groups,  each  increasing 
in  severity.  At  the  close  of  this  division 
the  tenth  and  most  terrible  plague  is 
denounced,  and  the  failure  of  the  other 
nine,  in  turning  Pharaoh,  is  declared  in 
the  often  recurring  form,  “ the  Lord 
hardened  Pharaoh’s  heart,  so  that  he 
would  not  let  the  children  of  Israel  go 
out  of  his  land”  (xi.  10). 

The  next  section,  xii.  i — 42,  gives  an 
account  of  the  institution  of  the  Pass-  ' 
over,  and  the  departure  of  the  I.sraelites 
from  Rameses:  the  close  of  the  section 
is  distinctly  marked  by  the  chronological 
statement.  This  important  section  is 
closely  connected  with  the  preceding 
narrative,  but  it  was  evidently  intended 
to  be  read  as  a separate  lesson,  and  may 


THE  BOOK  OF  EXODUS.  239 


possibly  have  been  rewritten  or  revised 
for  that  purpose  towards  the  close  of 
the  life  of  Moses.  From  xii.  43  to  xiii.  16 
special  injunctions  touching  the  Passover 
are  recorded;  they  may  have  been  in- 
serted here  as  the  most  appropriate  place 
when  the  separate  documents  were  put 
together. 

The  narrative  begins  again  c.  xiii.  17. 
After  a brief  introduction,  stating  the 
general  direction  of  the  journey,  comes 
the  history  of  the  marcli  towards  the 
Red  Sea,  the  passage  across  it,  and  the 
destruction  of  Pharaoh’s  host.  This 
subdivision  extends  to  the  end  of  the 
xivth  chapter. 

The  Song  of  Moses'  is  inserted  here: 
it  does  not  interrupt  the  narrative,  which 
proceeds  without  a break  until,  in  the 
third  month  after  the  Exodus,  Israel 
came  to  the  Wilderness  of  Sinai  and 
camped  before  the  Mount:  c.  xix.  In 
this  chapter  and  the  next  the  promulga- 
tion of  the  law  is  described.  The  re- 
mainder of  the  book  gives  the  directions 
received  by  Moses  touching  the  Taber- 
nacle and  its  appurtenances,  and  the 
institution  of  the  Aaron ic  priesthood. 
It  then  relates  the  sin  of  the  Israelites, 
and  their  forgiveness  at  the  intercession 
of  Moses:  and  concludes  with  an  ac- 
count of  the  making  of  the  ta.bernacle, 
and  a description  of  the  symbolical 

^ Tlie  length  and  structure  of  this  great  hymn 
have  been  represented  as  proofs  of  a later  origin. 
A comparison  with  Egyptian  poems  of  the  age 
of  Moses,  or  much  earlier,  gives  these  results. 
The  hymn  to  the  Nile,  in  the  ‘Pap.  Sallier,’  ii., 
was  written  at  the  time  when  the  Exodus  is  fixed 
by  most  Egyptologers.  It  is  more  than  twice 
the  length  of  the  Song  of  Moses.  The  structure 
is  elaborate  and  the  cadences  resemble  the  He- 
brew. It  begins  thus,  “Hail,  O Nile,  thou 
comest  forth  over  this  land,  thou  comest  in  peace, 
giving  life  to  Egypt,  O hidden  God.”  Again,  a 
poem  inscribed  on  the  walls  of  a temple  built  by 
Thotmes  HI.  is  about  twice  as  long  as  the  Song. 
Its  style  is  artificial  and  the  cadences  even  more 
strongly  marked.  It  is  some  two  centuries  older 
than  the  hymn  to  the  Nile.  We  have  also  exact 
information  as  to  the  time  which  it  would  take 
to  write  out  such  a hymn.  An  Egyptian  scribe 
writing,  witli  the  greatest  care,  with  rubrical  head- 
ings, &c.  would  have  done  it  in  half  a day : a few 
hours  would  suffice  in  the  simpler  characters 
used  by  the  Semitic  races.  This  comparison 
leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  possibility  of  such  a 
hymn  being  written  by  Moses,  who  was  trained 
in  the  schools  of  Egypt ; and  no  one  denies  his 
genius. 


manifestation  of  God’s  Presence  with 
J-Jis  people. 

This  general  view  of  the  structure  of 
the  book  meets  several  questions  which 
have  been  raised  as  to  its  integrity. 
That  the  several  portions  are  distinct, 
forming  complete  subdivisions,  may  not 
only  be  admitted  without  misgiving,  but 
this  fact  is  best  accounted  for  by  the 
circumstances  under  which  the  work 
must  have  been  composed,  if  Moses  was 
its  author.  It  was  the  form  in  which  a 
man  engaged  in  such  an  undertaking 
would  naturally  present  at  intervals  an 
account  of  each  series  of  transactions, 
and  in  which  such  an  account  would  be 
best  adapted  for  tlie  instruction  of  the 
people.  The  combination  of  all  the  do- 
cuments into  a complete  treatise  might 
naturally  occupy  the  period  of  compara- 
tive leisure  towards  the  end  of  his  life, 
and,  w’hile  it  involved  some  few  addi- 
tions and  explanations,  would  be  effected 
without  any  substantial  change. 

§ 2.  The  principal  arguments  for  the 
Mosaic  .authorship  have  been  stated  in 
the  Introduction  to  the  Pentateuch:  but 
many  objections  apply  especially  to  this 
book;  and  some  of  the  most  convincing 
evidences  are  supplied  by  its  contents. 
This  might  be  expected.  On  the  one 
hand  the  question  of  authorship  is  in- 
separably bound  up  with  that  of  the  mi- 
raculous character  of  many  transactions 
which  are  recorded.  Critics  who  reject 
miracles  as  simply  incredible  under  any 
circumstances,  have  ever  felt  that  the 
narrative  before  us  could  scarcely  have 
been  written  by  a man  in  the  position 
and  with  the  character  of  Moses,  and 
could  not  certainly  have  been  addressed 
to  eye-witnesses  or  contemporaries  of 
the  events  which  it  relates.  It  is  a fore- 
gone conclusion  with  writers  of  this 
school.  On  the  other  hand  a narrative 
of  the  personal  history  .of  Moses,  of  the 
circumstances  under  which  the  greatest 
work  in  the  world’s  annals  was  accom- 
plished, if  it  be  authentic  and  veracious, 
must  abound  in  internal  coincidences 
and  evidences  sufficient  to  convince 
any  inquirer  not  shut  up  to  the  opposite 
theory.  In  fact  no  critic  of  any  weight, 
either  in  France  or  Germany,  who  admits 
the  supernatural  character  of  the  trans- 
actions, rejects  the  authorship  of  Moses. 


240 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


One  argument  is  drawn  from  the  re- 
presentation of  the  persona]  character 
and  qualifications  of  Moses.  In  its 
most  important  features  it  is  such  as 
could  never  have  been  produced  by  a 
writer  collecting  the  traditional  reminis- 
cences or  legends  of  a later  age:  not 
such  even  as  might  have  been  drawn  by 
a younger  contemporary.  To  posterity, 
to  Israelites  of  his  own  time,  Moses  was 
simply  the  greatest  of  men : but  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  writer  of  this  book  was  un- 
conscious of  the  personal  greatness  of 
the  chief  actor.  He  was  indeed  tho- 
roughly aware  of  the  greatness  of  his 
mission,  and  consequently  of  the  great- 
ness of  the  position,  which  was  recog- 
nized at  last  by  the  Egyptians,  see  ch.  xi. 
3 ; but  as  to  his  personal  qualifications, 
the  points  which  strike  him  most  forcibly 
are  the  deficiencies  of  natural  gifts  and 
powers,  and  the  defects  of  character, 
which  he  is  scrupulously  careful  to  re- 
cord, together  with  the  rebukes  and  pe- 
nalties which  they  brought  upon  him, 
and  the  obstacles  which  they  opposed 
to  his  work.  His  first  attempt  to  deliver 
the  people  is  described  as  a complete 
failure ; an  act  which,  however  it  might 
be  palliated  by  the  provocation,  is  evi- 
dently felt  by  the  writer  to  have  been 
wrongful,  punished  by  a long  exile  ex- 
tending over  the  best  years  of  his  life. 
When  he  receives  the  Divine  call  he  is 
full  of  hesitation,  and  even  when  his  un- 
belief is  overcome  by  miracles  he  still 
recoils  from  the  work,  dwelling  with 
almost  irreverent  pertinacity  upon  his 
personal  disqualifications,  ch.  iii.  lo — 13. 
On  his  homeward  journey  he  is  severely 
chastised  for  neglect  of  a religious  duty, 
ch.  iv.  24 — 26.  When  his  first  application 
to  Pharaoh  brings  increased  suffering  to 
his  people,  he  bursts  out  into  i)assionate 
remonstrance.  The  courage  and  mag- 
nanimity of  his  conduct  to  Pharaoh  are 
never  the  subject  of  direct  commenda- 
tion. No  act  is  attributed  to  his  per- 
sonal character.  Even  in  the  passage 
over  the  Red  Sea  and  in  the  journeying 
tlu'ough  the  wilderness,  nothing  recalls 
^ his  individuality.  Each  step  is  under 
Divine  guidance:  no  intimation  is  given 
of  wisdom,  skill,  or  foresight  in  the  di- 
rection of  the  march.  The  first  conflict 
with  assailants  is  conducted  by  Joshua. 


The  only  important  act  in  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  nation,  which  is  not  distinctly 
assigned  to  a Divine  revelation,  is  attri- 
buted to  the  wisdom,  not  of  Moses,  but 
of  his  kinsman  Jethro.  The  few  notices 
of  personal  character  in  the  other  books 
accord  with  this  portraiture:  the  repug- 
nance to  all  self-assertion  in  the  contro- 
versy with  Aaron  and  Miriam;  the  hasty 
and  impetuous  temper  which,  manifested 
on  one  important  occasion,  brought  upon 
him  the  lasting  displeasure  of  God,  and 
ultimately  transferred  the  execution  of 
his  great  work  to  the  hands  of  his  suc- 
cessor Joshua. 

Such  a representation  is  perfectly  in- 
telligible, as  proceeding  from  Moses  him- 
self : but  what  in  him  was  humility  would 
have  been  obtuseness  in  an  annalist : 
such  as  never  is  found  in  the  accounts 
of  other  great  men,  nor  in  the  notices 
of  Moses  in  later  books*.  What  other 
men  have  seen  in  Moses  is  the  chief 
agent  in  the  greatest  work  ever  intrusted 
to  man,  an  agent  whose  peculiar  and 
unparalleled  qualifications  are  admitted 
alike  by  those  who  accept  and  by  those 
who  deny  the  Divine  interposition^: 
what  the  writer  himself  sees  in  Moses  is 
a man  whose  only  qualification  is  an  in- 
voluntary and  reluctant  surrender  to  the 
will  of  God.  The  only  rational  account 
of  the  matter  is,  that  we  have  Moses’ 
own  history  of  himself  and  of  his  work. 

The  next  argument  is  even  less  open 
to  objection,  since  it  rests  not  on  sub- 
jective impressions,  but  on  external 
facts.  The  book  of  Exodus  could  not 
have  been  written  by  any  man  who  had 
not  passed  many  years  in  Egypt,  and 
who  had  not  also  a thorough  know- 
ledge, such  as  could  only  be  acquired 
by  personal  observation,  of  the  Sinaitic 
Peninsula.  But  it  is  improbable  that 
any  Israelite  between  the  time  of  Moses 
and  Jeremiah  could  have  possessed  either 
of  these  qualifications;  it  is  not  credible, 
or  even  possible,  that  any  should  have 

^ .See  especially  the  three  last  verses  of  Deute- 
ronomy, added  either  by  a younger  contempo- 
rary of  Moses,  or  at  a later  time  by  a reviser. 

d'he  two  writers  by  whom  the  greatness  of 
the  character  and  work  of  Moses  are  perhaps 
most  thoroughly  appreciated  and  developed  with 
greatest  power  are  Ewald,  ‘G.  I.’  vol.  ir.,  and 
Salvador,  ‘ Ilistoire  des  Institutions  de  Moise 
ct  dll  peuple  IIcbr6u.’ 


THE  BOOK  OF  EXODUS. 


241 


combined  • both.  Israelites  may  have 
been,  and  probably  were,  brought  into 
Egypt  as  captives  by  the  Pharaohs  in 
their  not  unfrequent  invasions  of  Syria, 
but  in  that  position  they  were  not  likely 
to  become  acquainted  with  the  institu- 
tions of  Egypt : still  less  likely  is  it  that 
any  should  have  returned  to  their  native 
land.  Again,  no  Israelite,  for  centuries 
after  the  occupation  of  Palestine,  is  likely 
to  have  penetrated  into  the  Sinaitic  Penin- 
sula, occupied  as  it  was  by  hostile  tribes, 
while  it  is  certain  that  none  could  have 
had  any  motive,  or  opportunity,  for  tra- 
versing the  route  from  Egypt  to  Horeb, 
with  which  no  one  doubts  the  writer  of 
the  Pentateuch  was  personally  familiar. 
The  notices  are  too  numerous,  and  inter- 
woven with  the  narrative  too  intimately, 
to  be  accounted  for  as  mere  traditional 
reminiscences,  or  even  as  derived  from 
scanty  records  in  the  possession  of  the 
Israelites  at  a later  period.  We  have  no 
probable  alternative  but  to  admit  that 
the  narrative  in  its  substance  came  from 
Hoses,  or  from  a contemporary.  Either 
alternative  might  suffice  so  far  as  regards 
the  accuracy  and  trustworthiness  of  the 
narrative,  and  consequently  the  miracu- 
lous character  of  the  transactions  which 
.it  records;  but  we  can  have  little  hesita- 
tion as  to  our  choice  between  these  al- 
ternatives, when  we  consider  that  none 
of  the  contemporaries  of  Moses  had 
equal  opportunities  of  observation,  and 
that  none  were  likely  to  have  received 
the  education  anct  training^  which  would 
have  enabled  them  to  record  the  events. 

§ 3.  A weighty  argument  is  drawn 
from  the  accounts  of  the  miracles,  by 
which  Moses  was  expressly  bidden  to 
attest  his  mission,  and  by  which  he  was 
enabled  to  accomplish  the  deliverance  of 
his  people.  One  characteristic,  common 
to  all  scriptural  miracles,  but  in  none 
more  conspicuous  than  in  those  record- 
ed in  the  book  of  Exodus,  is  their 
strongly  marked,  and  indeed  unmistake- 
a*ble,  local  colouring.  They  are  such  as 
no  later  writer  living  in  Palestine  could 
have  invented  for  Egypt.  From  begin- 
ning to  end  no  miracle  is  recorded  which 

^ On  the  education  of  Moses  see  note  at  the 
end  of  ch.  ii. 

VOL.  I, 


does  not  strike  the  mind  by  its  peculiar 
suitableness  to  the  place,  time,  and  cir- 
cumstances under  which  it  was  wrought. 
The  plagues  are  each  and  all  Egyptian ; 
and  the  modes  by  which  the  people’s 
wants  are  supplied  in  the  Sinaitic  Penin- 
sula recall  to  our  minds  the  natural 
conditions  of  such  a journey  in  such  a 
country.  We  find  nature  everywhere, 
but  nature  in  its  master’s  hand. 

Detailed  accounts  of  the  plagues  and 
of  the  natural  phenomena  in  Egypt  with 
which  they  were  severally  connected 
will  be  found  in  the  notes;  but  it  may 
be  well  to  bring  together  a -few  points 
which  shew  the  effects  produced  both 
by  the  miracles,  and  by  the  apparent 
failure  of  all  but  the  last  in  determining 
the  immediate  deliverance  of  the  people. 
The  direct  and  indirect  effects  were  in 
fact  equally  necessary,  humanly  speak- 
ing, for  the  accomplishment  of  that 
event. 

In  the  first  place  it  must  be  remarked, 
that  the  delay  occasioned  by  Pharaoh’s 
repeated  refusals  to  listen  to  the  com- 
mands afforded  ample  time  for  prepara- 
tion. Two  full  months  elapsed  between 
the  first  and  second  interview  of  Moses 
with  the  king;  see  notes  on  v.  7 and 
vii.  17.  During  that  time  the  people, 
uprooted  for  the  first  time  from  the 
district  in  which  they  had  been  settled 
for  centuries,  were  dispersed  throughout 
Egypt,  subjected  to  severe  suffering,  and 
impelled  to  exertions  of  a kind  differing 
altogether  from  their  ordinary  habits, 
whether  as  herdsmen  or  bondsmen. 
This  was  the  first  and  a most  important 
step  in  their  training  for  a migratory 
life  in  the  desert. 

Towards  the  end  of  June,  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  rise  of  the  annual  inun- 
dation, the  first  series  of  plagues  began. 
The  Nile  was  stricken.  Egypt  was 
visited  in  the  centre  both  of  its  physical 
existence,  and  of  its  national  supersti- 
tions. Pharaoh  did  not  give  way,  and 
no  intimation  as  yet  was  made  to  the 
people  that  permission  for  their  depar- 
ture would  be  extorted;  but  the  inter- 
vention of  their  Lord  was  now  certain, 
the  people,  on  their  return  wearied  and 
exhausted  from  the  search  for  stubble, 
had  an  interval  of  suspense.  Three 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


242 

months  appear  to  have  intervened  be- 
tween this  and  the  next  plague.  There 
must  have  been  a movement  among  all 
the  families  of  Israel;  as  they  recapitu- 
lated their  wrongs  and  hardships,  the  suf- 
ferings of  their  officers,  and  their  own 
position  of  hopeless  antagonism  to  their 
oppressors,  it  is  impossible  that  they 
should  not  have  looked  about  them, 
calculated  their  numbers  and  resources, 
and  meditated  upon  the  measures  which, 
under  the  guidance  of  a leader  of  ability 
and  experience,  might  enable  them  to 
effect  their  escape  from  Egypt.  Five 
months  might  not  be  too  much,  but  were 
certainly  sufficient,  to  bring  the  people 
so  far  into  a state,  of  preparation  for 
departure. 

The  plague  of  frogs  followed.  It  will 
be  shewn  in  the  notes  that  it  coincided 
in  time  with  the  greatest  extension  of 
the  inundation  in  September.  Pharaoh 
then  gave  the  first  indication  of  yielding; 
the  permission  extorted  from  him,  though 
soon  recalled,  was  not  therefore  ineffec- 
tual. On  the  one  hand  native  worship 
in  one  of  its  oldest  and  strangest  forms 
was  attacked*;  on  the  other  hand  Moses 
was  not  likely  to  lose  any  time  in  trans- 
mitting instructions  to  the  people.  The 
first  steps  may  have  been  then  taken 
towards  an  orderly  marshalling  of  the 
people. 

I'he  third  plague  differed  from  the 
preceding  in  one  important  point.  There 
was  no  previous  warning®.  It  must  have 
followed  soon  after  that  of  frogs,  early 
in  October.  It  marks  the  close  of  the 
first  series  of  inflictions,  none  of  them 
causing  great  suffering,  but  quite  suffi- 
cient on  the  one  hand  to  make  the 
Egyptians  conscious  of  danger,  and  to 
confirm  in  the  Israelites  a hope  of  no 
remote  cJeliverance. 

^ This  has  been  shewn  by  Lepsius ; see  note 
in  loc.  There  is  a curious  vignette  in  Mariette’s 
work,  ‘ b'ouillcs  d’Abydos,’  Part  II.  Vol.  i.  p.  30, 
No.  evil!.  It  represents  Seti,  the  father  of 
Raineses  1 1.,  offering  two  vases  of  wine  to  a frog 
inslirined  in  a small  chapel,  with  the  legend, 
‘The  Sovereign  Lady  of  both  worlds.’  Ma- 
riette’.s  work  has  been  withdrawn  from  circu- 
lation. 

2 'I'his  peculiarity,  which  applies  to  the  third 
plague  in  each  group,  was  pointed  out  by 
ftlaimonidcs. 


The  second  series  of  plagues  was  far 
more  severe;  it  began  with  swarms  of 
poisonous  insects,  probably  immediately 
after  the  subsidence  of  the  inundation. 
It  is  a season  of  great  importance  to 
Egypt;  from  that  season  to  the  follow- 
ing June  the  land  is  uncovered;  culti- 
vation begins;  a great  festival  (called 
Chabsta)  marks  the  period  for  plough- 
ing, At  that  time  there  was  the  first 
separation  between  Goshen  and  the  rest 
of ‘Egypt  The  impression  upon  Pha- 
raoh was  far  deeper  than  before,  and 
then,  in  November,  the  people  once 
more  received  instructions  for  departure ; 
there  was  occasion  for  a rehearsal,  so  to 
speak,  of  the  measures  requisite  for  the 
proper  organization  of  the  tribes  and 
families  of  Israel. 

The  cattle  plague  broke  out  in  De- 
cember, or  at  the  latest  in  January.  It 
was  thoroughly  Egyptian  both  in  season® 
and  in  character.  The  exemption  of 
tlie  Israelites  was  probably  attributed 
by  Pharaoh  to  natural  causes;  but  the 
care  then  bestowed  by  the  Israelites 
upon  their  cattle,  the  separation  from 
all  sources  of  contagion,  must  have  ma- 
terially advanced  their  preparation  for 
departure. 

Then  came  the  plagues  of  boils,  severe 
but  ineffectual,  serving  however  to  make  ‘ 
the  Egyptians  understand  that  continu- 
ance in  opposition  would  be  visited  on 
their  persons.  With  this  plague  the 
second  series  ended.  It  appears  to  have 
lasted  about  three  months. 

The  hailstorms  followed,  just  when 
they  now  occur  in  Egypt,  from  the  mid- 
dle of  February  to  the  early  weeks  of 
March.  The  time  was  now  drawing 
near.  The  Egyptians  for  the  first  time 
shew  that  they  are  seriously  impressed. 
There  was  a division  among  them,  many 
feared  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  took 
the  precautions,  which,  also  for  the  first 
time,  Moses  then  indicated.  This  plague 

^ In  an  Egyptian  calendar,  written  in  the 
reign  of  Rameses  II.,  and  lately  translated  by 
IM.  Cliabas,  the  72nd  of  Tobi,  corresponding  to 
January,  has  this  notice,  “Ilyades  ouragans 
dans  le  ciel  ce  jour-lh,,  la  contagion  annuelle  s’y 
mele  abondamment.”  ‘ Pap.  Saltier,’  iv.  pp.  14, 
15.  This  applies  even  more  specially  to  the 
following  plague. 


THE  BOOK  OF  EXODUS. 


243 


drew  from  Pharaoh  the  first  confession 
of  guilt;  and  now  for  the  third  time,  be- 
tween one  and  two  months  before  the 
Exodus,  the  Israelites  receive  permission 
to  depart,  when  formal  instructions  for 
preparation  were  of  course  given  by- 
Moses.  The  people  now  felt  also  for 
the  first  time  that  they  might  look  for 
support  or  sympathy  among  the  very 
servants  of  Pharaoh. 

I The  plague  of  locusts,  when  the  leaves 
were  green,  towards  the  middle  of  March, 
was  preceded  by  another  warning,  the  last 
but  one.  The  conquest  over  the  spirit 
of  Egypt  was  now  complete.  All  but  the 
king  gave  way;  see  x.  7.  Though  not 
so  common  in  Egypt  as  in  adjoining 
countries,  the  plague  occurs  there  at 
intervals,  and  is  peculiarly  dreaded. 
Pharaoh  once  more  gives  permission  to 
depart;  once  more  the  people  are  put 
in  an  attitude  of  expectation. 

The  ninth  plague  concludes  the  third 
series.  Like  the  third  and  the  sixth, 
each  closing  a series,  it  was  preceded 
by  no  warning.  It  was  peculiarly  Egyp- 
tian. Though  causing  comparatively  but 
little  suffering,  it  was  felt  most  deeply 
as  a menace  and  precursor  of  destruc- 
tion. It  took  place  most  probably  a 
very  few  days  before  the  last  and  crown- 
ing plague,  a plague  distinct  in  character 
from  all  others,  the  first  and  the  only 
one  which  brought  death  home  to  the 
Egyptians,  and  accomplished  the  deliver- 
ance of  Israel. 

We  have  thus  throughout  the  charac- 
teristics of  local  colouring,  of  adaptation 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  Israelites,  and 
of  repeated  announcements  followed  by 
repeated  postponements,  which  enabled 
and  indeed  compelled  the  Israelites  to 
complete  that  organization  of  their  na- 
tion, without  which  their  departure  might 
have  been,  as  it  has  been  often  repre- 
sented, a mere  disorderly  flight. 

There  are  some  who  fear  to  compro- 
mise the  miraculous  character  of  events 
by  admitting  any  operation  of  natural 
causes  to  a share  of  them.  Yet  the  in- 
spired writer  does  not  fail  to  record  that 
it  was  by  the  east  wind  that  the  Lord 
brought  the  locusts  (Exod.  x.  12)  and 
sent  back  the  sea  (xiv.  21),  and  by  the 
mighty  strong  west  wind  (x.  19)  took 


back  the  plague  that  he  had  sent.  Nor 
is  the  miracle  at  all  lessened,  because 
the  winds  of  heaven  were  made  God’s 
messengers  and  instruments  in  the  doing 
it.  In  order  to  guard  against  misappre- 
hensions from  such  readers,  let  us  state 
with  some  precision  the  view  we  take 
of  the  miracles  in  Egypt.  They  were 
supernatural  in  their  greatness,  in  their 
concentration  upon  one  period,  in  their 
coming  and  going  according  to  the 
phases  of  the  conflict  between  the  t3Tant 
and  the  captive  race,  in  their  measured 
gradation  from  weak  to  strong,  as  each 
weaker  wonder  failed  to  break  the  stub- 
born heart.  And  king  and  people  so 
regarded  them;  they  were  accustomed 
perhaps  to  frogs  and  lice  and  locusts; 
but  to  such  plagues,  so  intense,  so  threat- 
ened, and  accomplished,  and  withdrawn, 
as  it  were  so  disciplined  to  a will,  they 
were  not  accustomed ; and  they  rightly 
saw  them  as  miraculous  and  divinely 
sent.  This  being  clearly  laid  down  it  is 
most  desirable  to  notice  that  the  pheno- 
mena that  are  put  to  this  use  are  such, 
as  mark  the  country  where  this  great 
liistory  is  laid.  No  Jewish  writer,  who 
had  lived  in  Palestine  alone,  could  have. 
imagined  a narrative  so  Egyptian  in  its 
marks.  Much  evidence  will  appear  in 
the  course  of  the  Commentary  tending 
this  way;  that  the  history  was  Written 
by  some  one  well  conversant  with  Egypt; 
and  we  shall  look  in  vain  for  any  one, 
other  than  Moses  himself,  who  pos- 
sessed this  qualification  for  writing  under 
divine  guidance  the  history  of  the  eman- 
cipation of  the  Israelites. 

A point  of  subordinate,  but  in  the 
present  state  of  biblical  criticism  of 
practical  importance,  is  suggested  by 
the  view  here  presented.  The  two  facts 
that  between  all  the  miracles  there  is 
an  intimate  connection,  and  that  each 
and  all  are  shewn  to  be  nearly  allied 
to  analogous  phenomena  recorded  in 
ancient  and  modern  accounts  of  Egypt, 
leave  no  place  for  interpolations  of 
any  considerable  extent,  none  certainly 
for  the  introduction  of  any  single  visi- 
tation. In  the  commentaries  of  some' 
scholars,  to  whose  learning  and  ability 
the  student  of  Holy  Scripture  is  deeply 
indebted,  some  of  the  accounts  are  at- 

(^2 


244 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


tributed  to-  the  Elohistic,  others  to  the 
Jehovistic  writer.  The  arguments  based 
upon  language  are  considered  in  their 
proper  places^;  those  resting  on  merely 
subjective  impressions,  varying  to  a most 
remarkable  extent  in  writers  of  the  same 
school,  are  too  vague  and  indefinite  to 
be  capable  of  disproof,  as  they  are  inca- 
pable of  demonstration,  and  will  proba- 
bly leave  no  trace  in  biblical  literature ; 
but  the  characteristics  here  pointed  out 
are  common  to  all  the  plagues,  and  they 
are  conclusive.  In  fact  no  one  plague 
could  be  omitted  without  dislocating  the 
whole  narrative,  and  breaking  the  order 
distinctly  intimated,  though  nowhere 
formally  stated,  by  the  writer.  The  re- 
sults weje  brought  about  by  the  com- 
bined operation  of  all  the  plagues;  they 
could  never  have  been  produced  by  a 
merely  fortuitous  concurrence  of  natural 
events,  and  the  narrative  which  records 
them,  remarkable  as  it  is  for  artlessness 
and  simplicity,  is  certainly  not  one  which 
could  have  been  concocted  from  docu- 
ments of  different  ages,  constructed  on. 

^ The  attention  of  scholars  is  specially  called 
to  the  following  list  of  words.  They  are  either 
found  only  in  this  book  and  marked  a.  X.,  or 
in  the  Pentateuch  and  later  Psalms  taken  directly 
from  it,  marked  P.  All  marked  E.  have  Egyp- 
tian equivalents,  and  are  derived  from  roots  either 
common  to  Egyptian  and  Hebrew,  or  found  only 
in  Egyptian. 

Ch.  i.  7,  were  fruitful,  E.,  increased  exceed- 
ingly, P.  E.  V.  II,  taskmasters,  d.  X.,  E. 
I’ithon  and  Rameses,  E.  v.  i6,  the  stools,  d.  X. 
ii.  3,  ark,  P.  E.  bulrushes,  E.  pitch,  E. 
flags,  E.  river’s  brink,  E.  v.  5,  wash,  E. 
V.  10,  drew  out,  P.  E.  v.  16,  troughs,  P.,  once 
in  Cant.  iii.  a bush,  P.  E.  v.  12,  stubble  and 
straw,  E.  vii.  3,  magicians,  sorcerers,  E. 
V.  22,  enchantments,  d.  X.,  E.  v.  27,  frogs,  P. 
Pk  viii.  13,  lice,  d.  X.,  i.e.  here  and  Ps.  cv. 
31,  E.  V.  17,  swarms  of  flies,  d.  X.,  E.  ix.  8, 
ashes,  d.  X. , Ik  furnace,  P.  E.  v.  9,  a boil,  Pk 
breaking  forth,  E.,  blains,  d.  X.,  E.  x,  31, 
flax,  Pk  boiled,  d.  X.,  E.  v.  32,.  spelt,  E. 
not  grown  up,  d.  X.,  E.  xii.  4,  number,  d.  X. 
7.'.  6,  two  evenings,  d.  X.  v.  7,  lintel,  d.  X. 
vj.  8,  II,  passover,  E.  v.  15,  leaven,  d.  X.,  E. 
xiii.  16,  frontlets,  P.  xiv.  horse,  E.  xv.  i, 
hath  triumphed  gloriously,  E.  7/.  2,  I will 
])reparc  him  an  habitation?  d.  X.  v.  7,  heaped 
up,  d.  X.  V.  8,  congealed:  in  this  sense,  d.  X.,  E. 
V.  20,  timbrel,  E.  xvi.  3,  flesh-pots,  E.  v.  15, 
manna,  Ik  v.  16,  omer,  ]’.  E.  v.  33,  pot,  P.  Ik 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  these  words  occur 
indiscriminately  in  the  so-called  Jehovistic  and 
Elohistic  passages.  The  list  may  be  extended. 


different  principles,  and  full  of  internal 
discrepancies  and  contradictions.  It  is 
the  production  of  one  mind,  written  by 
one  man,  and  by  one  who  had  alone 
witnessed  all  the  events  which  it  records, 
who  alone  was  at  that  time  likely  to  pos- 
sess the  knowledge  or  ability  required  to 
write  the  account. 

§ 4.  The  portion  of  the  book,  which 
follows  the  account  of  the  departure  from 
Egypt,  has  characteristics  marked  with 
equal  distinctness,  and  bearing  with  no 
less  force  upon  the  question  of  authorship. 
It  has  never  occurred  to  any  traveller 
who  has  traversed  the  route  from  Suez 
to  Sinai,  or  from  Sinai  to  Palestine,  to 
doubt  that  the  chapters  of  Exodus  which 
touch  that  ground  were  written  by  one  to 
whom  the  localities  were  known  from 
personal  observation.  It  is  not  merely 
that  the  length  of  each  division  of  the 
journey,  the  numerous  halting  places  are 
distinctly  marked;  for  although  such  no- 
tices could  not  possibly  have  been  in- 
vented, or  procured  at  any  later  period 
by  a dweller  in  Palestine,  the  fact  might 
be  accounted  for  by  the  supposition, 
gratuitously  made,  but  hard  to  be  re- 
butted, that  some  ancient  records  of  the 
journey  had  been  preserved  by  written 
or  oral  tradition;  but  the  chapters  which 
belong  either  to  the  early  sojourn  of 
Moses,  or  to  the  wanderings  of  the  Is- 
raelites, are  pervaded  by  a peculiar  tone, 
a local  colouring,  an  atmosphere  so  to 
speak  of  the  desert,  which  has  made 
itself  felt  by  all  those  who  have  explored 
the  country,  to  whatever  school  of  reli- 
gious thought  they  may  have  belonged. 
And  this  fact  is  the  more  striking  when 
we  bear  in  mind  that,  although  the 
great  general  features  of  the  Peninsula, 
the  grouping  of  its  arid  heights  and  the 
direction  of  its  innumerable  wadys  are 
permanent,  still  changes  of  vast,  and 
scarcely  calculable  importance  in  matters 
which  personally  affect  the  traveller  and 
modify  his  impressions,  have  taken  place 
since  the  time  of  Moses;  changes  to 
which,  for  obvious  reasons,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  call  special  attention. 

At  present  one  great  difiiculty  felt  by 
all  travellers  is  the  insufficiency  of  the 
resources  of  the  Peninsula  to  support 
such  a host  as  that  which  is  described  in 


THE  BOOK  OF  EXODUS. 


245 


the  narrative;  a difficulty  not  wholly  re- 
moved by  the  acceptance  of  the  accounts 
of  providential- interventions,  which  ap- 
pear to  have  been  not  permanent,  but 
limited  to  special  occasions.  But  facts 
can  be  adduced  which  confirm,  and  in- 
deed go  far  beyond,  the  conjectures  of 
travellers,  who  have  pointed  out  that  the 
supply  of  water,  and  the  general  fertility 
of  the  district,  must  have  been  very  dif- 
ferent before  the  process  of  denudation, 
which  has  been  going  on  for  ages,  and 
is  now  in  active  progress,  had  com- 
menced. We  have  now  proofs  from  in- 
scriptions coeval  with  the  pyramids, 
both  in  Egypt  and  in  the  Peninsula,  that 
under  the  Pharaohs  of  the  third  to  the 
eighteenth  dynasty,  ages  before  Moses, 
and  up  to  his  time,  the  whole  district 
was  occupied  by  a population,  whose 
resources  and  numbers  must  have  been 
considerable,  since  they  were  able  to  re- 
sist the  forces  of  the  Egyptians,  who 
sent  large  armies  in  repeated,  but  un- 
successful, attempts  to  subjugate  the 
Peninsula.  Their  principal  object  how- 
ever was  effected,  since  they  establish- 
ed permanent  settlements  at  Sarbet  el 
Khadim,  and  at  Mughara,  to  work  the 
copper-mines'.  These  settlements  were 
under  the  command  of  officers  of  high 
rank,  and  are  proved  by  monuments 
and  inscriptions  to  have  been  of  an 
extent,  which  implies  the  existence  of 
considerable  resources  in  the  imme- 
diate neighbourhood.  It  is  well  known 

^ Brugsch  differs  from  all  Egyptian  scholars  in 
a point  of  secondary  importance,  holding  that  the 
mines  here  were  worked  chiefly  for  the  sake  of 
turquoises  (see  Leps.  ‘Zeits.’  1866,  p.  74,  n.  3) ; 
but  h’is  treatise,  entitled  ‘ Wanderung  nach  den 
Tiirkis  Minen,’  gives  a good  account  of  the  in- 
scriptions. They  are  very  numerous  in  the  Wady 
Mughara;  the  earliest  dates  from  Snefru,  of  the 
third  dynasty;  8 Pharaohs  of  the  three  following 
dynasties  have  left  many  inscriptions,  a consider- 
able number  belong  to  Amenemha  III.,  dating 
from  his  2nd  to  his  42nd  year;  and  one  of  great 
importance  describes  an  expedition  under  Ra- 
maaka,  i.e.  Hatasu,  the  widow  of  Thotmes  II. 
These  inscriptions  repeatedly  speak  of  victories 
over  native  tribes : the  very  earliest  inscription 
in  existence,  earlier  than  any  in  Egypt,  records 
a victory  achieved  by  Snefru  over  the  Mentu, 
the  general  designation  of  the  mountaineers  of 
the  Peninsula.  The  mines  were  lately  worked  by 
an  Englishman,  Major  Macdonald,  of  whom 
^ Brugsch  gives  a full  and  very  interesting  account. 


that  the  early  Egyptian  kings  were 
careful  to  provide  for  the  security  and 
sustentation  of  the  caravans  and  bodies 
of  troops,  by  which  the  communica- 
tions with  settlements  under  such  cir- 
cumstances were  carried  on:  and  every 
spot  where  the  modern  traveller  still 
finds  water  on  the  route  was  doubtless 
then  the  object  of  special  attention  ^ 
The  vegetation  which  even  now  protects 
the  wells  of  Moses,  from  which  the 
dwellers  at  Suez  obtain  a supply  of 
brackish  water,  must  have  been  then  far 
more  luxuriant;  and  tli£  seventy  palm- 
trees,  which  Moses  found  at  Pdim, 
doubtless  sheltered  fountains,  from  which 
streams  far  more  copious  tlian  those 
which  now  water  the  wady,  flowed  over 
the  adjoining  district.  See  note,  ch.  xv. 
27.  Where  the  superficial  water  was  in- 
sufficient, it  was  customary  in  that  early 
age  to  dig  wells  of  whatever  depth  might 
be  needed’'';  and  every  tree,  now  reck- 
lessly destroyed,  was  the  object  of  spe- 
cial care,  and  even  superstitious  rever- 
ence. During  the  long  ages  which 
have  elapsed  since  the  Egyptian  power 
passed  away,  the  Peninsula  has  never 
been  subjected  to  an  Empire  which  has 
had  a sufficient  motive,  or  sufficient  wis- 
dom and  resources,  to  arrest  the  process 
of  deterioration : and  every  horde  of 
Arabs,  who  have  since  been  virtually  its 
masters,  bent  only  on  supplying  their  own 
limited  wants,  cut  down  without  remorse 
the  shrubs  and  trees,  on  which  the  water 
supply,  and  consequently  the  general 
fertility  of  the  district,  mainly  depend. 
The  aspect  of  the  whole  country  when 

^ In  one  of  the  most  ancient  papyri  we  find  a 
notice  of  a place  called  She-Snefru,  that  is,  the 
reservoir  of  Snefru,  named  after  Snefru,  the 
earliest  Pharaoh  who  is  known  to  have  estab- 
lished an  Egyptian  settlement  in  the  Peninsula 
of  Sinai.  M.  Chabas  remarks  “ She-Snefru 
dtait  sans  doute  Tune  des  stations  qu’il  avait 
dispos^es  au  desert  d’Arabie,  sur  la  route  de  la 
Mer-Rouge.”  ‘Les  Papyrus  Hi^ratiques  de 
Berlin,’  p.  39. 

^ See,  for  instance,  the  inscription  relating 
to  the  gold  mines  near  Dakkeh,  explained  by 
Mr  IPrch.  It  mentions  a well  180  feet  deep, 
and  another  still  deeper,  on  a route  where  water 
could  not  be  procured,  dug  by  the  order  of 
Seti  I.  and  Raineses  Ilf  The  works  of  pre- 
ceding Pharaohs,  especially  under  the  12th 
dynasty,  were  equally  remarkable  for  fore- 
thought. 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


246 

it  was  first  visited  by  Christian  pilgrims 
who  have  left  us  accounts  of  their  jour- 
neyings,  must  have  differed  greatly  from 
that  which  it  presented  to  the  Israelites, 
when,  under  the  guidance  of  Moses, 
they  found  pasturage  for  their  flocks 
and  herds.  But  far  greater  is  the  differ- 
ence at  present.  Under  Turkish  mis- 
rule the  Arabs  carry  on  the  work  of 
desolation  with  no  effective  interfei- 
ence ; no  plantations  are  made,  no  wells 
are  dug,  the  fountains  are  unprotected; 
and  as  though  natural  causes  were  insuf- 
ficient, the  annual  tribute  demanded  by 
the  Pasha  consists  in  charcoal,  each 
contribution  laying  waste  a whole  dis- 
trict. The  devastation  which  began  ages 
ago  has  in  fact  continued  without  cessa- 
tion, and  if  it  goes  on  at  the  present  rate 
of  increase,  wdll  ere  long  reduce  the 
whole  district  to  a state  of  utter  aridity 
and  barrenness.  When  Niebuhr  visited 
the  country,  at  the  beginning  of  the  last 
century,  large  supplies  of  vegetable  pro- 
duce w^ere  exported  regularly  to  Egypt, 
shewung  that  the  original  fertility  w'as  not 
even  then  exhausted.  Those  supplies 
have  ceased ; and  the  only  wonder  is 
that  so  much  remains  to  satisfy  a careful 
inquirer  of  the  possibility  of  the  events 
recorded  in  Exodus. 

Taking  summarily  the  points  in  this 
part  of  the  argument,  w'e  find  the  fol- 
lowing coincidences  between  the  narra- 
tive and  accounts  of  travellers.  Absence 
of  w^ater  where  no  sources  now  exist, 
abundance  of  water  where  fountains  are 
still  found,  and  indications  of  a far  more 
copious  supply  in  former  ages;  tracts, 
occupying  the  same  time  in  the  journey, 
in  wEich  food  would  not  be  found;  and 
in  some  districts  a natural  production 
similar  to  manna,  most  abundant  in 
rainy  seasons  (such  as  several  notices 
shew  the  season  of  the  Exodus  to  have 
been),  but  not  sufficient  for  nourishment, 
nor  fit  for  large  consumption,  wuthout 
such  modifications  in  character  and 
quantity  as  are  attributed  in  the  narra- 
tive to  a divine  intervention.  We  have 
the  presence  of  Nomad  hordes,  and  an 
attack  made  by  them  precisely  in  the 
district,  and  undfer  the  circumstances 
w'hen  their  presence  and  attack  might 
be  expected.  We  have  a route  which 


the  late  exploration  of  the  Peninsula,  of 
which  an  account  will  be  found  at  the 
end  of  the  notes  on  this  book,  will 
shew  to  have  been  probably  determined 
by  conditions  agreeing  with  incidental 
notices  in  the  history ; and  when  we 
come  to  the  chapters  in  which  the  cen- 
tral event  in  the  history  of  Israel,  the 
delivery  of  God’s  law,  is  recorded,  we 
find  localities  and  scenery  which  travel- 
lers concur  in  declaring  to  be  such  as 
fully  correspond  to  the  exigencies  of 
the  narrative,  and  which  in  some  accounts 
(remarkable  at  once  for  scientific  accu- 
racy and  graphic  power)  are  described 
in  terms  which  shew  they  correspond, 
so  far  as  mere  outward  accessories  can 
correspond,  to  the  grandeur  of  the  mani- 
festation. 

Throughout  this  portion  it  will  be 
observed  that  the  notices  on  which  the 
argument  mainly  rests  are  interwoven 
with  the  narrative  and  inseparable  from 
it.  It  is  easy  to  assert  that  any  single 
notice  may  have  been  retained  by  oral 
tradition,  or  preserved  for  ages  in  scanty 
documents,  such  as  were  formerly  sup> 
posed  to  be  alone  likely  or  possible  to 
have  been  produced  in  the  time  of 
Moses;  and  such  is  the  course  generally 
adopted  when  any  coincidence  is  pointed 
out  too  clear  to  be  explained  away;  a 
course  which,  were  it  applied  to  any 
secular  history,  would  be  condemned  as 
disingenuous  or  uncritical,  making  it  in 
fact  impossible  to  establish  the  authen- 
ticity of  any  ancient  writing.  But  in 
addition  to  the  positive  arguments  thus 
adduced,  a negative  argument  at  least 
equally  conclusive  demands  attention. 
No  history  or  composition  in  existence, 
which  is  known  to  have  been  written 
long  after  the  events  which  it  describes, 
is  without  internal  indications  which  con- 
clusively prove  its  later  origin;  contem- 
porary documents  may  be  interwoven 
with  it,  and  great  pains  taken  in  ages  of 
literary  refinement  and  artifice  to  disguise 
its  character,  but  even  when  anachro- 
nisms and  errors  of  detail  are  avoided, 
which  is  seldom,  if  ever,  effectually  done, 
the  genuine  touch  of  antiquity,  the 
dpxaio7rp€7rrj^,  is  invariably  and  inevita- 
bly absent.  Whether  we  look  at  the 
general  tone  of  this  narrative,  the  style 


THE  BOOK  OF  EXODUS. 


247 


equally  remarkable  for  artlessness  and 
power,  or  at  the  innumerable  points  of 
contact  with  external  facts  capable  of 
exact  determination,  we  are  impressed 
by  the  weight  of  this  internal  evidence, 
supported  as  it  has  been  shewn  to  be 
by  the  unbroken  and  unvarying  tradition 
of  the  nation  to  whom  the  narrative  was 
addressed,  and  by  whom  it  was  held  too 
sacred  not  to  be  preserved  from  wilful 
mutilation  or  interpolation. 

§ 5.  An  argument  which  many  readers 
may  feel  to  be  even  less  open  to  objec- 
tion is  drawn  from  the  account  of  the 
Tabernacle.  In  the  notes  on  this  part 
of  the  work  the  following  facts  are  de- 
monstrated. 

In  form,  structure,  and  materials,  the 
tabernacle  belongs  altogether  to  the  wil- 
derness. The  wood  used  in  the  struc- 
ture is  found  there  in  abundance.  It 
• appears  not  to  have  been  used  by  the 
Israelites  in  Palestine;  when  the  temple 
was  rebuilt  .it  was  replaced  by  cedar. 
(See  note  on  xxv.  10.)  The  whole  was  a 
tent,  not  a fixed  structure,  such  as  would 
naturally  have  been  set  up,  and  in  point 
of  fact  was  very  soon  set  up,  in  Palestine; 
where  wooden  doors  and  probably  a sur- 
rounding wall  existed  under  the  Judges 
of  Israel.  The  skins  and  other  native 
materials  belong  equally  to  the  locality. 
One  material  whiph  entered  largely  into 
the  construction,  the  skin  of  the  Tachash, 
was  in  all'  probability  derived  from  the 
Red  Sea;  with  the  exception  of  one  re- 
ference in  Ezekiel  xvi.  10,  no  traces  of 
its  use  are  found  at  a later  period,  or 
in  any  other  district.  The  metals,  bronze, 
silver  and  gold,  were  those  which  the 
Israelites  knew,  and  doubtless  brought 
with  them  from  Egypt;  nor  is  it  proba- 
ble that  they  possessed  equal  resources 
for  a long  time  after  their  settlement  in 
Palestine.  The  names  of  many  of  the 
materials  and  implements  which  they 
used,  and  the  furniture  and  accessories 
of  the  tabernacle,  the  dress  and  orna- 
ments of  the  priests,  are  shewn  to  have 
been  Egyptian.  It  is  also  certain  that 
the  arts  required  for  the  construction 
of  the  tabernacle,  and  for  all  its  acces- 
sories, were  precisely  those  for  which 
the  Egyptians  had  been  remarkable  for 
ages;  such  as  artizans  who  had  lived 


under  the  influence  of  Egyptian  civiliza- 
tion would  naturally  have  learned.  The 
rich  embroidery  of  the  hangings,  the 
carving  of  the  cherubic  forms,  the  or- 
namentation of  the  capitals,  the  .natu- 
ralistic character  of  the  embellishments, 
were  all  things  with  which  the  Israelites 
had  been  familiar  in  Egypt;  but  which 
for  ages  after  their  settlement  in  Pales- 
tine, in  which  the  traces  of  Canaanitish 
culture  had  been  destroyed  as  savouring 
of  idolatry,  and  where  the  people  were 
carefully  separated  from  the  contagious 
influences  of  other  nations  on  a par 
with  Egypt,  must  have  died  out,  if  not 
from  their  remembrance,  yet  from  all 
practical  application.  There  are  ex- 
ceedingly few  indications  of  any  such  arts 
among  the  Israelites  during  the  period 
from  the  occupation  of  Palestine  to  the 
accession  of  Solomon;  the  ephod  of  Mi- 
cah,  and  the  teraphim  in  David’s  bed, 
being  scarcely  noticeable  exceptions.  It 
is  improbable  that  any  portion  of  the 
decorations  of  the  tabernacle  could  have 
been  produced,  even  had  the  rich  mate- 
rials been  forthcoming;  and  it  is  to  be 
noted  as  a fact  of  very  special  importance 
in  this  inquiry,  that  when  Solomon,  in 
the  height  of  his  prosperity,  with  the  re- 
sources of  a vast  empire  at  his  disposal, 
erected  the  temple  which  was  to  re- 
place the  tabernacle,  he  was  compelled 
to  seek  the  aid  of  foreigners,  and  to  bring 
Tyrian  artists  to  accomplish  the  work 
which  Bezaleel  had  produced,  when  his 
native  genius,  trained  in  the  school  of 
Egypt,  was  developed  by  the  Spirit  of 
God. 

The  peculiar  way  in  which  the  history 
of  the  erection  of  the  T^abernacle  is  re- 
corded suggests  another  argument,  which 
has  not  hitherto  received  due  attention. 
Two  separate  accounts  are  given.  In 
the  first  Moses  relates  the  instructions 
which  he  received,  in  the  second  he 
.describes  the  accomplishment  of  the 
work.  Nothing  would  be  less  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  natural  order  of  a 
history  written  at  a later  period  than 
this  double  account.  It  has  been  re- 
presented as  an  argument  for  a double 
authorship,  as  though  two  sets  of  docu- 
ments had  been  carelessly  or  supersti- 
tiously  adopted  by  a compiler.  It  is 


248 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


however  fully  accounted  for  by  the 
obvious  hypothesis,  adopted  through- 
out this  part  of  the  commentary’  that 
each  part  of  the  narrative  was  written 
at  the  time,  and  on  the  occasion,  to 
which  it  immediately  refers.  When  Mo- 
ses received  these  instructions  he  wrote 
a full  account  of  them  for  the  informa- 
tion oT  the  people.  This  was  on  all 
accounts  probable  and  necessary : among 
other  obvious  reasons  it  was  necessary 
in  order  that  the  people  might  learn 
exactly  what  amount  of  materials  and 
what  amount  of  work  would  be  required 
of  them.  When  again  he  had  executed 
his  task,  it  was  equally  proper,  and 
doubtless  also  in  accordance  with  the 
habits  of  a people  keen  and  jealous  in 
the  management  of  their  affairs,  and  at 
^ no  time  free  from  tendencies  to  sus- 
picion, that  he  should  give  a formal 
account  of  every  detail  in  its  execution 
a proof,  to  such  as  might  call  for  proof, 
that  all  their  precious  offerings  had  been 
devoted  to  the  purpose;  and  what  was 
of  far  more  importance,  that  the  divine 
instructions  had  been  completely  and 
j literally  obeyed.  It  is  a curious  fact, 

! that  in  the  two  accounts  the  order  of  the 
narrative  is  systematically  reversed.  In 
the  instructions  given  to  Moses  and  re- 
corded for  the  information  of  the  people, 
the  most  important  objects  stand  first. 
The  ark,  the  mercy-seat,  the  cherubs, 
the  table  of  shew-bread,  the  golden  can- 
dlestick, the  whole  series  of  symbolic 
forms  by  which  the  national  mind  was 
framed  to  comprehend  the  character  of 
the  divine  revelation,  are  presented  at 
once  to  the  worshippers.  Then  come 
instructions  for  the  tabernacle,  its  equip- 
ments and  accessories ; and  when  ail 
else  is  completed,  the  dress  and  orna- 
ments of  the  ofliciating  priests.  But 
when  the  work  of  Bezaleel  and  his  assist- 
ants is  described,  the  structure  of  the 
tabernacle  comes  first,  as  it  naturally 

' ' It  is  also  to  be  observed  that  a very  large 

i portion  of  the  papyri,  written  at  nearly  tlie  same 
; period  in  Bgypt,  consist  of  minute  accounts  of 
the  work  done,  and  the  sums  expended  under 
tlie  superintendence  of  tlie  writers.  In  an  in- 
scription on  the  statue  of  an  Egyptian  architect, 
IJokenchons,  who  lived  under  Sethos  I.  and 
Rameses  II.,  special  note  is  made  of  his  accu- 
racy in  accounting  for  expensive  buildings. 


would  do  when  the  work  was  commenced; 
the  place  was  first  prepared,  and  then 
the  ark  and  all  the  sacred  vessels,  ac- 
cording to  all  that  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

§ 6.  The  Chronology  of  Exodus  in- 
volves two  questions,  the  duration  of  the 
sojourn  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  and 
the  date  of  their  departure.  So  far  as 
regards  the  direct  statements  in  the  He- 
brew text,  the  answers  to  both  questions 
are  positive  and  unambiguous.  Exodus 
xii.  40  gives  430  years  for  the  sojourn, 
Genesis  xv.  13  gives  400  years  for  the 
whole,  or  the  greater  portion  of  the  same 
period.  Again,  the  istbook  of  Kings,  c. 
vi.  1,  fixes  the  Exodus  at  480  years  before 
the  building  of  the  Temple  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Solomon’s  reign.  This  would 
settle  the  date  within  a few  years,  about 
1490  B.c.  See  note  on  c.  xii.  40. 

Both  statements  are  taken  in  their  ob-  ^ 
vious  and  literal  meaning  by  critics  of 
different  schools  in  Germany  and  Eng- 
land. The  latter  statement  presents  some 
difficulties.  On  the  one  hand  it  involves 
a longer  period  than  appears  to  be  con- 
sistent with  the  genealogies,  especially 
with  the  genealogy  of  David.  This  ob- 
jection loses  its  weight  if  the  omission 
of  several  links  in  the  genealc^ies  be 
admitted  as  probable:  in  some  cases  of 
the  highest  importance  it  is  certain,  e.g. 
in  that  of  Ezra  and  of  our  Lord.  On 
the  other  hand  it  involves  a shorter 
period  than  is  deduced  from  notices  in 
the  book  of  Judges;  an  objection  met 
by  the  probable  hypothesis  that  many 
transactions  in  that  book  may  have  taken 
place  at  the  same  period  in  different 
parts  of  Palestine.  Egyptian  chrono- 
logy is  too  uncertain  to  determine  the 
question,  as  is  shewn  in  the  Appendix. 
The  date  appears  on  the  whole  to  be 
reconcileable  with  the  facts  of  history, 
and  to  rest  on  higher  authority  than  any 
other  which  has  been  proposed. 

The  grounds  on  which  the  duration 
of  the  sojourn  is  determined  are  con- 
sidered in  the  note  at  the  end  of  c.  xii. 

It  is  especially  important  with  reference 
to  the  number  of  the  Israelites,  which 
amounted  to  600,000  males  at  the  time 
of  the  Exodus.  Such  an  increase  of  a 
pati'iarclial  family  within  215  years,  the 


THE  BOOK  OF  EXODUS. 


249 


period  deduced  by  the  Rabbins  from  admit  they  must  have  been  to  effect  the 
genealogical  computations,  and  adopted  conquest  of  Canaan  and  to  retain  their 
by  many  theologians,  presents  great,  if  national  integrity  in  the  midst  of  a hostile 
not  insuperable  difficulties,  which  are  population, 
removed  if  we  accept  the  statement  of 
Moses  in  the  sense  attached  to  it  by 

most  commentators.  It  needs  no  ela-  The  commentary  on  this  book  was 
borate  calculation  to  shew  that  in  a originally  assigned  to.  the  Rev.  R.  C. 
period  extending  over  more  than  four  Pascoe,  Principal  of  the  Theological 
centuries,  a family  which  counted  70  college  at  Exeter.  His  death  in  June 
males  with  their  households,  probably  1868  was  preceded  by  a long  illness, 
amounting  to  many  hundreds,  occupy-  which  prevented  him  from  preparing 
» ing  the  most  fertile  district  in  Egypt,  notes  which  could  be  used  for  this  work, 
under  circumstances  most  favourable  to  In  consequence  of  this  very  serious  loss 
rapid  and  continuous  increase  specially  the  first  19  chapters,  together  with  the 
recorded  in  this  book,  should  become  a Introduction  and  appendices  on  Egyptian 
mighty  nation,  such  as  they  are  repre-  subjects,  were  undertaken  by  the  Editor, 
sented  in  the  narrative,  and  as  critics  and  the  remaindei  by  the  Rev.  S.  Clarke. 


THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  MOSES, 


CALLED 

EXODUS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

1 The  children  of  Israel,  after  Joseph's  death, 
do  multiply.  8 The  more  they  are  oppressed 
by  a new  king,  the  7nore  they  multiply.  1 5 
The  godliness  of  the  midivives,  in  saving  the 
7}ien  ehildre7i  alive.  22  Pha7'aoh  co77ima7ideth 
the  male  ehild7'e7i.  to  he  east  mto  the  7'iver. 

N’  OW  these  are  the  names  of  the 
"children  of  Israel,  which  came 
chap.  6.  into  Egypt;  every  man  and  his  house- 
hold  came  with  Jacob. 

2 Reuben,  Simeon,  Levi,  and  Judah, 
3 Issachar,  Zebulun,  and  Benjamin, 
4 Dan,andNaphtali,Gad,  and  Asher. 


27. 

Deut.  10. 

all  his  22. 


5 And  all  the  souls  that  came  out 

of  the  Hoins  of  Jacob  were  ^ seventy  ^ Heb. 
souls : for  Joseph  was  in  Egypt  al-  46 
ready. 

6 And  Joseph  died,  and 
brethren,  and  all  that  generation. 

7 ^ ^And  the  children  of  Israel ‘'Acts  7, 
w’ere  fruitful,  and  increased  abundant- 

ly,  and  multiplied,  and  waxed  exceed- 
ing mighty;  and  the  land  was  filled 
with  them. 

8 Now  there  arose  up  a new  king 
over  Egypt,  which  knew  not  Joseph. 


Chap.  I.  1.  No2v\  Literally  “and.”  This 
conjunction  is  omitted  by  the  LXX.  but  it 
is  commonly  used  at  the  beginning  of  the 
historical  books  after  Genesis,  and  here  indi- 
cates a close  connection  with  the  preceding 
narrative.  This  chapter  in  fact  contains  a 
fulfilment  of  the  predictions  recorded  in  Gen. 
xlvi.  3,  that  God  would  make  of  Jacob  “a 
great  nation”  in  Egypt:  and  in  Gen.  xv.  13, 
that  the  people  of  that  land  would  “afflict 
them  four  hundred  years.” 

e2}ery  man  and  his  household]  It  may  be  in- 
ferred from  various  notices  that  the  total 
number  of  dependents  was  considerable,  a 
point  of  importance  in  its  bearings  upon  the 
history  of  the  Exodus.  See  Gen.  xiii.  6,  xiv. 
14,  from  which  we  learn  that  Abram  had  318 
trained  servants  bom  in  his  house.  The 
daughters  are  not  mentioned,  nor  are  the 
names  of  their  husbands  given;  it  is  more 
likely  that  they  were  married  to  their  near  re- 
lations, or  to  dependents  than  to  heathens; 
and  in  that  case  they  with  their  families  would 
form  part  of  the  patriarchal  households. 

5.  se’vojty]  This  number  includes  Joseph, 
his  two  sons,  and  by  a mode  of  reckoning  not 
uncommon,  Jacob  himself;  see  Gen.  xlv.  ii, 
xlvi.  27  ; Deut.  x.  22.  The  object  of  the 
writer  in  this  introductory  statement  is  to 
give  a complete  list  of  the  heads  of  separate 
families  at  the  time  of  their  settlement  in 
. Egypt.  See  note  on  Num.  xxvi.  5.  The 
LXX.  place  the  last  clause,  “Joseph  was  in 
Egypt,”  at  the  beginning  of  the  verse,  an  ar- 
rangement which  seems  preferable,  and  is  de- 
fended by  Egli;  sec  ‘ Zeitschrift  fur  wissen- 
schaftliche  Theologie,’  1870,  p.  326. 


7.  The  narrative  begins,  properly  speak- 
ing, with  this  paragraph.  This  is  clearly  shewn 
by  the  construction  of  the  Hebrew,  which 
does  not  connect  the  word  “was  fruitful” 
with  the  preceding  verse.  Egypt  was  always 
celebrated  for  its  fruitfulness,  and  in  no  pro- 
vince does  the  population  increase  so  rapidly 
as  in  that  occupied  by  the  Israelites.  See 
notes  on  Gen.  xlvii  6.  At  present  it  has 
more  flocks  and  herds  than  any  province  in 
Egypt,  and  more  fishermen,  though  many 
villages  are  deserted;  it  is  calculated  that 
another  million  might  be  sustained  in  it.  (See 
Robinson,  Vol.  i.  p.  55.)  Until  the  acces- 
sion of  the  new  king,  the  relations  between 
the  Egyptians  and  the  Israelites  were  undoubt- 
edly friendly.  The  expressions  used  in  this 
verse  imply  the  lapse  of  a considerable  period 
after  the  death  of  Joseph. 

the  land  ^as  filed  nvith  them]  i.  e.  the  dis- 
trict allotted  to  them,  extending  probably  from 
the  Eastern  branch  of  the  Nile  to  the  borders 
of  the  desert.  It  appears  from  other  pas- 
sages (see  iii.  22)  that  they  did  not  occupy 
this  land  exclusively,  but  were  intermingled 
with  the  native  Egyptians. 

8.  The  expressions  in  this  verse  are  pe- 
culiar, and  emphatic.  “A  new  king”  is  a 
phrase  not  found  elsewhere.  It  is  understood 
by  most  commentators  to  imply  that  he  did 
not  succeed  his  predecessor  in  natural  order 
of  descent  and  inheritance.  He  “arose  up 
over  Egypt,”  occupying  the  land,  as  it  would 
seem,  on  different  terms  from  the  king  whose 
place  he  took,  either  by  usurpation  or  con- 
quest. The  fact  that  he  knew  not  Josepn 
implies  a complete  separation  from  the  tradi- 


V.  9—12, 


EXODUS.  I. 


251 


9 And  he  said  unto  his  people, 
Behold,  the  people  of  the  children,  of 
Israel  are  more  and  mightier  than  we  : 

10  Come  on,  let  us  deal  wisely 
with  them;  lest  they  multiply,  and 
it  come  to  pass,  that,  when  there 
falleth  out  any  war,  they  join  also 
unto  our  enemies,  and  fight  against 
us,  and  so  get  them  up  out  of  the  land. 


11  Therefore  they  did  set  over 
them  taskmasters  to  afflict  them  with 
their  burdens.  And  they  built  for 
Pharaoh  treasure  cities,  Pithom  and 
Raamses. 

12  ^ But  the  more  they  afflicted 
them,  the  more  they  multiplied  and^^o"*/- 
grew.  And  they  were  grieved  be-  them,  so 
cause  of  the  children  of  Israel. 


tions  of  Lower  Egypt.  At  present  the  gene- 
rality of  Egyptian  scholars  identify  this  Pha- 
raoh with  Rameses  II.  The  question  is  dis- 
cussed in  the  Appendix,  where  it  is  shewn  that 
all  the  conditions  of  the  narrative  are  fulfilled 
in  the  person  of  Amosis  I.,  the  head  of  the 
1 8th  Dynasty.  He  was  the  descendant  of  the 
old  Theban  sovereigns,  but  his  family  resided 
for  many  years  at  Eileithyia,  (El  Kab,  south 
of  Thebes,)  and  was  tributary  to  the  Dynasty 
of  the  Shepherds,  the  Hyksos  of  Manetho,  then 
ruling  in  the  North  of  Egypt.  Amosis  mar- 
ried an  Ethiopian  princess,  Nephertari,  and 
in  the  third  year  of  his  reign  captured  Avaris, 
or  Zoan,  the  capital  of  the  Hyksos,  and 
completed  the  expulsion  of  that  race. 

9.  unto  his  people]  This  expression  has  a 
peculiar  fitness  as  addressed  by  the  represen- 
tative of  the  old  Egyptian  kings  to  his  coun- 
trymen immediately  after  their  emancipation 
from  the  dominion  of  aliens. 

more  and  mightier]  This  may  have  been 
literally  true,  if,  as  was  natural,  the  king  com- 
pared the  Israelites  of  Goshen  with  the  popu- 
lation of  the  North  Eastern  district  after  the 
expulsion  of  the  shepherds.  The  first  im- 
pression made  upon  his  mind  would  be  the 
insecurity  of  a frontier  occupied  by  a foreign 
race. 

10.  any  <ujar]  The  king  had  good  cause  to 
anticipate  war.  The  North  Eastern  frontier 
was  infested  by  the  neighbouring  tribes,  the 
Shasous  of  Egyptian  monuments,  and  war 
was  waged  with  Egypt  by  the  confederated 
nations  of  Western  Asia  under  the  reigns  of 
his  successors.  These  incursions  were  re- 
pulsed with  extreme  difficulty.  In  language, 
features,  costume,  and  partly  ^Iso  in  habits, 
the  Israelites  probably  resembled  those  ene- 
mies of  Egypt,  and  were  regarded  by  the 
Egyptians  as  their  natural  allies. 

out  of  the  land]  This  is  important  as  the 
first  indication  of  a motive  which  determined 
the  policy  of  the  Pharaohs  in  dealing  with  the 
Israelites : they  apprehended  the  loss  of  revenue 
and  power,  which  would  result  from  the  with- 
drawal of  a peaceful  and  industrious  race. 

11.  taskmasters]  The  writer  uses  the  pro- 
per Egyptian  designation  for  these  officers, 
viz.  Chiefs  of  tributes  (see  Note  at  the  end 
of  the  Chapter).  They  were  men  of  rank. 


superintendents  of  the  public  works  (LXX. 
enia-TaTai  tSv  epycoi/),  such  as  are  often  re- 
presented on  Egyptian  monuments,  and  care- 
fully distinguished  from  the  subordinate 
overseers.  The  Israelites  were  employed  in 
forced  labours,  probably  in  detachments, 
each  under  an  Egyptian  “taskmaster:”  but 
they  were  not  reduced  to  slavery,  properly 
speaking,  nor  treated  as  captives  of  war.  They 
continued  to  occupy  and  cultivate  their  own 
district,  and  they  retained  possession  of  their 
houses,  flocks,  herds,  and  other  property  until 
they  emigrated  from  Egypt.  Amosis  had 
special  need  of  such  labourers.  He  restored 
the  temples  and  other  buildings  destroyed  by 
the  shepherds,  employing  foreigners,  either  as 
subjects  or  mercenaries,  for  the  transport  of 
materials.  This  is  proved  by  an  inscription, 
dated  in  his  22nd  year,  see  ‘ yEg.  Zeitschrift,’ 
November  1867. 

treasure  cities]  The  Hebrew  word  corre- 
sponds very  closely  both  in  form  and  mean- 
ing with  “magazines,”  depots, of  ammunition 
and  provisions:  the  same  word  is  used  i 
Kings  ix.  19  ; 2 Chron.  viii.  4 and  xxxii.  28. 
Captives  were  employed  in  great  numbers 
for  building  and  enlarging  such  depots  under 
the  Egyptian  kings  of  the  i8th  and  19th 
dynasties. 

Pithom  and  Raamses]  Both  cities  were  situ- 
ate on  the  canal,  which  had  been  dug  or 
enlarged  long  before,  under  Osertasen,  of  the 
12th  dynasty.  The  names  of  both  cities  are 
found  on  Egyptian  monuments : the  former 
is  known  to  have  existed  under  the  i8th  dyn- 
asty : both  were  in  existence  in  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Rameses  II.,  by  whom  they 
were  fortified  and  enlarged.  The  name  “ Pi- 
thom” means  “House  or  temple  of  Turn,” 
the  Sun  God  of  Heliopolis.  The  name  of 
Raamses,  or  Rameses  is  generally  assumed  to 
have  been  derived  from  Rameses  II.,  the  Se- 
sostris  of  the  Greeks,  but  it  was  previously 
known  as  the  name  of  the  district.  See 
Genesis  xlvii.  ii,  and  Appendix.  The  LXX. 
add  “ On,  which  is  Heliopolis:”  a reading  com- 
mended by  Egli,  l.c.  but  On  existed  long  be- 
fore that  age. 

12.  they  (were  grieved]  The  Hebrew  ex- 
presses a mixture  of  loathing  and  alami.  Foi 
“they”  the  LXX.  read  “the  Egyptians.” 


ux 


2 EXODUS.  I.  [v.  r3-2i. 


13  And  the  Egyptians  made  the 
children  of  Israel  to  serve  with  rigour: 

14  And  they  made  their  lives  bit- 
ter with  hard  bondage,  in  morter, 
and  in  brick,  and  in  all  manner  of 
service  in  the  field:  all  their  service, 
wherein  they  made  them  serve,  was 
with  rigour. 

15^  And  the  king  of  Egypt  spake 
to  the  Hebrew  midwives,  of  which 
the  name  of  the  one  was  Shiphrah, 
and  the  name  of  the  other  Puah : 

16  And  he  said.  When  ye  do  the 
office  of  a midwife  to  the  Hebrew 
women,  and  see  t/jem  upon  the  stools ; 
if  it  be  a son,  then  ye  shall  kill  him : 
but  if  it  be  a daughter,  then  she  shall 
live. 


17  But  the  midwives  feared  God, 
and  did  not  as  the  king  of  Egypt 
commanded  them,  but  saved  the  men 
children  alive. 

18  And  the  king  of  Egypt  called 
for  the  midwives,  and  said  unto  them. 
Why  have  ye  done  this  thing,  and 
have  saved  the  men  children  alive  ? 

19  And  the  midwives  said  unto 
Pharaoh,  Because  the  Hebrew  wo- 
men are  not  as  the  Egyptian  women ; 
for  they  are  lively,  and  are  deliver- 
ed ere  the  midwives  come  in  unto 
them. 

20  Therefore  God  dealt  well  with 
the  midwives:  and  the  people  multi- 
plied, and  waxed  very  mighty. 

21  And  it  came  to  pass,  because 


13.  rigourl  The  word  is  repeated 
V.  14 ; but  does  not  occur  elsewhere. 

14.  morter  and  brick']  The  use  of  brick, 
at  all  times  common  in  Egypt,  was  es- 
pecially so  under  the  i8th  dynasty.  An  ex- 
act representation  of  the  whole  process  of 
brickmaking  is  given  in  a small  temple  at 
Thebes,  erected  by  Thctmes  III.,  the  fourth 
in  descent  from  Amosis.  The  persons  there 
employed  are  captives,  taken  by  that  Pharaoh 
in  his  Asiatic  campaigns.  They  are  under  a 
general  superintendent,  or  “ taskmaster,”  and 
are  driven  to  work  by  overseers,  armed  with 
heavy  lashes,  who  cry  out  “work  without  faint- 
ing.” A report  from  a scribe  at  a later  date, 
under  the  19th  dynasty,  shews  the  rigour  with 
which  the  labour,  generally  assigned  to  captives 
or  to  slaves,  was  enforced.  See  Brugsch,  ‘ His- 
toire  d’Egypte,’  p.  1 74,  and  Chabas,  ‘ Melanges 
cgyptologiques,’  il.  p.  121.  Immense  masses 
of  brick  are  found  at  Belbeis,  the  modern 
capital  of  Sharkiya,  i.e.  Goshen,  and  in  the 
adjoining  district.  There  is  no  intimation 
that  the  Israelites  were  employed  in  build- 
ing pyramids,  which  were  erected  by  kings 
of  Lower  Egypt,  with  few  exceptions,  long 
before  this  period. 

all  manner  of  service  in  the  field]  Not 
merely  agricultural  labours  to  which  the  Is- 
raelites were  accustomed,  but  probably  the 
digging  of  canals  and  processes  of  irrigation 
which  are  pcH:uliarly  onerous  and  unhealthy, 
and  on  both  accounts  likely  to  have  been  im- 
posed upon  the  Israelites.  The  word  used 
throughout  by  the  I'argumist  (see  Note  at 
the  end  of  the  Chapter)  is  interesting;  the 
designation  Fellahs,  forced  workers,  is  derived 
from  it. 

15.  HebrevJ  mukvives]  Or  “ mid  wives  of 


the  Hebrew  women.”  This  measure  at  once 
attested  the  inefficacy  of  the  former  measures, 
and  was  the  direct  cause  of  the  event  which 
issued  in  the  deliverance  of  Israel,  viz.  the 
exposure  of  Moses.  Two  midwives  only  are 
named.  They  may  have  been  the  two  chief 
midwives,  but  it  is  not  improbable  that  they 
were  the  only  ones  in  Goshen.  At  present 
all  travellers  state  that  midwives  are  very  sel- 
dom employed  by  Egyptian  women,  never  by 
the  common  people,  and  by  women  of  station 
only  in  cases  of  peculiar  difficulty.  Two 
might  therefore  have  sufficed  for  the  Israelites. 
It  may  perhaps  be  inferrai  from  this  state- 
ment that  the  object  of  the  king  was  not  to  de- 
stroy all  the  male  infants,  a course  obviously 
contrary  to  his  interests,  but  those  of  the  chiefs, 
whose  wives  were  alone  likely  to  call  in  the 
midwives.  Both  midwives  bear  names  which 
are  supposed  by  some  to  be  of  Hebrew  origin, 
signifying  personal  beauty.  They  were  how- 
ever probably  Egyptians,  as  would  seem  to 
be  implied  in  the  expressions  in  vv.  1 7 and  19  : 
an  Egyptian  etymology  of  each  name  may  be 
suggested : Puah  from  a word  which  means 
“child  bearing,”  and  Shiphrah,  “prolific.” 
See  Note  belcfiv. 

16.  upon  the  stools]  The  Hebrew  means 
literally  “ two  stones.”  The  meaning  is  doubt- 
ful, as  the  expression  does  not  occur  elsewhere, 
but  it  probably  denotes  a peculiar  seat,  such 
as  is  represented  on  monuments  of  the  i8th 
dynasty,  and  according  to  Lane  is  still  used 
by  Egyptian  midwives.  So  it  is  understood 
by  our  translators,  by  the  Targumist,  and  the 
Arabian  translatoi^Saadia,  a resident  in  Egypt 
and  a man  of  great  learning,  whose  authority 
on  such  a point  has  considerable  weight. 
Gesenius,  however,  takes  it  to  mean  the  stone 


253 


V.  22.]  EXODUS.  I. 

the  midwives  feared  God,  that  he  people,  saying,  Every  son  that  is  born 
made  them  houses.  ye  shall  cast  into  the  river,  and  every 

22  And  Pharaoh  charged  all  his  daughter  ye  shall  save  alive. 


laver  in  which  the  newborn  infant  was 
washed,  and  he  quotes  a striking  passage  from 
Thevenot,  stating  that  the  Persian  kings  order 
the  newborn  male  infants  of  their  relatives  to 
be  killed  in  the  stone  basin  in  which  they  are 
washed.  See  Note  below. 

21.  made  them  houses']  i.e.  they  mar- 
ried Hebrews  and  became  mothers  in  Israel. 
The  expression  is  proverbial.  See  a Sam.  vii. 
II,  ay. 

22.  Pharaoh  thus  made  the  people  agents 
in  the  crime.  The  command,  though  gene- 
ral, may  have  been  understood  to  apply  to 
the  leading  families  by  whom  the  midwives 
had  been  employed,  or  to  be  in  force  until 
the  population  was  reduced,  so  as  to  remove 
all  apprehensions  for  the  security  of  the  fron- 


tier. The  extreme  cruelty  of  the  measure 
does  not  involve  improbability.  Hatred  of 
strangers  was  always  a characteristic  of  the 
Egyptians,  see  Gen.  xliii.  32,  and  was  likely 
to  be  stronger  than  ever  after  the  expulsion 
of  an  alien  race.  Before  Psammetichus 
chance  visitors  were  taken  as  slaves  or  put 
to  death,  see  Diod.  Sic.  i.  67.  Under  the 
12th  dynasty,  in  the  time  of  Abraham,  the 
wives  and  children  of  foreigners  were  the 
property  of  the  king  (Chabas,  ‘Pap.  Hier.’ 
p.  14).  The  Spartans  were  even  more  guilty; 
they  systematically  murdered  their  Helots 
when  their  increased  numbers  excited  alarm ; 
on  one  occasion  they  slew  2,000,  who  had 
offered  themselves  as  volunteers  at  the  invita- 
tion of  the  state.  Plut.  ‘ Lyc.’  § 28,  and 
Thuc.  IV.  80. 


NOTES  on  vv.  ii,  14,  15,  16. 


11.  The  Hebrew  is  D'DD"nK^,  Sare  mas- 
sim.  Sar  means  chief,  or  prince  in  Semitic 
languages,  in  Assyrian  it  has  lately  been 
shewn  to  be  the  proper  phonetic  for  king; 
and  it  is  common  in  Hebrew:  but  it  is  an 
Egyptian  title,  found  on  very  ancient  monu- 
ments, and  it  is  the  title  specially  given  to  the 
head  of  the  works  in  the  representation  of  brick 
making  underThotmosisIII.,  to  which  allusion 
is  more  than  once  made  in  these  notes.  The 
word  massim  has  no  satisfactory  etymology 
in  Hebrew.  Gesenius  supposes  it  to  be  a 
contracted  form,  Michaelis  suggests  an  im- 
probable derivation  from  Arabic.  The  Egyp- 
tian mas,  gives  a good  and  natural  sense, 
it  means  to  bring  tribute,  mas-mas  to  divide  or 
number  in  portions.  See  the  Egyptian  forms 
in  the  Appendix. 

14.  The  Chaldee  paraphrase  of  Onkelos 
is  always  meant  when  reference  is  made  to 
the  Targum  in  these  notes;  it  is  of  great 
antiquity  and  authority.  The  Targum  at- 
tributed to  Jonathan  is  of  late  date  and 
comparatively  of  little  value.  Saadia,  who  is 
often  mentioned,  was  a Jew  of  great  learning, 
a native  of  Fayoum  in  Egypt,  towards  the 
end  of  the  9th  century.  His  Arabic  trans- 
lation is  priiited  in  Walton’s  Polyglott. 

15.  The  Hebrew  derivations  of  the  two 
names  are  not  satisfactory.  Simonis  makes 
nyiQ  equivalent  to  nyiD',  splendid,  from  yst , a 
form  for  which  there  is  no  authority.  Gese- 
nius suggests  the  Arabic  countenance; 


this  would  require  a change  of  letters,  and  is 
quite  improbable.  The  Egyptian  gives  a sim- 
ple and  very  satisfactory  etymology ; pa  = VQ 
with  one  determinative  or  explanatory  sign 
means  “splenduit”  (coinciding  in  sense  with 
Simonis’  conjecture) ; with  another  and  equally 
common  sign  it  means  “parturio,  accoucher 
d’un  enfant.”  Brugsch,  ‘ D.  H.’  p.  463. 
Shiphra  is  rendered  “child  of  Ra,”  by  Bunsen, 
‘Bibelwerk.’  This  is  inadmissible;  “seh” 
means  “child,”  but  the  transcription  of  both 
syllables  is  inexact.  The  sense  “prolific” 
given  above  is  derived  from  one  of  the  com- 
monest words  in  Egyptian,  Cheper;  the  tran- 
scription is  very  close,  the  ch  and  sh  being 
regularly  interchanged;  the  meaning  “esse, 
fieri,  nasci,  procreare,”  with  the  additional 
notion  of  rapid  increase  and  reproduction. 

16.  Professor  Selwyn  proposes  an  emenda- 
tion which  would  entirely  remove  the  difficulty ; 
instead  of  he  would  read  D'33,  when  ye 

look  upon  the  children.  The  insertion  of  them 
in  the  Authorised  Version  is  unauthorised. 
The  only  objection  to  the  conjecture  is  that  the 
change  from  so  plain  and  intelligible  a reading 
can  scarcely  be  accounted  for.  Hirsch,  chief 
Rabbi  at  Frankfort,  whose  commentary  has 
appeared  since  these  notes  were  printed,  ob- 
serves very  truly  that  there  is  no  authority  for 
the  interpretation  most  commonly  received  of 
but  the  explanation  which  he  suggests 
is  forced  and  improbable.  Like  many  other 
words  it  belongs  to  the  age  of  Moses. 


5 54 


EXODUS.  II. 


[v.  I— s- 


CHAPTER  II. 

I Moses  is  born,  3 and  in  an  ark  cast  into  the 
flags,  5 He  is  found,  and  brought  tip  by 
JViaraoh's  daughter . 1 1 He  slayeth  an  Egyp- 
tian.  13  He  reproveth  an  Hebrew.  15  He 
fleeth  into  Midian.  21  He  marrieth  Zippo- 
rah.  22  Gcrshom  is  born,  23  Godrespecteth 
the  Israelites'  cry. 

AND  there  went  '*a  man  of  the 
Nt  Mb.  26.  house  of  Levi,  and  took  to  wife 
a daughter  of  Levi. 

2 And  the  woman  conceived,  and 
^ bare  a son : and  when  she  saw  him 

that  he  was  a goodly  child.^  she  “^hid 
”■  him  three  months. 


3 And  when  she  could  not  longer 
hide  him,  she  took  for  him  an  ark  of 
bulrushes,  and  daubed  it  with  slime 
and  with  pitch,  and  put  the  child 
therein ; and  she  laid  it  in  the  flags  by 
the  river’s  brink. 

4 And  his  sister  stood  afar  offj  to 
wit  what  would  be  done  to  him. 

5 ^ And  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh 
came  down  to  wash  herself  at  the  river ; 
and  her  maidens  walked  along  by  the 
river  side ; and  when  she  saw  the  ark 
among  the  flags,  she  sent  her  maid  to 
fetch  it. 


Chap.  II.  1.  a man  of  the  house  of  LenoT^ 
The  marriage  of  Amram  and  Jochebed  took 
place  so  long  after  the  immigration  of  the 
Israelites,  that  it  seems  scarcely  possible  that 
Amram  should  have  been  the  grandson,  and 
Jochebed  the  daughter  of  Levi,  The  idiom 
which  calls  even  a remote  descendant  the  son 
or  daughter  is  common  to  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  and  this  passage  may  be  under-, 
stood  to  mean  that  both  parents  ot  Moses 
were  of  the  house  and  lineage  of  Levi.  Thus 
the  Vulgate  renders  the  verse,  “and  he  took 
a wife  of  his  own  family;”  the  LXX.  has 
“a  wife  of  the  daughters  of  Levi.”  See  the 
Introduction,  and  note  on  ch.  vi.  20,  and 
on  Num.  xxvi.  59. 

2.  bare  a son']  Not  her  firstborn,  Aaron 
and  Miriam  were  older  than  Moses.  In  this 
part  of  the  book  the  object  of  the  writer  is 
simply  to  narrate  the  events  which  led  to  the 
Exodus,  and,  as  usual,  he  omits  to  notice 
what  had  no  direct  bearing  upon  that  object. 
It  is  remarkable  that  any  critic  conversant 
with  the  style  of  the  sacred  writers  should 
have  drawn  from  this  omission  an  argument 
against  the  accuracy  or  veracity  of  the  writer. 

a goodly  child]  This  is  the  only  allusion  in 
the  Pentateuch  to  the  personal  appearance  of 
Moses,  upon  which  much  stress  is  laid  by  later 
tradition.  Jochebed  probably  did  not  call  in  a 
midwife,  see  note  on  ch.  i.  15,  and  she  was  of 
course  cautious  not  to  shew  herself  to  Egyp- 
tians, The  hiding  of  the  child  is  spoken  of  as 
an  act  of  faith,  see  Heb.  xi.  23.  It  was  done 
in  the  belief  that  God  would  watch  over  the 
child. 

3.  an  ark  of  bulrushes]  Both  of  these 
words,  like  the  other  words  used  in  this 
description,  are  cither  common  to  Hebrew' 
and  Egyptian,  or  simply  Egyptian.  See 
Appendix,  'I'lie  ark  was  made  of  the  papy- 
rus which  was  commonly  used  by  the  Egyp- 
tians for  light’  and  swift  boats.  The  species 
is  no  longer  found  in  the  Nile  below  Nubia. 
It  is  a strong  rush,  like  the  bamboo,  about 


the  thickness  of  a finger,  not  quite  cylin- 
drical but  three  cornered,  and  attains  the 
height  of  10  to  15  feet.  It  is  represented 
with  great  accuracy  on  the  most  ancient  mo- 
numents of  Egypt;  as  for  instance  in  the 
tomb  of  Tei  under  the  6th  dynasty.  An 
article  on  the  Papyrus  is  given  in  the  ‘Me- 
moires  de  I’Academie  des  Inscriptions  et  de 
belles  lettres,’  Tom.  xix.  p.  156. 

slime  and  pitch]  The  “slime”  is  under- 
stood by  most  critics  to  be  asphalt,  but  it 
more  probably  means  the  mud,  of  which 
bricks  were  usually  made  in  Egypt,  and 
which  in  this  case  was  used  to  bind  the  stalks 
of  the  papyrus  into  a compact  mass,  and 
perhaps  also  to  make  the  surface  smooth  for 
the  infant.  The  pitch  or  bitumen  (com- 
monly used  in  Egypt,  bearing  the  name  here 
used  by  Moses,)  made  the  small  vessel  water- 
tight. 

in  the  flags]  This  is  another  species  of  the 
papyrus,  called  tufi,  or  sufi,  (an  exact  equiva- 
lent of  the  Hebrew  suph,]  which  was  less  in 
size  and  height  than  the  rush  of  which  the  ark 
was  made.  The  brink,  or  “lip  of  the  river” 
is  an  expression  common  to  Egyptian  and 
Hebrew ; both  words  correspond  in  meaning 
and  form.  That  which  is  rendered  “river,” 
viz.  Jor  is  not  used  in  the  Bible  of  any  river 
out  of  Egypt,  except  once  by  Daniel  xii.  5,  on 
which  see  Ges.  ‘ Thes.’  s.v. 

5.  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh]  The  tradi- 
tions which  give  a name  to  this  princess  are 
probably  of  late  origin,  and  merely  conjectu- 
ral. Josephus  calls  her  Thermuthis;  which 
means  “the  great  Mother,”  a designation  of 
Neith,  the  special  deity  of  Lower  Egypt : but 
it  does  not  occur  as  the  name  of  a princess. 
The  names  Pharia,  Merris,  and  Bithia  are  also 
found  in  Syncellus,  Eusebius,  and  the  Rab- 
bins, It  is  of  more  importance  to  obseiwe  that 
the  Eg)'ptian  princesses  held  a very  high  and 
almost  independent  position  under  the  ancient 
and  middle  empire,  with  a separate  house- 
hold and  numerous  officials.  This  was  espe- 


EXODUS.  11. 


255 


V.  6— II.] 

6 And  when  she  had  opened  /V,  she 
saw  the  child : and,  behold,  the  babe 
wept.  And  she  had  compassion  on 
him,  and  said.  This  is  one  of  the  He- 
brews’ children. 

7 Then  said  his  sister  to  Pharaoh’s 
daughter.  Shall  I go  and  call  to  thee  a 
nurse  of  the  Hebrew  women,  that  she 
may  nurse  the  child  for  thee? 

8 And  Pharaoh’s  daughter  said  to 
her.  Go.  And  the  maid  went  and 
called  the  child’s  mother. 

9 And  Pharaoh’s  daughter  said  unto 
her.  Take  this  child  away,  and  nurse 


dally  the  case  with  the  daughters  of  the  first 
sovereigns  of  the  i8th  dynasty:  in  two  in- 
stances at  least  they  were  regents  or  co-regents 
with  their  brothers.  See  Appendix. 

The  facts  recorded  in  these  verses,  accord- 
ing to  M.  Quatremde,  suggest  a satisfactory 
answer  as  to  the  residence  of  the  daughter  of 
Pharaoh  and  of  the  family  of  Moses.  It 
must  have  been  in  the  immediate  neighbour- 
hood of  the  Nile,  and  therefore  not  at  On  or 
Heliopolis,  at  which  place  Amosis  put  down 
human  sacrifices  offered  by  the  Hyksos:  it 
must  have  been  near  a branch  of  the  Nile  not 
Ln  Tested  by  crocodiles,  or  the  child  would  not 
have  been  exposed,  nor  would  the  princess 
have  bathed  there : therefore  not  near  Mem- 
phis, where  Amosis  rebuilt  the  great  temple 
of  Ptah,  from  which  the  city  took  its  name. 
At  present  crocodiles  are  not  often  found  be- 
low the  cataracts,  but  under  the  ancient 
empire  they  were  common  as  far  north  as 
Memphis.  These  and  other  indications  agree- 
ing with  the  traditions  recorded  by  Euty- 
chius  (see  Milman,  ‘ H.  J.’  i.  p.  68),  point  to 
Zoan,  Tanis,  now  San,  the  ancient  Avaris, 
on  the  Tanitic  branch  of  the  river,  near  the 
sea,  where  crocodiles  are  never  found,  which 
was  probably  the  western  boundary  of  the 
district  occupied  by  the  Israelites.  Avaris 
was  captured  by  Amosis,  and  was  the  most 
suitable  place  for  the  head  quarters  of  the 
Pharaohs,  ■ both  as  commanding  the  districts 
liable  to  incursions  from  Asiatic  nomads,  and 
as  well  adapted  for  carrying  out  the  measures 
for  crushing  the  Israelites.  The  field  of  Zoan 
was  always  associated  by  the  Hebrews  with 
the  mangels  which  preceded  the  Exodus.  See 
Ps.  Ixxviii.  43, 

/o  avaj/j]  It  is  not  customary  at  present 
for  women  of  rank  to  bathe  in  the  river,  but 
it  was  a common  practice  in  ancient  Egypt. 
See  Wilkinson,  iii.  p.  389.  The  Nile  was 
worshipped  as  an  emanation  (aTropporj)  of 
Osiris,  and  a peculiar  power  of  imparting 
life  and  fertility  was  attributed  to  its  waters, 
a superstition  still  prevalent  in  the  country. 


it  for  me,  and  I will  give  f/oee  thy 
wages.  And  the  woman  took  the 
child,  and  nursed  it. 

10  And  the  child  grew,  and  she 
brought  him  unto  Pharaoh’s  daughter, 
and  he  became  her  son.  And  she 
called  his  name  " Moses  : and  she  said,  “That  is, 
Because  I drew  him  out  of  the  water,  oju. 

1 1 And  it  came  to  pass  in  those 
days,  when  Moses  was  grown,  that  he 
went  out  unto  his  brethren,  and  looked 
on  their  burdens:  and  he  spied  an 
Egyptian  smiting  an  Hebrew,  one  of 
his  brethren. 


(Thus  Strabo,  jElian,  and  Pliny  and  Seet- 
zen,  Vol.  III.  p.  204.  See  also  Brugsch, 
‘ Zeitschrift,’  1868,  p.  123,  and  ‘D.  H.’  p.413.) 
The  habits  of  the  princess,  as  well  as  her  cha- 
racter, must  have  been  well  known  to  the 
mother  of  Moses,  and  probably  decided  her 
choice  of  the  place. 

6.  she  had  compassion  on  hint]  A touch 
of  natural  feeling,  to  which  throughout  the 
narrative  Moses  is  careful  to  direct  attention. 
The  Egyptians  indeed  regarded  such  ten- 
derness as  a?  condition  of  acceptance  on  the 
day  of  reckoning.  In  the  presence  of  the 
Lord  of  truth  each  spirit  had  to  answer,  “ I 
have  not  afflicted  any  man,  I have  not  made 
any  man  weep,  I have  not  withheld  milk  from 
the  mouths  of  sucklings.”  See  the  ‘Funeral 
Ritual,’  c.  125.  There  was  special  ground 
for  mentioning  the  feeling,  since  it  led  the 
princess  to  save  and  adopt  the  child  in  spite 
of  her  father’s  commands. 

10.  he  became  her  son']  This  expression 
leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  formal  adoption 
of  Moses.  He  became  a member  of  the 
royal  household,  where  the  training  and  edu- 
cation which  he  received  would  be  such  as 
St  Stephen  describes,  he  became  learned  in 
all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians.  (See  Note  at 
the  end  of  the  Chapter.)  Such  a preparation 
was  indeed  humanly  speaking  all  but  indispens- 
able to  the  efficient  accomplishment  of  his 
work  as  the  predestined  leader  and  instructor 
of  his  countrymen.  Moses  probably  passed  the 
early  years  of  his  life  in  Lower  Egypt,  where 
the  princess  resided ; all  the  notices  in  this  book 
indicate  a thorough  familiarity  with  that  por- 
tion of  the  country,  and  scarcely  refer  to  the 
Thebaid.  There  may  however  be  substantial 
grounds  for  the  tradition  in  Josephus  that  he 
was  engaged  in  a campaign  against  the  Ethio- 
pians, thus  shewing  himself,  as  St  Stephen 
says,  “ mighty  in  word  and  deed.”  See  ‘ Ex- 
cursus’ I.  at  the  end  of  the  volume. 

Moses]  The  Egyptian  origin  of  this  word 
is  generally  admitted.  The  name  itself  is  not 
uncommon  in  ancient  documents.  The  exact 


256 


EXODUS.  II. 


[v.  12 16. 


12  And  he  looked  this  way  and  that 
way,  and  when  he  saw  that  there  was 
no  man,  he  slew  the  Egyptian,  and 
hid  him  in  the  sand. 

13  And  v/hen  he  went  out  the 
second  day,  behold,  two  men  of  the 
Hebrews  strove  together : and  he  said 
to  him  that  did  the  wrong.  Wherefore 
smitest  thou  thy  fellow? 

14  And  he  said,  Who  made  thee 


^a  prince  and  a judge  over  us? 
tendest  thou  to  kill  me,  as  thou  killedst/^;' 
the  Egyptian  ? And  Moses  feared, 
and  said.  Surely  this  thing  is  known. 

15  Now  when  Pharaoh  heard  this 
thing,  he  sought  to  slay  Moses.  But 
Moses  fled  from  the  face  of  Pharaoh, 
and  dwelt  in  the  land  of  Midian  : and 
he  sat  down  by  a well. 

16  Now  the  “priest  of  Midian  had])2w^. 


meaning  is  “ son,”  but  the  verbal  root  of  the 
word  signifies  “produce,”  “drawforth.”  The 
whole  sentence  in  Egyptian  would  exactly  cor- 
respond to  our  version.  She  called  his  name 
Moses,  i.e.  “son,”  or  “brought  forth,”  be- 
cause she  brought  him  forth  out  of  the  water. 
See  Appendix. 

11.  Moses  records  no  incident  of  his  life 
during  the  following  years.  His  object,  as 
Ranke  observes,  was  not  to  write  his  own 
biography,  but  to  describe  God’s  dealings 
with  his  people.  Later  tradition  would  have 
been  full  of  details.  At  the  end  of  40  years, 
when  according  to  St  Stephen,  Moses  visited 
his  brethren,  the  princess  was  probably  dead, 
as  Syncellus  relates,  and  the  events  which  fol- 
low took  place  under  another  Pharaoh. 

^juent  out  unto  his  brethren^  This  shews 
that  the  Egyptian  princess  had  not  concealed 
from  him  the  fact  of  his  belonging  to  the 
oppressed  race,  nor  is  it  likely  that  she  had 
debarred  him  from  intercourse  with  his  foster- 
mother  and  her  family,  whether  or  not  she 
became  *aware  of  the  true  relationship. 

an  Egyptian^  This  man  was  probably  one 
of  the  overseers  of  the  workmen,  natives  under 
the  chief  superintendent,  who  are  represented 
in  the  well-known  picture  of  brickmakers  un- 
der Thotmes  III.  See  note  on  c.  i.  13.  They 
were  armed  with  long  heavy  scourges,  made  of 
a tough  pliant  wood  imported  from  Syria. 
See  Chabas,  ‘ Voyage  d’un  Egyptien,’  pp.  119 
and  136.  The  discipline  of  the  Egyptian  ser- 
vices, both  military  and  civil,  was  maintained 
by  punishments  of  excessive  severity,  even  in 
the  case  of  native  officers.  lienee  the  proverbial 
saying,  “ the  child  grows  up  and  his  bones 
are  broken  like  the  bones  of  an  ass,”  and 
again,  “the  back  of  a lad  is  made  that  he 
may  hearken  to  him  that  beats  it.”  (Cha- 
bas, 1.  c.  p.  136,  and  ‘Pap.  Anast.’  V.  8,  6.) 
The  “smiting”  must  have  been  unusually 
cruel  to  excite  the  wrath  of  Moses.  The 
slaying  of  the  Egyptian  is  not  to  be  justified, 
or  attributed  to  a divine  inspiration,  which 
Moses  would  not  have  omitted  to  mention; 
but  it  is  to  be  judged  with  reference  to  the 
provocation,  the  impetuosity  of  Moses’  natu- 
ral character,  perhaps  also  to  the  habits  de- 
veloped by  his  training  at  the  court  of  Pharaoh. 


See  the  excellent  remarks  of  St  Augustine, 
‘c.  Faust.’  XXII.  70.  The  act  involved  a com- 
plete severance  from  the  Egyptians ; but  far 
from  expediting,  it  delayed  for  many  years  the 
deliverance  of  the  Israelites.  Forty  years  of  a 
very  different  training  prepared  Moses  for  the 
execution  of  that  appointed  work. 

13.  did  the  cwro7ig~\  Lit.  “the  wicked 
one,”  i.  e.  the  aggressor. 

thy  fellow]  Tliy  neighbour:  so  the 
word  should  be  rendered : the  reproof  was  that 
of  a legislator  who  established  moral  obliga- 
tions on  a recognized  principle.  Heace  in  the 
following  verse  the  offender  is  represented  as 
feeling  that  the  position  claimed  by  Moses 
was  that  of  a Judge.  The  act  could  only 
have  been  made  known  by  the  Hebrew  on 
whose  behalf  Moses  had  committed  it. 

14.  a prince]  lit.  as  in  the  margin,  a man, 
a prince.  The  Hebrew  for  Prince  is  Sar^  used 
in  i.  II.  The  word  “Sar”  implies  the  power, 
“judge”  the  right,  of  interfering. 

15.  Pharaoh  heard  it]  No  Egyptian  king 
would  have  left  such  an  offence  unpunished, 
even  had  it  been  committed  by  a native  of  high 
rank : it  is  not  even  necessary  to  assume  the 
death  of  the  princess  (see  note  on  v.  2)  to  rebut 
the  objectio^i  Ihat  her  adopted  son  found  no 
defender.  It  is  observed  however  (by  Hirsch) 
that  the  expression  “sought  to  kill  him”  im- 
plies that  the  position  of  Moses,  as  adopted  son 
of  a princess,  made  it  necessary  even  for  a des- 
potic sovereign  to  take  unusual  precautions. 

the  land  of  Midian]  The  Midianites  occu- 
pied an  extensive  district  from  the  eastern 
coast  of  the  Red  Sea  to  the  borders. of  Moab. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  in  the  time  of 
Moses  they  may  have  had  a settlement  in  the 
peninsula,  at  Sherm,  where  the  two  harbours, 
the  only  safe  ones  on  that  coast,  offered  pecu- 
liar advantages  to  them,  engaged  as  they  were 
from  the  earliest  times  in  the  transport  of 
merchandize.  (See  Note  at  the  end  of  the 
Chapter.) 

by  a well]  The  well.  The  well  is  spoken 
of  as  well  known,  the  chief  feature  of  the 
locality ; such  was  the  case  whichever  site  be 
accepted  as  the  residence  of  Reuel. 

16.  the  Priest  of  Midiati]  Not  “the 
prince”  as  in  the  margin.  The  word  Cohen 


V.  17 22. J 


EXODUS.  II. 


257 


seven  daughters:  and  they  came  and 
drew  water^  and  filled  the  troughs  to 
water  their  father’s  flock. 

17  And  the  shepherds  came  and 
drove  them  away : but  Moses  stood 
up  and  helped  them,  and  watered  their 
flock. 

18  And  when  they  came  to  Reuel 
their  father,  he  said.  How  is  it  that  ye 
are  come  so  soon  to  day  ? 

19  And  they  said,  An  Egyptian 
delivered  us  out  of  the  hand  of  the 


shepherds,  and  also  drew  water  enough 
for  us,  and  watered  the  flock. 

20  And  he  said  unto  his  daughters, 
And  where  is  he?  why  is  it  that  ye 
have  left  the  man  ? call  him,  that  he 
may  eat  bread. 

2 1 And  Moses  was  content  to  dwell 
with  the  man:  and  he  gave  Moses 
Zipporah  his  daughter. 

22  And  she  bare  him  a son,  and  he 
called  his  name  ‘^Gershom : for  he  said,  * ch; 
I have  been  a stranger  in  a strange  land. 


may  have  that  meaning  in  some  passages,  but 
there  is  no  reason  for  assuming  it  in  this. 
Josephus  and  most  of  the  ancient  versions 
render  it  “priest.”  A Jewish  tradition,  derived 
probably  from  the  Targum  (which  styles  him 
Rabba,  or  Lord),  represents  Reuel  as  the  prince, 
or  probably  as  combining,  like  Melchizedek, 
the  hereditary  offices  of  chieftain  and  priest  of 
the  tribe,  the  Imam,  the  word  used  in  the 
Arabic  Version.  The  name  of  Reuel,  and  the 
detailed  notices  in  c.  xviii.  (where  see  notes), 
prove  that  he  was  a priest  of  the  one  true 
God,  known  to  the  patriarchs  especially  under 
the  name  El;  although  the  great  bulk  of  the 
tribe,  certainly  those  who  lived  farther  north 
and  more  closely  in  contact  with  the  Hamites 
of  Canaan,  were  already  plunged  in  idolatry. 
The  conduct  of  the  shepherds  may  indicate 
that  his  person  and  office  were  lightly  re- 
garded by  the  idolatrous  tribes  in  his  imme- 
diate neighbourhood. 

dre^v  nx.mter']  This  act  would  not  be  un- 
becoming or  uncommon  for  the  daughters  of 
a priest  whether  chief  of  his  tribe  or  not.  At 
present  the  watering  of  cattle  in  that  district 
is  a work  of  maidens,  from  which  even  the 
daughters  of  sheickhs  are  not  exempt.  See 
Burcldiardt,  ‘Syria,’  p.  531.  Thus  Dr  Stanley 
speaks  of  flocks  climbing  the  rocks  or  gathered 
round  the  brooks  and  springs  of  the  valleys 
under  the  charge  of  the  black-vested  Bedouin 
women  of  the  present  day. 

18.  Reuel'\  Or  as  in  Num.  x.  29,  Raguel. 
The  name  means  “friend  of  God.”  It  ap- 
pears to  have  been  not  uncommon  among  He- 
brews and  Edomites;  see  Gen.  xxxvi.  4,  10  ; 
I Chron.  ix.  8;  Tobitvi.  10.  Commentators, 
who  identify  Reuel  with  Jethro,  a point  open 
to  grave  objections  (see  Note  at  the  end  of 
the  Chapter),  generally  accept  the  conjecture 
of  Josephus,  viz.  that  Reuel  was  his  proper 
name,  and  Jether  or  Jethro,  which  means 
“excellency”  (corresponding,  as  Knobel  ob- 
serves, to  Imam),  was  his  official  designation. 
Moses  naturally  used  the  former  name  when 
he  first  mentioned  his  father-in-law,  on  other 
occasions  he  might  take  that  by  which  the 
Priest  was  probably  best  known  to  the  Israelites. 

VOL.  I. 


19.  An  Egyptian']  Of  course  they  spoke 
judging  from  his  costume,  or  language, 
which  must  have  been  Egyptian  at  that  time ; 
a slight  coincidence,  but  such  as  may  be 
looked  for  only  m a narrative  of  facts.  Had 
Moses  lived  long  among  the  Israelites,  the 
Midianitish  maidens  would  not  have  mistaken 
him  for  an  Egyptian:  a later  writer  would 
scarcely  have  noted  the  occurrence. 

21.  <ivas  content  to  dwell  with  the  man] 
This  conveys  the  true  sense  of  the  Hebrew. 
It  implies  that  Moses  recognized  in  Reuel  a 
man  in  whom  he  could  confide;  and  in  his 
family  a fitting  home.  So  quietly,  and  yet  so 
impressively,  Moses  records  the  entrance  up- 
on a long  period,  extending  over  forty  years 
of  mature  life.  Moses  tells  us  nothing  of 
what  he  may  have  learned  from  his  father-in- 
law,  but  he  must  have  found  in  him  a man 
conversant  with  the  traditions  of  the  family 
of  Abraham;  nor  is  there  any  improbability 
in  the  supposition  that,  as  hereditary  priest, 
Reuel  may  have  had  written  documents  con- 
cerning their  common  ancestors.  The  use 
of  letters  was  well  known  to  the  Phoenicians, 
whose  trade  with  the  dwellers  in  that  very 
district  is  recorded  on  Egyptian  monuments 
of  the  13th  dynasty,  long  anterior  to  the 
age  of  Moses:  (see  Brugsch,  ‘Histoire  d’E- 
gypte,’  p.  74,)  and  inscriptions  which  re- 
cord the  campaigns  of  Pharaohs  of  the  1 8th 
and  19th  dynasties,  make  express  mention  of 
scribes  and  historians  of  nations,  e.g.  of  the 
Kheta  or  Hittites,  who  were  probably  not 
in  advance  of  the  Miidianites. 

22.  Gershom]  According  to  most  Hebrew 
scholars  the  nam.e  is  derived  from  a word 
meaning  “ expulsion.”  This,  however,  is 
scarcely  reconcileable  with  Moses’  own  ac- 
count, of  which  the  Egyptian  supplies  an  exact 
and  satisfactory  explanation.  The  first  syllable 
“ Ger”  is  common  to  Hebrew  and  Egyptian, 
and  means  “ sojourner.”  The  second  syllable 
“Shorn”  answers  exactly  to  the  Coptic 
“Shemmo,”  which  means  “a  foreign  or 
strange  land.”  For  the  old  Egyptian  forms, 
see  Appendix. 

R 


258 


EXODUS.  11. 


[v.  23—25. 


23  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  in  process 
of  time,  that  the  king  of  Egypt  died : 
and  the  children  of  Israel  sighed  by 
reason  of  the  bondage,  and  they  cried, 
and  their  cry  came  up  unto  God  by 
reason  of  the  bondage. 


24  And  God  heard  their  groaning,and 
God  remembered  his  ‘^covenant  with  Gen. 
Abraham,  with  Isaac,  and  with  Jacob.  & 46. 4 

25  And  God  looked  upon  the 
children  of  Israel,  and  God  ^ had  re-  t Heb. 
spect  unto  them. 


23.  in  process  of  time]  Nearly  forty  years : 
some  delay  intervened  between  the  call  of 
Moses  and  his  departure  for  Egypt.  This 
verse  marks  the  beginning  of  another  section. 
We  now  enter  at  once  upon  the  history  of 
the  Exodus. 

their  cry  came  up  unto  God]  This  statement, 
taken  in  connection  with  the  two  following 
verses,  proves  that  the  Israelites  retained  their 
faith  in  the  God  of  their  Fathers.  The  divine 
name  God,  Elohim,  is  chosen  because  it  was 
that  which  the  Israelites  must  have  used  in 
their  cry  for  help,  that  under  which  the  cove- 
nant had  been  ratified  with  the  Patriarchs. 
Dr  Stanley  would  illustrate  this  by  an  ac- 
count of  the  cries  of  the  Fellahs  in  Egypt : 
but  the  distinction  ought  to  be  marked  be- 


tween their  execrations,  and  the  prayers  which 
reached  God  from  the  Israelites. 

24.  remembered]  This  means  that  God 
was  moved  by  their  prayers  to  give  effect  to 
the  covenant,  of  which  an  essential  condition 
was  the  faith  and  contrition  involved  in  the 
act  of  supplication.  The  whole  history  of  Is- 
rael is  foreshadowed  in  these  words.  The 
accumulation  of  so  called  anthropomorphic 
terms  in  this  passage  is  remarkable.  God 
heard,  remembered,  looked  upon,  and  knew 
them.  It  evidently  indicates  the  beginning  of  a 
crisis  marked  by  a personal  intervention  of  God. 

25.  had  respect  unto  them]  lit.  and  ,God 
knew.  The  LXX.  “and  was  known  unto 
them.”  This  involves  only  a change  of 
punctuation  and  may  be  preferable. 


NOTES  on  vv.  10,  13,  18. 


10.  The  education  which  would  be  given  to 
a youth  belonging  to  the  royal  household,  and 
destined  for  military  or  civil  service  under  the 
Middle  Empire,  has  lately  been  illustrated  by 
the  labours  of  Goodwin,  Chabas,  and  other 
Egyptologers,  from  the  select  papyri  pub- 
lished in  1844  by  the  Trustees  of  the  British 
Museum.  These  documents  belong  for  the 
most  part  to  the  reigns  of  Rameses  II.  and 
his  immediate  successors,  but  the  literary 
habits  and  attainments  which  they  describe 
are  known  to  have  been  far  more  ancient; 
collections  of  manuscripts,  and  scribes  hold- 
ing high  offices  of  state,  are  frequently  men- 
tioned in  the  monuments  of  the  early  dynasties 
(see  M.  de  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  73),  and 
some  of  the  most  valuable  papyri  are  pro- 
ductions of  the  ancient  empire.  M.  Maspero 
has  lately  collected  the  most  important  facts 
in  the  introduction  to  his  work  on  a portion 
of  a papyrus  of  the  19th  dynasty,  entitled 
‘Hymne  au  Nil.’ 

He  observes  that  we  know  for  certain  that 
a literary  education  was  the  first  condition 
for  admission  to  the  public  service;  the  title 
of  scribe  was  necessary  in  order  to  obtain  the 
lowest  appointment  in  the  civil  administration 
or  in  the  army.  Hence  a real  enthusiasm  for 
study  is  manifested  by  men  of  letters,  such  as 
Enna  and  Pentaour,  whose  compositions,  in- 
deed whose  autographs  are  preserved.  We 
have  addresses  to  Thoth,  the  Hermes  of  the 
Greeks,  the  god  of  learning,  in  which  the 


superiority  of  his  work  to  all  works  is  pas- 
sionately maintained.  “Thy  works  are  better 
than  all  works;  he  who  devotes  himself  to 
them  becomes  a noble ; all  successes  achieved 
in  life  are  due  to  thee ; under  thy  inspiration 
a man  becomes  great,  powerful,  rich ; of  him 
all  the  world,  all  generations  of  men  cry  out, 

‘ Great  is  he,  great  is  the  work  of  Thoth.’” 

The  education  so  highly  valued  began  at  a 
tender  age;  the  infant,  when  it  was  weaned, 
was  sent  to  school,  and  there  instructed  by 
scribes  officially  appointed.  The  discipline 
was  severe,  but  due  care  was  taken  for  the 
child’s  maintenance:  the  mother  brought  his 
food  daily  from  his  home,  and  in  the  upper 
schools  rations  of  bread  and  salt  fish  seem  to 
have  been  supplied  regularly  by  the  govern- 
ment: the  register  of  distribution  being,  as  in 
our  colleges,  accepted  as  proofs  of  the  scholars’ 
attendance  (see  Chabas,  ‘Voyage  d’un  Egyp- 
tien,’  p.  23). 

The  scholar  learned  the  elements  of  letters, 
the  rules  of  orthography  and  gramm.ar ; and  as 
he  advanced,  the  art  of  expressing  his  thoughts 
in  simple  and  perspicuous  prose,  of  which  the 
story  of  the  two  brothers  in  the  D’Orbiney 
papyrus  is  a fair  specimen ; or  in  the  epistolary 
style  adapted  for  official  communications, 
which  occupy  a large  portion  of  the  papyri ; or 
in  poetical  composition,  in  which  extant  ex- 
amples shew  a genuine  feeling  for  art;  resem- 
bling Hebrew  poetry  in  the  carefully  balanced 
parallelisms,  and  skilful  combination  of  anti- 


EXODUS.  II. 


259 


theses,  though  differing  from  it  as  markedly 
in  the  absence  of  the  essential  characteristics 
of  simplicity  and  grace.  It  was  indeed  no 
slight  thing  to  master  the  qualifications  of  a 
man  of  letters.  The  mere  art  of  writing  pre- 
sented difficulties  so  serious  that  we  find 
scribes  boasting  of  a thorough  knowledge  of 
the  mysteries  of  sacred  letters  as  a rare  and 
wonderful  attainment.  According  to  Diodorus 
special  pains  were  bestowed  upon  arithmetic 
and  geometry,  an  assertion  borne  out  by  late 
inquiries,  which  shew  that  the  system  of 
notation  was  remarkably  clear,  and  that  exact 
accounts  were  kept  in  every  large  household ; 
a treatise  on  geometry  in  the  British  Museum 
now  engages  the  attention  of  scholars,  and 
will  probably  be  published  by  Mr  Birch. 
The  mystic  writings,  in  which  ancient  truths 
were  imbedded  in  dark  and  dreary  supersti- 
tions, occupied  much  of  the  time,  not  only 
of  the  priests,  but  of  all  men  of  learning. 
Schools  of  interpretation  existed  at  an  age 
long  before  Moses,  which  have  left  abundant 
traces  in  various  readings,  glosses,  and  mys- 
tic explanations  of  the  so-called  Funeral  Ri- 
tual or  Book  of  the  Dead,  a work  which  the 
literal  translation  of  Mr  Birch,  remarkable 
for  learning  and  ingenuity,  has  made  to 
some  extent  accessible  to  English  readers. 
The  earliest  extant  copy  of  the  chapter  (the 
17th)  which  gives  the  deepest  insight  into  the 
ancient  theosophy  of  Egypt*  dates  from  the 
nth  dynasty,  and  has  even  in  that  form 
numerous  glosses  bearing  witness  to  a remote 
antiquity.  In  an  address  to  an  officer  , of 
rank,  whose  adventures  in  Syria  have  been 
illustrated  by  Goodwin  and  Chabas,  the  scribe 
whose  autograph  is  before  us,  says,  “Thou 
art  a scribe  skilful  above  thy  equals,  learned 
in  the  sacred  writings,  chastened  in  heart,  dis- 
ciplined in  tongue;  thy  words  pierce  me,  one 
phrase  has  thrice  gone  forth,  thou  hast  broken 
me  with  terror.”  In  a work  just  published 
(‘Moses  der  Hebraer’)  M.  l.auth  attempts 
to  identify  this  personage  so  remarkable  for 
talents,  learning,  and  bold  speculations  on 
religion,  \^th  Moses  the  Hebrew;  an  identifi- 
cation not  likely  to  approve  itself  to  scholars, 
but  which  serves  to  show  the  course  of  thought, 
and  to  some  extent  the  state  of  mental  de- 
velopment, in  Egypt  at  a time  not  far  remote 
from  that  in  which  Moses  became  learned  in 
all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  and  mighty 
in  word  and  deed. 

13.  The  question  whether  the  residence  of 
Reuel  was  on  the  eastern  or  western  coast  of 
the  Tdanitic  gulf  is  not  easily  settled.  The 
older  and  more  general  tradition  is  in  favour 
of  the  former.  The  ruins  of  the  city  of  Ma- 
dian,  described  by  Edrisi  and  Abul-feda  and 
visited  by  S^etzen,  lay  on  the  east  of  the 
gulph,  five  days’  journey  from  Aila,  i.  e. 
Akaba,  and  a well  was  shewn  there  as  that 
from  which  Moses  watered  the  flocks  of  his 


father-in-law.  It  would  seem  scarcely  proba- 
ble that  Moses  would  be  secure  from  pursuit 
within  the  peninsula,  which  was  frequented 
by  the  Egyptians,  who  long  before  that  time 
worked  the  copper  mines  and  carried  on  a 
considerable  traffic.  Under  the  i8th  and  19th 
dynasties  the  power  of  the  Pharaohs  appears 
to  have  extended  over  the  whole  country.  It 
is  also  to  be  observed  that  the  Israelites  did 
not  come  into  contact  with  the  Midianites 
while  they  were  in  the  peninsula,  and  that 
Jethro  appears  from  the  notices  in  ch.  xviii. 
vv.  I,  27  to  have  come  from  some  con- 
siderable distance  to  meet  Moses.  It  is  ob- 
jected that  the  distance  of  this  city  would 
have  been  too  great  for  Moses  to  have  pas- 
tured the  flocks  of  Jethro  in  the  peninsula, 
but  we  find  instances  of  much  longer  distances 
in  the  history  of  Jacob  and  Laban,  and  at 
present  in  the  accounts  of  the  Bedouins.  Thus 
Bochart,  D’Anville,  Mannert,  and  Quatre- 
mere,  ‘ Memoires  de  I’Academie  des  Inscrip- 
tions et  Belles  Lettres.’ 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  argued  by  Laborde, 
Knobel  and  others,  that  Reuel  must  Lave 
lived  on  the  west  of  the  gulf.  The  communi- 
cations between  the  two  coasts  have  always 
been  frequent ; at  present  sheep  and  goats  are 
brought  in  great  numbers  from  Mukna,  near 
Madian,  for  sale  in  the  peninsula,  and  at  dif- 
ferent times  settlements  have  been  made  by 
Bedouins  from  the  Hedjaz.  The  Towara,  who 
are  now  the  most  powerful  and  most  civilized 
tribe  in  the  Peninsula,  and  have  been  recog- 
nized as  the  true  descendants  of  the  Midian- 
ites by  most  geographers  (see  Ritter,  ‘ Sinai,’ 
p.  936),  occupied  Madian  in  the  time  of  Ma- 
homet, who  received  one  of  their  chieftains 
with  the  exclamation,  “welcome  to  the  bro- 
thers-in-law of  Moses,  welcome  to  the  race 
of  Shoeib,  i.e.  Jethro.”  If  Reuel  lived  in  this 
district,  it  must  have  been  at  Sherm,  about  10 
miles  from  Ras  Mohammed,  the  southern 
headland.  There  are  proofs  that  peculiar 
sanctity  attached  to  that  place  at  a very  early 
period.  The  notices  of  ancient  geographers 
(Strabo,  Artemidorus,  and  Agatharchides,  ap. 
Diodor.  Sic.,  collected  and  examined  by 
Knobel)  speak  of  extensive  palm-groves,  abun- 
dant sources  of  fresh  water,  and  a sanctuary 
under  the  charge  of  an  hereditary  priest  and 
priestess,  who  held  their  office  for  life.  The 
same  writers  testify  to  the  existence  of  an 
ancient  tribe  in  that  neighbourhood  bearing 
a name  (Maptai/rif)  nearly  resembling  and 
probably  identical  with  ^lidianites;  the  d 
and  r are  frequently  interchanged,  or  con- 
founded owing  to  the  similarity  of  *1  and  "1, 

A similarity  even  more  striking  in  the  most 
archaic  forms  of  the  two  letters.  The  place, 
though  sharing  the  general  desolation  of 
Turkish  provinces,  is  at  present  of  some  im- 
portance. “There are  two  large  bays  afford- 
ing the  only  safe  anchorage  for  large  ships , ^n• 
the  southern  bay  is  the  tomb  of  an  unknown 

R 2 


26o 


EXODUS.  III. 


Lv-  I- 


sheickh,  near  the  northern  bay  are  several  co- 
pious wells  of  brackish  water,  deep,  and  lined 
with  ancient  stones,  apparently  an  ancient  work 
of  considerable  labour.”  Burckhardt,  ‘ Syria,’ 
P-  52- 


18.  The  identity  of  Reuel  with  Jethro  rests 
chiefly  on  the  assumption  that  }nn,  which  is 
applied  to  Jethro  repeatedly  in  the  3rd  and 
1 8th  chapters,  means  “father-in-law.”  If 
Jethro  were  the  father-in-law  of  Moses  he 
would  of  course  be  the  same  person  as  Reuel. 
But  in  all  other  passages  when  the  word  tnn 
occurs,  it  means  simply  a “relation  by  mar- 
riage.” In  the  Pentateuch  it  is  applied  to  the 
sons-in-law  of  Lot,  Gen.  xix.  12,  14:  to  the 
brother-in-law  of  Moses,  Hobab,  Num.  x. 
29  : to  Moses  himself,  as  husband  of  Zipporah, 
Exod.  iv.  25,  26.  In  the  book  of  Judges  it 
is  used  once  (xix.  4)  of  “a  father-in-law,” 
twice  of  “a  son-in-law,”  twice  of  “a  brother- 
in-law.”  The  meaning  in  other  passages  is  far 
more  commonly  son-in-law.  The  LXX.  uses 
7,-ev6(pus  and  yapppos-  The  usage  in  Hebrew, 
Syriac,  and  Arabic  is  the  same.  Thus  Freytag, 
socer,  vel  omnis  propinquus  ab  uxoris 

parte,  scil.  pater  ejus,  aut  frater,  &c. : ita  apud 
genuinos  Arates:  vulgo  autem  est  gener.  ^Our 
rendering  follows  the  Targums  and  Saadia. 
I'he  Coptic  word  “Shorn”  has  the  same 


range  of  meaning.  The  meaning  “ circum- 
cidit”  has  no  authority  in  Hebrew,  unless 
the  very  improbable  explanation  of  ch.  iv.  21, 
proposed  by  Gesenius,  were  admitted.  The 
relationship  therefore  between  Jethro  and 
Moses  cannot  be  decided  by  this  word;  it 
depends  upon  the  internal  evidence  of  the 
narrative.  But  Reuel  must  have  been  advanced 
in  years,  having  seven  grown  up  daughters 
when  Moses  arrived  in  Midian.  When  Moses 
was  eighty  years  old,  it  is  more  probable 
that  Reliefs  son  had  succeeded  him  in  his 
hereditary  priesthood  than  that  he  was  still 
living:  and  no  difficulty  is  presented  by  the 
supposition  that  Jethro  was  the  brother-in- 
law,  not  the  father-in-law  of  Moses.  The 
identity  in  that  case  of  Jethro  and  Hobab, 
see  Numb.  x.  29,  may  be  regarded  as  possible, 
but  by  no  means  as  certain.  Jethro  returned 
to  his  own  land  before  the  promulgation  of 
the  law  on  Sinai,  nor  does  his  name  occur 
afterwards.  Hobab  appears  to  have  accom- 
panied Moses  on  his  journey,  casting  in  his 
lot  with  the  Israelites  (see  Judges  iv.  ii).  Fie 
may  have  been,  and  very  probably  was,  a 
younger  brother  of  Jethro,  not  bound,  like 
him,  to  his  own  tribe  by  the  duties  of  an  he- 
reditary priesthood.  This  combination  seems 
to  meet  all  the  conditions  of  the  narrative, 
which  would  otherwise  present  serious,  if  not 
insuperable,  difficulties. 


CHAPTER  III. 

I Moses  kcepeth  Jethro's  fiock.  2 God  appeareth 
to  him  in  a burning  bush.  9 He  sendcth  him 
to  deliver  Israel.  1 4 The  name  of  God.  1 5 
His  7?iessage  to  Israel. 


NOW  Moses  kept  the  flock  of 
Jethro  his  father  in  law,  the 
priest  of  Midian : and  he  led  the  flock 
to  the  backside  of  the  desert,  and 


Chap.  III.  The  connection  between  this 
chapter  and  the  preceding  is  very  close,  al- 
though many  years  intei-vened  between  the 
arrival  of  Moses  in  Midian  and  the  transac- 
tions described  in  it.  It  marks  however  a 
distinct  epoch,  the  commencement  of  the  sc- 
ries of  events  which  immediately  preceded  the 
Exodus.  Hitherto  the  narrative  has  been  stu- 
diously brief,  stating  only  what  was  necessary 
to  b-e  known  as  preparatory  to  those  events; 
but  from  this  point  Moses  dwells  minutely  on 
the  details,  and  enables  us  to  realize  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  catastrophe  which  in  its 
immediate  and  remote  consequences  stands 
alone  in  the  world’s  history.  Idiis  chapter  is 
attributed  by  some  Avriters  to  the  so-called 
Jehovist;  by  others  it  is  broken  up  into  frag- 
ments, in  order  to  meet  the  obvious  objection 
that  the  name  Elohim  is  found  in  it  seventeen 
times,  that  of  Jehovah  six  times  only.  But 
the  internal  evidence  of  unity  is  irresistible, 
and  the  fact  that  both  the  divine  names  occur 
far  more  frc(]uently  than  in  tlie  preceding 
chapters  is  sufficiently  accounted  for  by  our 


having  here  a record  of  the  personal  interven- 
tion of  the  Lord  God. 

1.  the  flock']  The  expression  is  precise 
in  Hebrew  as  in  English,  meaning  not  the 
cattle,  but  the  sheep  and  goats.  At  present 
neither  oxen  nor  horses  are  kept  in  ♦he  Penin- 
sula, which  does  not  supply  fodder  for  them, 
under  ordinary  circumstances.  It  was  how- 
ever far  more  fertile  in  the  time  of  Moses. 

Jethro  his  father-in-lazv]  Or  “brother- 
in-law,”  see  note  above.  An  indefinite  word 
such  as  affinis,  signifying  relation  by  marriage, 
would  be  preferablo,  but  Jethro  was  probably 
the  brother-in-law  of  Moses. 

the  backside]  Gesenius  explains  this  to  mean 
“to  the  west  of  the  district.”  This  follows 
from  the  Hebrew  system  of  orientation.  The 
East  is  the  region  which  is  looked  upon  as 
before  a man,  the  west  behind  him,  the  south 
and  north  as  the  right  and  left  hand. 

desert]  Or  w i i d e r n e s s.  T he  word  here 
used  does  not  mean  a barren  waste,  but  a dis- 
trict supplying  pasturage.  The  district  near 


' V.  2 6.] 


EXODUS.  III. 


261 


came  to  the  mountain  of  God,  even 
to  Horeb. 

2 And  the  angei  of  the  Lord  ap- 
- Acts  7 peared  unto  him  in  a flame  of  fire 

out  of  the  midst  of  a bush : and  he 
looked,  and,  behold,  the  bush  burned 
with  fire,  and  the  bush  was  not  con- 
sumed. 

3 And  Moses  said,  I will  now  turn 
aside,  and  see  this  great  sight,  why  the 
bush  is  not  burnt. 


4 And  when  the  Lord  saw  that  he 
turned  aside  to  see,  God  called  unto 
him  out  of  the  midst  of  the  bush,  and 
said,  Moses,  Moses.  And  he  said. 

Here  am  1. 

5 And  he  said.  Draw  not  nigh 
hither:  ^put  off  thy  shoes  from  off d josh  5. 
thy  feet,  for  the  place  whereon  thou  ^ 
standest  is  holy  ground. 

6 Adoreover  he  said,  am  the  God  22. 
of  thy  father,  the  God  of  Abraham,  7. 32. 


Sherm,  where  Jethro  may  have  resided,  is 
described  by  ancient  and  modern  travellers  as 
barren  and  parched ; on  the  west  and  east  are 
rocky  tracts,  but  to  the  north-west,  at  a dis- 
tance of  three  or  four  days’  journey,  lies  the 
district  of  Sinai,  where  the  pasturage  is  good 
and  water  abundant.  The  Bedouins  drive 
their  flocks  thither  from  the  lowlands  at  the 
approach  of  summer.  From  this  it  may  be 
inferred  that  the  events  here  recorded  took 
place  at  that  season. 

the  mountain  of  God^  eTen  to  Horeb~\  More 
exactly.  To  the  mountain  of  God,  to- 
wards Horeb.  The  meaning  is  that  Moses 
came  to  the  mountain  of  God,  i.e.  Sinai,  on 
his  way  towards  Horeb.  The  name  Horeb 
appears  to  belong  to  the  northern  part  of  the 
Sinaitic  range,  and  to  reach  it  Moses  probably 
followed  the  road  from  Sherm,  which  passes 
through  the  deep  valley  between  the  Gebel  ed 
Deir  and  the  range  terminated  on  the  south 
by  the  commanding  height  called  Gebel  Musa. 
The  tract  which  leads  to  the  height  is  half 
way  between  the  two  extremities,  about  three 
miles  distant  from  each  other:  this  would 
bring  Moses  to  the  lower  part  of  the  range 
towards  the  north,  which  is  best  adapted  for 
pasturage.  An  argument  is  drawn  from  the 
expression  “mountain  of  God”  against  the 
Mosaic  authorship:  but  Moses,  who  appears  to 
have  written,  or  to  have  revised,  this  book  to- 
wards the  end  of  his  life,  may  naturally  have 
given  this  name  by  anticipation,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  manifestation  of  God.  The 
paraphrase  in  the  Targum  gives  the  true 
meaning,  “the  mountain  in  which  the  glory  of 
Jah  was  revealed  to  him.”  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  assumed  that  the  spot  was  previ- 
ously held  sacred.  For  this  there  is  no  ancient 
authority;  though  it  has  been  lately  shewn 
that  the  whole  Peninsula  was  regarded  by  the 
Egyptians  as  specially  consecrated  to  the  gods 
from  a very  early  time.  An  inscription  at 
Sarbut  el  Chadem,  dated  the  25  th  year  of 
Thotmes  III.,  speaks  of  an  offlcer  charged  to 
bring  copper  from  the  land  of  the  gods. 

2.  the  angel  of  the  Lord]  Or  an  angel 
of  Jebovab;  the  article  is  not  in  the  He- 


brew. On  the  meaning  and  usage  of  the  ex- 
pression see  note  on  Gen.  xii.  7.  In  this  pas- 
sage it  appears  to  designate  a manifestation  of 
God  by  the  agency,  or  instrumentality  of  a 
created  being.  What  Moses  saw  was  the 
flame  of  fire  in  the  bush ; what  he  recognised 
therein  was  an  intimation  of  the  presence  of 
God,  who  maketh  “ a flame  of  fire  His  angel.” 
Ps.  civ.  4.  The  words  which  Moses  heard 
were  those  of  God  Himself,  as  all  ancient  and 
most  modern  divines  have  held,  manifested  in 
the  Person  of  the  Son. 

out  of  the  midst  of  a bush]  Literally  “ of  the 
busk,  or  seneh,”  a word  which  ought  perhaps 
to  be  retained  as  the  proper  name  of  a thorny 
shrub  common  in  that  district,  a species  of 
acacia  according  to  Dr  Stanley.  The  name  is 
very  ancient,  in  Coptic  Sheno ; it  is  found  in 
papyri  of  the  19th  dynasty  and  in  inscriptions 
quoted  by  Brugsch,  ‘D.  H.’  p.  1397,  who 
translates  it  Dorn-Acacia,  thorny  acacia.  The 
use  of  the  article  is  peculiar:  it  seems  to  mean 
that  bush  of  which  Moses  must  have  spoken 
frequently  to  the  Israelites. 

4.  the  Lord  saw]  The  interchange  of  the 
two  divine  names  is  to  be  observed  ; Jehouah 
saw,  God  called. 

5.  put  off  thy  shoes]  The  reverence  due  to 
holy  places  thus  rests  on  God’s  own  command. 
The  custom  itself  is  well  known  from  the 
observances  of  the  Temple,  it  was  almost 
universally  adopted  by  the  ancients,  and  is 
retained  in  the  East. 

holy  ground]  This  passage  is  almost  con- 
clusive against  the  assumption  that  the  place 
was  previously  a sanctuary.  Moses  knew  no- 
thing of  its  holiness  after  some  40  years  spent 
on  the  Peninsula.  It  became  holy  by  the 
presence  of  God. 

6.  Moreo-ver]  Literally  And. 

thy  father]  The  word  seems  to  be  used 
collectively  for  the  forefathers  of  Moses;  it 
may,  however,  refer  specially  to  Abraham,  the 
father  of  the  faithful ; with  whom  the  covenant 
was  first  m.ade. 

Our  Saviour  adduces  the  passage  as  a proof 
that  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  was 
taught  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  he  calls  this 


262 


EXODUS.  III. 


. 7 12 


the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of 
Jacob.  And  Moses  hid  his  face;  for 
he  was  afraid  to  look  upon  God. 

7 H And  the  Lord  said,  I have 
surely  seen  the  affliction  of  my  people 
which  are  in  Egypt,  and  have  heard 
their  cry  by  reason  of  their  task- 
masters ; for  I know  their  sorrows ; 

8 And  I am  come  down  to  deliver 
them  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Egyptians, 
and  to  bring  them  up  out  of  that  land 
unto  a good  land  and  a large,  unto  a 
land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey; 
unto  the  place  of  the  Canaanites,  and 
the  Hittites,  and  the  Amorites,  and 
the  Perizzites,  and  the  Hivites,  and 
the  Jebusites. 


book  the  book  of  Moses  (see  marg.),  two 
points  to  be  borne  in  mind  by  readers  of  the 
Pentateuch. 

7.  taskmasters\  A different  word  from 
that  used  in  ch.  i.  ii.  It  means  oppressors. 

I Xwo-xu]  The  expression  implies  a personal 
feeling,  tenderness,  and  compassion. 

8.  a good  land^  Slc.']  The  natural  richness 
of  Palestine,  the  variety  and  excellence  of  its 
productions,  are  attested  by  all  ancient  writers, 
whose  descriptions  are  strongly  in  contrast 
with  those  of  later  travellers.  The  expression 
“flowing  with  milk  and  honey”  is  used  pro- 
verbially by  Greek  poets.  Knobel  assumes 
very  unnecessarily,  that  the  honey  of  wine,  not 
of  bees,  is  meant ; Euripides,  describing  a 
paradisiacal  state,  says:  “It  flows  with  milk, 
it  flows  with  the  honey  of  bees,”  ‘Bacchae,’  1. 
142.  On  the  abundance  of  honey  in  Palestine 
see  Tristram,  ‘Land  of  Israel,’  p.  88. 

the  place  of  the  Canaanites^  I'his  is  the  first 
passage  in  this  book  where  the  enumeration, 
so  often  repeated,  of  the  nations  then  in  pos- 
session of  Palestine,  is  given.  Moses  was  to 
learn  at  once  the  extent  of  the  promise,  and 
the  greatness  of  the  enterprise.  In  Egypt, 
the  forces,  situation,  and  character  of  these 
nations  were  then  well  known.  Aahmes  I. 
had  invaded  the  south  of  Palestine  in  his 
pursuit  of  the  Shasous ; Thotmes  1.  had 
traversed  the  whole  land  on  his  campaign  in 
Syria  and  Mesopotamia;  representations  of 
Canaanites,  of  the  Cheta,  identified  by  most 
Egyptologers  with  the  Hittites,  are  common 
on  monuments  of  the  i8th  and  19th  dynas- 
ties, and  give  a strong  impression  of  their 
civilization,  riches,  and  especially  of  their 
knowledge  of  the  arts  of  war.  In  this 
passage,  the  more  general  designations  come 
first — “Canaanites”  probably  includes  all  the 
races;  the  Hittites,  who  had  great  numbers  of 
chariots  (892  were  taken  from  them  by  Thot- 


9 Now  therefore,  behold,  the  cry 
of  the  children  of  Israel  is  come  unto 
me : and  I have  also  seen  the  oppres- 
sion wherewith  the  Egyptians  oppress 
them. 

10  Come  now  therefore,  and  I will 
send  thee  unto  Pharaoh,  that  thou 
mayest  bring  forth  my  people  the 
children  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt. 

1 1 ^ And  Moses  said  unto  God, 
Who  am  I,  that  I should  go  unto 
Pharaoh,  and  that  I should  bring 
forth  the  children  of  Israel  out  of 
Egypt? 

12  And  he  said.  Certainly  I will 
be  with  thee ; and  this  shall  be  a token 
unto  thee,  that  I have  sent  thee : 


mes  III.  in  one  battle),  occupied  the  plains; 
the  Amorites  were  chiefly  mountaineers,  but 
gave  their  name  to  the  whole  country  in 
Egyptian  inscriptions;  the  name  Perizzites 
probably  denotes  the  dwellers  in  scattered 
villages,  the  half-nomad  population  ; the  Hi- 
vites, a comparatively  unwarlike,  but  influential 
people,  held  4 cities  in  Palestine  proper,  but 
their  main  body  dwelt  in  the  north-western  dis- 
trict, from  Hermon  to  Hamath  (see  Josh.  xi.  3, 
and  Judg.  iii.  3)  ; the  Jebusites  at  that  time 
appear  to  have  occupied  Jerusalem  and  the 
adjoining  district.  Soon  after  their  expulsion 
by  Joshua,  they  seem  to  have  recovered  pos- 
session of  part  of  Jerusalem,  probably  Mount 
Zion,  and  to  have  retained  it  until  the  time  of 
David. 

11.  Who  am  7]  The  change  in  the  character 
of  Moses  since  his  first  attempt,  is  strongly 
marked  by  these  words,  which,  however, 
iridicate  humility,  not  fear.  Amongthegrounds 
which  he  alleges  for  his  hesitation,  in  no  in- 
stance is  there  any  allusion  to  personal  danger; 
what  he  feared  was  failure  owing  tc  incom- 
petcncy,  especially  in  the  power  of  expres- 
sion. This  shrinking  from  self-assertion  is  the 
quality  which  seems  to  be  specially  intimated 
by  the  word  rendered  “meek”  in  Numbers 
ch.  xii.  3. 

12.  a token  unto  thee]  Or  the  sign.  This 
passage  illustrates  a peculiar  use  of  the  word. 
It  generally  means  any  act,  whether  super- 
natural or  not,  which  is  made  the  pledge  of 
some  future  event;  but  sometimes,  as  un- 
doubtedly in  this  place,  it  means  a declaration 
or  promise  of  God,  which  rests  absolutely  on 
His  word,  and  demands  faith.  The  pro- 
mise that  God  would  have  the  people  serve 
Him  in  that  place  was  an  assurance,  if  fully 
believed^  that  all  intervening  obstacles  would 
be  removed  by  His  power. 


V.  13— 1 8.] 


EXODUS.  III. 


263 


When  thou  hast  brought  forth  the 
people  out  of  Egypt,  ye  shall  serve 
God  upon  this  mountain. 

« 13  And  Moses  said  unto  God,  Be- 

hold, when  I come  unto  the  children 
of  Israel,  and  shall  say  unto  them. 
The  God  of  your  fathers  hath  sent 
me  unto  you;  and  they  shall  say  to 
me.  What  is  hisr  name  ? what  shall  I 
say  unto  them? 

14  And  God  said  unto  Moses,  I 
AM  THAT  I AM:  and  he  said. 
Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  the  children 
of  Israel,  I AM  hath  sent  me  unto 
you. 

15  And  God  said  moreover  unto 
Moses,  Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  The  Lord  God  of 
vour  fathers,  the  God  of  Abraham, 
the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Ja- 
cob, hath  sent  me  unto  you:  this  is 


my  name  for  ever,  and  this  is  my 
memorial  unto  all  generations. 

16  Go,  and  gather  the  elders  of 
Israel  together,  and  say  unto  them. 
The  Lord  God  of  your  fathers,  the 
God  of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of 
Jacob,  appeared  unto  me,  saying,  I 
have  surely  visited  you,  and  seen  that 
which  is  done  to  you  in  Itgypt: 

17  And  I have  said,  I will  bring 
you  up  out  of  the  affliction  of  Egypt 
unto  the  land  of  the  Canaanites,  and 
the  Hittites,  and  the  Amorites,  and 
the  Perizzites,  and  the  Hivites,  and 
the  Jebusites,  unto  a land  flowing  with 
milk  and  honey. 

18  And  they  shall  hearken  to  thy 
voice : and  thou  shalt  come,  thou  and 
the  elders  of  Israel,  unto  the  king  of 
Egypt,  and  ye  shall  say  unto  him. 
The  Lord  God  of  the  Hebrews  hath 


13.  What  is  bis  name]  The  meaning  of 
this  question  is  evidently:  By  which  name 
shall  I tell  them  the  promise  is  confirmed? 
Each  name  of  the  Deity  represented  some 
aspect  or  manifestation  of  His  attributes.  El, 
Elohim,  or  Shaddai  would  speak  of  majesty,  or 
might;  either  would  probably  have  sufficed 
for  Moses,  but  he  would  not  use  any  one  of 
them  without  God’s  special  permission.  What 
he  needed  was  not  a new  name,  but  direction 
to  use  that  Name  which  would  bear  in  itself 
a pledge  of  accomplishment.  It  is  not  pro- 
bable that  Moses  alluded  to  the  multitudinous 
gods  of  Egypt ; but  he  was  familiar  with  the 
Egyptian  habit  of  choosing  from  their  many 
names  that  which  bore  specially  upon  the  wants 
and  circumstances  of  their  worshippers  (see 
especially  the  formulse  in  the  ‘Papyrus  ma- 
gique  d’ Harris,’  Ghabas),  and  this  may  possi- 
bly have  suggested  the  question  which  he  was 
of  course  aware  would  be  the  first  his  own 
people  would  expect  him  to  ansv/er. 

14.  I am  that  I am]  That  is  “I  am 
what  I am.”  The  words  express  absolute, 
and  therefore  unchanging  and  eternal  Being. 
So  they  are  understood  by  ancient  and  modern 
interpreters  (On  the  meaning  and  use  of  the 
name  see  the  General  Introduction).  To 
Moses  and  the  Israelites  this  was  an  explana- 
tion of  the  name  Jehovah,  which  had  been 
known  from  the  beginning,  but  of  which  pro- 
bably the  meaning,  certainly  the  full  import, 
v/as  not  comprehended.  The  word  “I  am” 
in  Hebrew  is  equivalent  in  meaning  to  Jehovah, 
and  differs  from  it  very  slightly  in  form.  This 


is  much  obscured  by  our  substitution  of 
Lord  for  Jehovah.  The  name,  which  Moses 
was  thus  commissioned  to  use,  was  at  once 
new  and  old ; old  in  its  connection  with 
previous  revelations;  new  in  its  full  interpre- 
tation, and  in  its  bearing  upon  the  covenant 
of  which  Moses  was  the  destined  mediator. 

15.  The  Lord  God]  In  this  passage  it  is 
of  great  importance  to  keep  the  divine  name 
Jehovah  God  of  your  fathers,  God 
of  Ahraham,  God  of  Isaac,  and  God 
of  Jacob.  It  corresponds  exactly  to  the  pre- 
ceding verse,  the  words  lam  and  Jehovah 
being  equivalent.  This  enables  us  to  omit 
the  article  before  “God,”  which  is  not  in  the 
Hebrew,  and  may  be  misunderstood,  as  though 
distinguishing  Jehovah  from  other  gods.  The 
name  met  all  the  requirements  of  Moses,  in- 
volving a twofold  pledge  of  accomplishment; 
the  pledges  of  ancient  benefits  and  of  a new 
manifestation. 

name... memorial]  The  name  signifies  that 
by  which  God  makes  himself  known,  the 
memorial  that  by  which  His  people  worship 
Him;  or  as  Bishop  Wordsworth,  following 
Keil,  expresses  it  “the  name  declares  the 
objective  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Nature ; 
the  memorial,  the  subjective  recognition  by 
man.” 

18.  hath  met  ^ith  ns]  This  translation 
has  been  questioned,  but  it  is  now  generally 
adopted.  The  Ancient  Versions  generally 
have  “ hath  commanded  or  called  us.” 


t 


264 


EXODUS.  III. 


[v.  19—22. 


met  with  us : and  now  let  us  go,  we 
beseech  thee,  three  days’  journey  into 
the  wilderness,  that  we  may  sacrifice 
to  the  Lord  our  God. 

19  ^ And  I am  sure  that  the  king 

\%rons  will  not  let  you  go,  “no,  not 

by  a mighty  hand. 

20  And  I will  stretch  out  my  hand, 
and  smite  Egypt  with  all  my  wonders 
which  I will  do  in  the  midst  thereof: 
and  after  that  he  will  let  you  go. 


21  And  I will  give  this  people  fa- 

vour in  the  sight  of  the  Egyptians: 
and  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that,  when 
ye  go,  ye  shall  not  go  empty : » 

22  ^But  every  woman  shall  borrow  «rchap. 
of  her  neighbour,  and  of  her  that^-^^^’ 
sojourneth  in  h?r  house,  jewels  of 
silver,  and  jewels  of  gold,  and  raiment : 

and  ye  shall  put  f/7em’upon  your  sons, 
and  upon  your  daughters ; and  ye  shall 
spoil  “the  Egyptians. 


f/?ree  days'  journey^  i.e.  A journey  which 
would  occupy  three  days  in  going  and  re- 
turning. The  request  which  the  Israelites 
were  instructed  to  make  was  therefore  most 
probably  not  a permission  to  go  beyond  the 
frontier,  but  into  the  part  of  the  desert  adjoin- 
ing Goshen.  In  this  there,  was  no  deception. 
The  Israelites  were  to  ask  what  could  not 
reasonably  be  refused,  being  a demand  quite  in 
accordance  with  Egyptian  customs.  The  re- 
fusal of  Pharaoh  and  his  subsequent  proceed- 
ings led  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  ultimate 
purpose  of  God,  which  was  revealed  to  Moses 
at  once,  since  without  it  his  mission  would 
have  had  no  adequate  object.  It  is  important 
to  observe  that  the  first  request  which  Pharaoh 
rejected  could  have  been  granted  without  any 
damage  to  Egypt,  or  any  risk  of  the  Israelites 
passing  the  strongly  fortified  frontier.  The 
point  is  well  drawn  out  by  M.  de  Quatremere. 
See  ‘MC-moires  de  1’ Academic  des  Inscriptions 
et  Belles  Lettres,’  Vol.  xix. 

19.  And  I am  sure]  Or,  I know. 

no,  not]  The  marginal  rendering  “but  by 
a mighty  hand”  probably  gives  the  true  mean- 
ing, but  the  construction  presents  some  diffi- 
culty. The  LXX.  have  iav  iirj,  unless.  Keil 
renders  the  phrase  “not  even  by  a mighty 
hand,”  and  explains  it  to  mean  Pharaoh  will 
not  let  the  people  go  even  when  severely 
smitten.  This  is  a satisfactory  explanation, 
and  is  borne  out  by  the  history;  even  after 
the  8th  plague,  we  read  “Pharaoh  would  not 
let  them  go.” 

22.  shall  borro'w]  or  shall  ask.  (See 
Note  at  the  end  of  the  Chapter.)  Our  trans- 
lation is  unfortunate.  The  word  is  exceed- 
ingly common,  and  always  means  ask  or  de- 
mand. Setting  aside  this  passage  no  proof  or 
justification  of  the  rendering  “borrow”  is  ad- 
duced, except  1 Sam.  i.a8,and  2 Kingsvi.5.  In 
the  foiTuer  passage  the  meaning  is  “asked,” 
and  granted,  not  “borrowed.”  In  the  latter  the 
meaning  “borrowed”  is  true,  but  secondary. 
Of  course  “asked”  may  apply  either  to  a gift  or 
a loan,  a sense  to  be  determined  by  the  context, 
as  in  Exod.  xxii.  14,  where  the  construction 
is  different. , Iii  this  case  there  is  no  indication 


that  the  jewels  which  were  demanded  when  the 
final  departure  of  the  Israelites  was  settled, 
and  strongly  urged  upon  their  acceptance  by 
the  Egyptians,  were  expected  to  be  returned. 
The  Egyptians  had  made  the  people  serv'e 
“with  rigour,  in  all  manner  of  service  in  the 
fields,”  and  the  Israelites  when  about  to  leave 
the  country  for  ever  were  to  ask,  or  claim  the 
jewels  as  a just,  though  very  inadequate  remune- 
ration for  services  which  had  made  “their  lives 
bitter.”  The  Egyptians  doubtless  would  have 
refused  had  not  their  feelings  towards  Moses 
(see  ch.  xi.  3)  and  the  people  been  changed 
under  God’s  influence,  by  calamities  in  which 
they  recognized  a divine  interposition,  v/hich 
also  they  rightly  attributed  to  the  obstinacy  of 
their  own  king,  (see  ch.  x.  7).  The  Hebrew 
w^omen  were  to  make  the  demand,  and  were 
to  make  it  to  women,  who  would  of  course 
be  specially  moved  to  compliance  by  the  loss 
of  their  children,  the  fear  of  a recurrence  of 
calamity,  perhaps  also  by  a sense  of  the  fitness 
of  the  request  in  connection  with  a religious 
festival. 

jewels]  The  Hebrew  may  be  rendered  more 
generally  “vessels”  or  simply  “articles.”  (The 
Vulgate  has  vasa,  the  LXX.  (tk€vtj.)  But  the 
word  probably  refers  chiefly  to  trinkets.  The 
ornaments  of  gold  and  silver  worn  at  that 
time  by  Egyptian  women  were  beautiful  and 
of  great  value.  It  is  probable  that,  as  at 
present,  husbands  invested  their  earnings  in 
j ewels.  The  wife  of  a tradesman  or  of  a drago- 
man is  thus  often  in  possession  of  bracelets  and 
collars  of  gold  which  in  Europe  would  indicate 
wealth  or  high  station.  It  is  to  be  observed 
that  these  ornaments  were  actually  applied  to 
the  purpose  for  which  they  were  probably  de- 
manded, being  employed  in  making  the  vessels 
of  the  sanctuary. 

sojourneth  hi  her  house]  This  indicates  a 
degree  of  friendly  and  neighbourly  intercourse, 
which  could  scarcely  be  inferred  from  the 
preceding  narrative,  but  it  is  in  accordance 
with  several  indirect  notices,  and  was  a natural 
result  of  long  and  peaceable  sojourn  in  the 
district.  The  Egyptians  did  not  all  necessaiily 
share  the  feelings  of  their  new  king. 


V.  I — 8.] 


EXODUS.  IV. 


265 


NOTE  on  Chap.  hi.  v.  22. 


The  true  translation  is  important.  The 
word  has  in  fact  but  one  true  meaning,  ‘ask.’ 
The  ancient  Versions  take  it  in  this  sense. 
The  LXX.  has  the  Vulgate,  postu- 

labit.  The  Syriac  and  the  Targum  use  the 
same  word,  in<  the  same  sense  as  the  Hebrew. 
Thus  too  the  Samaritan  paraphrase.  Saadia 


has  V which  is  incorrectly  ren- 

dered in  Walton's  Polyglott,  mutuabitur. 
Freytag,  ‘Lex.  Arab.’  s.  v.,  gives  the  true 
sense,  rogavit  donum,  aut  petiit  dono  sibi  dari 
quid.  See  also  the  note  on  c.  xii.  36. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

I Moses's  rod  is  ht.rned  into  a serpent.  6 His 
hand  is  leprous.  10  He  is  loth  to  be  sent. 
14  Aaron,  is  appointed  to  assist  him.  18 
Moses  departeth  fro7n  JetJu’o.  -21  God's  mes- 
sage to  Pharaoh.  24  Zipporah  circmnciseth 
her  son.  27  Aaron  is  se^it  to  meet  A/oses. 
31  The  people  believeth  them. 

AND  Moses  answered  and  said, 
But,  behold,  they  will  not  be- 
lieve me,  nor  hearken  unto  my  voice  : 
for  they  will  say,  The  Lord  hath  not 
appeared  unto  thee. 

2 And  the  Lord  said  unto  him. 
What  is  that  in  thine  hand?  And 
he  said,  A rod. 

3 And  he  said.  Cast  it  on  the 
ground.  And  he  cast  it  on  the 
ground,  and  it  became  a serpent ; 
and  Moses  fled  from  before  it. 

4 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Put  forth  thine  hand,  and  take  it  by 
the  tail.  And  he  put  forth  his  hand. 


and  caught  it,  and  it  became  a rod  in 
his  hand ; 

5 That  they  may  believe  that  the 
Lord  God  of  their  fathers,  the  God 
of  Abraham,  the  God  of  Isaac,  and 
the  God  of  Jacob,  hath  appeared  unto 
thee. 

6 ^ And  the  Lord  said  further- 
more unto  him.  Put  now  thine  hand 
into  thy  bosom.  And  he  put  his 
hand  into  his  bosom : and  when  he 
took  it  out,  behold,  his  hand  was 
leprous  as  snow. 

7 And  he  said,  Put  thine  hand  into 
thy  bosom  again.  And  he  put  his 
hand  into  his  bosom  again ; and  pluck- 
ed it  out  of  his  bosom,  and,  behold,  it 
was  turned  again  as  his  other  flesh. 

8 And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if  they 
will  not  believe  thee,  neither  hearken 
to  the  voice  of  the  first  sign,  that  they 
will  believe  the  voice  of  the  latter  sign. 


Chap.  IV.  With  this  chapter  begins  the 
series  of  miracles  which  resulted  in  the  de- 
liverance of  Israel.  Long  intervals  of  sacred 
history  pass  without  any  notice  of  miracle; 
not  one,  properly  speaking,  is  recorded  in  con- 
nection with  the  previous  history  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Jacob;  but  they  cluster  around  great 
and  critical  events,  occurring  where  they  are 
demonstrably  necessary.  It  is  clear  that  un- 
less a spiritual  miracle  transcending  out- 
ward mai-vels  had  been  wrought  in  the  hearts 
both  of  the  Israelites  and  of  their  oppressors, 
some  special  manifestations  of  divine  power 
were  indispensable.  The  first  miracle  was 
wrought  to  remove  the  first  obstacle,  viz.  the 
reluctance  of  Moses,  conscious  of  his  own 
weakness,  and  of  the  enormous  power  with 
which  he  would  have  to  contend.  The  LXX. 
add,  “what  shall  I say  unto  them?”  a pro- 
bable, but  not  a necessary  reading. 

‘2.  A rod']  The  word  seems  to  denote 
the  long  staff  which  on  Egyptian  monuments 
is  borne  by  men  in  positions  of  authority. 
See  Wilkinson,  iir.  pp.  367  and  386.  It  was 
usually  made  of  .acacia  wood,  such  as  is  still 


sold  for  that  purpose  by  the  monks  of  the 
convent  of  Mount  Sinai. 

3.  a serpent]  This  miracle  had  a meaning 
which  Moses  could  not  mistake.  The  serpent 
was  probably  the  basilisk  or  Urceus,  the  Cobra. 
See  Tristram,  ‘Nat.  Hist.’  p.  271.  This  was 
the  symbol  of  royal  and  divine  power  on  the 
diadem  of  every  Pharaoh.  It  was  a poisonous 
snake,  as  is  shown  by  the  flight  of  Moses  and 
by  most  passages  in  which  the  same  word 
occurs,  nabash.,  derived  from  hissing.  This 
snake  never  attacks  without  first  inflating  its 
neck,  and  then  hissing ; on  the  monuments  it 
is  always  represented  with  its  neck  enormously 
swollen.  The  conversion  of  the  rod  was  not 
merely  a portent  (repa?),  it  was  a sign  (o-T^peioA^ 
at  once  a pledge  and  representation  of  victory 
over  the  king  and  gods  of  Egypt. 

6.  hprous]  The  instantaneous  production 
and  cure  of  the  most  malignant  and  subtle 
disease  known  to  the  Israelites  was  a sign  of 
their  danger  if  they  resisted  the  command, 
and  of  their  deliverance  if  they  obeyed  it.  The 
infliction  and  cure  v'ere  always  regarded  as 
special  proofs  of  a divine  intervention. 


266 


EXODUS.  IV. 


[v.  9 — j6. 


9 And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if  they 
will  not  believe  also  these  two  signs, 
neither  hearken  unto  thy  voice,  that 
thou  shalt  take  of  the  water  of  the 
river,  and  pour  it  upon  the  dry  land: 
and  the  water  which  thou  takest  out 
tHeb.  ol*  the  river  Uhall  become  blood  upon 
‘he  dry  land. 

tc’.  10  ^ And  Moses  said  unto  the 

fHeb  Lord,  O my  Lord,  I am  not  ^elo- 
amano/  Quent,  neither  ^heretofore,  nor  since 

luords.  Ill  1 

t Heb.  thou  hast  spoken  unto  thy  servant ; 
TerdayT  ^ speech,  and  of  a 

'tr  >aurd  tongue. 

day.  1 1 And  the  Lord  said  unto  him. 

Who  hath  made  man’s  mouth  ? or 
who  maketh  the  dumb,  or  deaf,  or 
the  seeing,  or  the  blind?  have  not  I 
the  Lord  ? 


12  Now  therefore  go,  and  I will 

be  "with  thy  mouth,  and  teach  thee  " Matt.  lo. 
what  thou  shalt  say.  Mark  13. 

1 3 And  he  said,  O my  Lord,  send,  lAc  12 

I pray  thee,  by  the  hand  of'  him  whom  “• 
thou  " wilt  send.  “ Or, 

14  And  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was 
kindled  against  Moses,  and  he  said.  Is 
not  Aaron  the  Levite  thy  brother?  I 
know  that  he  can  speak  well.  ’ And 
also,  behold,  he  cometh  forth  to  meet 
thee  : and  when  he  seeth  thee,  he 
will  be  glad  in  his  heart. 

15  And  thou  shalt  speak  unto  him, 
and  put  words  in  his  mouth  : and  I 
v/ill  be  with  thy  mouth,  and  with  his 
mouth,  and  will  teach  you  v/hat  ye 
shall  do. 

16  And  he  shall  be  thy  spokesman 


9.  shall  become^  This  rendering  is  prefer- 
able to  that  in  the  margin. 

10.  eloquent]  Lit.  a man  of  •words,  as 
in  margin.  The  expressions  -which  Moses 
uses  do  not  imply  a natural  defect  or  im- 
pediment, but  an  inability  to  speak  fluently. 
“Slow  of  speech,”  literally  heavy,  is  specially 
used  of  persons  speaking  a foreign  language 
imperfectly  (see  Ezek.  iii.  5).  The  double 
expression  slow  of  speech  and  of  a slow  tongue 
seems  to  imply  a difliculty  both  in  finding 
words  and  in  giving  them  utterance,  a very 
natural  result  of  so  long  a period  of  a shep- 
herd’s life,  passed  in  a foreign  land,  and  as 
such  to  be  counted  among  the  numerous  latent 
coincidences  of  the  narrative. 

since  thou  hast  spoken]  This  expression 
seems  to  imply  that  some  short  time  had  inter- 
vened between  this  address  and  the  first  com- 
munication of  the  divine  purpose  to  Moses. 

12.  Compare  with  this  our  Lord’s  pro- 
mise to  His  Apostles;  Matt.  x.  19,  Mark 
xiii.  II,  It  applies  to  both  difficulties;  “be 
with  thy  mouth  ” giving  prompt  utterance, 
and  “teach  thee”  supplying  or  eliciting  the 
best  expression  of  the  right  thought. 

13.  And  he  said]  The  reluctance  of  Moses 
is  a point  of  great  moment.  It  had  a per- 
manent effect,  for  it  caused  the  transfer  of 
a most  important  part  of  his  work  to  his 
brother,  and  its  record  supplies  a strong  evi- 
dence of  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  this  por- 
tion, attributed  by  Knobel  to  the  so-called 
Jehovist.  Like  every  other  circumstance  in 
the  narrative  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  in- 
ner law  of  man's  spiritual  development,  and 
specially  with  the  character  of  Moses ; but 
under  the  circumstances  it  indicates  a weak- 
ness of  faith,  such  as  no  late  writer  would 


have  attributed  to  the  greatest  of  the  descend- 
ants of  Abraham. 

send... by  the  hand]  The  Hebrew  phrase  is 
curt,  so  to  speak,  and  ungracious;  literally 
“ send  I pray  by  hand,  thou  wilt  send,” 
i.e.  by  whomsoever  thou  wilt;  an  expression 
which  has  scarcely  a precedent  and  which  may 
serve  to  illustrate  Moses’  (Bvn  account  of  his 
heavy  and  awkward  utterance:  cf.  Note  on 
Numb.  xiv.  13 — 17. 

14.  anger]  This  proves  that  the  words  of 
Moses  indicated  more  than  a consciousness 
of  infirmity;  somewhat  of  the  vehemence  and 
stubbornness,  characteristic  failings  of  strong, 
concentrated  natures,  which  had  previously 
been  displayed  in  the  slaying  of  the  Egyptian. 

Aarori]  This  is  the  first  mention  of  Aaron. 
The  exact  meaning  of  the  words  “he  can 
speak  well,”  lit.  “speaking  he  can  speak,”  has 
been  questioned,  but  they  probably  imply  that 
Aaron  had  both  the  power  and  will  to  speak. 
Aaron  is  here  called  “the  Levite,”  with  refer- 
ence, it  may  be,  to  the  future  consecration 
of  this  tribe  ; but  not,  as  Knobel  assumes, 
as  though  at  that  time  the  office  and  duties  of 
the  priesthood  were  assigned  to  him. 

he  cometh  forth]  i.  e.  is  on  the  eve  of  setting 
forth.  The  Hebrew  does  not  imply  that 
Aaron  was  already  on  the  way,  but  that  he 
had  the  intention  of  going  to  his  brother,  pro- 
bably because  the  enemies  of  Moses  were  now 
dead,  see  v.  19.  The  divine  intimation  was 
given  afterwards,  v.  27;  it  told  Aaron  where 
his  brother  was  to  be  found.  The  expression 
“glad  in  his  heart”  should  be  noted  as  cne  of 
many  indications  of  the  divine  sympathy  with 
strong  and  pure  natural  affections. 

15.  thou  shalt  speak]  Moses  thus  retains 
his  position  as  “mediator;”  the  word  comes 
to  him  first,  he  transmits  it  to  hif  brother. 


V.  17 2 2.] 


EXODUS.  IV. 


267 


unto  the  people  : and  he  shall  be, 
even  he  shall  be  to  thee  instead  of  a 
* chap.  7.  niouth,  and  “^thou  shalt  be  to  him  in- 
stead  of  God. 

17  And  thou  shalt  take  this  rod  in 
thine  hand,  wherewith  thou  shalt  do 
signs. 

18  H And  Moses  went  and  return- 
ed to  kis  father  in  law,  and 

said  unto  him.  Let  me  go,  I pray 
thee,  and  return  unto  my  brethren 
which  are  in  Egypt,  and  see  whether 
they  be  yet  alive.  And  Jethro  said 
to  Moses,  Go  in  peace. 

19  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses 
in  Midian,  Go,  return  into  Egypt : 


for  all  the  men  are  dead  which  sought 
thy  life. 

20  And  Moses  took  his  wife  and 
his  sons,  and  set  them  upon  an  ass, 
and  he  returned  to  the  land  of  Egypt : 
and  Moses  took  the  rod  of  God  in  his 
hand. 

21  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
When  thou  goest  to  return  into  Egypt, 
see  that  thou  do  all  those  wonders  be- 
fore Pharaoh,  which  I have  put  in 
thine  hand : but  I will  harden  his  heart, 
that  he  shall  not  let  the  people  go. 

22  And  thoif  shalt  say  unto  Pha- 
raoh, Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Israel  h 
my  son,  even  my  firstborn  : 


16.  instead  of  a mouth~\  We  may  bear  in 
mind  Aaron’s  unbroken  habitude  of  speak- 
ing Hebrew  and  his  probable  familiarity  with 
Egyptian.  The  Arabic  translator  (Saadia) 
uses  the  word  tarjaman,  i.e.  dragoman,  inter- 
preter. Thus  also  the  Syriac  and  the  Targum. 

instead  of  God\  The  word  God  is  used 
of  persons  who  represent  the  Deity,  as  kings, 
or  judges,  and  it  is  understood  in  this  sense 
by  the  Targumist  and  Saadia:  “Thou  shalt 
be  to  him  a master.” 

18.  Jethro'^  In  the  Hebrew  Jether,  see 
not?  on  ch.  ii.  Moses  says  nothing  of  his 
divine  mission  to  Jethro;  it  was  a secret 
thing  between  him  and  God. 

19.  in  Midian~\  The  LXX.  insert  before 
this  verse  “ but  after  those  many  days  the 
king  of  Egypt  died.”  Egli,  1.  c.,  holds  this 
to  be  the  ancient  reading,  but  it  was  probably 
introduced  to  explain  the  following  state- 
ment, which  is  clear  without  it.  There  was 
apparently  some  delay  on  the  part  of  Moses, 
who  did  not  set  out  until  he  received  a distinct 
assurance  that  all  his  enemies  were  removed. 
Such  notices  would  never  have  occurred  to  a 
later  writer,  nor  could  they  have  originated  in 
popular  impressions.  They  show  moreover 
how  entirely  Moses  acted  under  an  influence 
overruling  the  feelings,  in  which  some  would 
find  the  key  to  his  acts. 

20.  an  ass']  Lit.  “the  ass,”  which  ac- 
cording to  Hebrew  idiom  means  that  he  set 
them  upon  asses,  not  upon  one  ass,  which 
would  imply  that  they  were  both  infants. 
This  is  the  first  notice  of  other  sons  besides 
Gershom. 

the  rod  of  God]  The  reference  to  the  miracle 
recorded  in  v.  2,  and  to  the  express  com- 
mand in  V.  17,  is  so  obvious  that  it  would 
be  unnecessary  to  point  it  out  but  for  the 
strange  statement  (Knobel)  that  the  rod  is  here 
first  mentioned.  The  staff  of  Moses  was  con- 
secrated by  the  miracle  and  became  the  rod  of 
God. 


21.  see  that  thou  do^  &c.]  The  Hebrew 
has,  See  all  the  wonders  which  I have  put 
into  thy  hand,  and  do  them  before  Pharaoh. 
Moses  is  called  upon  to  consider  the  signs  and 
to  be  prepared  to  produce  them.  The  con- 
struction however  is  not  certain ; and  the  old 
Versions  for  the  most  part  agree  with  our 
Authorised  Version,  which  gives  the  general 
sense. 

I 'will  harden]  Calamities  which  do  not 
subdue  the  heart  harden  it ; and  the  effects  of 
God’s  judgments  being  foreknown  are  willed 
by  Him.  We  should  not  therefore  adopt  a 
forced  interpretation  of  this  expression  in  order 
to  explain  away  its  apparent  harshness.  The 
hardening  itself  is  judicial,  and  just,  when  it  is 
a consequence  of  previously  formed  habits ; in 
the  case  of  Pharaoh  it  was  at  once  a righteous 
judgment,  and  a natural  result  of  a long  series 
of  oppressions  and  cruelties.  Theodoret  thus 
deals  with  the  question:  “The  sun  by  the 
action  of  heat  makes  wax  moist,  and  mud  dry, 
hardening  the  one  while  it  softens  the  other,  by 
the  same  operation  producing  exactly  opposite 
results;  thus  from  the  long-suffering  of  God 
some  derive  benefit  and  others  harm,  some  are 
softened  while  others  are  hardened.”  ‘ Qusest. 
XII.  in  Exod.’  The  reason  why  the  action  of 
God  rather  than  the  character  of  Pharaoh  is 
dwelt  on  in  this  passage  would  seem  to  be 
that  it  was  necessary  to  sustain  the  spirit  of 
Moses  and  the  people  during  the  process  of 
events,  which  they  were  thus  taught  were 
altogether  foreseen  and  predetenuined  by  God. 

22.  my  firstborn]  The  expression  would 
be  perfectly  intelligible  to  Pharaoh,  whose 
official  designation  was  Si  Ra,  son  of  Ra.  In 
numberless  inscriptions  the  Pharaohs  are  styled 
“own  sons”  or  “beloved  sons”  of  the  deity. 
It  is  here  applied  for  the  first  time  to  Israel; 
and  as  we  learn  from  2^.  23,  emphatically  in 
antithesis  to  Pharaoh’s  own  firstborn.  The 
menace  however  was  not  uttered  until  it  was 
called  forth  by  Pharaoh’s  sin.  See  ch.  xi.  5, 


268 


EXODUS.  IV. 


IV.  23—29. 


I Or, 

kni/e. 
t Heb. 
made  it 
tottck. 


23  And  I say  unto  thee,  Let  my 
son  go,  that  he  may  serve  me : and  if 
thou  refuse  to  let  him  go,  behold,  I 
will  slay  thy  son,  even  thy  firstborn. 

24  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  by  the 
way  in  the  inn,  that  the  Lord  met 
him,  and  sought  to  kill  him. 

25  Then  Zipporah  took  a sharp 
° stone,  and  cut  off  the  foreskin  of  her 
son,  and  Tast  it  at  his  feet,  and  said. 
Surely  a bloody  husband  art  thou  to 
me. 


26  So  he  let  him  go:  then  she  said, 
A bloody  husband  thou  art^  because  of 
the  circumcision. 

27  ^ And  the  Lord  said  to  Aaron, 
Go  into  the  wilderness  to  meet  Mo- 
ses. And  he  went,  and  met  him  in 
the  mount  of  God,  and  kissed  him. 

28  And  Moses  told  Aaron  all  the 
words  of  the  Lord  who  had  sent 
him,  and  all  the  signs  which  he  had 
commanded  him. 

29  And  Moses  and  Aaron  went 


24.  in  the  inn\  Or  “resting  place,”  it 
probably  does  not  mean  a building,  but 
the  place  where  they  rested  for  the  night, 
whether  under  a tent,  or  in  the  open  air.  The 
khans  or  caravanserais,  now  common  in  the 
East,  appear  to  have  been  unknown  to  the 
ancient  Israelites  and  Egyptians. 

met  him^  and  sought  to  kill  him\  The  ex- 
pression is  obscure,  but  is  understood  to 
mean  that  Moses  was  attacked  by  a sudden 
and  dangerous  illness,  which  he  knew  was 
inflicted  by  God.  The  word  ‘ sought  to  kill’ 
implies  that  the  sickness,  whatever  might  be 
its  nature,  was  one  which  threatened  death 
had  it  not  been  averted  by  a timely  act.  We 
are  not  told  for  what  cause  the  visitation 
came;  but  from  the  context  it  may  be  inferred 
that  it  was  because  Moses  had  neglected  the 
duty  of  an  Israelite  and  had  not  circumcised 
his  son.  From  the  words  of  Zipporah  it  is 
evident  that  she  believed  the  illness  of  Moses 
was  to  be  thus  accounted  for;  the  delay  was 
probably  owing  to  her  own  not  unnatural  re- 
pugnance to  a rite,  which  though  practised 
by  the  Egyptians  under  the  19th  dynasty,  and 
perhaps  earlier,  was  not  adopted  generally  in 
the  East,  even  by  the  descendants  of  Abraham 
and  Keturah.  Moses  appears  to  have  been 
utterly  prostrate  and  unable  to  perform  the 
rite  himself. 

25.  sharp  stone'\  Not  “knife,”  as  in  the 
margin.  Zipporah  used  a piece  of  flint,  in 
accordance  with  the  usage  of  the  patriarchs. 
'Fhe  Egyptians  never  used  bronze  or  steel  in 
the  preparation  of  mummies  because  stone 
was  regarded  as  a purer  and  more  sacred 
material  than  metal.  See  Wilkinson,  Vol.  ii. 
p.  16 and  M.  de  Rougemont,  ‘Age  du 
Brori/.e,'  p.  152. 

cast  it  at  his  feet]  The  Hebrew  is  ob- 
scure, but  the  Authorised  Version  probably 
gives  the  true  meaning.  Zipporah  threw  it 
at  the  feet  of  Moses,  not  of  her  .son,  as  some 
commentators  suppose;  showing  at  once  her 
abliOrrence  of  the  rite,  and  her  feeling  that  by 
it  she  had  saved  her  husband's  life. 

a bloody  husband]  Lit.  “A  husband  of 
blood.;”  or  “bloods:”  the  plural  form  signifies 


effusion  of  blood;  the  word  (jrin)  rendered 
husband  (as  in  Psalm  xix.  5,  bridegroom)  in- 
cludes all  relations  by  marriage;  see  note  at 
the  end  of  c.  ii.  The  meaning  is,  the  marriage 
bond  between  us  is  now  sealed  by  blood.  In  the 
next  verse  Zipporah  repeats  the  expression, 
as  though  she  would  say,  thou  art  bound  to 
me  by  a second  covenant  of  which  this  bloody 
rite  is  the  sign  and  pledge.  By  performing  it 
Zipporah  had  recovered  her  husband ; his  life 
was  purchased  for  her  by  the  blood  of  her 
child.  See  the  remarks  of  Hooker,  ‘ E.  P.’  v. 
62.  The  Targum  Onk.  gives  a paraphrase, 
“ had  it  not  been  for  the  blood  of  this  circum- 
cision my  husband  had  been  condemned  to 
death.”  This  appears  to  be  the  true  explanation 
of  a very  obscure  passage ; other  interpretations, 
which  make  the  words  refer  to  the  child,  or 
to  the  Angel  of  the  Covenant,  are  generally 
admitted  to  be  untenable. 

26.  So  he  let  him  go]  i.e.  God  withdrew 
His  visitation  from  Moses.  The  Hebrew 
allows  no  other  interpretation. 

We  learn  from  ch.  xviii.  2,  that  Moses  sent 
Zipporah  and  her  children  back  to  Jethro 
before  he  went  to  Egypt.  It  was  probably  on 
this  occasion.  The  journey  would  hjve  been 
delayed  had  he  waited  for  the  healing  of  the 
child. 

27.  ydnd  the  Lord  said]  See  ns.  14.  Aaron 
now  receives  direct  intimation  where  he  is  to 
meet  his  brother.  He  might  otherwise  have 
undertaken  a long  and  fruitless  journey  to 
the  residence  of  Jethro. 

in  the  mount  of  God]  Horeb  lies  on  the 
direct  route  from  Shenn  to  Egypt;  this  pas- 
sage is  therefore  in  favour  of  the  supposition 
that  Jethro's  residence  was  on  the  west  of  the 
gulf.  See  note  on  c.  ii. 

28.  w/jo  had  sent  him]  The  meaning  is, 
probably,  “which  God  had  charged  him  to 
do.”  Thus  the  Vulgate,  LXX.,  Knobel,  and 
other  commentators;  but  it  is  not  necessary 
to  alter  the  translation,  which  is  literal  and 
supported  by  Rosenmiillcr,  who  renders  it, 
“qui  eum  miserat.’’ 


V.  30—4-] 


EXODUS.  IV.  V. 


269 


and  gathered  together  all  the  elders  of 
the  children  of  Israel : 

30  And  Aaron  spake  all  the  words 
which  the  Lord  had  spoken  unto 
Moses,  and  did  the  signs  in  the  sight 
of  the  people. 

31  And  the  people  believed;  and 
when  they  heard  that  the  Lord  had 
visited  the  children  of  Israel,  and  that 
he  had  looked  upon  their  affliction, 
then  they  bowed  their  heads  and  wor- 
shipped. 

CHAPTER  V. 

1 Pharaoh  chideth  Moses  and  Aaron  for  iheir 
message.  5 He  hicreaseth  the  Israelites’  task. 
15  He  checketh  their  cotnplaints.  'lo  They 
cry  out  npon  Moses  and  Aaron.  22  Moses 
complameth  to  God. 


AND  afterward  Moses- and  Aaron 
±\,  went  in,  and  told  Pharaoh, 

Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  of  Israel, 

Let  my  people  go,  that  they  may  hold 
a feast  unto  me  in  the  wilderness. 

2 And  Pharaoh  said.  Who  is  the 
Lord,  that  I should  obey  his  voice  to 
let  Israel  go?  I know  not  the  Lord, 
neither  will  I let  Israel  go. 

3 And  they  said,  '^The  God  of  the  cliap. 
Hebrews  hath  met  with  us : let  us  go, 

we  pray  thee,  three  days’  journey 
into  the  desert,  and  sacrifice  unto 
the  Lord  our  God;  lest  he  fall  upon 
us  with  pestilence,  or  with  the 
sword. 

4 And  the  king  of  Egypt  said  unto 


29.  all  the  elders']  The  Israelites  retained 
their  awn  national  organization;  their  affairs 
were  administered  by  their  own  elders. 

31.  the  people]  This  implies  that  the  elders 
called  a public  assembly  to  hear  the  message 
brought  by  Moses  and  Aaron. 

and  ^du.orshipped]  There  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  this  act  of  worship  was  addressed 
to  God,  not  to  Moses  and  Aaron.  It  is  im- 
portant to  remark  that  in  this  narrative  there 
is  no  indication  of  ignorance  of  the  history 
of  the  patriarchs,  or  of  abandonment  of  the 
worship  of  God,  sometimes  attributed  to  the 
Israelites. 

Chap.  V.  1.  Pharaoh]  This  king,  pro- 
bably (see  Appendix)  Thotmes  II.  the  great 
grandson  of  Aahmes,  the  original  persecutor 
of  the  Israelites,  must  have  been  resident  at  this 
time  in  a city  of  lower  Egypt,  situate  on  the 
Nile.  It  could  not  therefore  have  been  Helio- 
polis, and  we  have  to  choose  between  Memphis 
and  Tanis;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
most  of  the  events  which  follow  occurred  at 
the  latter  city,  the  Zoan  of  Scripture.  The 
notice  in  Psalm  Ixxviii.  12,  43,  is  admitted  by 
all  critics  to  be  of  great  weight,  and  all  the 
circumstances  confirm  it.  See  on  ix.  31  and 
on  ii.  5.  Tanis  was  a very  large  city,  and 
strongly  fortified.  The  remains  of  buildings 
and  the  obelisks  are  numerous;  they  bear  for 
the  most  part  the  name  of  Rameses  II.;  but 
it  was  the  place  of  rendezvous  for  the  armies 
of  the  Delta,  and  an  imperial  city  in  the  12th 
dynasty;  it  is  identified  by  M,  de  Rouge  with 
Avaris  the  capital  of  the  Hyksos,  who  pro- 
bably gave  it  its  Hebrew  nam.e;  both  Avaris 
and  Zoan  mean  “going  out.”  This  Pharaoh 
had  waged  a successful  war  in  the  beginning 
of  his  reign  against  the  Shasous,  the  nomad 
tribes  of  the  adjoining  district,  and  his  resi- 


dence in  the  north-west  of  Egypt  would  be 
of  importance  at  that  time. 

the  Lord  God]  This  version  rather  obscures 
the  meaning;  Jehovah  God  of  Israel 
demanded  the  services  of  his  people.  The 
demand  according  to  the  general  views  of 
the  heathens  was  just  and  natural;  the  Israel- 
ites could  not  offer  the  necessary  sacrifices  in 
the  presence  of  Egyptians. 

2.  I kno^v  not  the  Lord]  This  may  mean 
either  that  Pharaoh  had  not  heard  of  Jehovah, 
or  that  he  did  not  recognize  Him  as  a God. 
The  former  is  possible,  for  though  the  name 
was  ancient,  it  was  apparently  less  used  by 
the  Israelites  than  other  designations  of  God. 
The  Targum  thus  paraphrases:  “the  name 
of  Jah  has  not  been  revealed  to  me.” 

3.  three  days'  journey]  This  would  not 
suffice  for  the  journey  to  the  “Mountain 
of  God.”  See  note  on  iii.  18.  All  that  Moses 
was  instructed  to  ask  for  was  permission  to 
go  into  a part  of  the  desert  where  the  people 
might  offer  sacrifices  without  interruption 
from  the  Egyptians;  and  that  might  be  found 
on  the  frontiers  of  Egypt,  or,  at  least,  in  a 
district  commanded  by  the  king’s  army.  It 
is  evident  from  Pharaoh’s  answer  that  he  did 
not  see  in  the  request  any  indication  of  an 
intention  to  escape  from  Egypt.  Ewald  (Vol. 
II.  pp.  84,  85)  recognizes  the  reasonableness 
and  modesty  of  this  demand,  which  he  re- 
presents as  a manifest  proof  that  the  sober 
and  noble  spirit  of  prophecy  in  its  best  age 
has  interpenetrated  the  narrative;  words 
which  do  but  express  the  old  truth  that  the 
transaction  and  record  bear  equally  the  marks 
of  divine  governance  and  inspiration. 

'With  pestilence.,  or  with  the  sword]  This 
notice  is  important  as  shewing  that  the  plague 
was  well  known  to  the  ancient  Egyptians.  It 


270 


EXODUS.  V. 


[v.  5—13- 


them,  Wherefore  do  ye,  Moses  and 
Aaron,  let  the  people  from  their 
works  ? get  you  unto  your  burdens. 

5 And  Pha-raoh  said.  Behold,  the 
people  of  the  land  now  are  many,  and 
ye  make  them  rest  from  their  burdens. 

6 And  Pharaoh  commanded  the 
same  day  the  taskmasters  of  the 
people,  and  their  officers,  saying, 

7 Ye  shall  no  more  give  the  people 
straw  to  make  brick,  as  heretofore : 
let  them  go  and  gather  straw  for 
themselves. 

8 And  the  tale  of  the  bricks,  which 
they  did  make  heretofore,  ye  shall 
lay  upon  them ; ye  shall  not  diminish 
ought  thereof : for  they  he  idle ; there- 
fore they  cry,  saying.  Let  us  go  and 
sacrifice  to  our  God. 


9 ^ Let  there  more  work  be  laid  + Heb. 
upon  the  men,  that  they  may  labour  wJr/fe 
therein ; and  let  them  not  regard  vain  ^^po^the 
words. 

10  And  the  taskmasters  of  the 
people  went  out,  and  their  officers, 
and  they  spake  to  the  people,  saying, 

Thus  saith  Pharaoh,  I will  not  give 
you  straw. 

1 1 Go  ye,  get  you  straw  where  ye 
can  find  it:  yet  not  ought  of  your 
work  shall  be  diminished. 

12  So  the  people  were  scattered 
abroad  throughout  all  the  land  of 
Egypt  to  gather  stubble  instead  of 
straw. 

1 3 And  the  taskmasters  hasted  ^ 
them^  saying.  Fulfil  your  works,  "'your  a matter 
daily  tasks,  as  when  there  was  straw,  fnhf^day. 


was  probably  less  common  than  at  present 
under  the  ancient  Pharaohs,  who  bestowed 
great  care  on  the  irrigation  and  drainage  of 
the  country,  but  there  are  other  indications  of 
its  ravages.  See  Chabas,  ‘Mel.  Eg.’  i.  p.  40. 
The  reference  to  the  sword  is  equally  natural, 
since  the  Israelites  occupied  the  eastern  dis- 
trict, which  was  frequently  disturbed  by  the 
neighbouring  Shasous.  See  note  on  v.  i. 

6.  the  taskmasters']  This  word,  which 
means  “exactors”  or  “oppressors,”  desig- 
nates the  Egyptian  overseers,  who  were  sub- 
ordinate to  the  officers  called  “taskmasters” 
in  ch.  i.  II,  but  whose  name  is  different  in 
Hebrew.  See  note  on  ch.  i.  ii,  and  14. 

their  officers]  Or  scribes.  These  were  He- 
brews, appointed  by  the  Egyptian  superin- 
tendents, and  responsible  to  them  for  the  work ; 
see  V.  14.  The  Hebrew  name  shoter  is  equiva- 
lent to  “scribe and  it  is  probable  that  persons 
were  chosen  who  were  able  to  keep  accounts 
in  writing.  Subordinate  officers  are  frequent- 
ly represented  on  Egyptian  monuments  giving 
m written  accounts  to  th'cir  immediate 
superiors.  Rosellini  (ii.  3,  p.  272)  observes 
that  Egyptians  made  more  use  of  writing  on 
ordinary  occasions  than  modern  Europeans. 
“Shoterim”  are  often  mentioned  in  the  Old 
Testament,  generally  in  connection  with 
judges  or  leaders,  by  whom  they  were  em- 
ployed to  transmit  orders  to  the  people  and 
superintend  the  execution.  It  is  evident  how 
much  this  measure  must  have  advanced  the 
organization  of  the  Israelites,  and  prepared 
them  for  their  departure.  See  Note  at  the 
end  of  the  Chapter. 

7.  stra~>.u]  Some  of  the  most  ancient  build- 
ings in  Egypt  constructed  of  bricks 

not  burned,  but  dried  in  the  sun;  they  were 


made  of  clay,  or  more  commonly  of  mud, 
mixed  with  straw  chopped  into  small  pieces. 
Baked  bricks  are  seldom  found  in  ruins  more 
ancient  than  the  Exodus,  never,  according  to 
Sir  G.  Wilkinson,  (see  Quarterly  Review, 
1859,  April,  p.  421),  but  there  is  a specimen 
in  the  British  Museum  belonging  to  the  reign 
of  Thotmosis  III.  An  immense  quantity  of 
straw  must  have  been  wanted  for  the  works  on 
which  the  Israelites  were  engaged,  and  their 
labours  must  have  been  more  than  doubled  by 
this  requisition.  In  a papyrus  of  the  19th 
dynasty  (‘Anast.’  iv.  12,  16)  the  writer 
complains:  “I  have  no  one  to  help  me  in 
making  bricks,  no  straw.”  The  expression 
at  that 'time  was  evidently  proverbial,  whether 
or  not  as  a reminiscence  of  the  Israelites  may 
be  questioned,  but  it  shows  the  thoroughly 
Egyptian  character  of  the  transaction. 

9.  may  labour  therein]  The  LXX.  have 
“ that  they  may  attend  to  it  and  not  attend 
to  vain  words;”  a good  and  probable  reading. 

12.  stubble  instead  of  stra^]  Rather,  for 
the  straw.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the 
Chapter.  The  Israelites  had  to  go  into  the 
fields  after  the  reaping,  was  done,  to  gather 
the  stubble  left  by  the  reapers,  who  then,  as 
at  present  in  Egypt,  cut  the  stalks  close  to  the 
ears.  They  had  then  to  chop  it  into  morsels 
of  straw  before  it  could  be  mixed  with  the 
clay:  seethe  previous  note.  This  implies  that 
some  time  must  have  elapsed  before  Moses 
again  went  to  Pharaoh ; and  it  also  marks  the 
season  of  the  year,  viz.  early  spring,  after  the 
barley  or  wheat  haiwest,  towards  the  end  of 
April.  Their  suffering  must  have  been  severe, 
since  at  that  season  the  pestilential  sand-wind 
blows  over  Egypt  some  50  days,  hence  its 
name  Chamsin. 


V.  14— 23-] 


EXODUS.  V. 


271 


• 14  And  the  officers  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  which  Pharaoh’s  taskmas- 
ters had  set  over  them,  were  beaten, 
demanded.  Wherefore  have  ye  not 
fulfilled  your  task  in  making  brick  both 
yesterday  and  to  day,  as  heretofore  ? 

15  H Then  the  offi'cers  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  came  and  cried  unto 
Pharaoh,  saying.  Wherefore  dealest 
thou  thus  with  thy  servants  ? 

16  There  is  no  straw  given  unto 
thy  servants,  and  they  say  to  us.  Make 
brick : and,  behold,  thy  servants  ar^ 
beaten ; but  the  fault  is  in  thine  own 
people. 

17  But  he  said.  Ye  idle,  ar^ 
idle : therefore  ye  say.  Let  us  go  a/7.^ 
do  sacrifice  to  the  Lord. 

18  Go  therefore  now,  and  work; 
for  there  shall  no  straw  be  given 
you,  yet  shall  ye  deliver  the  tale  of 
bricks. 


19  And  the  officers  of  the  children 
of  Israel  did  see  f/^at  they  in  evil 

after  it  was  said.  Ye  shall  not 
minish  ought  from  your  bricks  of  your 
daily  task. 

20  ^ And  they  met  Moses  and  Aa- 
ron, who  stood  in  the  v/ay,  as  they 
came  forth  from  Pharaoh : 

21  And  they  said  unto  them.  The 
Lord  look  upon  you,  and  judge;  be- 
cause ye  have  made  our  savour  To  be  f Heh. 
abhorred  in  the  eyes  of  Pharaoh,  and 

in  the  eyes  of  his  servants,  to  put  a 
sword  in  their  hand  to  slay  us. 

22  And  Moses  returned  unto  the 
Lord,  and  said,  Lord,  wherefore  hast 
thou  so  evil  entreated  this  people  ? 
why  is  it  that  thou  hast  sent  me .? 

23  For  since  I came  to  Pharaoh 

to  speak  in  thy  name,  he  hath  done  J^^cb. 
evil  to  this  people;  neither  hast  thou  thou  hast 
^ delivered  thy  people  at  all,  Ihefc'd. 


13.  hasted  than]  See  the  words  of  the 
overseer  quoted  above  on  ch.  i.  14.  In  a pas- 
sage of  the  papyrus  ‘ Anast.’  III.  translated  by 
M.  Chabas,  ‘Mel.  Eg.’  ii.  p.  122,  twelve 
labourers  employed  in  the  same  district  are 
punished  for  negligence  in  failing  to  make  up 
their  daily  tale  of  bricks. 

14.  tVere  beaten]  The  beating  of  these 
officers  is  quite  in  accordance  with  Egyptian 
customs;  even  natives  of  rank  in  civil  and 
military  service  were  subject  to  severe  cor- 
poral punishments.  See  note  on  ch.  ii.  ii. 

16.  the  fault  is  in  thine  o<njon  people]  Lit. 
thy  people  sin:  which  may  possibly 
mean  thy  subjects,  i.e.  the  Israelites,  are  made 
guilty  and  punished:  but  the  Authorised  Ver- 
sion probably  gives  the  true  meaning ; thus  the 
Vulg.,  Targ.  and  Saadia.  The  LXX.  and  Syr. 
have  “thou  hast  sinned  against  thy  people.” 

17.  Te  are  idle]  The  old  Egyptian  lan- 
guage abounds  in  epithets  which  shew  con- 
tempt for  idleness.  The  charge  was  equally 
offensive  and  ingenious;  one  which  would  be 
readily  believed  by  Egyptians  who  knew  how 
much  public  and  private  labours  were  impeded 
by  festivals  and  other  religious  ceremonies. 
Among  the  great  sins  which  involved  con- 


NOTES  on  Chap. 

6.  The  question  whether  the  were 

Egyptians  or  Hebrews  is  important  in  its 
bearings  on  the  narrative.  The  word  is  com- 
mon, and  always  denotes  the  class  of  persons 
described  in  the  foot-note.  Gesenius  finds 


demnation  in  the  final  judgment,  idleness  is 
twice  mentioned ; see  funeral  ritual  in  Bunsen’s 
‘ Egypt,’  ed.  2,  Vol.  v.  pp.  254,  255. 

19.  in  e'vil  case]  They  saw  plainly  that 
the  object  of  Pharaoh  was  to  find  a pretext 
for  further  cruelty ; probably  for  cutting  off 
the  leaders  of  the  Israelites;  s^e  v.  21.  The 
effect,  however,  would  be  to  bring  them  into 
closer  union  and  sympathy  with  the  people. 

20.  ^vho  stood  in  the  <^ay\  Or  “waiting 
to  meet  them,”  i.e.  Moses  and  Aaron  stood 
without  the  palace  to  learn  the  result  of  the 
interview. 

21.  in  the  eyes]  The  change  of  metaphor 
shows  that  the  expression  was  proverbial. 
Thus  an  Egyptian  of  rank  complains  to  the 
scribe,  who  writes  his  history,  “Thou  hast 
made  my  name  offensive,  stinking,  to  all 
men.”  ‘Anast.’  i.  27,  7. 

23.  The  earnestness  of  this  remon- 
strance, and  even  its  approach  to  irreverence, 
are  quite  in  keeping  with  other  notices  of 
Moses’  naturally  impetuous  character,  see 
especially,  ch.  iil.  13  ; but  such  a speech  would 
certainly  not  have  been  put  into  his  mouth 
by  a later  writer.  See  note  on  ch.  iv.  10. 


V.  vv.  6 and  12. 

its  root  in  the  Arabic he  wrote.  The 
LXX.  render  it  roi?  ypafiixaTevaiv'.  the  Syr. 
f^£D,  writer  or  scribe.  Thus  also  the 
Samaritan  version.  The  Targum  Onk.  uses 
the  word  which  is  incorrectly  rendered 


272 


EXODUS.  VI. 


[v.  1—7. 


“exactor”  in  Walton’s  Polyglott  It  corre- 
sponds exactly  to  shoter^  and  is  applied  to 
the  native  officers  of  Israel:  see  Buxtorf, 
‘ Lex.  Chal.’  s.  v.  Saadia  uses  a w^ord  which 
Walton  renders  “exactor;”  but  its  true 
meaning  is  “ cognitor,  qui  suos  cognitos 
habet;”  a very  apt  expression  for  these 
'-lebrew  officials.  ^ 

L2.  The  Hebrew  has  stubble,  and  pH?, 


which  does  not  mean  instead  of,  but  “for,” 
i.e.  to  be  prepared  as  pH,  “ straw  chopped 
small:”  stramenta  minutim  concisa.  Thus 
the  ancient  versions  and  Targ.Onk.,  which  is 
incorrectly  translated  in  Walton.  The  ety- 
mology of  pn  is  doubted;  no  Semitic  root  is 
found.  The  Egyptian  has  tebu^  chaff.  ‘ Pap. 
Sallier,’  v.  6.  Kash  also  is  Egyptian  for 
stubble,  or  stalk. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

I God  rcnewetJi  his  promise  by  his  name 
JEHOVAH.  14  The  gejiealogy  of  Reuben., 
i.'i  of  Jim  eon,  16  of  Lezd,  ^ whom  came 
Moses  and  Aaron. 

Then  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Now  shalt  thou  see  what  I will 
do  to  Pharaoh  : for  with  a strong  hand 
shall  he  let  them  go,  and  with  a strong 
hand  shall  he  drive  them  out  of  his 
land. 

2  And  God  spake  unto  Moses,  and 
said  unto  him,  I am  " the  Lord  : 

3  And  I appeared  unto  Abraham, 
unto  Isaac,*  and  unto  Jacob,  by  the 
name  of  God  Almighty,  but  by  my 
name  JEHOVAH  was  I not  known 
to  them. 


4 And  I have  also  established  my 
covenant  with  them,  to  give  them  the 
land  of  Canaan,  the  land  of  their  pil- 
grimage, wherein  they  were  strangers. 

5 And  I have  also  heard  the  groan- 
ing of  the  children  of  Israel,  whom 
the  Egyptians  keep  in  bondage;  and 
I have  remembered  my  covenant. 

6 Wherefore  say  unto  the  children 
of  Israel,  I am  the  Lord,  and  I will 
bring  you  out  from  under  the  burdens 
of  the  Egyptians,  and  I will  rid  you 
out  of  their  bondage,  and  I will  re- 
deem you  with  a stretched  out  arm, 
and  with  great  judgments  : 

7 And  I will  take  you  to  me  for  a 
people,  and  I will  be  to  you  a God ; 
and  ye  shall  know  that  I am  the  Lord 


Chap.  VI.  1.  av'ith  a itrong  hand'\  Or, 
by  a strong  band,  i.e.  compelled  by  the 
power  of  God,  manifested  in  judgments.  In 
the  2nd  clause  the  LXX.  have  “by  a stretched 
out  arm:”  a probable  reading,  adopted  by 
Egli,  1.  c. 

2,  3.  There  appears  to  have  been  an 
interval  of  some  months  between  the  pre- 
ceding events  and  this  renewal  of  the  promise 
to  Moses.  The  oppression  in  the  mean  time 
was  not  merely  driving  the  people  to  despera- 
tion, but  preparing  them  by  severe  labour, 
varied  by  hasty  wanderings  in  search  of 
stubble,  for  the  exertions  and  privations  of 
the  wilderness.  Hence  the  formal  and  solemn 
character  of  the  announcements  in  the  whole 
chapter. 

2.  I am  the  Lor  id]  See  General  Introduc- 
tion, p.  25.  The  meaning,  as  is  there  shewn, 
seems  to  be  this.  I am  Jehovah,  and  I ap- 
peared to  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  as  El 
Shaddai,  but  as  to  my  name  Jehovah,  I was 
not  made  known  to  them.  In  other  words, 
the  full  import  of  that  name  was  not  disclosed 
to  thorn.  On  the  one  hand  it  i?  scarcely 
possible  to  doubt,  and  it  is  in  fact  admitted 
by  most  critics,  that  the  sacred  name  Jehovah 
was  known  from  very  early  times;  on  the 


other,  the  revelation  on  Mount  Sinai  clearly 
states  that  the  derivation  and  full  meaning 
of  the  name  were  then  first  declared.  On 
this  special  occasion  it  was  important  or  ne- 
cessary, for  the  support  and  encouragement  of 
Moses  and  the  people  to  whom  he  gave  the 
announcement,  to  repeat  the  declaration  as 
a pledge  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  promises 
made  on  the  “Mountain  of  God.” 

3.  God  Almighty]  Rather,  “El  Shaddai,” 
it  is  better  to  keep  this  as  a proper  name;  the 
meaning  is  correctly  given  in  the  text. 

4.  And  I have  also]  The  connection  be- 
tween this  and  the  following  verse  is  marked 
by  the  repetition  of  these  words.  Two 
reasons  are  assigned  for  the  promise,  viz.  the 
old  covenant  with  the  patriarchs,  and  the 
divine  compassion  for  the  sufferings  of  Is- 
rael. 

6.  a.vith  a stretched  out ^rm]  The  figui'^ 
is  common  and  quite  intelligible;  it  may  have 
struck  Moses  and  the  people  the  more  forcibly 
since  they  were  familiar  with  the  hieroglyphic 
which  represents  might  by  two  outstretehed 
arms.  On  the  obelisk  at  Heliopolis,  Moses 
had  been  from  infancy  familiar  with  the  symbol 
in  the  official  name  of  Osertasen  P^acheperka, 
i.e.  Ra  is  might. 


V.  8—15.] 


EXODUS.  VI. 


273 


your  God,  which  bringeth  you  out 
from  under  the  burdens  of  the  Egyp- 
tians. 

8 And  I will  bring  you  in  unto 
the  land,  concerning  the  which  I did 

f Heb.  ^ swear  to  give  it  to  Abraham,  to  Isaac, 

and  to  Jacob;  and  I will  give  it  you 
for  an  heritage : I am  the  Lord. 

9 *!T  And  Moses  spake  so  unto  the 
children  of  Israel : but  they  hearkened 

trieb.  not  unto  Moses  for  ^anguish  of  spirit, 
irTtrTit-  cruel  bondage. 

ness.  10  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 

ses, saying, 

1 1 Go  in,  speak  unto  Pharaoh  king 
of  Egypt,  that  he  let  the  children  of 
Israel  go  out  of  his  land. 

12  And  Moses  spake  before  the 
Lord,  saying.  Behold,  the  children  of 


Israel  have  not  hearkened  unto  me; 
how  then  shall  Pharaoh  hear  me,  who 
am  of  uncircumcised  lips  ? 

13  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses and  unto  Aaron,  and  gave  them  a 
charge  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  and 
unto  Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt,  to  bring 
the  children  of  Israel  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt. 

14  These  he  the  heads  of  their 
fathers’  houses : ^The  sons  of  Reuben  " Gen.  46. 
the  firstborn  of  Israel ; Hanoch,  and  ?'chron. 
Pallu,  Hezron,  and  Carmi : these  be 

the  families  of  Reuben. 

15  ^And  the  sons  of  Simeon;  Je--^i  Chri,n. 
muel,  and  Jamin,  and  Ohad,  and  Ja- 

chin,  and  Zohar,  and  Shaul  the  son  of 
a Canaanitish  woman : these  a^^e  the 
families  of  Simeon. 


8.  I am  the  Lord']  Rather,  I the 
Lord:  the  word  “am”  obscures  the  con- 
struction. 

9.  they  hearkened  not]  The  contrast  be- 
tween the  reception  of  this  communication 
and  that  recorded  in  ch.  iv.  31,  is  dwelt  upon 
by  some  critics  as  indicating  different  authors, 
but  it  is  distinctly  accounted  for  by  the  change 
of  circumstances.  On  the  former  occasion 
the  people  were  comparatively  at  ease,  accus- 
tomed to  their  lot,  sufficiently  afflicted  to  long 
for  deliverance,  and  sufficiently  free  in  spirit 
to  hope  for  it. 

for  anguish]  Literally  as  in  the  margin, 
for  shortness  of  spirit;  out  of  breath, 
as  it  were,  after  their  cruel  disappointment, 
they  were  quite  absorbed  by  their  misery, 
unable  and  unwilling  to  attend. to  any  fresh 
communication ; an  effect  which  might  seem 
recorded  expressly  to  preclude  the  notion  that 
the  deliverance  of  Israel  was  the  result  of  a 
religious  struggle,  such  as  is  assumed  in  some 
accounts  of  the  transaction. 

11.  go  out  qf  his  land]  There  is  now  a 
change  in  the  demand ; the  first  of  a series  of 
changes.  Moses  is  now  bidden  to  demand 
not  a permission  for  a three  days’  journey, 
which  might  be  within  the  boundaries  of 
Egypt,  but  for  departure  from  the  land. 

12.  uncircumcised  lips]  An  uncircumcised 
car  is  one  that  does  not  hear  clearly ; an  uncir- 
cumcised  heart  one  slow  to  receive  and  under- 
stand warnings;  uncircumcised  lips,  such  as 
Ccmnot  speak  fluently.  Thus  LXX.,  Syr., 
Targ.,  &c.  There  is  no  ground  for  assuming 
a natural  defect.  See  note  on  ch.  iv.  10.  The 

VoL.  I. 


recurrence  of  Moses’  hesitation  is  natural  ; 
great  as  was  the  former  trial  this  was  far 
more  severe;  yet  his  words  as  ever  imply 
fear  of  failure,  not  of  personal  danger. 

13.  unto  Moses  and  unto  Aaron]  The  final 
and  formal  charge  to  the  two  brothers  is  given, 
as  might  be  expected,  before  the  plagues  are 
denounced.  With  this  verse  begins  a new 
section  of  the  history,  and  as  in  the  book 
of  Genesis  “ there  is  in  every  such  case  a 
brief  repetition  of  so  much  of  the  previous 
account  as  is  needed  to  make  it  an  intel- 
ligible narrative  in  itself;  a peculiarity  which 
extends  to  the  lesser  subdivisions  also.”  Quarry 
‘On  Genesis,’  p.  322. 

14;  These  he  the  heads]  We  have  in  the 
following  verses,  not  a complete  genealogy, 
but  a summary  account  of  the  family  of  the 
two  brothers.  It  has  been  objected  to  as  out 
of  place,  interrupting  the  narrative,  and  there- 
fore probably  an  interpolation ; but,  as  Rosen- 
muller  and  other  unbiassed  critics  have  ob- 
sei-ved,  the  reason  is  clear  why  Moses  should 
have  recorded  his  own  genealogy  and  that  of 
his  brother,  when  they  were  about  to  ex- 
ecute a duty  of  the  highest  importance  which 
had  been  imposed  upon  them;  just  then  it 
was  right  and  natural  to  state,  for  the  satis- 
faction of  Hebrew  readevs,  to  whom  genea- 
logical questions  were  always  interesting,  the 
descent  and  position  of  the  designated  leaders 
of  the  nation. 

The  sons  of  Reuben]  Moses  mentions  in  the 
first  place  the  families  of  the  elder  brothers  of 
Levi,  in  order  to  shew  the  exact  position  of 
his  own  tribe  and  family.  Thus  Rashi  and 
Rosenmuller. 


S 


EXODUS.  VI. 


[v.  1 6 — 26. 


274 


16  ^ And  these  are  the  names  of 
<^Numb.  3.  the  “^sons  of  Levi  according  to  their 
J Chron.  6.  generations ; Gershon,  and  Kohath, 

and  Merari : and  the  years  of  the  life 
of  Levi  were  an  hundred  thirty  and 
seven  years. 

17  T'he  sons  of  Gershon;  Libni, 
and  Shimi,  according  to  their  families. 

'^Numb.  18  And  ^the  sons  of  Kohath;  Am- 
iChron.6.  tam,  aiid  Izhar,  and  Hebron,  and 
Uzziel : and  the  years  of  the  life  of 
Kohath  were  an  hundred  thirty  and 
three  years. 

19  And  the  sons  of  Merari;  Ma- 
hali  and  Adushi : these  are  the  families 
of  Levi  according  to  their  generations. 
«fchap.  2.  20  And  ^Amram  took  him  Joche- 

Jjumb.  26.  father’s  sister  to  wife ; and  she 

59-  bare  him  Aaron  and  Moses : and  the 
years  of  the  life  of  Amram  were  an 
hundred  and  thirty  and  seven  years. 


21  ^ And  the  sons  of  Izhar;  Ko- 
rah,  and  Nepheg,  and  Zithri. 

22  And  the  sons  of  Uzziel;  Mi- 
shael,  and  Elzaphan,  and  Zithri. 

23  And  Aaron  took  him  Elisheba, 
daughter  of  Amminadab,  sister  of 
Naashon,  to  wife;  and  she  bare  him 
Nadab,  and  Abihu,  Eleazar,  and 
Ithamar. 

24  And  the  sons  of  Korah ; Assir, 
and  Elkanah,  and  Abiasaph  : these  are 
the  families  of  the  Korhites. 

25  And  Eleazar  Aaron’s  son  took 
him  one  of  the  daughters  of  Putiel  to 
wife;  and  -^she  bare  him  Phinehas :-^Numb. 
these  are  the  heads  of  the  fathers  of 

the  Levites  according  to  their  families. 

26  These  that  Aaron  and  Moses, 
to  whom  the  Lord  said.  Bring  out  the 
children  of  Israel  from  the  land  of 
Egypt  according  to  their  armies. 


16.  sons  of  Levi\  Thus  Moses  shews 
that  of  the  three  great  divisions  of  the  tribe, 
the  one  to  which  he  and  Aaron  belonged,  and 
to  which  the  priesthood  was  afterwards  con- 
fined, was  the  second,  not  the  first.  Again, 
he  does  not  trace  the  descent  of  other  families, 
but  passes  at  once  from  Kohath,  the  son  of 
Levi,  to  the  heads  of  Kohath’s  tamily  in  his 
own  time. 

the  years  of  the  life  of  Le^'i\  It  is  usual 
throughout  Genesis  in  each  genealogy  to  give 
the  age  of  the  chief  person  in  each  principal 
family,  and  to  omit  it  in  the  case  of  secondary 
families. 

20.  Amrani]  This  can  scarcely  be  the 
same  person  who  is  mentioned  in  -i;.  1 8 ; but 
his  descendant  and  representative  in  the  gene- 
ration immediately  preceding  that  of  Moses. 
The  intervening  links  are  omitted,  as  is  the 
rule  where  they  are  not  needed  for  some 
special  purpose,  and  do  not  bear  upon  the 
history.  Between  the  death  of  Amram  and 
the  birth  of  Moses  was  an  interval  which 
can  scarcely  be  brought  within  the  limits 
assigned  by  any  system  of  chronology  to  the 
sojourn  in  Egypt.  Thus  Tiele,  quoted  by 
Kcil:  “According  to  Numbers  iii.  27,  &c. 
in  the  time  of  Moses  the  Kohathites  were 
divided  into  four  branches,  that  of  Amram, 
I/har,  Hebron,  and  U/.ziel : their  number 
amounted  to  8600  males;  of  these  the  Am- 
ramites  were  about  one  fourth,  i.e.  more 
than  2000  males.  This  would  be  impossible 
were  Amram  the  son  of  Kohath  identical 
with  Amram  the  Either  of  Moses.  We  must 
therefore  admit  an  omission  of  several  links 


between  the  two.”  Thus  in  the  genealogy 
of  Ezra  (Ezra  vii.  3,  compared  with  i Chron. 
V.  33 — 35)  five  descents  are  omitted  between 
Azariah  the  son  of  Meraioth  and  Azariah 
son  of  Johanan,  and  several  between  Ezra 
himself  and  Seraiah,  who  was  put  to  death 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  150  years  before  the 
time  of  Ezra.” 

Jochebed]  Here  named  for  the  first  time, 
and,  as  might  be  expected,  not  in  the  general 
narrative  but  in  a genealogical  statement.  The 
name  means  “the  glory  of  Jehovah,”  one 
clear  instance  of  the  usage  of  the  sacred  name 
before  the  Exodus. 

father's  sister]  This  was  within  the  pro- 
hibited degrees  after  the  law  was  given,  but 
not  previously. 

23.  Elisheba]  Her  brother  Naashon  was 
at  that  time  captain  of  the  children  of  Judah, 
Num.  ii.  3.  Theodoret  remarks,  /Sao-t- 
Ka\  rrjs  UpariKrjs  (bvXrjs  rrjv  inipi^iav 
bL^da-Ket.  ‘Qusest.  in  Exod.’  i.e.  (Moses) 
shews  the  intermixture  of  the  royal  and 
priestly  tribes. 

25.  Putiel]  This  name  is  remarkable,  being 
compounded  of  Puli,  or  Poti,  in  Egyptian 
“ devoted  to,”  and  “ El,”  the  Hebrew  name 
of  God.  See  De  Vogue,  ‘ Inscriptions  semi- 
tiques,’  p.  125. 

26,  27.  This  emphatic  repetition  shews 
the  reason  for  inserting  the  genealogy.  The 
names  of  Moses  and  Aaron  are  given  twice 
and  in  a different  order;  in  the  26th  verse 
probably  to  mark  Aaron  as  the  elder  in  the 
genealogy,  and  in  the  27th  to  denote  the 
leadership  of  Moses. 


V.  27—1.] 


EXODUS.  VI.  VII. 


2 


27  These  are  they  which  spake  to 
Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt,  to  bring  out 
the  children  of  Israel  from  Egypt : 
these  are  that  Moses  and  Aaron. 

28  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
day  when  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
in  the  land  of  Egypt, 

29  That  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying,  I a?n  the  Lord  : speak 
thou  unto  Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt  all 
that  I say  unto  thee. 

30  And  Moses  said  before  the 


Lord,  Behold,  I an/  of  uncircumcised 
lips,  and  how  shall  Pharaoh  hearken 
unto  me.^ 

CFIAPTER  VII. 

I Moses  is  encoitraged  to  go  to  Pharaoh.  7 His 
age.  8 llis  rod  is  turned  into  a serpent.  1 1 
T he  sorcerers  do  the  like.  1 3 Fharao/i’s  heart 
is  hardened.  14  God's  message  to  Pharaoh. 
19  The  river  is  turned  into  blood. 

AND  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
See,  I have  made  thee  a god  to 
Pharaoh  ; and  Aaron  thy  brother  shall 
be  thy  prophet. 


28.  This  and  the  following  verses  belong 
to  the  next  chapter.  They  mark  dis- 
tinctly the  beginning  of  a subdivision  of 
the  narrative,  and  according  to  the  general 
rule  in  the  Pentateuch  (see  note  on  ver.  14), 
begin  with  a brief  recapitulation.  Moses 
once  more,  like  other  sacred  writers,  dwells 
strongly  upon  his  personal  deficiencies  and 
faults  of  character  (see  Ewald,  ii.  p.  84),  an 
all  but  certain  indication  of  autobiography 
in  the  case  of  great  and  heroic  personages. 

Chap.  VII.  With  this  chapter  begins  the 
series  of  miracles  wrought  in  Egypt.  They 
are  progressive.  The  first  miracle  is  wrought 
to  accredit  the  mission  of  the  brothers;  it  is 
simply  credential,  and  unaccompanied  by  any 
infliction.  Then  come  signs  which  shew  that 
the  powers  of  nature  are  subject  to  the  will 
of  Jehovah,  each  plague  being  attended  with 
grave  consequences  to  the  Egyptians,  yet  not 
indicting  severe  loss  or  suffering;  then  in  ra- 
pid succession  come  ruinous  and  devastating 
plagues,  murrain,  boils,  hail  and  lightning, 
locusts,  darkness,  and  lastly,  the  death  of  the 
firstborn.  Each  of  the  inflictions  has  a demon- 
strable connection  with  Egyptian  customs  and 
phenomena;  each  is  directly  aimed  at  some 
Egyptian  superstition;  all  are  marvellous,  not, 
for  the  most  part,  as  reversing,  but  as  de- 
veloping forces  inherent  in  nature,  and  direct- 
ing them  to  a special  end.  The  effects  cor- 
respond with  these  characteristics;  the  first 
miracles  are  neglected ; the  following  plagues 
first  alarm,  and  then  for  a season,  subdue, 
^he  king,  who  does  not  give  way  until  his 
firstborn  is  struck.  Even  that  blow  leaves 
him  capable  of  a last  effort,  which  completes 
his  ruin,  and  the  deliverance  of  the  Israelites. 

It  is  admitted  by  critics  that  the  deliver- 
ance of  the  Israelites  must  have  been  the 
result  of  heavy  calamities  indicted  upon  the 
Egyptians,  who  certainly  would  never  have 
submitted  to  so  great  a loss  had  they  been 
in  a state  to  prevent  it.  Nor  could  it  have 
been  effected  by  a successful  uprising  of  the 
Israelites,  who  were  not  in  a position  to  resist 
the  power  of  Egypt,  and  who,  had  such  been 


the  case,  would  certainly  have  preserved  the 
record  of  a war  issuing  in  so  glorious  a re- 
sult. It  is  also  generally  admitted  that  the 
calamities,  w'hatever  they  might  have  been, 
did  not  include  an  overthrow  of  Egyptian 
powder  by  foreign  enemies,  or  national  in- 
surrections. No  notice  of  cither,  as  Knobel 
remarks,  is  found  in  Hebrew  traditions; 
and  it  may  be  added,  that  in  neither  of  the 
reigns  to  which  the  Exodus  has  been  assigned, 
are  there  any  indications  of  either  calamity. 
Egypt  was  in  the  highest  state  of  poAver 
and  prosperity  through  the  whole  period 
within  which  all  agree  that  the  Exodus  took 
place.  The  reign  of  Thotmes  II.,  which  has 
been  shewn  in  the  Appendix  to  be  that 
which  tallies  best  with  all  ascertained  facts, 
intervened  between  two  of  the  ablest  and 
most  successful  sovereigns  in  Egypt,  and 
though  obscure  and  uneventful,  it  gives  no 
indications  of  loss  or  disturbance;  the  only 
war  recorded  was  one  that  extended  or  con- 
firmed his  power.  Late  investigations  have  also 
shewn  that  the  reigns  of  Merneptah  and  his 
successor  (under  whom  these  events  are  sup- 
posed by  most  critics  to  have  occurred),  were 
on  the  wdiole  prosperous;  one  only  invasion  is 
recorded  in  the  beginning  of  that  period  and 
it  was  completely  repelled.  A succession  of 
such  plagues  as  are  described  in  Exodus  must 
therefore  be  assumed,  and  is  in  fact  accepted 
by  .critics,  as  the  only  conceivable  cause  of 
the  result.  The  question  whether  it  was 
miraculous,  depends  upon  the  ulterior  ques- 
tion, whether  miracles  under  any  circum- 
stances are  conceivable;  if  in  any  case  possible 
no  case  can  be  imagined  in  which  the  necessity 
of  a divine  interposition,  and  its  direct  and 
permanent  results  upon  the  whole  state  of 
humanity,  could  be  more  satisfactorily  shewn. 

1.  I ha-ve  made  thee'\  Or  “appointed 
thee.”  The  expression  “a  god”  is  not  un- 
frequently  used  of  an  appointed  representative 
of  God;  but  here  it  implies  that  Moses  will 
stand  in  this  peculiar  relation  to  Pharaoh, 
that  he  will  address  him  by  a prophet,  i.  e.  by 
one  appointed  to  speak  in  his  name.  The  pas- 
. 82 


276 


EXODUS.  VII. 


[v.  2—12. 
spake  unto 


2 Thou  shalt  speak  all  that  I com- 
mand thee:  and  Aaron  thy  brother 
shall  speak  unto  Pharaoh,  that  he  send 
the  children  of  Israel  out  of  his  land. 

3 And  I will  harden  Pharaoh’s 
heart,  and  multiply  my  signs  and  my 
wonders  in  the  land  of  Egypt. 

4 But  Pharaoh  shall  not  hearken 
unto  you,  that  I may  lay  my  hand 
upon  Egypt,  and  bring  forth  mine 
armies,  and  my  people  the  children  of 
Israel,  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  by 
great  judgments. 

5 And  the  Egyptians  shall  know 
that  I am  the  Lord,  when  I stretch 
forth  mine  hand  upon  Egypt,  and 
bring  out  the  children  of  Israel  from 
among  them. 

6 And  Moses  and  Aaron  did  as  the 
Lord  commanded  them,  so  did  they. 

7 And  Moses  was  fourscore  years 
old,  and  Aaron  fourscore  and  three 


sage  is  an  important  one  as  illustrating  the  pri- 
mary and  essential  characteristic  of  a prophet, 
he  is  the  declarer  of  God’s  will  and  purpose. 

3.  and  my  <^jjonders']  The  distinction  between 
signs  and  the  word  here  rendered  “wonders,” 
according  to  Kimchi,  is  that  the  former  is 
used  more  generally,  the  latter  only  of  por- 
tents wrought  to  prove  a divine  interposition ; 
they  were  the  credentials  of  God’s  messengers. 

9.  thy  rod'\  Apparently  the  rod  before 
described,  which  Moses  on  this  occasion  gives 
to  Aaron  as  his  representative. 

a serpent']  A different  word  is  used  in  ch. 
iv.  3,  when  the  rod  of  IVIoses  is  changed.  In 
that  passage  the  snake  is  called  “Nahash,” 
which  corresponds  to  the  Egyptian  Ara,  or 
Uneus.  Here  another  and  more  general  term, 
“Tannin,”  is  employed,  wliich  in  other  pas- 
sages includes  all  sea  or  river  monsters,  and 
is  more  specially  applied  to  the  crocodile  as 
a symbol  of  Egypt.  It  occurs  in  the  Egyp- 
tian ritual,  c.  163,  nearly  in  the  same  form, 
“ d'anem,”  as  a synonym  of  the  monster 
serpent  which  represents  the  principle  of  an- 
tagonism to  light  and  life.  I'he  ancient  ver- 
sions either  render  the  word  coluber,  hpciKOiv^ 
or  simply  transcribe  the  Hebrew;  thus  Syr., 
Targ.,  Sam.,  and  Saadia. 

11.  tnagictans]  See  Note  rft  the  end  of 
the  chapter. 

(with  their  enchantments]  The  derivation  of 
the  original  expression  is  ambiguous.  It  may 
come  from  a woril  meaning  “flame,”  or  from 
another  meaning  “conceal;”  in  cither  case  it 


years  old,  when  they 
Pharaoh. 

8 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

9 When  Pharaoh  shall  speak  unto 
you,  saying,  Shew  a miracle  for  you : 
then  thou  shalt  say  unto  Aaron,  Take 
thy  rod,  and  cast  it  before  Pharaoh, 
and  it  shall  become  a serpent. 

10  ^ And  Moses  and  Aaron  went 
in  unto  Pharaoh,  and  they  did  so  as 
the  Lord  had  commanded : and  Aaron 
cast  down  his  rod  before  Pharaoh,  and 
before  his  servants,  and  it  became  a 
serpent. 

1 1 Then  Pharaoh  also  called  the 
wise  men  and  the  sorcerers ; now  the 
magicians  of  Egypt,  they  also  did  in 
like  manner  with  their  enchantments. 

12  For  they  cast  down  every  man 
his  rod,  and  they  became  serpents  : but 
Aaron’s  rod  swallowed  up  their  rods. 


implies  a deceptive  appearance,  an  illusion,  a 
juggler’s  trick,  not  an  actual  putting  forth  of 
magic  power.  It  bears  a very  near  resem- 
blance to  an  Egyptian  term  for  a magic  for- 
mula, sc.  Ra,  or  Ea,  ap.  Chabas,  ‘P.  M.’  p. 
170.  Moses  describes  the  act  of  the  sorcerers 
as  it  appeared  to  Pharaoh  and  the  spectators; 
living  serpents  may  have  been  thrown  down 
by  tlie  jugglers,  a feat  not  transcending  the 
well-known  skill  of  their  modern  representa- 
tives, with  whom  it  is  a common  trick  to 
handle  venomous  serpents,  and  benumb  them 
so  that  they  are  motionless  and  stiff  as  rods. 
Pharaoh  may  or  may  not  have  believed  in 
a real  transformation;  probably  he  did,  for 
the  jugglers  have  always  form.ed  a separate 
caste,  and  have  kept  their  arts  secret;  but  in 
cither  case  he  would  naturally  consider  that  if 
the  portent  wrought  by  Aaron  differed  from 
theirs,  it  wvas  a difference  of  degree  only,  im- 
plying merely  superiority  in  a common  art. 
The  miracle  which  followed  was  sufficient  to 
convince  him  had  he  been  open  to  conviction. 
The  accounts  in  the  Koran,  Sur.  vii.  and  7 :t., 
are  curious.  They  represent  the  magicians 
as  deceiving  the  spectators  by  acting  upon 
their  imagination. 

12.  s-ivallouued  up  their  rods]  The  miracle 
here  is  distinctly  stated,  and  is  bound  up  with 
tlie  very  substance  of  the  narrative.  Its  mean- 
ing is  obvious.  Ewald  remarks  truly  that 
this  miracle  was  the  clearest  expression  of  the 
truth  which  underlies  all  these  stories,  as  be 
is  pleased  to  call  the  miracles,  vi/.  the  trnih 
and  power  of  the  religion  of  Jehovah  in  con- 
trast w'ith  others. 


V.  13— >9] 


EXODUS.  VII. 


277 


13  And  he  hardened  Pharaoh’s 
heart,  that  he  hearkened  not  unto 
them ; as  the  Lord  had  said. 

14  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Pharaoh’s  heart  is  hardened,  he 
refuseth  to  let  the  people  go. 

15  Get  thee  unto  Pharaoh  in  the 
morning;  lo,  he  goeth  out  unto  the 
water;  and  thou  shalt  stand  by  the 
river’s  brink  against  he  come ; and  the 
rod  which  was  turned  to  a serpent 
shalt  thou  take  in  thine  hand. 

16  And  thou  shalt  say  unto  him. 
The  Lord  God  of  the  Hebrews  hath 
sent  me  unto  thee,  saying.  Let  my 
people  go,  that  they  may  serve  me  in 
the  wilderness : and,  behold,  hitherto 
thou  wouldest  not  hear. 


17  7'hus  saith  the  Lord,  In  this 
thou  shalt  know  that  I am  the  Lord  : 
behold,  I will  smite  with  the  rod  that 
is  in  mine  hand  upon  the  waters  which 
are  in  the  river,  and  they  shall  be 
turned  to  blood. 

18  And  the  fish  that/r  in  the  river 
shall  die,  and  the  river  shall  stink; 
and  the  Egyptians  shall  lothe  to  drink 
of  the  water  of  the  river. 

19  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  Say  unto  Aaron,  Take  thy 
rod,  and  stretch  out  thine  hand  upon 
the  waters  of  Egypt,  upon  their 
streams,  upon  their  rivers,  and  upon 
their  ponds,  and  upon  all  their  ^ pools  ^ Heb. 
of  water,  that  they  may  become  their 
blood ; and  that  there  may  be  blood 


13.  And  he  hardened^  Or  Pharaoh's 
heart  was  hardened.  The  word  is  here 
used  intransitively,  as  in  many  passages : thus 
all  the  Ancient  Versions. 

15.  he  goeth  out  unto  the  <zvater'\  The 
Nile  was  worshipped  under  various  names  and 
symbols,  at  Memphis  especially,  as  Hapi,  i.e. 
Apis,  the  sacred  bull,  or  living  representation  of 
Osiris,  of  whom  the  river  was  regarded  as  the 
embodiment  or  manifestation.  See  ‘Zeitschrift 
Eg.’  1868,  p.  123.  It  is  therefore  probable 
that  the  king  went  in  the  morning  to  offer  his 
devotions.  This  gives  a peculiar  force  and 
suitableness  to  the  miracle.  The  reason  which 
Knobel  assigns  is  not  incompatible  with  this. 
It  was  the  season  of  the  yearly  overflowing, 
about  the  middle  of  June.  (The  Arabic 
almanacs  give  the  i8th  of  Payni,  i.e.  the  12th 
of  June,  for  the  festival  of  the  rising  of  the 
Nile.)  The  daily  rise  of  the  water  was  accu- 
rately recorded,  probably  in  the  time  of  Moses, 
as  some  centuries  later,  under  the  personal 
superintendence  of  the  king.  In  early  inscrip- 
tions the  Nilometer  is  the  symbol  of  stability 
and  providential  care.  According  to  Diodorus 
a Nilometer  was  erected  at  Memphis  under  the 
ancient  Pharaohs;  one  is  described  by  Lepsius 
which  bears  the  name  of  Amenemha  III.,  of 
the'izth  dynasty,  by  whom  the  system  of 
irrigation  was  completed.  See  Appendix. 

The  First  Plague. 

17.  turned  to  blood~\  In  accordance  with 
the  general  character  of  the  narrative  it  might 
be  expected  that  this  miracle  would  bear  a 
certain  resemblance  to  natural  phenomena, 
and  therefore  be  one  which  Pharaoh  might 
see  with  amazement  and  dismay,  yet  without 
complete  conviction.  It  is  well  known  that 
before  the  rise  the  water  of  the  Nile  is  green 


and  unfit  to  drink.  About  the  25th  of  June 
it  becomes  clear,  and  then  yellow,  and 
gradually  reddish  like  ochre;  this  effect  has 
been  generally  attributed  to  the  red  earth 
brought  down  from  Sennaar,  but  Ehrenberg 
proves  that  it  is  owing  to  the  presence  of 
microscopic  cryptogams  and  infusoria.  The 
depth  of  the  colour  varies  in  different  years ; 
when  it  is  very  deep  the  water  has  an  offensive 
smell.  Late  travellers  say  that  at  such  seasons 
the  broad  turbid  tide  has  a striking  resem- 
blance to  a river  of  blood.  The  supernatural 
character  of  the  visitation  was  attested  by 
the  suddenness  of  the  change ; by  its  immediate 
connection  with  the  words  and  act  of  Moses, 
and  by  its  effects.  It  killed  the  fishes,  and 
made  the  water  unfit  for  use,  neither  of  which 
results  follows  the  annual  discoloration. 

18.  shall  lothe']  Lit.  “be  weary  of,”  but 
the  Authorised  Version  expresses  the  meaning. 
The  word  has  a special  force  as  applied  to 
the  water  of  the  Nile,  which  has  a certain 
sweetness  when  purified  of  the  slime,  and  has 
always  been  regarded  by  Egyptians  as  a bless- 
ing peculiar  to  their  land.  It  is  the  only  pure  ' 
and  wholesome  water  in  their  country,  since 
the  water  in  wells  and  cisterns  is  unwhole- 
some, while  rain  water  seldom  falls,  and 
fountains  are  extremely  rare.  Maillet,  ap. 
Kalisch. 

19.  The  expressions  in  this  verse  shew  an 
accurate  knowledge  of  Egypt,  where  the  water 
‘system  was  complete  at  a period  long  before 
Moses.  Lepsius  (‘Zeitschrift,’  1865)  describes 
it  carefully..  Their  streams  mean  the  natural 
branches  of  the  Nile  in  Lower  Egypt.  The 
word  rh'ers  should  rather  be  canals.  Mo- 
ses uses  the  Egyptian  word  explained  above 
(ch.  ii.).  It  includes  canals.  They  were  of 
great  extent,  running  parallel  to  the  Nile,  and 


278 


EXODUS.  VII. 


[v.  2C 25. 


throughout  all  the  land  of  Egypt, 
both  in  vessels  of  wood,  and  in  vessels 
cf  stone. 

20  And  Moses  and  Aaron  did  so, 
as  the  Lord  commanded;  and  he 

« chap.  17.  ^ lifted  up  the  rod,  and  smote  the 
waters  that  were  in  the  river,  in  the 
sight  of  Pharaoh,  and  in  the  sight  of 
'^Psai.  78.  his  servants;  and  all  the  “^waters  that 
were  in  the  river  were  turned  to  blood.’ 

21  And  the  fish  that  was  in  the 
river  died ; and  the  river  stank,  and 
the  Egyptians  could  not  drink  of  the 
water  of  the  river;  and  there  was 
blood  throughout  all  the  land  of  Egypt. 


22  ^And  the  magicians  of  Egypt 17, 
did  so  with  their  enchantments:  and 
Pharaoh’s  heart  was  hardened,  neither 

did  he  hearken  unto  them;  as  the 
Lord  had  said. 

23  And  Pharaoh  turned  and  went 
into  his  house,  neither  did  he  set  his 
heart  to  this  also. 

24  And  all  the  Egyptians  digged 
round  about  the  river  for  water  to 
drink;  for  they  could  not  drink  of 
the  water  of  the  river. 

25  And  seven  days  were  fulfilled, 
after  that  the  Lord  had  smitten  the 
river. 


communicating  with  it  by  sluices,  which  were 
opened  at  the  rise,  and  closed  at  the  subsidence 
of  the  inundation.  The  word  rendered 
^'ponds'"  refers  either  to  natural  fountains,  or 
more  probably  to  cisterns  or  tanks  found  in 
every  town  and  village.  The  “poo/j,”  lit. 
“gathering  of  waters,”  were  the  reservoirs, 
always  large  and  some  of  enormous  extent, 
containing  sufficient  water  to  irrigate  the 
country  in  the  dry  season. 

in  ‘vessels  of  nvood'\  Lit.  “in  wood  and 
stone;”  but  the  word  “vessels”  is  understood 
and  should  be  retained.  This  also  marks  the 
familiarity  of  the  writer  with  Egyptian  cus- 
toms. I'he  Nile  water  is  kept  in  vessels  and 
is  purihcd  for  use  by  filtering,  and  by  certain 
ingredients  such  as  the  paste  of  almonds.  At 
present  the  vessels  are  generally  earthenware. 
'Ehe  words  in  the  text  appear  to  include  all 
household  vessels  in  which  the  water  was  kept. 

21.  the  fsh^  &c.]  The  expression  may 
not  necessarily  mean  “all  the  fish;”  but  a 
great  mortality  is  of  course  implied,  and 


would  be  a most  impressive  warning.  The 
Egyptians  subsisted  to  a great  extent  on  the 
fish  of  the  Nile,  though  salt-water  fish  was 
regarded  as  impure.  A mortality  among  the 
fish  was  a plague  much  dreaded.  In  a hymm 
to  the  Nile  written  by  the  scribe  Enna  it  is 
said  that  the  wrath  of  Hapi  the  Nile-God 
is  a calamity  for  the  fisties.  See  Maspero, 

‘ Hymne  au  Nil,’  p.  27. 

22.  did  j(?]  From  this  it  must  be  in- 
ferred that  the  plague  though  general  was  not 
universal.  In  numberless  instances  the  He- 
brew terms  which  imply  universality  must 
be  understood  in  a limited  sense. 

24.  digged  round  about  the  r/Trr]  This  • 
statement  c.orroborates  the  explanation  given 
above  on  -v.  17.  The  discoloured  water  would 
be  purified  by  a natural  filtration. 

25.  se’veyi  days'\  This  marks  the  duration 
of  the  plague.  4'he  natural  discoloration  of 
the  Nile  water  lasts  generally  much  longer, 
about  20  days. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  vii.  ii. 


11.  Three  n.ames  for  the  magicians  of 
‘"^re  given  in  this  verse.  The  first  and 
last  occur  in  Genesis,  ch.  v.  The  word 
(C/Orn),  wise  men,  is  used  specifically  of 
men  who  know  occult  arts.  Correspond- 
ing expressions  in  Arabic  are  well  known, 
as  araph,  alam,  &c.  Thus  in  the  Acts  the 
sorcerer  Bar-jesus  is  called  Elymas,  “the 
knowing  one.”  In  ancient  Egyptian  the  most" 
general  name  is  Rechiu  Chetu,  i.e.  people 
who  know  things,  the  word  “things”  being 
applied  technically  to  .secret  and  curious 
things,  'Ehe  word  rendered  “sorcerers” 
(□'eebt:)  occurs  first  in  this  passage.  It  is 
used  in  the  sense  “muttering  magic  fonuul^E.” 
According  to  Gesenius  the  original  meaning. 


as  retained  in  Syriac  and  Ethiopic,  is  simply 
to  worship  or  pray.  No  exact  parallel  is  found 
for  this  word  am.ong  the  numerous  desig- 
nations for  sorcerers  in  Egyptian  documents  ; 
but  it  seems  not  improbable  that  it  may  be 
connected  with  “Chesef,”  a very  common 
word  used  specially  in  the  sense  of  repelling, 
driving  away,  conjuring  all  noxious  creatures 
by  magic  formulse.  Thus  in  the  funeral  ritual 
there  are  no  less  than  1 1 chapters  (32 — 42)  con- 
taining forms  for  “stopping”  or  driving  away 
crocodiles,  snakes,  asps,  &c.  It  was  natural 
that  Pharaoh  should  have  sent  especially  for 
persons  armed  with  such  formulae  on  this  occa- 
sion. The  more  general  word  “chartummim,” 
which  corresponds  in  meaning  to  Upoypa>i' 


V.  I— 3-] 


EXODUS.  VIII. 


fiarevs  or  e^rjyrjriisj  “sacrcd  scribe”  or  “inter- 
preter,” has  not  been  yet  traced  in  Egyptian. 
If  however  it  is  resolved  into  its  probable 
elements,  the  first  syllable  "in  (char)  answers 
exactly  to  “cher,”  one  of  the  commonest  Egyp- 
tian words,  used  in  compound  teians  as  “bear- 
ing,” “having,”  “possessing;”  the  second  part 
corresponds  to  “temu”  or  “turn,”  “to  speak, 
utter,”  which  is  applied  specifically  to  uttering 
a sacred  name,  and  apparently  as  “a  spell.” 
Thus  on  certain  days  of  the  calendar  it  was 
unlawful  to  utter  (temu)  the  name  of  .Set  or 
Sutech,  the  Typhon,  or  spirit  of  force  and 
destruction.  See  ‘Papyrus  Sallier,’  iv.  p.  12, 
last  line;  and  Brugsch,  ‘D.  H.’  s.  v.  In  the 
trilingual  inscription  lately  discovered  at  San, 
“turn”  means  to  recite  a sacred  hymn,  1.  34. 
Cher-tum  would  thus  mean  “bearer  of  sacred 
words.” 

The  most  complete  and  interesting  account 
of  Egyptian  magic  is  given  by  M.  Chabas  in 
his  work  called  ‘Le  Papyrus  Magique,’  Har- 
ris, 1866.  Books  containing  magic  formuhc 
belonged  exclusively  to  the  king;  no  one  was 
permitted  to  consult  them  but  the  priests  and 
wise  men,  who  formed  a council  or  college, 
and  were  called  in  by  the  Pharaoh  on  all 
occasions  of  difficulty.  These  “wise  men” 
are  called  “scribes”  (see  Brugsch,  ‘D.  H.’ 
p.  1576),  “scribes  of  the  sacred  house,”  or 


279 

“te-ameni,”  i.e.  “scribes  of  occult  writings,” 

&c.  Under  the  20th  dynasty,  the  use  of  these 
books  was  interdicted  under  pain  of  death. 
Two  curious  documents  (the  Papyrus  Lee  and 
Rollin  explained  by  M.  Chabas,  and  lately 
edited  by  Pleyte)  give  a full  account  of  the 
trial  and  execution  of  a criminal  who  fraudu- 
lently obtained  possession  of  some  books  kept 
in  the  archives  of  the  palace.  No  fonnulae  are 
more  common  than  those  which  were  used  to 
fascinate,  or  to  repel  serpents. 

The  names  of  the  two  principal  magicians, 
Jannes  and  Jambres,  who  “withstood  Moses” 
are  preserved  by  S.  Paul,  2 Tim.  iii.  8.  Both 
names  are  Egyptian,  in  which  language  An, 
or  Anna,  identical  with  Jannes,  means  scribe. 

It  was  also  a proper  name  borne  by  a writer 
well  known  in  Papyri  of  the  time  of  Ra- 
meses  II.  Jambres  may  mean  Scribe  of  the 
South.  The  tradition  was  widely  spread.  It 
is  found  in  the  Talmud,  in  the  later  Targum, 
and  in  other  Rabbinical  writings  quoted  by 
Buxtorf,  ‘Lex.  H.  C.’  p.  946.  Pliny,  who 
makes  Moses,  Jamnes,  and  Jotape  heads  of 
magic  factions,  seems  to  have  derived  his  in- 
formation from  other  sources,  and  he  is  fol- 
lowed by  Apuleius.  Numenius,  a Pythago- 
rean, quoted  by  Eusebius,  comes  nearer  to 
the  truth,  though  according  to  Greek  habit 
he  transforms  Moses  into  Musieus. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


X Frogs  are  sent.  8 Pharaoh  sneth  to  Moses, 
1 2 a7id  Moses  by  pi-ayer  reni(roeth  theni  muay. 
16  The  dust  is  turned  into  lice,  which  the 
magicians  could  not  do.  20  The  swarms  of 
flies.  25  Pharaoh,  inclineth  to  let  the  people 
go,  32  but  yet  is  hardened. 


K 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
Go  unto  Pharaoh,  and  say 


unto  him,  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Let 
my  people  go,  that  they  may  serve  me. 

2 And  if  thou  refuse  to  let  them 
go,  behold,  I will  smite  all  thy  bor- 
ders with  frogs : 

3 And  the  river  shall  bring  forth 
frogs  abundantly,  which  shall  go  up 
and  come  into  thine  house,  and  into 


The  Second  Plague. 

Chap.  VIII.  2.  'with  frogs~\  The  an- 
noyance and  suffering  caused  by  frogs  are 
described  by  ancient  writers,  quoted  by  Bo- 
chart,  ‘Hier.’  iii.  In  Egypt  they  sometimes 
amount  at  present  to  a severe  visitation.  Some 
months  appear  to  have  elapsed  between  this 
and  the  fonner  plague,  if  they  made  their 
appearance  at  the  usual  time,  that  is  (accord- 
ing to  Seetzen,  who  gives  the  fullest  and  most 
accurate  account  of  them,  Vol.  iii.  p.  492) 
in  September.  He  describes  two  species,  the 
rana  Nilotica,  and  the  rana  Mosaica,  called 
by  the  natives  “Dofda,”  which  exactly  cor- 
responds to  the  Hebrew  word  used  in  this 
and  no  other  passage,  except  in  the  psalms 
taken  from  it;  it  is  not  a general  designation, 
but  restricted  to  the  species,  and  probably  of 


Egyptian  origin.  See  Appendix  and  end  of 
volume.  They  are  small,  do  not  leap  much, 
are  much  like  toads,  and  fill  the  whole  country 
with  their  croakings.  They  are  generally  con- 
sumed rapidly  by  the  Ibis  (ardea  Ibis)',  which 
thus  preserves  the  land  from  the  stench  de- 
scribed 07. 14.  This  plague  was  thus,  like  the 
preceding,  in  general  accordance  with  natural 
phenomena,  but  marvellous  both  for  its  extent 
and  intensity,  and  for  its  direct  connection 
with  the  words  and  acts  of  God’s  messengers. 
It  had  also  apparently,  like  the  other  plagues, 
a direct  bearing  upon  Egyptian  superstitions. 
A female  deity  with  a frog’s  head,  named 
Heka,  was  worshipped  in  the  district  of  Sah 
(i.e.  Benihassan)  as  the  wife  of  Chnum,  the 
god  of  the  cataracts,  or  of  the  inundation  ; see 
]3rugsch,  ‘Geog.’  p.  224.  Lepsius  has  shewn 
that  the  frog  was  connected  v/ith  the  most 


28o 


EXODUS.  VIII. 


[v.  4—I5- 


thy  bedchamber,  and  upon  thy  bed, 
and  into  the  house  of  thy  servants, 
and  upon  thy  people,  and  into  thine 
nor,  ovens,  and  into  thy  " kneadingtroughs : 
daugh.  ^ frogs  shall  come  up 

both  on  thee,  and  upon  thy  people, 
and  upon  all  thy  servants. 

5 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  Say  unto  Aaron,  Stretch  forth 
thine  hand  with  thy  rod  over  the 
streams,  over  the  rivers,  and  over  the 
ponds,  and  cause  frogs  to  come  up 
upon  the  land  of  Egypt. 

6 And  Aaron  stretched  out  his 
hand  over  the  waters  of  Egypt;  and 
the  frogs  came  up,  and  covered  the 
land  of  Egypt. 

«wisd.  17.  7 "And  the  magicians  did  so  with 

their  enchantments,  and  brought  up 
frogs  upon  the  land  of  Egypt. 

8 ^ Then  Pharaoh  called  for  Mo- 
ses and  Aaron,  and  said,  Intreat  the 
Lord,  that  he  may  take  away  the 
II  Or,  frogs  from  me,  and  from  my  people  ; 

and  I will  let  the  people  go,  that  they 
over  me,  rnay  do  sacrifice  unto  the  Lord. 
a Or,  9 And  Moses  said  unto  Pharaoh, 

' Glory  over  me : “ when  shall  I in- 


treat for  thee,  and  for  thy  servants, 
and  for  thy  people,  ^ to  destroy,  the  t Heb. 
frogs  from  thee  and  thy  houses,  ' that^° 
they  may  remain  in  the  river  only  r 

10  And  he  said, ‘'Tomorrow.  And  " O’-,, 
he  said.  Be  it  according  to  thy  word  ; to  mor- 
that  thou  mayest  know  that  there  is 
none  like  unto  the  Lord  our  God. 

1 1 And  the  frogs  shall  depart  from 
thee,  and  from  thy  houses,  and  from 
thy  servants,  and  from  thy  people; 
they  shall  remain  in  the  river  only. 

1 2 And  Moses  and  Aaron  went 
out  from  Pharaoh : and  Moses  cried 
unto  the  Lord  because  of  the  froo;s 
which  he  had  brought  against  Pha- 
raoh. 

13  And  the  Lord  did  according 
to  the  word  of  Moses ; and  the  frogs 
died  out  of  the  houses,  out  of  the 
villages,  and  out  of  the  fields. 

14  And  they  gathered  them  to- 
gether upon  heaps : and  the  land 
stank. 

15  But  v/hen  Pharaoh  saw  that 
there  was  respite,  he  hardened  his 
heart,  and  hearkened  not  unto  them ; 
as  the  Lord  had  said. 


ancient  forms  of  nature-worship  in  Egypt. 
See  also  Duemichen,  ‘Tg.  Zeitschrift,’  1869, 
p.  6.  According  to  Choeremon  (see  Bunsen’s 
‘Egypt,’  Vol.  V.  p.  736)  the  frog  was  regarded 
as  a symbol  of  regeneration.  See  the  ijote, 
p.  242,  on  the  adoration  of  the  frog  by  the 
father  of  Rameses  1 1. 

3.  into  tkine  bouse']  This  appears  to  have 
been  peculiar  to  the  plague,  as  such.  No 
mention  is  made  of  it  by  travellers.  It  was 
specially  the  visitation  which  would  be  felt  by 
the  scrupulously  clean  Egyptians. 

bneadingt roughs]  Not  “dough,”  as  in  the 
margin. 

7.  The  magicians  would  seem  to  have 
been  able  to  increase  the  plague,  but  not  to 
remove  it ; hence  Pharaoh’s  application  to 
Moses,  the  first  symptom  of  yielding.  An 
explanation,  which  is  certainly  ingenious  and 
not  improbable,  is  suggested  by  a late  com- 
mentator (Hirsch,  1869).  He  assumes  that 
the  words  “ the  magicians  did  so,”  mean  that 
they  imitated  the  action  of  Aaron,  stretching 
out  their  rods,  but  using  magic  formiiiljE 
with  the  intention  of  driving  away  the  frogs, 
the  result  being  not  only  a frustration  of  their 
object,  but  an  increase  of  the  plague. 


9.  Gloiy  over  me"]  The  expression  is 
rather  obscure,  but  it  is  supposed  by  most  of 
the  later,  and  by  some  early  commentators,  to 
mean,  as  the  margin  renders  it,  “have  honour 
over  me,” have  the  honour,  or  advantage 
over  me,  directing  me  when  I shall  entreat 
God  for  thee  and  thy  servants,  &c.  Moses 
thus  accepts  the  first  intimation  of  a change 
of  mind  in  Pharaoh,  and  expresses  him- 
self, doubtless  in  accordance  with  Egyptian 
usage,  at  once  courteously  and  deferentially. 
It  is,  however,  obvious  that  such  an  expression 
would  not  have  been  attributed  to  him  by  a 
later  writer.  The  old  versions,  LXX.,  Vulg., 
Saadia,  who  are  followed  by  Gesenius,  gene- 
rally render  the  word,  appoint  for  me,  deter- 
mine for  me  when,  &c.,  the  Syriac  has  “ask 
for  me  a time  when ; ” this  agrees  well  with 
the  answer  “ to-morrow.” 

<^uheri]  Or  by  wlien;  for  what  exact 
time.  Pharaoh's  answer  in  2;.  10  refers  to  this, 
by  to-morroviT.  The  shortness  of  the  time 
would,  of  course,  be  a test  of  the  supernatural 
character  of  the  transaction. 

13.  villages]  Lit.  “inclosures,  or  court- 
yards.” . 


EXODUS.  VIIL 


281 


V.  16 21.] 


16  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Say  unto  Aaron,  Stretch  out  thy 
rod,  and  smite  the  dust  of  the  land, 
that  it  may  become  lice  throughout 
all  the  land  of  Egypt. 

17  And  they  did  so;  for  Aaron 
stretched  out  his  hand  with  his  rod, 
and  smote  the  dust  of  the  earth, 
and  it  became  lice  in  man,  and  in 
beast;  all  the  dust  of  the  land  be- 
came lice  throughout  all  the  land  of 
Egypt. 

18  And  the  magicians  did  so  with 
their  enchantments  to  bring  forth  lice, 
but  they  could  not:  so  there  were  lice 
upon  man,  and  upon  beast. 

19  Then  the  magicians  said  unto 
Pharaoh,  This  is  the  finger  of  God: 


and  Pharaoh’s  heart  was  hardened, 
and  he  hearkened  not  unto  them;  as 
the  Lord  had  said. 

20  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto 
Moses,  Rise  up  early  in  the  morning,  ^ 
and  stand  before  Pharaoh ; lo,  he 
cometh  forth  to  the  water;  and  say 

unto  him.  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Let 
my  people  go,  that  they  may  serve 
me. 

21  Else,  if  thou  wilt  not  let  my 
people  go,  behold,  I will  send  " swarms  n Or, 

of  flies  upon  thee,  and  upon  thy  fnfisoZ 
servants,  and  upon  thy  people,  and 
into  thy  houses : and  the  houses  of 
the  Egyptians  shall  be  full  of  swarms 
of  flies^  and  also  the  ground  whereon 
they  are. 


The  Third  Plague. 

It  is  observed  by  Hebrew  commentators 
that  the  nine  plagues  are  divided  into  three 
groups:  distinct  warnings  are  given  of  the  first 
two  plagues  in  each  group ; the  third  in  each  is 
inflicted  without  any  previous  notice,  the  third, 
Uce^  the  sixth,  boils^  the  ninth,  darkness. 

16.  the  dust  of  the  land'\  The  two  pre- 
ceding plagues  fell  upon  the  Nile.  This  fell 
on  the  earth,  which  was  worshipped  under 
the  name  Seb,  its  personification,  regarded,  in 
the  pantheistic  system  of  Egypt,  as  the  father 
of  the  gods.  See  Brugsch,  ‘Zeitschrift,’  1868, 
p.  123.  An  especial  sacredness  was  attached 
to  the  black  fertile  soil  of  the  basin  of  the  Nile, 
called  Chemi,  from  which  the  ancient  name 
of  Egypt  is  supposed  to  be  derived. 

lice'\  In  Hebrew  “Kinnim.”  The  word 
occurs  only  in  connection  with  this  plague. 
These  insects  are  generally  identified  with 
mosquitos,  a plague  nowhere  greater  than  in 
Egypt.  They  are  most  troublesome  towards 
October,  i.e.  soon  after  the  plague  of  frogs,  and 
are  dreaded  not  only  for  the  pain  and  annoyance 
which  they  cause,  but  also  because  they  are 
said  to  penetrate  into  the  body  through  the 
nostrils  and  ears.  Thus  the  LXX.  (cr/cH(j6es'), 
Philo,  and  Origen,  whose  testimony  as  resi- 
dents in  Egypt  is  of  great  weight.  The  mos- 
quito net  is  an  indispensable  article  to  Egyptian 
travellers.  There  are  however  some  grave 
objections  to  this  interpretation.  Mosquitos 
are  produced  in  stagnant  waters  where  their 
larvse  are  deposited,  whereas  these  kinnim 
spring  from  the  dust  of  the  earth.  The  word 
in  our  version  may  be  nearer  to  the  original, 
which  is  probably  Egyptian;  see  Appendix. 
Late  travellers  {e.g.  Sir  S.  Baker)  describe  the 
visitation  of  vermin  in  very  similar  terms,  “it 


is  as  though  the  very  dust  were  turned  into 
lice.”  The  lice  which  he  describes  are  a sort 
of  tick,  not  larger  than  a grain  of  sand,  which 
when  filled  with  blood  expands  to  the  size  of 
a hazel  nut.  Saadia  renders  the  word  “ lice.” 

17.  ail  the  dust\  The  sense  is  here  ne- 
cessarily limited : the  meaning  being,  the  dust 
swarmed  with  lice  in  every  part  of  the  land. 

19.  the  fnger  of  God~\  This  expression 
is  thoroughly  Egyptian;  it  need  not  imply 
that  the  magicians  recognised  Jehovah  as  the 
God  who  wrought  the  marvel,  which  they 
attributed  generally  to  the  act  of  the  Deity. 
They  may  possibly  have  referred  it  to  a god 
hostile  to  their  own  protectors,  such  as  Set,  or 
Sutech,  the  Typhon  of  later  mythology,  to 
whom  such  calamities  were  attributed  by 
popular  .superstition. 

The  Fourth  Plague. 

20.  cometh  forth  to  the  'njoater'\  See  note 
ch.  vii.  15.  It  is  not  improbable  that  on  this 
occasion  Pharaoh  went  to  the  Nile  with  a 
procession  in  order  to  open  the  solemn  festi- 
val, which  w^as  held  120  days  after  the  first 
rise,  at  the  end  of  October  or  early  in  No- 
vember, when  the  inundation  is  abating  and 
the  first  traces  of  vegetation  are  seen  on  the 
deposit  of  fresh  soil. 

The  plague  now  denounced  may  be  re- 
garded as  connected  with  the  atmosphere,  each 
element  in  turn  being  converted  into  a scourge. 
The  air  was  an  object  of  worship,  personified 
in  the  deity  Shu,  the  son  of  Ra,  the  sun-god; 
or  in  Isis,  queen  of  heaven. 

21.  s^joarms  of  flies'\  The  Hebrew  has 
the  word  “ Arob,”  which  most  of  the  ancient, 
and  some  modern  interpreters,  understand 
to  mean  a mixture  of  beasts  and  insects,  a sense 


282 


EXODUS.  VIIL 


[v.  2 2 27. 


22  And  I will  sever  in  that  day 
the  land  of  Goshen,  in  which  my 
people  dwell,  that  no  swarms  of  fies 
shall  be  there;  to  the  end  thou  may- 
A*  est  knov/  that  I am  the  Lord  in  the 
midst  of  the  earth. 

t Hcb.  23  And  I will  put  ^a  division  be- 
tween  my  people  and  thy  people : " to 
morrow  shall  this  sign  be. 

by  to  7nor-  a 1 i t ° 1 • 1 1 

rozo.  24  And  the  Lord  did  so;  and 

b wisd.  16.  ^ there  came  a grievous  swarm  of  fies 
^ into  the  house  of  Pharaoh,  and  into 

his  servants’  houses,  and  into  all  the 
Egypt:  the  land  was  'cor- 
rupted  by  reason  of  the  sv/arm  of  flies. 


25  ^ And  Pharaoh  called  for 
Moses  and  for  Aaron,  and  said.  Go 
ye,  sacrifice  to  your  God  in  the 
land. 

26  And  Moses  said.  It  is  not  meet 
so  to  do;  for  we  shall  sacrifice  the 
abomination  of  the  Egyptians  to  the 
Lord  our  God:  lo,  shall  we  sacrifice 
the  abomination  of  the  Egyptians  be- 
fore their  eyes,  and  will  they  not 
stone  us  ? 

27  We  will  go  three  days’  journey 
into  the  wilderness,  and  sacrifice  to 

the  Lord  our  God,  as  ^he  shall  com-  ^chap. 
mand  us. 


derived  from  the  Arabic  “Arab,”  “mixed.” 
(Thus  the  Vulg.,  Targ.,  Saadia,  Syr.,  and 
Aquila.)  It  is  now,  however,  more  generally 
supposed  that  a particular  species  of  fly  is  de- 
scribed, the  dog-fly  {KvvoyzvLa,  LXX.),  which 
at  certain  seasons  is  described  as  a far  worse 
plague  than  mosquitos.  The  bite  is  exceedingly 
sharp  and  painful,  causing  severe  inflammation, 
especially  in  the  eyelids.  Coming  in  immense 
swarms  they  coverall  objectsin  black  and  loath- 
some masses  and  attack  every  exposed  part  of  a 
travellers  person  with  incredible  pertinacity. 
Some  commentators  however  adopt  the  opinion 
of  GEdmann,  who  identifies  the  species  here 
described  with  the  blatta  orientalis,  or  the 
kakerlaque,  a species  of  beetle,  of  which  Munk 
(‘Palestine,’  p.  120)  says:  “Ceux  qui  ont 
voyage  sur  le  Nil  savent  combien  cet  in- 
secte  est  incommode:  les  bateaux  en  sont  in- 
festes,  et  on  les  y voit  souvent  par  milliers.” 
Kalisch  quotes  passages  which  prove  that  they 
inflict  painful  bites  and  consume  all  sorts  of 
materials.  There  would  be  a special  fitness 
in  tiiis  plague,  since  the  beetle  was  reverenced 
by  the  Egyptians  as  the  symbol  of  life,  of  re- 
productive or  creati\e  power.  No  object  is 
more  common  in  hieroglyphics,  where  it 
represents  the  word  “cheper,”  “to  exist,”  or 
“to  become.”  The  sun-god,  as  creator,  bore 
the  name  Chepera,  and  is  represented  in  the 
form,  or  with  the  head,  of  a beetle.  The 
word  “arob,”  which  occurs  nowhere  else, 
moreover  bears  a very  near  resemblance  to 
an  old  Egyptian  word,  retained  in  Coptic, 
which  designates  a species  of  beetle.  See 
Brugsch,  ‘J).  H.’  p.  178,  s.v.  ‘Abeb.’ 

22.  I sever,  &c.]  This  severance  con- 
stituted a specific  difference  between  this  and 
the  jJix'ceding  plagues.  Pharaoh  could  not  of 
course  attribute  the  exemption  of  Goshen  from 
a scourge,  which  fell  on  the  valley  of  the  Nile,  to 
an  Egyptian  deity,  certainly  not  to  Chepera 
(see  the  last  note),  a special  object  of  worship 
in  lower  Egypt. 


in  the  midst]  Literally  “ heart.”  The  idiom 
is  common  in  Hebrew,  but  there  may  possibly 
be  an  allusion  to  the  Egyptian  “heart”  used 
specially  to  designate  lower  Egypt. 

25.  to  your  God]  Pharaoh  now  admits 
the  existence  and  power  of  the  God  whom  he 
had  professed  not  to  know;  but,  as  Moses  is 
careful  to  record,  he  recognises  Him  only  as 
the  national  Deity  of  the  Israelites. 

in  the  land]  i.e.  In  Egypt,  not  beyond  the 
frontier. 

26.  the  abomination]  The  expression  may 
mean  either  the  object  of  an  abominable  wor- 
ship (as  Chemosh  is  called  the  abomination 
of  Moab,  and  Moloch  the  abomination  of 
Ammon,  see  i Kings  xi.  7),  or  an  animal 
which  the  Egyptians  held  it  sacrilegious  to 
slay.  The  latter  meaning  seems  more  probable, 
considering  that  the  words  were  addressed 
to  Pharaoh.  Thus  Ros.,  Knob.,  but  the 
former  meaning  is  preferred  by  Bp.  Words- 
worth, and  is  given  by  the  LXX.,  Targ., 
Vulg.,  and  Syr.  In  either  case  the  ox,  bull, 
or  cow,  is  meant.  The  cow  was  never  sacri- 
ficed in  Egypt,  being  sacred  to  Isis;  but  as 
a general  rule,  no  animal  vras  slaughtered  in 
a district  where  it  represented  a local  dcit)a 
Erom  a very  early  age  the  ox  was  worshipped 
throughout  Ifgypt,  and  more  especially  at 
Heliopolis  and  Memphis  under  various  desig- 
nations, Apis,  Mnevis,  Amen-Ehe,  as  the 
symbol  or  manifestation  of  their  greatest 
deities,  Osiris,  Atum,  Ptah,  and  Isis. 

27.  three  days'  journey]  See  note  on  ch. 
iii.  18.  The  demand  does  not  refer  to  a 
journey  to  Sinai,  which  would  have  oc- 
cupied much  longer  time.  In  the  next  verse 
Pharaoh  grants  the  permission,  not  however 
without  imposing  a condition  which  w'ould 
have  enabled  him  to  take  effectual  measures  to 
prevent  the  final  emigration  of  the  Israelites. 
'Efie  power  of  the  Pharaohs  extended  far 
beyond  the  frontier,  espscially  on  tlie  road  to 


V.  28 — 8.] 


EXODUS.  VIII.  IX. 


283 


28  And  Pharaoh  said,  I will  let 
you  go,  that  ye  may  sacrifice  to  the 
Lord  your  God  in  the  wilderness; 
only  ye  shall  not  go  very  far  away : 
intreat  for  me. 

29  And  Moses  said.  Behold,  I go 
out  from  thee,  and  I will  intreat  the 
Lord  that  the  swarms  of  flies  may 
depart  from  Pharaoh,  from  his  ser- 
vants, and  from  his  people,  to  mor- 
row: but  let  not  Pharaoh  deal  de- 
ceitfully any  more  in  not  letting  the 
people  go  to  sacrifice  to  the  Lord. 

30  And  Moses  went  out  from  Pha- 
raoh, and  intreated  the  Lord. 

31  And  the  Lord  did  according  to 
the  word  of  Moses ; and  he  removed 
the  swarms  of  flies  from  Pharaoh, 
from  his  servants,  and  from  his  peo- 
ple; there  remained*  not  one. 

32  And  Pharaoh  hardened  his  heart 
at  this  time  also,  neither  would  he  let 
the  people  go. 

CPIAPTER  IX. 

I The  murrain  of  beasts.  8 The  plague  of  boils 

a7id  blahis.  13  This  message  aboict  the  hail. 

22  The  plague  of  hail.  27  Pharaoh  siieth  to 

Moses,  35  but  yet  is  haj'dened. 

Then  the  Lord  said  unto  Ado- 
ses,  Go  in  unto  Pharaoh,  and 


tell  him.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God 
of  the  Hebrews,  Let  my  people  go, 
that  they  may  serve  me. 

2 For  if  thou  refuse  to  let  the?n  go, 
and  wilt  hold  them  still, 

3 Behold,  the  hand  of  the  Lord 
is  upon  thy  cattle  which  is  in  the 
field,  upon  the  horses,  upon  the  asses, 
upon  the  camels,  upon  the  oxen,  and 
upon  the  sheep:  there  shall  be  a very 
grievous  murrain. 

4 And  the  Lord  shall  sever  be- 
tween the  cattle  of  Israel  and  the 
cattle  of  Egypt : and  there  shall  no- 
thing die  of  all  that  is  the  children’s  of 
Israel. 

5 And  the  Lord  appointed  a set 
time,  saying.  To  morrow  the  Lor.d 
shall  do  this  thing  in  the  land. 

6 And  the  Lord  did  that  thing  on 
the  morrow,  and  all  the  cattle  of 
Egypt  died : but  of  the  cattle  of  the 
children  of  Israel  died  not  one. 

7 And  Pharaoh  sent,  and,  behold, 
there  was  not  one  of  the  cattle  of 
the  Israelites  dead.  And  the  heart 
of  Pharaoh  was  hardened,  and  he  did 
not  let  the  people  go. 

8 And  the  Lord  said  unto  A/lo- 
ses and  unto  Aaron,  Take  to  vou 


Palestine,  which  was  commanded  by  fortresses 
erected  by  the  early  sovereigns  of  the  i8th 
dynasty. 

The  Fifth  Plague. 

Chap.  IX.  3.  a very  grievous  7nurrain\ 
Or  “pestilence;”  but  the  vrord  murrain,  i.e.  a 
great  mortality,  exactly  expresses  the  meaning. 
This  terrible  visitation  struck  far  more  severely 
than  the  preceding,  which  had  caused  distress 
and  suffering ; it  attacked  the  resources  of  the 
nation.  The  disease  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  common  in  ancient  times,  no  distinct 
notice  is  found  on  the  monuments,  unless  it  is 
included,  as  seems  not  improbable,  under  the 
term  “Aat,”  which,  as  M.  Chabas  shews, 
applies  to  the  contagious  or  epidemic  pestilence 
which  frequently,  as  it  would  almost  seem 
annually,  broke  out  after  the  subsidence  of  the 
inundation;  see  ‘ Melanges  Egyptologiques,’  i. 
p.  39.  Within  the  last  few  years  the  murrain 
has  thrice  fallen  upon  Egypt,  in  1842, 1863,  and 
1866  (also  60  years  previously);  when  nearly 
the  whole  of  the  herds  have  been,  destroyed. 
The  disease  appears  to  have  been  of  the  same 
kind  as  that  which  lately  fell  so  severely  upon 


England.  The  exact  time  of  the  infliction  is  not 
mentioned;  but  in  Egypt  the  cattle  are  in  the 
fields  from  December  to  the  end  of  April,  and 
the  disease  may  have  broken  out  in  the  form.er 
month  when  the  cattle  were  predisposed  to  it  by 
the  change  from  confinement  to  the  open  air, 
and  from  old  to  fresh  pastures;  a change  more 
dangerous  than  usual  in  so  exceptional  a year. 
In  1863  the  murrain  began  in  November,  and 
was  at  its  height  in  December. 

the  camels']  These  animals  are  only  twice 
mentioned,  here  and  Gen.  xii.  16,  in  connec- 
tion with  Egypt.  In  this  passage  the  enu- 
meration of  cattle  is  studiously  complete.  It 
is  shewn  in  the  Appendix,  that  though  camels 
are  never  represented  on  the  monuments,  they 
were  known  to  the  Egyptians  and  were  pro- 
bably used  on  the  frontier  bordering  on  the 
desert. 

7.  veas  hardened]  Pharaoh  may  iiave  at- 
tributed to  natural  causes  both  the  severity 
of  the  plague  and  even  the  exemption  of  the 
Israelites,  a pastoral  race  well  acquainted  with 
all  that  appertained  to  the  care  of  cattle; 
and  dwelling  in  a district  probably  far  more 
healthy  than  the  rest  of  lower  Egypt. 


EXODUS.  IX. 


[v.  9 -15.. 


2?  I 


handfuls  of  ashes  of  the  furnace,  and 
let  Adoses  sprinkle  it  toward  the  hea- 
ven in  the  sight  of  Pharaoh. 

9 x\nd  it  shall  become  small  dust 
in  all  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  shall  be 
a boil  breaking  forth  with  blains  upon 
man,  and  upon  beast,  throughout  all 
the  land  of  Egypt. 

10  xA.nd  they  took  ashes  of  the 
furnace,  and  stood  before  Pharaoh; 
and  Adoses  sprinkled  it  up  toward 
heaven;  and  it  became  a boil  break- 
ing forth  with  blains  upon  man,  and 
upon  beast. 

1 1 And  the  magicians  could  not 
stand  before  Adoses  because  of  the 
boils ; for  the  boil  was  upon  the  ma- 
gicians, and  upon  all  the  Egyptians. 

12  And  the  Lord  hardened  the 


heart  of  Pharaoh,  and  he  hearkened 
not  unto  them;  "as  the  Lord  had  "chap.  4. 
spoken  unto  Adoses. 

13  ^1  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Ado- 
ses, Rise  up  early  in  the  morning,  and 
stand  before  Pharaoh,  and  say  unto 
him.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  of  the 
Hebrews,  Let  my  people  go,  that 
they  may  serve  me. 

14  For  I will  at  this  time  send  all 
my  plagues  upon  thine  heart,  and 
upon  thy  servants,  and  upon  thy 
people;  that  thou  mayest  know  that 
there  is  none  like  me  in  all  the 
earth. 

15  For  now  I will  stretch  out  my 
hand,  that  I may  smite  thee  and  thy 
people  with  pestilence ; and  thou  shalt 
be  cut  off  from  the  earth. 


The  Sixth  Plague. 

This  marks  a distinct  advance  and  change 
in  the  character  of  the  visitations,  flitherto 
the  Egyptians  had  not  been  attacked  directly 
in  their  own  persons.  It  is  the  second  plague 
which  was  not  preceded  by  a demand  and 
warning,  probably  on  account  of  the  peculiar 
hardness  shewn  by  Pharaoh  in  reference  to  the 
murrain. 

8.  ashes  of  the  furnace']  The  Hebrew  word 
occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch,  and  is  proba- 
bly of  Egyptian  origin.  The  act  was  evidently 
symbolical ; the  ashes  were  to  be  sprinkled 
towards  heaven,  challenging,  so  to  speak,  the 
Egyptian  Deities,  and  specially  it  may  be  Neit, 
who  bore  the  designation  “The  Great  Mother 
Queen  of  highest  heaven,”  and  was  wor- 
shij)])ed  as  tlie  tutelary  Goddess  of  lower 
Egypt.  I'here  may  possibly  be  a reference  to 
an  Egyptian  custom  of  scattering  to  the 
winds  ashes  of  victims  offered  to  Sutech,  or 
'Eyphon.  Human  sacrifices  said  to  have  been 
offered  at  Heliopolis  under  the  Shepherd 
dynasty  were  abolished  by  Amosis  I.,  but 
some  jiart  of  the  rite  may  have  been  retained, 
and  the  memory  of  the  old  superstition  would 
give  a terrible  significance  to  the  act.  Thus 
Purder,  Haivcrnick  and  Kurtz. 

9.  a boil  breaking  forth  (with  blains]  The 
word  rendered  boil  is  derived  from  “burn- 
ing inflammation,”  and  is  used  elsewhere  of 
plague-boils;  of  tlie  leprosy,  and  elephantiasis. 
See  IDeut.  xxviii.  27,  and  .^5,  which  may  specially 
refer  to  this  passage.  Here  it  means  probably 
a burning  tumour  or  carbuncle  breaking  out 
in  pustulous  ulcers.  Cutaneous  eruptions  of 
extieine  severity  arc  common  in  the  valley  of 
the  Nile,  some  bearing  a near  resemblance  to 


the  symptoms  described  in  this  passage.  The 
date  is  not  marked.  It  was  probably  soon 
after  the  last  plague.  In  an  old  Egyptian 
calendar  m.ention  is  made  of  severe  contagious 
diseases  in  December,  Pap.  Sail.  IV.  The 
analogy  of  natural  law  is  still  preserved,  the 
miracle  consisting  in  the  severity  of  the  plague 
and  its  direct  connection  with  the  act  of 
Moses. 

11.  This  verse  seem.s  to  imply  that  the  ma- 
gicians now  formally  gave  way  and  confessed 
their  defeat. 

The  Seventh  Plague. 

13 — 34.  The  plague  of  hail:  with  this 
begins  the  last  series  of  plagues,  which  differ 
from  the  former  both  in  their  severity  and 
their  effects.  Each  produced  a temporary, 
but  real  change  in  Pharaoh’s  feelings. 

14.  all  my  plagues]  This  applies  to 
all  the  plagues  which  follow ; the  effect  of 
each  was  foreseen  and  foretold.  The  words 
“at  this  time”  are  understood  by  some  to  limit 
the  application  to  the  plague  of  hail,  but  they 
point  more  probably  to  a rapid  and  continu- 
ous succession  of  blows.  The  plagues  which 
precede  appear  to  have  been  spread  over  a 
considerable  time ; the  first  message  of  Moses 
was  delivered  after  the  early  harvest  of  the 
year  before,  when  the  Israelites  could  gather 
stubble,  i.e.  in  April  and  May:  the  second 
mission,  when  the  plagues  began,  was  proba- 
bly towards  the  end  of  June,  and  they  went 
on  at  intervals  until  the  winter;  this  plague 
was  in  Eebruary;  see  note  on  'v.  31. 

15.  For  noav,  &c.]  This  verse  (as  scholars 
are  agreed,- Rosenmiiller,  Ewald,  Knobel, 
Keil)  should  be  rendered  thus:  For  now  in- 


V.  1 6 — 27.] 


EXODUS.  IX. 


285 


* Rom.  9.  16  And  in  very  deed  for  ‘^’this 

?Heb.  cause  have  I Uaised  thee  up,  for  to 

shew  zVz  thee  my  power;  and  that  my 
name  may  be  declared  throughout  all 
the  earth. 

17  As  yet  exaltest  thou  thyself 
against  my  people,  that  thou  wilt  not 
let  them  go  ? 

18  Behold,  to  morrow  about  this 
time  I will  cause  it  to  rain  a very 
grievous  hail,  such  as  hath  not  been 
in  Egypt  since  the  foundation  thereof 
even  until  nov/. 

19  Send  therefore  now,  and  gather 
thy  cattle,  and  all  that  thou  hast  in 
the  field ; for  upon  every  man  and 
beast  which  shall  be  found  in  the  field, 
and  shall  not  be  brought  home,  the 
hail  shall  come  down  upon  them,  and 
they  shall  die. 

20  He  that  feared  the  word  of  the 
Lord  among  the  servants  of  Pharaoh 
made  his  servants  and  his  cattle  flee 
into  the  houses : 

l-nwi/u's  Regarded  not  the 

lieartu7iio.  word  of  the  Lord  left  his  servants 
and  his  cattle  in  the  field. 


22  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Stretch  forth  thine  hand  toward 
heaven,  that  there  may  be  hail  in  all 
the  land  of  Egypt,  upon  man,  and 
upon  beast,  and  upon  every  herb  of 
the  field,  throughout  the  land  of  Egypt. 

23  And  Moses  stretched  forth  his 
rod  toward  heaven:  and  the  Lord 
sent  thunder  and  hail,  and  the  fire 
ran  along  upon  the  ground;  and  the 
Lord  rained  hail  upon  the  land  of 
Egypt.^ 

24  So  there  was  hail,  and  fire  min- 
gled v/ith  the  hail,  very  grievous,  such 
as  there  was  none  like  it  in  all  the 
land  of  Egypt  since  it  became  a nation. 

25  And  the  hail  smote  throughout 
all  the  land  of  Egypt  all  that  was  in 
the  field,  both  man  and  beast;  and 
the  hail  smote  every  herb  of  the  field, 
and  brake  every  tree  of  the  field. 

26  Only  in  the  land  of  Goshen, 
where  the  children  of  Israel  were^  was 
there  no  hail. 

27  ^ And  Pharaoh  sent,  and  called 
for  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  said  unto 
them,  I have  sinned  this  time : the 


deed  had  I stretched  forth  my  hand 
and  smitten  thee  and  thy  people  with 
the  pestilence  then  hadst  thou  been 
cut  off  from  the  earth.  The  next  verse 
gives  the  reason  why  God  had  not  thus  in- 
(iicted  a summary  punishment  once  for  all. 

16.  hu’ve  I raised  thee  up\  The  margin 
made  thee  stand  is  correct:  the  mean- 
ing is,  not  that  God  raised  Pharaoh  to  a posi- 
tion of  rank  and  power,  but  that  he  kept  him 
standing,  i.e.  permitted  him  to  live  and  hold 
out  until  His  own  purpose  was  accomplished. 

18.  a ‘very  grie'vous  hail'\  This  verse  dis- 
tinctly states  that  tfle  miracle  consisted  in  the 
magnitude  of  the  infliction  and  in  its  imme- 
diate connection  with  the  act  of  Moses. 
Travellers  in  lower  Egypt  speak  of  storms 
of  snow,  thunder  and  lightning  in  the  winter 
months;  and  Seetzen  and  Willman  (quoted 
by  Knobel)  describe  storms  of  thunder  and 
hail  in  March.  A friend  (Rev.  T.  H.  Tooke) 
describes  a storm  of  extreme  severity,  which 
lasted  24  hours,  in  the  middle  of  February, 
at  Benihassan.  The  natives  spoke  of  it  as 
not  uncommon  at  that  season. 

19.  thy  cattle]  In  Egypt  the  cattle  are 
sent  to  pasture  in  the  open  country  from  Ja- 
nuary to  April,  when  the  grass  is  abundant ; 


see  note  on  -z;.  3.  They  are  kept  in  stalls  the 
rest  of  the  year.  The  word  “gather”  does 
not  exactly  express  the  meaning  of  the  ori- 
ginal, “cause  to  flee,”  i.e.  bring  them  rapidly 
under  cover. 

20.  the  msord  of  the  Lord]  This  gives 
the  first  indication  that  the  warnings  had  a 
salutary  effect  upon  the  Egyptians.  See  ch. 
xi.  3. 

22.  in  all  the  land  of  Egypt]  The  stonus 
described  above  fell  on  lower  Egypt : the  ex- 
pression here  may  imply  that  this  extended 
to  the  upper  valley  of  the  Nile,  but  it  is  pos- 
sible that  the  land  of  Mizraim  is  used  specially 
to  designate  the  Delta  and  the  adjoining  dis- 
trict. 

23.  and  the  fire  ran  along  upon  the  ground] 
The  expression  is  peculiar  (literally  “ fire 
walked  earthwards”),  and  appears  to  describe 
a succession  of  flashes  mingled  with  the  hail : 
our  Authorised  Version  seems  to  present  a true 
and  graphic  account  of  the  phenomenon. 

25.  smote]  The  words  imply  heavy  da- 
mage both  to  herbs  and  trees,  but  not  total 
destruction : the  loss  however  must  have  been 
enormous. 

27.  this  time]  i.e.  I acknowledge  now 
that  I have  sinned. 


286 


EXODUS.  IX.  X. 


[v.  28 1. 


Lord  is  righteous, and  I and  my  people 
are  wicked. 

28  Intreat  the  Lord  (for  it  is 
t Heb.  enough)  that  there  be  no  more  ^ mighty 

of  thunderings  and  hail ; and  I will  let 
you  go,  and  ye  shall  stay  no  longer. 

29  And  Moses  said  unto  him,  As 
soon  as  I am  gone  out  of  the  city,  I 
will  spread  abroad  my  hands  unto  the 
Lord  ; are/  the  thunder  shall  cease, 
neither  shall  there  be  any  more  hail ; 
that  thou  mayest  know  how  that  the 

fPsai.  24.  ^earth  is  the  Lord’s. 

30  But  as  for  thee  and  thy  servants, 
I know  that  ye  will  not  yet  fear  the 
Lord  God. 

31  And  the  flax  and  the  barley  was 
smitten  : for  the  barley  zaas  in  the 
ear,  and  the  flax  was  boiled. 

32  But  the  wheat  and  the  rie  were 
» Heb.  not  smitten : for  they  were  ^ not  grown 

hiddeti^  or,  ^ ° 

dark.  up. 

33  And  Moses  went  out  of  the  city 


from  Pharaoh,  and  spread  abroad  his 
hands  unto  the  Lord  : and  the  thun- 
ders and  hail  ceased,  and  the  rain  was 
not  poured  upon  the  earth. 

34  And  when  Pharaoh  saw  that 
the  rain  and  the  hail  and  the  thunders 


were  ceased,  he  sinned  yet  more,  and 
hardened  his  heart,  he  and  his  servants. 

35  And  the  heart  of  Pharaoh  v/as 
hardened,  neither  would  he  let  the 
children  of  Israel  go;  as  the  Lord 
had  spoken  ^by  Moses. 

CHAPTER  X. 

I God  threatenetk  to  scud  locusts.  ^Pharaoh, 
viovcd  by  his  servants.,  inclineth  to  let  the 
Israelites  go.  12  The  flagiie  of  the  locusts. 
16  Pharaoh  sucth  to  Moses.  21  The plagite 
of  darkness.  24  Pharaoh  sueth  unto  Moses, 
27  bict  yet  is  hardened. 


t Heb. 
by  the 
hand  of 
Moses. 


AND  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 

Go  in  unto  Pharaoh:  for  «I^^chap.4 
have  hardened  his  heart,  and  the  heart 
of  his  servants,  that  I might  shew 
these  my  signs  before  him : 


the  Lord']  Thus  for  the  first  time  Pharaoh 
explicitly  recognizes  Jehovah  as  God. 

28.  for  it  is  enough]  The  Authorised  Ver- 
sion is  not  literal,  but  it  probably  expresses 
the  meaning  of  the  original,  which  is  some- 
what obscure,  and  it  is  much,  i.e.  enough, 
that  there  should  be  voices  of  God  (thunder- 
ings) and  hail,  no  more  are  needed  nov.\ 

29.  the  earth  is  the  Lords]  This  de- 
claration has  a direct  reference  to  Egyptian 
superstition.  Each  God  was  held  to  have 
special  power  within  a given  district;  Pharaoh 
had  learned  that  Jehovah  was  a God,  he  was 
now  to  admit  that  his  power  extended  over 
the  whole  earth.  The  unity  and  universality 
of  the  Divine  power  are  tenets  distinctly  pro- 
mulgated in  the  Pentateuch,  and  though  occa- 
sionally recognized  in  ancient  Egyptian  docu- 
ments {e.g.  in  the  early  copies  of  the  17th 
chapter  of  the  Funeral  Ritual  under  the  nth 
dynasty),  were  overlaid  at  a very  early  period 
by  systems  alternating  between  Polytheism  and 
Pantheism. 

31.  the  fax  eivas  boiled]  i.e.  in  blos- 
som. d'his  is  a point  of  great  importance. 
It  marks  the  time.  In  the  north  of  Egypt 
the  barley  ri[)ens  and  (lax  blossoms  about  the 
middle  of  Febru.ary,  or  at  the  latest  early  in 
March,  and  both  arc  gathered  in  before  April, 
when  the  wheat  harvest  begins  (Forskal  and 
Seetzen  ap.  Knobel).  'Fhe  cultivation  of  flax 
must  have  Ixx'U  of  gr(*at  importance;  linen 
was  preferred  to  any  material  and  exclusively 


used  by  the  priests.  It  is  frequently  men- 
tioned on  Egyptian  monuments.  Four  kinds 
are  noted  by  Pliny  (xix.  i)  as  used  in  Egypt, 
fie  makes  special  mention  of  Tanis,  i.e.  Zoan, 
as  one  of  the  places  famous  for  flax.  The 
texture  was  remarkably  fine,  in  general  qua- 
lity equal  to  the  best  now  made,  and  for  the 
evenness  of  the  threads,  without  knot  or  break, 
superior  to  any  of  modern  manufacture.  Wil- 
kinson on  Herod,  ii.  c.  37,  p.  54. 

32.  rie]  Rather  spelt,  triticum  spelta,  the 
common  food  of  the  ancient  Egyptians,  now 
called  doora  by  the  natives:  the  only  grain, 
according  to  Wilkinson  (on  Herod,  ii.  c.  36), 
represented  on  the  sculptures  : the  name  how- 
ever occurs  on  the  monuments  very  frequently 
in  combination  with  other  species.  See  Brugsch, 
‘D.  H.’p.  442. 

34.  hardened]  Different  words  are  used 
in  this  and  the  following  verse:  here  the  word 
means  “heavy,”  i.e.  obtuse,  incapable  of 
forming  a right  judgment;  the  other,  which 
is  more  frequently  used  in  this  narrative,  is 
stronger  and  implies  a stubborn  resolution. 
The  LXX.  render  the  former  word  efSapuye, 
the  latter  laKXrjpvudr).  The  other  old  Versions 
mark  the  distinction  with  equal  clearness. 

The  Eighth  Plague. 

Chap.  X.  1 — 20.  1 ha-ve  hardened]  Lite- 
rally “made  heavy.”  This  state  of  mind, 
though  judicial,  may  be  accounted  for  psy- 
chologically by  the  fact  that  the  corn,  10 


V,  2 8.] 


EXODUS.  X. 


287 


2 And  that  thou  mayest  tell  in  the 
ears  of  thy  son,  and  of  thy  son’s  son, 
what  things  I have  wrought  in  Egypt, 
and  my  signs  which  I have  done  among 
them ; that  ye  may  know  how  that  I 
arn  the  Lord. 

3 And  Moses  and  Aaron  came  in 
unto  Pharaoh,  and  said  unto  him.  Thus 
saith  the  Lord  God  of  the  Hebrews, 
How  long  wilt  thou  refuse  to  humble 
thyself  before  me  ? let  my  people  go, 
that  they  may  serve  me. 

4 Else,  if  thou  refuse  to  let  my 
people  go,  behold,  to  morrow  wrll  I 

rwisd.  bring  the  ^locusts  into  thy  coast: 

? lieb  eye.  5 covct  the  ^ face 

of  the  earth,  that  one  cannot  be  able 
to  see  the  earth : and  they  shall  eat 
the  residue  of  that  which  is  escaped, 


which  remaineth  unto  you  from  the 
hail,  and  shall  eat  every  tree  which 
groweth  for  you  out  of  the  field : 

6 And  they  shall  fill  thy  houses, 
and  the  houses  of  all  thy  servants,  and 
the  houses  of  all  the  Egyptians ; which 
neither  thy  fathers,  nor  thy  fathers’ 
fathers  have  seen,  since  the  day  that 
they  were  upon  the  earth  unto  this 
day.  And  he  turned  himself,  and  went 
out  fromi  Pharaoh. 

7 And  Pharaoh’s  servants  said  unto 
him.  How  long  shall  this  man  be  a 
snare  unto  us?  let  the  men  go,  that 
they  may  serve  the  Lord  their  God : 
knowest  thou ; not  yet  that  Egypt  is 
destroyed  ? 

8 And  Moses  and  Aaron  were 
brought  again  unto  Pharaoh : and  he 


which  he  and  his  people  attached  most  im- 
portance had  been  spared  in  the  visitation. 
The  word  “I”  is  emphatic,  equivalent  to 
“as  for  me  I have,”  &c. 

2.  thou\  Moses  is  addressed  as  the  re- 
presentative of  Israel. 

eivrought\  The  Hebrew  word  is  not  very 
commonly  used.  It  implies  an  action  which 
brings  shame  and  disgrace  upon  its  objects, 
making  them,  so  to  speak,  playthings  of  di- 
vine power  (bbynn,  LXX.  eixTrenaixa).  Ges. 

‘ Thes.’  interprets  it  with  reference  to  i Sam. 
xxxi.  4,  “animum  explevit  illudendo,”  which 
appears  to  be  the  true  meaning  in  this  passage, 
as  in  most  others. 

4.  the  locust s\  The  locust  is  less  cqm- 
mon  in  Egypt  than  in  many  eastern  countries, 
yet  it  is  well  known,  and  dreaded  as  the  most 
terrible  of  scourges.  In  the  papyrus  Anast. 
V.  p.  10,  it  is  mentioned  as  a common  enemy 
of  the  husbandmen.  Niebuhr  and  Forskal  wit- 
nessed two  visitations;  Tischendorf  describes 
one  of  unusual  extent  in  March  which  covered 
the  whole  country : they  come  generally  from 
the  western  deserts,  but  sometimes  from  the 
east  and  the  south-east.  Denon  saw  an  enor- 
mous cloud  of  locusts  in  May,  which  came 
from  the  east,  settling  upon  every  blade  of 
grass,  and  after  destroying  the  vegetation  of  a 
district  passing  on  to  another.  No  less  than 
nine  names  are  given  to  the  locust  in  the  Bible, 
the  word  here  used  is  the  most  common;  it 
signifies  “multitudinous,”  and  whenever  it 
occurs  reference  is  made  to  its  terrible  devas- 
tations. See  notes  on  Leviticus  xi.  12. 

5.  the  facel  Literally  “ the  eye  of  the 
earth,”  alluding  doubtless  to  the  darkness  when, 
as  Olivier  describes  it,  “the  whole  atmosphere 


is  filled  on  all  sides  and  to  a great  height  by 
an  innumerable  quantity  of  these  insects — in 
a moment  all  the  fields  are  covered  by  them.” 

shall  eat  euery  tree~\  Not  only  the  leaves, 
but  the  branches  and  even  the  wood  are  at- 
tacked and  devoured.  Pliny  says,  xi.  29, 
“ omnia  morsu  erodentes  et  fores  quoque  tec- 
torum.”  The  Egyptians  were  passionately 
fond  of  trees;  in  hieroglyphics  one  of  the 
most  ancient  names  of  Egypt  is  “the  land  of 
the  sycomore:”  see  De  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’ 
p.  80,  under  the  5th  dynasty;  Saneha,  i.e. 
“son  of  the  sycomore,”  is  found  as  a name 
given  to  a court  favourite  under  the  12th  dy- 
nasty. The  widow  of  Thotmes  11.  a few 
years  after  his  death,  imported  a large  numiber 
of  trees  from  Arabia  Felix;  a singular  coin- 
cidence if,  as  seems  probable,  that  was  the 
date  of  the  Exodus.  See  Duemichen’s  ‘ Fleet 
of  an  Egyptian  Queen.’ 

6.  fill  thy  houses']  The  terraces,  courts, 
and  even  the  inner  apartments  are  said  to  be 
filled  in  a moment  by  a locust  storm.  Cf. 
Joel  ii.  9. 

7.  Pharaoh's  ser-vants]  This  marks  a very 
considerable  advance  in  the  transaction.  For 
the  first  time  the  officers  of  Pharaoh  inteiwene 
before  the  scourge  is  inflicted,  shewing  at  once 
their  belief  in  the  threat,  and  their  special 
terror  of  the  infliction.  Pharaoh  also  for  the 
first  time  takes  measures  to  prevent  the  evil; 
he  does  not  indeed  send  for  Moses  and  Aaron, 
but  he  permits  them  to  be  brought  into  his 
presence. 

let  the  men  go]  i.  e.  the  men  only,  not  all 
tlie  people ; the  officers  assumed  that  the  women 
and  children  would  remain  as  hostages,  and 
Pharaoh  was  now  ready  to  consent  to  the 
proposal  so  limited. 


288 


EXODUS.  X.  [v.  9 — 19. 


♦Heb. 
who  and 
who,  &c. 


said  unto  them,  Go,  serve  the  Lord 
your  God:  but  Evho  are  they  that 
shall  go? 

9 And  Moses  said,  W e will  go  with 
our  young  and  with  our  old,  with  our 
sons  and  with  our  daughters,  with 
our  flocks  and  with  our  herds  will  we 
0-0 : for  we  7nust  hold  a feast  unto  the 

O ^ 

Lord. 

10  And  he  said  unto  them,  Let  the 
Lord  be  so  with  you,  as  I will  let  you 
go,  and  your  little  ones : look  to  it; 
for  evil  is  before  you. 

11  Not  so:  go  nov/  ye  that  are 
men,  and  serve  the  Lord;  for  that 
ye  did  desire.  And  they  were  driven 
out  from  Pharaoh’s  presence. 

12  HI  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Stretch  out  thine  hand  over  the 
land  of  Egypt  for  the  locusts,  that 
they  may  come  up  upon  the  land 
of  Egypt,  and  eat  every  herb  of 
the  land,  even  all  that  the  hail  hath 
left. 

13  And  Moses  stretched  forth  his 
rod  over  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the 
Lord  brought  an  east  v/ind  upon  the 
land  all  that  day,  and  all  that  night ; 


and  when  it  v/as  morning,  the  east 
wind  brought  the  locusts. 

14  And  the  locusts  went  up  over 
all  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  rested  in 
all  the  coasts  of  Egypt : very  grievous 
were  they;  before  them  there  were  no 
such  locusts  as  they,  neither  after 
them  shall  be  such. 

15  For  they  covered  the  face  of  the 
whole  earth,  so  that  the  land  was 
darkened;  and  they  did  eat  every  herb 
of  the  land,  and  all  the  fruit  of  the 
trees  which  the  hail  had  left:  and 
there  remained  not  any  green  thing 
in  the  trees,  or ‘in  the  herbs  of  the 
field,  through  all  the  land  of  Egypt. 

16  HI  Then  Pharaoh  Tailed  for  t Heb. 
Moses  and  Aaron  in  haste ; and  he  iTcali. 
said,  I have  sinned  against  the  Lord 
your  God,  and  against  you. 

17  Now  therefore  forgive,  I pray 
thee,  my  sin  only  this  once,  and  in- 
treat the  Lord  your  God,  that  he  may 
take  away  from  me  this  death  only. 

18  And  he  went  out  from  Pharaoh, 
and  intreated  the  Lord. 

19  And  the  Lord  turned  a mighty 
strong  west  wind,  which  took  away 


9.  ^^vitb  our  youngs  &c.]  The  demand  was 
not  contrary  to  Egyptian  usage,  as  great  festi- 
vals were  kept  by  the  v*^hole  population : see 
Herod,  ii.  58,  “the  numbers  who  attend  (J.e. 
the  festival  at  Bubastis)  counting  only  the 
men  and  women,  and  omitting  the  children, 
amounted,  according  to  the  native  reports, 
to  seven  hundred  thousand.” 

10.  e-vil  is  before  yoii\  The  meaning  is 
ambiguous.  It  may  be  a threat,  but  most 
commentators  (LXX.,  Vulg.,  Rosen.,  Kno- 
bel,  &c.)  render  it,  “for  your  intentions  are 
evil,”  and  this  doubtless  expresses  the  exact 
motive  of  the  king:  great  as  the  possible  in- 
fliction might  be,  he  held  it  to  be  a less  evil 
than  the  loss  of  so  large  a population. 

13.  an  east  ^Mind']  Moses  is  careful  to  record 
the  natural  and  usual  cause  of  the  evil,  porten- 
tous as  it  was  in  its  extent,  and  in  its  connec- 
tion with  his  denouncement.  The  east  wind 
sometimes  brings  locusts  into  Egypt,  see  note 
on  'V.  4,  nor  is  there  any  reason  for  departing 
from  the  common  meaning  of  the  word  which 
is  given  in  the  Authorised  Version. 

14.  ^vent  ?//>]  The  expression  is  exact 
and  graphic ; at  a distance  the  locusts  ap- 
pear hanging,  as  it  were,  like  a heavy  cloud 


over  the  land ; as  they  approach  they  seem  to 
rise,  and  they  fill  the  atmosphere  overhead  on 
their  arrival. 

o'ver  all  the  land~\  The  expression  may  be 
taken  in  the  broadest  sense.  Accounts  are 
given  by  Major  Moore  of  a cloud  of  locusts 
extending  over  500  miles,  and  so  compact 
while  on  the  wing  that,  like  an  eclipse,  it  com- 
pletely hid  the  sun.  Brown  states  (‘Travels  in 
Africa’),  that  an  area  of  nearly  two  thousand 
scjuare  miles  was  literally  covered  by  them. 
This  passage  describes  a swarm  unprecedented 
in  extent. 

17.  this  death  only~\  Pliny  calls  locusts 
“Pestis  irae  Deorum,”  a pestilence  brought 
on  by  divine  wrath.  Pharaoh  now  recognizes 
the  justice  of  his  servants’  apprehensions,  'v.  7. 

19.  ^cvest  <^vind']  Literally  “a  sea  wind,” 
which  in  Palestine  of  course  is  from  the  west : 
but  in  this  passage  it  may,  and  probably  does, 
denote  a wind  blowing  from  the  sea  on  the 
north-west  of  Egypt.  A direct  westerly  wind 
would  come  from  the  Lybian  desert  and  be 
far  less  effectual  than  one  rushing  transversely 
over  the  whole  surface  of  lower  Egypt  (which 
was  doubtless  the  main  centre  of  the  visita- 
tion), and  driving  the  locusts  into  the  Red 


V.  20 2 9- 


EXODUS.  X. 


289 


tHeb.  the  locusts,  and  ^cast  them  into  the 
fastened,  , there  remained  not  one 

locust  in  all  the  coasts  of  Egypt. 

20  But  the  Lord  hardened  Pha- 
raoh’s heart,  so  that  he  would  not  let 
the  children  of  Israel  go. 

21  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Stretch  out  thine  hand  toward 
heaven,  that  there  may  be  darkness 

tHeb.  over  the  land  of  Egypt,  ^even  dark- 

tJiat  one  L V.  C 

may  feel  ness  which  may  be  relt. 
dar/:ness.  Moses  Stretched  forth  his 

hand  toward  heaven  j and  ther^  was 
a thick  darkness  in  all  the  land  of 
Egypt  three  days: 

23  They  saw  not  one  another,  nei- 
ther rose  any  from  his  place  for  three 

^wisd.  18.  days : '^but  all  the  children  of  Israel 
had  li^t  in  their  dwellings. 

24  ^ And  Pharaoh  called  unto 
Moses,  and  said.  Go  ye,  serve  the 
Lord;  only  let  your  flocks  and  your 


herds  be  stayed : let  your  little  ones 
also  go  with  you. 

25  And  Moses  said.  Thou  must 
give  ^us  also  sacrifices  and  burnt  I ^eb. 

° . . . f.  into  our 

offerings,  that  we  may  sacrifice  unto  hands. 
the  Lord  our  God. 

26  Our  cattle  also  shall  go  with 
us ; there  shall  not  an  hoof  be  left 
behind;  for  thereof  must  we  take  to 
serve  the  Lord  our  God  ; and  we 
know  not  with  what  we  must  serve 
the  Lord,  until  we  come  thither. 

27  ^ But  the  Lord  hardened  Pha- 
raoh’s heart,  and  he  would  not  let 
them  go. 

28  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  him. 

Get  thee  from  me,  take  heed  to  thy- 
self, see  my  face  no  more ; for  in  that 
day  thou  seest  my  face  thou  shalt  die. 

29  And  Moses  said.  Thou  hast 
spoken  well,  I will  see  thy  face  again 
no  more. 


Sea.  The  rendering  “cast”  in  the  text  is 
preferable  to  that  in  the  margin ; the  Hebrew 
Avord  means  to  drive  in  by  a sharp  stroke  or 
blow. 

Red  sea]  The  Hebrew  has  the  Sea  of  Siiph: 
the  exact  meaning  of  Suph  is  disputed.  Gese- 
nius  renders  it  “rush”  or  “sea- weed;”  but  it 
is  probably  an  Egyptian  word.  A sea-weed 
resembling  wool  is  thrown  up  abundantly  on 
the  shores  of  the  Red  Sea.  The  origin  of  the 
modern  name  is  uncertain.  The  Egyptians 
• called  it  the  sea  of  Punt,  i.e.  of  Arabia.  The 
sudden  and  complete  disappearance  of  the 
locusts,  generally  effected  by  a strong  wind 
(gregatim  siiblatas  vento  in  maria  aut  stagna 
decidunt,  Plin.  ‘ H.  N.’  xi.  35),  is  a pheno- 
menon scarcely  less  remarkable  than  their 
coming ; the  putrefaction  of  such  immense 
masses  not  unfrequently  causes  a terrible  pesti- 
lence near  the  coasts  of  the  sea  into  which 
they  fall. 


The  Ninth  Plague. 

21.  darkness]  This  infliction  was  specially 
calculated  to  affect  the  spirits  of  the  Egyp- 
tians, whose  chief  object  of  worship  was  Ra, 
the  Sun-god,  and  its  suddenness  and  severity 
in  connection  with  the  act  of  Moses  mark  it 
as  a preternatural  withdrawal  of  light.  Yet 
it  has  an  analogy  in  physical  phenomena. 
After  the  vernal  equinox  the  south-west  wind 
from  the  desert  blows  some  fifty  days,  see 
note  on  v.  12,  not  however  continuously  but 
at  intervals,  lasting  generally ’some  two  or  three 
days.  (Thus  Lane,  Willman  and  others 
VOL.  I. 


quoted  by  Knobel.)  It  fills  the  atmosphere 
with  dense  masses  of  fine  sand,  bringing  on 
a darkness  far  deeper  than  that  of  our  worst 
fogs  in  winter.  While  it  lasts  no  man  “ rises 
from  his  place;  men  and  beasts  hide  them- 
selves: people  shut  themselves  up  in  the  in- 
nennost  apartments  or  vaults.”  “So  satu- 
rated is  the  air  with  the  sand  that  it  seems 
to  lose  its  transparency,  so  that  artificial  light 
is  of  little  use.”  The  expression  “even  dark- 
ness which  might  be  felt,”  has  a special  ap- 
plication to  a darkness  produced  by  such  a 
cause.  The  consternation  of  Pharaoh  proves 
that,  familiar  as  he  may  have  been  with  the 
phenomenon,  no  previous  occurrence  had 
prepared  him  for  its  intensity  and  duration, 
and  that  he  recognized  it  as  a supernatural 
visitation.  The  rendering,  which  has  been 
questioned,  is  correct,  LXX.  \lnj\a<pr]T6v 
(TKuros-,  Vulg.  tarn  densce  ut  palpari  queant. 
Thus  Rosen.,  Maurer,  Knobel,  &c. 

23.  kad  light  in  their  d^iveUings]  The 
sandstonn,  if  such  were  the  cause,  may  not 
have  extended  to  the  district  of  Goshen ; but 
the  expression  clearly  denotes  a miraculous 
intei*vention,  whether  accomplished  or  not  by 
natural  agencies. 

24.  your  flocks  and  your  herds]  Pharaoh 
still  exacts  what  would  of  course  be  a complete 
security  for  their  return  : but  the  demand  was 
wholly  incompatible  with  the  object  assigned 
for  the  journey  into  the  wilderness.  Every 
gradation  in  the  yielding  of  Pharaoh  and  in 
the  demands  of  Moses  is  distinctly  noted:  but 
it  should  be  observed  that  these  do  not  yet 

T 


EXODUS.  XI. 


[v.  1—4. 


CHAPTER  XL 

1 God'‘s  message  to  the  Israelites  to  borrow 
je'wcls  of  their  neighboitrs.  4 Moses  threaten- 
eth  Pharaoh  with  the  death  of  the  firstborn. 

AND  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Yet  will  I bring  one  plague 
more  upon  Pharaoh,  and  upon  Egypt ; 
afterwards  he  will  let  you  go  hence : 
when  he  shall  let  you  go,  he  shall 
surely  thrust  you  out  hence  altogether. 

2 Speak  now  in  the  ears  of  the 
people,  and  let  every  man  borrow  of 


his  neighbour,  and  every  woman  of 
her  neighbour,  "jewels  of  silver,  and  « chap.  3. 
jewels  of  gold.  & 12. 35- 

3 And  the  Lord  gave  the  people 
favour  in  the  sight  of  the  Egyptians. 
Moreover  the  man  Moses  was  very  ^.Eccius. 
great  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  in  the 
sight  of  Pharaoh’s  servants,  and  in  the 
sight  of  the  people. 

4 And  Moses  said.  Thus  saith  the 
Lord,  ^ About  midnight  will  I go  out  ^chap.  12. 
into  the  midst  of  Egypt : 


extend  to  a permission  to  emigrate  from  the 
country.  Had  Pharaoh  even  then  yielded  he 
could  have  taken  measures  to  compel  them  to 
come  back,  a result  only  at  last  rendered  im- 
possible by  the  destruction  of  the  whole  army 
stationed  on  the  frontier  of  lower  Egypt. 

Chap.  XI.  1.  the  Lord  said'\  Or  “the 
Lord  had  said.”  Commentators  generally 
agree  that  the  first  three  verses  of  this  chapter 
are  parenthetical.  The  most  probable  account 
of  their  insertion  m this  place  appears  to  be 
that,  before  Moses  relates  the  last  warning 
given  to  Pharaoh,  he  feels  it  right  to  recall  to 
his  readers’  minds  the  revelation  and  command 
which  had  been  previously  given  to  him  by 
the  Lord.  Thus  Aben-Ezra,  who  proposes 
the  rendering  “had  said,”  which  is  adopted 
by  Rosenmiiller,  Keil,  Kalisch,  Ranke,  Smith 
(‘Pentateuch,’  pp.  557  — 560),  who  com- 
pletely disposes  of  the  objections  of  German 
and  English  critics.  No  grammatical  objec- 
tion is  made  to  this  construction,  which  is 
common  in  the  Old  Testament  and  belongs 
to  the  simple  and  inartificial  style  of  the 
Pentateuch.  The  command  may  have  been 
given  immediately  before  the  last  intei-view  with 
Pharaoh ; such  repetition  when  a work  is  on 
the  eve  of  accomplishment  is  customary  in 
Holy  Writ.  Here  it  accounts  “both  for  the 
confidence  with  which  Moses,  remembering 
the  words  of  Jehovah,  had  just  told  the  king 
that  he  would  no  more  see  his  face,  and  for 
the  prediction  which  immediately  follows,  that 
Pharaoh’s  court  would  come  humbly  to  en- 
treat him  to  depart.”  Smith,  /.  c. 

<whcn  he  shall  let  you  go.,  &c.]  The  original  is 
obsfiure,  but  it  may  probably  be  rendered  when 
heletsyougo  altogether  he  will  surely 
thrust  you  out  hence;  see  note  below. 
The  meaning  is,  when  at  last  he  lets  you  de- 
part with  children,  flocks,  herds,  and  all  your 
possessions,  he  will  compel  you  to  depart  in 
haste.  'Phis  part  of  the  command  is  important, 
as  shewing  that  Moses  was  already  aware  that 
the  last  plague  would  be  followed  by  an  im- 
mediate departure,  and,  therefore,  that  mea- 
sures had  probably  Ixx'n  taken  to  prepare  the 


Israelites  for  the  journey.  In  fact  on  each 
occasion  when  Pharaoh  relented  for  a season, 
immediate  orders  would  of  course  be  issued 
by  Moses  to  the  heads  of  the  people,  who 
were  thus  repeatedly  brought  into  a state  of 
more  or  less  complete  organization  for  the 
final  movement.  See  Introduction. 

2.  eojery  ma}i\  In  ch.  iii.  2%  women  only 
were  named;  the  command  is  more  explicit 
when  the  time  is  come  for  its  execution. 

borroqju']  Or  “demand.”  See  note  on  ch. 
iii.  22. 

3.  ga-ve  the  people  fa'vour'\  See  note  on 
iii.  22. 

Moreoojer  the  man  Moses  <u)af  •very  greaf 
No  objection  would  have  been  taken  to  this 
statement  had  it  been  found  in  any  other 
book.  It  does  not  assert,  however,  what  was 
perfectly  true,  that  Moses  was  a great  man  by 
reason  of  personal  qualifications,  but  that  he 
was  great  in  the  estimation  of  Pharaoh,  of  his 
servants,  and  of  all  the  Egyptians.  This  has^ 
a very  important  bearing  upon  the  narrative,* 
shewing  the  effect  produced  upon  the  Egyp- 
tians by  the  previous  visitations,  and  by  the 
conduct  of  Moses,  especially  by  the  care  he 
had  taken  to  warn  them,  and,  so  far  as  was 
practicable,  to  save  them  from  suffering.  See 
ch.  ix.  19,  20.  It  accounts  for  their  ready 
compliance  with  the  demand  of  the  Israelites. 
God  gave  them  a kindly  feeling,  by  an  in- 
ward act,  not  changing  their  nature,  but 
eliciting  their  better  feelings,  the  sense  of  obli- 
gation, and  gratitude  for  benefits  which  Dio- 
dorus specially  mentions  as  a characteristic  of 
the  Egyptians.  The  reasons  above  assigned 
appear  sufficient  to  account  for  the  intro- 
duction of  these  verses,  which  undoubtedly 
interrupt  the  narrative;  but  there  would  be  no 
objection  in  point  of  principle  to  the  sup- 
position that  they  may  have  been  inserted 
either  by  Moses  at  a later  period,  when  he 
probably  put  together  and  revised  the  detached 
portions  of  the  books;  or  by  one  of  his  younger 
contemporaries,  who  must  have  been  equally 
conversant  with  the  facts,  and  aware  of  the 


V.  5— IO-] 


EXODUS.  XI. 


291 


5 And  all  the  firstborn  in  the  land 
of  Egypt  shall  die,  from  the  firstborn 
of  Pharaoh  that  sitteth  upon  his  throne, 
even  unto  -the  firstborn  of  the  maid- 
servant that  is  behind  the  mill ; and 
all  the  firstborn  of  beasts. 

6 And  there  shall  be  a great  cry 
throughout  all  the  land  of  Egypt, 
such  as  there  was  none  like  it,  nor 
shall  be  like  it  any  more. 

7 But  against  any  of  the  children 
of  Israel  shall  not  a dog  move  his 
tongue,  against  man  or  beast : that 
ye  may  know  how  that  the  Lord 
doth  put  a difference  between  the 
Egyptians  and  Israel. 


8 And  all  these  thy  servants  shall 
come  down  unto  me,  and  bow  down 
themselves  unto  me,  saying.  Get  thee 
out,  and  all  the  people  ^ that  follow 

thee : and  after  that  I will  go  out.  t/iy /eel!' 
And  he  went  out  from  Pharaoh  in  ^ a + Heb. 

, heat  0/ 

great  anger.  a7tgcr. 

9 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Pharaoh  shall  not  hearken  unto  you; 
that  my  wonders  may  be  multiplied 
in  the  land  of  Egypt. 

10  And  Moses  and  Aaron  did  all 
these  wonders  before  Pharaoh : and 
the  Lord  hardened  Pharaoh’s  heart, 
so  that  he  would  not  let  the  children 
of  Israel  go  out  of  his  land. 


importance  of  the  statement  in  its  bearings 
upon  the  whole  transaction. 

4.  And  Moses  said^  The  following  words 
must  be  read  in  immediate  connection  with 
the  last  verse  of  the  preceding  chapter.  It  is 
not  there  stated  that  Moses  left  the  presence  of 
Pharaoh ; this  passage  tells  us  what  took  place 
after  his  declaration  that  this  would  be  his  last 
interview. 

About  midnight']  This  marks  the  hour,  but 
not  the  day,  on  which  the  visitation  would 
ta-ke  place.  There  may  have  been,  and  pro- 
bably was,  an  inteiwal  of  some  days,  during 
which  preparations  might  be  made  both  for 
the  celebration  of  the  Passover,  and  the  de- 
parture of  the  Israelites:  in  the  meantime 
Egypt  remained  under  the  shadow  of  the 
menace.  ’ 

5.  the  firstborn]  Two  points  are  to  be 
noticed:  i.  The  extent  of  the  visitation  : the 
whole  land  suffers  in  the  persons  of  its  first- 
born, not  merely  for  the  guilt  of  the  sovereign, 
but  for  the  actual  participation  of  the  people 
in  the  crime  of  infanticide.  2,  The  limitation. 


Pharaoh’s  command  had  been  to  slay  all  the 
male  children  of  the  Israelites,  one  child  only 
in  each  Egyptian  family  was  to  die.  If  Thot- 
mes  II,  was  the  Pharaoh  (see  Appendix)  the 
visitation  fell  with  special  severity  on  his 
family.  He  left  no  son,  but  was  succeeded  by 
his  widow’. 

the  mill]  The  mill  used  by  the  Israelites, 
and  probably  by  the  Egyptians,  consisted  of 
two  circular  stones,  one  fixed  in  the  ground, 
the  other  turned  by  a handle.  The  work  of 
grinding  was  extremely  laborious,  and  per- 
formed by  women  of  the  lowest  rank. 

firstborn  ofi  beasts]  This  visitation  has  a 
peculiar  force  in  reference  to  the  worship  of 
beasts,  which  was  universal  in  Egypt;  each 
nome  having  its  owm  sacred  animal,  adored  as 
a manifestation  or  representative  of  the  local 
tutelary  deity. 

8.  in  great  anger]  Or  in  heat  of  anger, 
as  in  the  margin. 

9,  10.  These  tw^o  verses  refer  to  the  whole 
preceding  narrative,  and  mark  the  close  of  one 
principal  division  of  the  book. 


NOTE  on  a*.  I. 


The  force  of  the  word  appears  to 

have,  been  overlooked  by  our  translators,  w^ho 
misplace  it,  as  also  by  the  Vulgate,  which 
takes  no  notice  of  it.  The  Targum  of  Onke- 
los  renders  it  correctly  The  LXX. 


dvv  TTavrl:  the  Syriac  less  accurately,  “all  of 
you.”  It  reads  also  in  both  clauses,  “ I will 
dismiss  you.”  The  Arabic  forcibly  and  cor- 
rectly 11^^. 


r2 


292 


EXODUS.  XII. 


[''•  I— 5- 


CHAPTER  XII. 


I The  beginning  of  the  year  is  changed.  3 The 
fassover  is  instituted,  i r The  rite  of  the 
passover.  15  Ujileavened  bread.  •29  The 
firstborn  are  slain.  31  The  Israelites  are 
driven  out  of  the  land.  37  They  come  to 
Succoth.  43  The  ordinance  of  the  passover. 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
]f\_  and  Aaron  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
saying, 

2 This  month  shall  be  unto  you 
the  beginning  of  months : it  shall  be 
the  first  month  of  the  year  to  you. 

3 ^ Speak  ye  unto  all  the  congre- 


gation of  Israel,  saying.  In  the  tenth 
day  of  this  month  they  shall  take  to 
them  every  man  a “ lamb,  according  “ On 
to  the  house  of  their  fathers,  a lamb 
for  an  house : 

4 And  if  the  household  be  too  little 
for  the  lamb,  let  him  and  his  neierh- 

’ . ^ to 

hour  next  unto  his  house  take  it  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  the  souls; 
every  man  according  to  his  eating 
shall  make  your  count  for  the  lamb. 

5 Your  lamb  shall  be  without  t Heb.. 
blemish,  a male  Tf  the  first  year: 


Chap.  XI I.  1.  in  the  land  of  Egypt\  It 
seems  evident  that  this  verse,  and  consequently 
the  rest  of  the  chapter,  was  written  some  time 
after  the  Exodus,  probably  when  Moses  put 
together  the  portions  of  the  book  towards  the 
end  of  his  life.  The  statements  that  these  in- 
structions were  given  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  that  they  were  given  to  Moses  and  Aaron, 
are  important:  the  one  marks  the  peculiar 
dignity  of  this  ordinance,  which  was  established 
before  the  Sinaitic  code,  the  other  marks  the 
distinction  between  Moses  and  Aaron  and  all 
other  prophets.  They  alone,  as  Aben-Ezra 
observes,  were  prophets  of  the  Law,  i.e.  no 
law  was  promulgated  by  any  other  prophets. 

2.  This  month']  The  name  of  the  month, 
Abib,  is  given  xiii.  4.  It  was  called  by  the 
later  Hebrews  Nisan,  a name  found  in  early 
Syrian  inscriptions,  De  Vogue,  ‘Syrie  cen- 
trale,’  p.  5,  and  derived  from  the  Nisannu  of 
the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians,  with  whom  it 
was  the  first  month  of  the  year.  It  corresponds 
nearly  to  our  April,  since  the  last  full  moon 
in  March  or  the  iirst  in  April  fell  in  the 
middle  of  the  month.  It  is  clear  that  in 
this  passage  the  Israelites  are  directed  to 
take  Abib  henceforth  as  the  beginning  of  the 
year;  the  year  previously  began  with  the 
month  Tisri,  when  the  harvest  ' was  gathered 
in;  see  xxiii.  16.  They  do  not  appear  to 
have  adopted  the  Egyptian  division,  in  which 
the  fixed  year  began  in  June,  at  the  rise  of 
the  Nile.  The  injunction  touching  Abib  or 
Nisan  referred  only  to  religious  rites;  in  other 
affairs  they  retained  the  old  arrangement, 
even  in  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbatic  year;  sec 
Levit.  XXV.  9;  and  Josephus,  ‘Ant.’  i.  25.  9. 
The  assumption  that  an  ancient  festival  was 
previously  held  at  this  season  to  celebrate  the 
ripening  of  the  wheat  has  no  grounds  in 
history  or  tradition. 

3.  a lamb]  The  Hebrew  word,  used  in 
the  same  way  in  Arabic  and  Chaldee,  is 
general,  meaning  cither  a sheep  or  goat,  male 
or  female,  and  of  any  age;  the  age  and  sex  are 
therefore  specially  defined  in  the  following 


verse.  The  direction  to  select  the  lamb  on 
the  tenth  day,  the  fourth  day  before  it  was 
offered,  is  generally  assumed  to  have  applied 
to  the  first  institution  only,  but  there  is  no 
indication  of  this  in  the  text,  and  it  seems  more 
probable  that  the  injunction  was  intended  to 
secure  due  care  in  the  preparation  for  the 
greatest  national  festival.  The  custom  cer- 
tainly fell  into  desuetude  at  a later  period, 
but  probably  not  before  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple.  The  later  Targum,  which  asserts 
that  the  rule  was  not  intended  to  be  of  per- 
manent obligation,  records  the  traditions  of 
Rabbins  of  the  sixth  century. 

the  house  of  their  fathers]  Lit.  a house  of 
fathers,  or  parents;  i.e.  for  each  family. 

4.  if  the  household  be  too  little.,  &c.]  The 
meaning  is  clear,  if  there  be  not  persons 
enough  to  consume  a lamb  at  one  meal : 
tradition  specifies  ten  as  the  least  number ; 
thus  Josephus  says,  not  less  than  ten  attend 
this  sacrifice,  and  twenty  are  generally  assem- 
bled, ‘De  B.  J.’  VI.  9.  3.  The  later* Targum 
paraphrases  the  passage  thus:  “If  the  men  of 
the  household  be  less  than  ten  in  number.” 
There  is,  however,  no  indication  of  such  a 
rule  earlier  than  Josephus,  and  it  was  pro- 
bably left  altogether  to  the  discretion  of  the 
heads  of  families.  The  women  and  children 
were  certainly  not  excluded,  though  the  Rab- 
bins held  their  attendance  to  be  unnecessary, 
and  the  Karaites  permitted  none  but  adult 
males  to  be  partakers. 

The  last  clause  should  be  rendered:  “let 
him  and  his  neighbour  who  is  near  to  his 
house  take  according  to  the  number  of  souls, 
each  man  according  to  his  eating  ye  shall 
count  for  the  lamb.”  Our  Version  only  re- 
quires the  insertion  of  ye,  ox  you.  before  “shall 
make  your  count.”  See  note  below. 

5.  ^without  blemish]  This  is  in  accordance 
with  the  general  rule  laid  down  in  Levit. 
xxii.  20:  so  also  is  the  choice  of  a male,  Levit. 
i.  3:  although  in  this  case  there  is  a special 
reason,  since  the  lamb  was  in  place  of  the 
firstborn  male  in  each  household.  The  re- 


V.  6 — 8.] 


EXODUS.  XII. 


293 


shall  take  it  out  from  the  sheep,  or 
from  the  goats : 

6 And  ye  shall  keep  it  up  until  the 
fourteenth  day  of  the  same  month ; 
and  the  whole  assembly  of  the  con- 
<Hcb.  greo-ation  of  Israel  shall  kill  it  Mn  the 
ihetwo  evening. 

ez.enings.  ^ And  they  shall  take  of  the 


blood,  and  strike  it  on  the  two  side 
posts  and  on  the  upper  door  post 
of  the  houses,  wherein  they  shall 
eat  it. 

8 And  they  shall  eat  the  flesh  in 
that  night,  roast  with  fire,  and  un- 
leavened bread ; and  with  bitter  herbs 
they  shall  eat  it. 


striction  to  the  first  year  is  peculiar,  and 
refers  apparently  to  the  condition  of  perfect 
innocence  in  the  antitype,  the  Lamb  of 
God. 

cr  from  the  goats']  There  is  no  indication  of 
a preference,  but  the  Hebrews  have  generally 
held  that  a lamb  was  the  more  acceptable 
offering. 

6.  ye  shall  keep  it  up]  The  Hebrew  implies 
that  it  was  to  be  kept  with  great  care,  which 
appears  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  expression 
“keep  it  up.” 

until  the  fourteenth  day]  It  should  be 
observed  that  the  offering  of  our  Lord  on 
the  selfsame  day  is  an  important  point  in 
determining  the  typical  character  of  the  trans- 
action. Masius  on  Josh.  v.  10  quotes  a re- 
markable passage  from  the  Talmud  : “It  was 
a famous  and  old  opinion  among  the  ancient 
Jews  that  the  day  of  the  new  year  which 
was  the  beginning  of  the  Israelites’  deliverance 
out  of  Egypt  should  in  future  time  be  the 
beginning  of  the  redemption  by  the  Messiah.” 

in  the  evening]  The  Hebrew  has  betv/een 
the  two  evenings.  The  meaning  of  the 
expression  is  disputed.  The  most  probable 
explanation  is  that  it  includes  the  time  from 
afternoon,  or  early  eventide,  until  sunset. 
This  accords  with  the  ancient  custom  of  the 
Hebrews,  who  slew  the  paschal  lamb  imme- 
diately after  the  offering  of  the  daily  sacrifice, 
which  on  the  day  of  the  passover  took  place  a 
little  earlier  than  usual,  between  two  and  three 
p.m.  This  would  allow  about  two  hours  and 
a half  for  slaying  and  preparing  all  the  lambs. 
It  is  clear  that  they  would  not  wait  until 
sunset,  at  which  time  the  evening  meal  would 
take  place.  This  interpretation  is  supported 
by  Rashi,  Kimchi,  Bochart,  Lightfoot,  Cleri- 
cus,  and  Patrick.  Thus  Josephus : “they  offer 
this  sacrifice  from  the  ninth  to  the  eleventh 
hour.”  The  Greeks  had  the  same  idiom,  dis- 
tinguishing between  the  early  and  late  even- 
ing. Other  interpreters  understand  it  to 
mean  the  interval  l^tween  sunset  and  total 
darkness,  an  exceedingly  short  time  in  the 
East,  and  quite  insufficient  for  the  work. 
Rosenmuller  shews  from  the  Talmud  that 
the  twilight  as  strictly  defined  did  not  last 
longer  than  it  would  take  to  walk  half  a mile, 
i.e.  about  ten  minutes.  If,  moreover,  the 


Iamb  were  slain  after  sunset,  it  would  not 
have  been  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month, 
since  the  day  was  reckoned  from  sunset  to 
sunset.  Knobel  observes  that  the  expression 
is  peculiar  to  the  so-called  Elohist;  it  is  in  fact 
peculiar  to  the  Pentateuch,  and  its  meaning 
was  evidently  ascertained  only  by  conjecture 
at  a later  period.  It  is  to  be  observed  that 
the  slaying  of  the  lamb  on  the  former  hypo- 
thesis coincides  exactly  with  the  death  of  our 
Saviour,  at  the  ninth  hour  of  the  day. 

7.  the  upper  door  post]  Or  lintel,  as 
it  is  rendered  v.  23.  This  meaning  is  gene- 
rally accepted,  but  the  word  occurs  only  in 
this  passage  ; it  is  derived  from  a root  which 
means  to  “look  out,”  and  may  signify  a lat- 
tice above  the  door:  thus  Aben-Ezra  and  Ro- 
senmiiller.  This  direction  was  understood  by 
the  Hebrews  to  apply  only  to  the  first  Pass- 
over:  it  was  certainly  not  adopted  in  Pales- 
tine. The  meaning  of  the  sprinkling  of  blood 
is  hardly  open  to  question.  It  was  a repre- 
sentation of  the  offering  of  the  life,  substi- 
tuted for  that  of  the  firstborn  in  each  house, 
as  an  expiatory  and  vicarious  sacrifice. 

8.  in  that  night]  The  night  is  thus  clearly 
distinguished  from  the  evening  when  the  lamb 
was  slain.  It  was  slain  before  sunset,  on  the 
14th,  and  eaten  after  sunset,  the  beginning  of 
the  15th. 

vuith  fire]  Among  various  reasons  given 
for  this  injunction  the  most  probable  and 
satisfactory  seems  to  be  the  special  sanctity 
attached  to  fire  from  the  first  institution  of 
sacrifice.  The  memory  of  this  primeval  sanc- 
tity is  preserved  by  universal  tradition,  e.g. 
among  the  Aryans,  as  is  shewn  by  the  hymns 
in  the  Rig  Veda  to  Agni,  the  fire-god,  and 
by  the  whole  system  of  the  Zend  Avesta. 

and  unleavened  bread]  Or,  and  they  shall 
eat  unleavened  cakes  with  bitter 
herbs.  See  note  below.  The  Hebrew  word 
is  certain  in  meaning,  but  of  doubtful  origin; 
see  note  below.  Like  many  others  in  this 
account  it  is  archaic,  found  only  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch, except  in  passages  which  refer  to  the 
Passover.  The  importance  of  the  injunction 
is  admitted;  the  unleavened  cakes  give  one 
of  the  two  general  designations  to  the  festival. 
This  may  in  part  be  accounted  for  by  its 
being  a lasting  memorial  of  the  circumstances 


294 


EXODUS.  XII. 


9 Eat  not  of  it  raw,  nor  sodden  at 
all  with  water,  but  roast  with  fire; 
his  head  with  his  legs,  and  with  the 
purtenance  thereof. 

10  And  ye  shall  let  nothing  of  it 


remain  until  the  morning;  and  that 
which  remaineth  of  it  until  the  morn- 
ing ye  shall  burn  with  fire. 

1 1  ^ And  thus  shall  ye  eat  it;  with 
your  loins  girded,  your  shoes  on  your 


of  the  hasty  departure,  allowing  no  time  for 
the  process  of  leavening:  but  the  meaning  dis- 
cerned by  St  Paul,  i Cor.  v,  7,  and  recognized 
by  the  Church  in  all  ages,  was  assuredly 
implied,  though  not  expressly  declared  in  the 
original  institution ; and  though  our  Lord 
may  not  directly  refer  to  the  Passover,  yet 
His  words,  Matt.  xiii.  33,  are  conclusive  as 
to  the  symbolism  of  leaven. 

bitter  herbs']  The  word  occurs  only  here 
and  in  Numbers  ix.  ii,  in  reference  to  herbs. 
The  symbolical  reference  to  the  previous  suf- 
ferings of  the  Israelites  is  generally  admitted. 
Various  kinds  of  bitter  herbs  are  enumerated 
in  the  Mishna;  but  the  expression  should  be 
taken  generally;  the  bitter  heros  of  Egypt 
would  of  coulee  differ  in  kind  from  those  of 
other  countries  where  the  Passover  was  to 
be  eaten. 

9.  razv]  Another  obsolete  word,  proba- 
bly Egyptian,  found  only  in  this  passage:  the 
corresponding  root  in  Arabic  means  “ half- 
cooked,”  and  this  appears  to  be  the  sense 
here:  raw  meat  was  not  likely  to  be  eaten, 
though  some  interpreters  find  here  a reference 
to  the  Wfiojsayln^  “ feasting  on  raw  food,”  in 
some  Gentile  festivals.  The  prohibition  of 
eating  it  sodden  with  water  has  been  consi- 
dered in  reference  to  “roast  with  fire:”  it 
was  probably  more  common  to  seethe  than  to 
roast  meat;  hence  the  regrets  expressed  by 
the  Israelites  for  the  seething  pots  of  Egypt; 
on  other  occasions  the  flesh  of  sin  and  peace- 
offerings,  whether  consumed  by  the  people  or 
the  priests,  was  ordered  to  be  sodden:  see 
Lev.  vi.  28;  Num.  vi.  19. 

sodden... ^ith  nvater]  or  “ sodden,” omitting 
“water,”  which  is  added  in  Hebrew  because 
the  word  in  that  language  may  be  used  either 
of  roasting  (as  in  2 Chron.  xxxv.  13)  or 
boiling. 

the  purtenance  thereof  ] orits  intestines. 
This  verse  directs  that  the  lamb  slunild  be 
roasted  and  placed  on  the  table  whole.  No 
bone  was  to  be  broken  (see  v.  46,  and  Num, 
ix.  12,  an  injunction  which  the  LXX.  insert 
in  the  next  verse)’.  According  to  Rashi  and 
other  Rabbins  the  bowels  were  taken  out, 
washed  and  then  replaced,  I'he  'Ealmud 
prescribes  the  form  of  the  oven  of  earthen- 
ware, in  which  the  lamb  was  roasted,  open 
above  and  below  with  a grating  for  the  fire. 
Lambs  and  sheep  are  roasted  whole  in  Persia, 
nearly  in  the  same  manner.  'Lhevenot  doscri bes 
the  process,  Vol.  11.  p,  180,  cd.  1674. 


This  entire  consumption  of  the  lamb  con- 
stitutes one  marked  difference  between  the 
Passover  and  all  other  sacrifices,  in  which 
either  a part  or  the  whole  was  burned,  and 
thus  offered  directly  to  God.  The  whole  sub- 
stance of  the  sacrificed  lamb  was  to  enter 
into  the  substance  of  the  people,  the  blood 
only  excepted,  which  was  sprinkled  as  a pro- 
pitiatory and  sacrificial  offering.  Another 
point  of  subordinate  importance  is  noticed. 
The  lamb  was  slain  and  the  blood  sprinkled 
by  the  head  of  each  family:  no  separate  priest- 
hood as  yet  existed  in  Israel;  its  functions  be- 
longed from  the  beginning  to  the  father  of  the 
family : when  the  priesthood  was  instituted  the 
slaying  of  the  lamb  still  devolved  on  the  heads 
of  families,  though  the  blood  was  sprinkled  on 
the  altar  by  the  priests;  an  act  which  essen- 
tially belonged  to  their  office.  The  typical 
character  of  this  part  of  the  transaction  is 
clear.  Our  Lord  was  offered  and  His  blood 
shed  as  an  expiatory  and  propitiatory  sacrifice, 
but  His  whole  humanity  is  transfused  spiri- 
tually and  effectually  into  His  Church,  an  effect 
which  is  at  once  symbolized  and  assured  in 
Holy  Communion,  the  Chnstian  Passover, 

10.  And  ye  shall  let  7iotbing.i  St.c.]  This  was 
afterwards  a general  law  of  sacrifices ; at  once 
preventing  all  possibility  of  profanity,  and  of 
superstitious  abuse,  such  as  was  practised 
among  some  ancient  heathens,  who  were  wont 
to  reserve  a portion  of  their  sacrifices;  sec 
Herod,  i.  132;  and  Baruch  vi.  28.  The  in- 
junction is  on  both  accounts  justly  applied  by 
our  Church  to  the  Eucharist. 

burn  <with  fire]  Not  being  consumed  by 
man,  it  was  thus  offered,  like  other  sacrifices, 
to  God. 

11.  '■voith your  loins  girded.,  &c,]  These  in- 
structions are  understood  by  the  Jews  to 
apply  only  to  the  first  Passover,  when  they 
belonged  to  the  occasion.  There  is  no  trace 
of  their  observance  at  any  later  time;  a strik- 
ing instance  of  good  sense  and  power  of  dis- 
tinguishing between  accidents  and  substantial 
characteristics.  Each  of  the  directions  marks 
preparation  for  a journey;  the  long  flowing 
robes  are  girded  round  the  loins;  shoes  or 
sandals,  not  worn  in  the  house  or  at  meals, 
were  fastened  on  the  fee^;  and  the  traveller’s 
staff  was  taken  in  hand. 

the  Lord's  passonjer]  A most  important 
statement.  It  gives  at  once  the  great  and 
most  significant  name  to  the  whole  ordinance. 
The  word  Passover  renders  as  nearly  as  pos- 


EXODUS.  XII 


295 


V.  12 1 4.] 


II  Or, 
J>rinces. 


feet,  and  your  staff  in  your  hand; 
and  ye  shall  eat  it  in  haste ; it  is  the 
Lord’s  passover. 

12  P'or  I will  pass  through  the  land 
of  Egypt  this  night,  and  will  smite  all 
the  firstborn  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
both  man  and  beast;  and  against  all 
the  “gods  of  Egypt  I will  execute 
judgment:  I am  the  Lord. 

13  And  the  blood  shall  be  to  you 


for  a token  upon  the  houses  where  ye 
are:  and  when  I see  the  blood,  I will 
pass  over  you,  and  the  plague  shall 
not  be  upon  you  ^to  destroy  you^ 
when  I smite  the  land  of  Egypt. 

14  And  this  day  shall  be  unto  you 
for  a memorial ; and  ye  shall  keep  it 
a feast  to  the  Lord  throughout  your 
generations;  ye  shall  keep  it  a feast 
by  an  ordinance  for  ever. 


t Heb. 
for  a de- 
stniction. 


sible  the  true  meaning  of  the  original,  of 
which  the  primary  sense  is  generally  held  to 
be  “ pass  rapidly,”  like  a bird  with  outstretched 
wings,  but  it  undoubtedly  includes  the  idea 
of  sparing.  See  Ges.  ‘ Thes.’  s.v.  It  is  a word 
which  occurs  very  seldom  in  other  books, 
twice  in  one  chapter  of  i K.,  xviii.  21,  where 
it  is  rendered  “ halt,”  and  seems  to  mean 
“ waver,”  flitting  like  a bird  from  branch  to 
branch,  and  26,  where  our  A.V.  has  in  the 
margin  “ leaped  up  and  down,”  A passage 
in  Isaiah  xxxi.  5 is  of  more  importance,  since 
it  combines  the  two  great  ideas  involved 
in  the  word:  “As  birds  flying,  so  will  the 
Lord  of  hosts  defend  Jerusalem;  defending 
also  he  will  deliver  it;  and  passing  over 
he  will  preserve  it.”  This  combination  of 
ideas  is  recognized  by  nearly  all  ancient  and 
modern  critics.  It  is  remarkable  that  the 
word  is  not  found  in  other  Semitic  languages, 
except  in  passages  derived  from  the  Hebrew 
Bible.  In  Egyptian  the  word  Pesh,  which 
corresponds  to  it  very  nearly  in  form,  means 
to  “spread  out  the  wings  over,”  and  “to  pro- 
tect;” see  Brugsch,  ‘ D.  H.’  p.  512. 

12.  I <will  pass  through~\  The  word  ren- 
dered “ passthrough”  is  wholly. distinct  from 
that  which  means  “ pass  over.”  The  passing 
through  was  in  judgment,  the  “passing 
over”  in  mercy. 

against  all  the  gods  of  Egypf\  The  meaning 
of  this  and  of  the  corresponding  passage,  Num. 
xxxiii.  4,  is  undoubtedly  that  the  visitation 
reached  the  gods  of  Egypt,  not  “ the  princes” 
as  in  the  margin.  The  true  explanation  in  this 
case  is  that  in  smiting  the  firstborn  of  all  living 
beings,  man  and  beast,  God  smote  the  objects 
of  Egyptian  worship.  It  is  not  merely  that 
the  bull  and  cow  and  goat  and  ram  and  cat 
were  worshipped  in  the  principal  cities  of 
Egypt  as  representatives,  or,  so  to  speak,  in- 
carnations, of  their  deities,  but  that  the  wor- 
ship of  beasts  was  universal;  every  nome, 
every  town  had  its  sacred  animal,  including 
the  lowest  forms  of  animal  life ; the  frog,  the 
beetle,  being  especial  objects  of  reverence  as 
representing  the  primeval  deities  of  nature. 
In  fact  not  a single  deity  of  Egypt  was 
unrepresented  by  some  beast.  This  explana- 
tion, which  is  adopted  by  many  critics,  e.g. 


Michaelis,  Rosenmuller,  forces  itself  upon  our 
minds  in  proportion  to  our  closer  and  more 
accurate  knowledge  of  Egyptian  superstitions. 
It  would  not  however  have  occurred  to  an 
Israelite  living  in  Palestine,  and  the  Rabbins 
in  course  of  time  adopted  a different  view, 
which  approved  itself  to  some  of  the  early 
Fathers  of  the  Church.  Thus  Jerome,  ‘ Ep. 
ad  Fabiolam,’  says:  “The  Hebrews  think 
that  in  the  night  v/hen  the  people  went  forth 
all  the  temples  in  Egypt  were  destroyed 
either  by  earthquake  or  lightning:”  and  the 
second  Targum,  which  gives  the  traditions  of 
a still  later  time,  asserts  that  each  and  every 
idol  was  destroyed.  The  explanation  given 
above  meets  the  whole  requirement  of  the 
text. 

13.  a tokenl  A sign  to  you,  so  to  speak, 
a sacramental  pledge  of  mercy. 

I rjoill  pass  o^er  you']  The  same  word  as  in 
2;.  II.  The  sense  of  sparing  is  clear.  The 
Targum  renders  it  “ I will  spare  you,”  and 
the  LXX.  “ I will  protect  you.” 

to  destroy  you]  or  “to  destruction,”  but 
our  version  gives  the  true  sense  and  may  be 
retained. 

14.  a mefnorial]  The  following  verses  to 
end  of  2;.  20  contain  explicit  instructions  for 
the  future  celebration  of  the  Passover.  They 
appear  from  a;.  17  to  have  been  given  to  Mo- 
ses after  the  departure  from  Egypt,  but  are 
inserted  here  in  their  proper  place,  in  connec- 
tion with  the  history.  The  passover  was  to 
be  a memorial,  a commemorative  and  sacra- 
mental ordinance  of  perpetual  obligation.  As 
such  it  has  ever  been  observed  by  the  He- 
brews. By  the  Christian  it  is  spiritually  ob- 
served; its  full  significance  is  recognized,  and 
all  that  it  foreshadowed  is  realized,  in  the 
Sacrament  of  Holy  Communion.  It  is  not 
therefore  necessary  to  limit  the  meaning  of 
the  words  “throughout  your  generations” 
and  “ for  ever,”  although  both  expressions  are 
frequently  used  with  reference  to  an  exist- 
ing dispensation,  or  to  a limited  period. 

ye  shall  keep  it  a feast]  The  word  chag 
is  used  twice  in  this  passage,  for  “keep  a 
feast.”  The  radical  meaning  is  festivity, 
expressed  in  outward  demonstrations  of  joy. 


296 


EXODUS.  XII. 


[v.  15—21. 


15  Seven  days  shall  ye  eat  unlea- 
vened bread ; even  the  first  day  ye 
shall  put  a\vay  leaven  out  of  your 
houses  : for  whosoever  eateth  leaven- 
ed bread  from  the  first  day  until  the 
seventh  day,  that  soul  shall  be  cut  off 
from  Israel. 

16  And  in  the  first  day  there  shall 
be  an  holy  convocation,  and  in  the 
seventh  day  there  shall  be  an  holy 
convocation  to  you ; no  manner  of 
work  shall  be  done  in  them,  save  that 

t Heb.  which  every  ^ man  must  eat,  that  only 
may  be  done  of  you. 

17  And  ye  shall  observe  the  feast 
of  unleavened  bread ; for  in  this  self- 
same day  have  I brought  your  armies 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt:  therefore 
shall  ye  observe  this  day  in  your  gene- 
rations by  an  ordinance  for  ever. 


18  ^^In  the  first  mouthy  on  the  “ “3- 

fourteenth  day  of  the  month  at  even.  Numb.  23. 
ye  shall  eat  unleavened  bread,  until 

the  one  and  twentieth  day  of  the 
month  at  even. 

19  Seven  days  shall  there  be  no 
leaven  found  in  your  houses  : for 
whosoever  eateth  that  which  is  lea- 
vened, even  that  soul  shall  be  cut  off 
from  the  congregation  of  Israel,  whe- 
ther he  be  a stranger,  or  born  in  the 
land. 

20  Ye  shall  eat  nothing  leavened; 
in  all  your  habitations  shall  ye  eat 
unleavened  bread. 

21  ^ Then  Moses  called  for  all  the 
elders  of  Israel,  and  said  unto  them. 

Draw  out  and  take  you  a "lamb  ac-"^*", 
cording  to  your  families,  and  kill  the 
passover. 


15.  Senjen  days\  From  the  evening  of  the 
fourteenth  of  Nisan  to  the  end  of  the  21st 
day.  The  leaven  was  removed  from  the  houses 
before  the  paschal  lamb  was  slain,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  general  instruction,  “ Thou 
shalt  not  offer  the  blood  of  my  sacrifice  with 
leavened  bread;”  xxiii.  18.  The  unleavened 
bread  was  an  essential  element  in  the  celebra- 
tion : see  note  on  'v.  8.  The  penalty  inflicted 
on  those  who  transgressed  the  command  may 
be  accounted  for  on  the  ground  that  it  was 
an  act  of  rebellion;  but  additional  light  is 
thrown  upon  it  by  the  typical  meaning  as- 
signed to  leaven  by  our  Lord,  Matt,  xvi.  6. 
The  period  of  seven  days  does  not  settle  the 
question  as  to  the  previous  observance  of  the 
week,  since  this  command  may  have  been  first 
given  after  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath,  but 
it  adds  considerable  weight  to  the  argument 
in  its  favour. 

16.  an  holy  conn}ocation'\  This  rendering 
exactly  expresses  the  sense  of  the  original; 
an  assembly  called  by  proclamation  for  a 
religious  solemnity.  The  proclamation  was 
directed  to  be  made  on  some  occasions  by 
the  blowing  of  the  silver  trumpets.  See  Num. 

2 3.  In  the  East  the  proclamation  is  made 
by  the  Muezzins  from  the  minarets  of  the 
mosques. 

sa've  that,  &c.]  In  this  the  observance  of 
the  festival  differed  from  the  Sabbath,  when 
the  preparation  of  food  was  prohibited.  The 
same  word  for  “ work”  is  used  here  and  in 
the  4th  Commandment;  it  is  very  general, 
and  includes  all  laborious  occupation,  not 
howc\'er  all  bodily  exercise,  as  it  is  under- 
stood by  the  stricter  sects  of  the  Rabbins. 


17.  the  feast  of  unleavened  hreaeT]  lit.  “the 
unleavened  bread;”  which  may  mean  either 
the  festival,  or  the  instructions  relating  to 
the  unleavened  bread.  The  Samaritan  Pen- 
tateuch and  the  LXX.  read  “the  precept,” 
taking  a word  which  differs  slightly  in  form 
in  the  unpunctuated  Hebrew : but  our  read- 
ing and  translation  are  accepted  by  most 
critics. 

18.  In  the first  month'\  or  “ in  the  beginning,” 
which  may  mean  at  the  beginning  of  the  fes- 
tival, on  the  evening  of  the  14th  Nisan. 
Thus  the  LXX.;  but  the  other  ancient  ver- 
sions agree  with  our  own,  and  their  render- 
ing is  supported  by  Rosenmiiller. 

19.  leaven\  The  Hebrew  word  used  here 
occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch.  It  denotes 
the  leaven  itself ; the  word  in  the  next  clause, 
which  is  also  found  only  in  the  Pentateuch, 
means  the  leavened  dough,  or  bread, 

born  in  the  la72d~\  or  “a  native  of  the 
land ;”  a .stranger  or  foreigner  might  be  born 
in  the  land,  but  the  word  here  used  means 
indigenous,  belonging  to  the  country  in  vir- 
tue of  descent,  that  descent  being  reckoned 
from  Abraham,  to  whom  Canaan  was  pro- 
mised as  a perpetual  inheritance.  The  He- 
brews had  no  tinge  of  the  opinion  which 
takes  human  races  to  be  autochthonous.  It 
is  indeed  remarkable  that  that  opinion  was 
entertained  most  strongly  of  old  by  the  Athe- 
nians, a people  whose  foreign  origin  is  incon- 
testably proved  by  their  language,  customs 
and  religion, 

21.  Then  Moses  called]^  From  this  verse  to 
end  of  the  28th  Moses  records  the  directions 


V.  2 2 29-] 


EXODUS.  XII. 


297 


. Heb.  XI.  22  '^Aiid  yc  shall  take  a bunch  of 
hyssop,  and  dip  it  in  the  blood  that 
is  in  the  bason,  and  strike  the  lintel 
and  the  two  side  posts  with  the  blood 
that  is  in  the  bason ; and  none  of  you 
shall  go  out  at  the  door  of  his  house 
until  the  morning. 

23  For  the  Lord  will  pass  through 
to  smite  the  Egyptians ; and  when  he 
seeth  the  blood  upon  the  lintel,  and 
on  the  two  side  posts,  the  Lord  will 
pass  over  the  door,  and  will  not  suffer 
the  destroyer  to  come  in  unto  your 
houses  to  smite  you. 

24  And  ye  shall  observe  this  thing 
for  an  ordinance  to  thee  and  to  thy 
sons  for  ever. 

25  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when 
ye  be  come  to  the  land  which  the  Lord 
will  give  you,  according  as  he  hath  pro- 
mised, that  ye  shall  keep  this  service. 


26  '^And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  4. 
when  your  children  shall  say  unto 

you,  W hat  mean  ye  by  this  service  r 

27  That  ye  shall  say.  It  is  the 

sacrifice  of  the  Lord’s  passover,  who 
passed  over  the  houses  of  the  children 
of  Israel  in  Egypt,  when  he  smote 
the  Egyptians,  and  delivered  our 
houses.  And  the  people  bowed  the 
head  and  worshipped.  » 

28  And  the  children  of  Israel  went 
away,  and  did  as  th*e  Lord  had  com- 
manded Moses  and  Aaron,  so  did 
they. 

29  ^ '^And  it  came  to  pass,  that  at  '^chap.  n. 
midnight  the  Lord  smote  all  the 
firstborn  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  ^from  ^wisd.  is. 
the  firstborn  of  Pharaoh  that  sat  on 

his  throne  unto  the  firstborn  of  the 
captive  that  was  in  the  ^ dungeon ; 
and  all  the  firstborn  of  cattle.  tkipa. 


which,  in  obedience  to  the  command,  he  gave 
at  the  time  to  the  people.  This  method  of 
composition  occurs  frequently  in  the  Penta- 
teuch: it  involves  of  course  some  repetition, 
from  which  no  very  ancient  writer  would 
shrink,  but  it  would  scarcely  have  been 
adopted  by  a compiler.  Moses  is  ever  careful 
to  record  first  the  commands  which  he  re- 
ceives, and  afterwards  the  way  m which  he 
executed  them. 

Draw  out~\  The  expression  is  clear,  but 
the  sense  has  been  questioned.  Moses  directs 
the  elders  to  draw  the  lamb  from  the  fold 
and  then  to  take  it  to  their  houses. 

the  pas  soever']  The  vrord  is  here  applied 
to  the  lamb ; an  important  fact,  marking  the 
lamb  as  the  sign  and  pledge  of  the  exemption 
of  the  Israelites. 

22.  a bunch  of  hyssop]  The  word  ren- 
dered hyssop  occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch, 
with  two  exceptions,  Ps.  li.  7,  which  refers 
to  the  Mosaic  rite,  and  i K.  iv.  33,  where  it 
is  applied  to  a herb  growing  on  the  wall, 
probably  a small  species  of  fern,  mentioned 
as  the  smallest  of  plants  and  therefore  not 
likely  to  be  used  for  the  sprinkling.  The 
species  here  designated  does  not  appear  to  be 
the  plant  now  bearing  the  name.  If  we  fol- 
low the  Hebrew  tradition,  which  in  such 
matters  is  of  weight,  and  is  supported  by  most 
critics,  it  would  seem  to  be  a species  of 
origanum,  common  in  Palestine  and  near 
Mount  Sinai,  an  aromatic  plant  with  a long 
straight  stalk  and  leaves  well  adapted  for  the 
purpose.  See  note  on  Lev.  xiv.  4. 

bason]  The  rendering  rests  on  good  au- 
thority and  gives  a good  sense:  but  the  word 


means  threshold  in  some  other  passages  and 
in  Egyptian,  and  is  taken  here  in  that  sense 
by  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate.  If  that  render- 
ing were  correct  it  would  imply  that  the 
lamb  was  slain  on  the  threshold. 

none... shall  go  out.,  &c.]  There  is  no  safety 
outside  of  the  precincts  protected  by  the 
blood  of  the  lamb ; a symbolism  too  obvious 
to  require  pointing  out. 

23.  the  destroyer]  The  word  certainly 
denotes  a personal  agent;  see  note  on  u.  29. 

24.  this  thing]  The  injunction  would  seem 
to  apply  specially  to  the  sprinkling  of  blood 
on  the  lintel  and  doorposts ; but  the  authority 
for  changing  the  rite  is  unquestioned ; see  note 
on  ‘n.  9 ; and  the  Hebrew  tradition  is  uniform. 
It  may  therefore  be  admitted,  with  Aben-Ezra 
and  Knobel,  who  represent  very  different 
schools,  that  this  charge  refers  to  the  general 
observance  of  the  Passover. 

27.  It  is  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord's  pass- 
over]  or  This  is  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Passover  to  Jehovah.  The  most  formal  and 
exact  designation  of  the  festival  is  thus  given : 
but  “the  Passover”  may  mean  either  the  act 
or  God’s  mercy  in  sparing  the  Israelites,  or 
the  lamb  which  is  offered  in  sacrifice:  more 
probably  the  latter,  as  in  v.  21,  “and  kill  the 
passover.”  This  gives  a clear  sense  to  the 
expression  “to  Jehovah;”  it  was  a sacrifice 
offered  to  Jehovah  by  His  ordinance. 

The  Tenth  and  Last  Plague. 

29.  smote  all  the  firstborn]  This  plague 
is  distinctly  attributed  here  and  in  -v.  23  to 


298 


EXODUS.  XII. 


30  And  Pharaoh  rose  up  in  the 
night,  he,  and  all  his  servants,  and  all 
the  Egyptians ; and  there  was  a great 
crv  in  Egypt;  for  there  vjas  not  a 
house  where  there  was  not  one  dead. 

.31  ^ And  he  called  for  Moses  and 
Aaron  by  night,  and  said,  Rise  up, 
and  get  you  forth  from  among  my 
people,  both  ye  and  the  children  of 
Israel ; and  go,  serve  the  Lord,  as  ye 
have  said. 

32  Also  take  your  flocks  and  your 
herds,  as  ye  have  said,  and  be  gone; 
and  bless  me  also. 

33  And  the  Egyptians  were  urgent 
upon  the  people,  that  they  might  send 


them  out  of  the  land  in  haste; 
they  said.  Wo.  be  ail  dead  men. 

34  And  the  people  took  their  dough 
before  it  was  leavened,  their  ” knead-  ^2,^^ 
ingtroughs  being  bound  up  in  their 
clothes  upon  their  shoulders. 

35  And  the  children  of  Israel  did 

according  to  the  word  of  Moses ; 
and  they  borrowed  of  the  Egyptians 
-^jewels  of  silver,  and  jewels  of  gold,  ■/'chap.  3. 
and  raiment : 2. 

36  And  the  Lord  gave  the  people 
favour  in  the  sight  of  the  Egyptians, 
so  that  they  lent  unto  them  such 
things  as  they  required.  And  they 
spoiled  the  Egyptians. 


the  personal  intervention  of  the  Lord;  but 
it  is  to  be  obsei'ved  that  although  the  Lord 
Himself  passed  through  to  smite  the  Egyp- 
tians, He  employed  the  agency  of  “the  de- 
stroyer,” in  whom,  in  accordance  with  Heb. 
xi.  28,  all  the  Ancient  Versions,  and  most 
critics,*  recognize  an  angel.  Such  indeed  is 
the  express  statement  of  Holy  Writ  with 
reference  to  other  visitations,  as  2 Kings  xix. 
35,  and  more  especially  2 Sam.  xxiv.  16.  The 
employment  of  angelic  agency,  however,  does 
not  always  exclude  the  operation  of  physical 
causes.  In  the  same  chapter  of  2 Sam.  which 
describes  the  destruction  of  70,000  Israelites 
by  an  angel,  whose  personality  is  distinctly  at- 
tested, see  'v'v.  15 — 17,  it  is  no  less  distinctly 
declared  to  have  been  effected  by  a pestilence ; 
see  n.i’v.  13  and  25.  Nature  accomplishes 
God’s  purposes  under  His  control.  As  in 
every  other  case  the  hand  of  God  was  dis- 
tinctly shewn  by  the  previous  announcement, 
the  suddenness,  intensity,  and  limitation  of 
the  calamity.  No  house  of  the  Egyptians 
escaped;  the  firstborn  only  perished  in  each; 
the  Israelites  were  unscathed. 

the  capti-ve]  In  ch.  xi.  5,  the  woman  at  the 
mill  is  mentioned.  Such  variations  are  common 
in  Holy  Writ,  and  are  to  be  noticed  as  shew- 
ing the  disregard  of  slight  or  apparent  dis- 
crepancies. The  notices  of  captives  under  the 
1 8th  dynasty  are  numerous  on  the  monuments: 
they  were  generally  employed  in  brick-making 
and  building,  and  this  passage  implies  that 
they  were  treated  to  some  extent  as  settlers  in 
the  land,  d'he  word  “dungeon”  translated 
more  literally  in  the  margin  “house  of  the 
pit,”  corresponds  to  the  Egyptian  “Rar,”  or 
“ Lar,”  in  meaning;  the  same  word  for  “pit” 
is  found  in  both  languages.  See  Brugsch, 
* D.  H.’  p.  402,  who  considers  it  to  be  Semitic. 

31.  the  Lord]  The  LXX.  add  “ your 
God,”  a very  probable  reading. 


32.  bless  me  also]  No  words  could 
shew  more  strikingly  the  complete,  though 
temporary  submission  of  Pharaoh. 

34.  kneadingt roughs]  Not  “dough”  as 
in  the  margin.  The  same  word  is  used  in 
ch.  viii.  3,  and  Deut.  xxviii.  5.  The  troughs 
were  probably  small,  such  as  are  now  used 
by  the  Arabians;  wooden  bowls  in  which  the 
cakes  when  baked  are  preserved  for  use.  The 
Hebrews  used  their  outer  garment,  or  mantle, 
in  the  same  way  as  the  Bedouins  at  present,  who 
make  a bag  of  the  voluminous  folds  of  their 
haiks  or  burnous.  See  Ruth  iii.  15 ; 2 Kings 
iv.  39. 

35.  borrowed]  Or  “asked  of.”  See  note 
ch.  iii.  22. 

36.  lent]  Or  gave.  The  word  here 
used  in  the  Hebrew  means  simply  “granted 
their  request.”  Whether  the  grant  is  made 
as  a loan,  or  as  a gift,  depends  in  every  in- 
stance upon  the  context.  In  this  case  the 
(juestion  is  whether  the  Israelites  asked  for 
the  jewels  and  the  Egyptians  granted  them 
as  a loan  with  reference  to  the  festival  in  the 
wilderness ; or  whether  this  was  regarded  on 
both  sides  as  a moderate  remuneration  for  long 
service,  and  a compensation  for  cniel  wrongs. 
The  word  “spoiling”  (iii.  22)  ought  to  be  re- 
garded as  conclusive  for  the  latter  sense.  The 
Arabic  translator,  Saadia,  uses  the  word  ‘ ‘ gave.” 
The  Syriac  and  theTargum  Onk.  have  the  exact 
equivalent  of  the  Hebrew.  Rosenmuller  says 
truly,  in  Hebrew  the  word  means  simply  “to 
give;”  often  with  the  idea  of  willingness  or 
readiness.  Thus^  too  Knobel,  who  altogether 
rejects  the  notion  of  lending;  and  Kalisch. 
Even  if  the  word  were  taken,  as  it  is  by  some 
distinguished  scholars,  in  the  sense  “lent,” 
it  must  be  remembered  that  the  actual  cause 
which  prevented  the  Egyptians  from  recover- 
ing their  property  was,  that  the  return  of  the 


V.  37—42.] 


EXODUS.  XII. 


299 


rNumb.  37  ^ And  the  children  of  Israel 
journeyed  from  Rameses  to  Succoth, 
about  six  hundred  thousand  on  foot 
that  were  men,  beside  children. 
tHeb.  28  And  ^a  mixed  multitude  went 
miZuU.  up  also  with  them;  and  flocks,  and 
herds,  even  very  much  cattle. 

39  And  they  baked  unleavened 
cakes  of  the  dough  which  they  brought 
forth  out  of  Egypt,  for  it  was  not 
leavened;  because  they  were  thrust 
out  of  Egypt,  and  could  not  tarry, 
neither  had  they  prepared  for  them- 
selves any  victual. 

40  ^ Now  the  sojourning  of  the 


children  of  Israel,  who  dwelt  in 
Egypt,  was  four  hundred  and  thirty  Gen.  15. 
years.  ^ Sts  7. 6. 

41  And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  ^7- 
end  of  the  four  hundred  and  thirty 
years,  even  the  selfsame  day  it  came 

to  pass,  that  all  the  hosts  of  the 
Lord  went  out  from  the  land  of 
Egypt. 

42  It  is  ^ a night  to  be  much  ob-  f Heb. 
served  unto  the  Lord  for  bringing 
them  out  from  the  land  of  Egypt : 
this  is  that  night  of  the  Lord  to  be 
observed  of  all  the  children  of  Israel 

in  their  generations. 


Israelites  was  cut  off  by  the  treachery  of 
Pharaoh.  Thus  Ewald,  ‘G.  I.’  ii.  p.  87. 
Ewald  also  accepts  the  application  of  the 
transaction  found  so  commonly  in  the  Fathers, 
who  see  in  it  a figure  of  the  appropriation 
by  the  Israelites  of  Egyptian  rites  and  ceremo- 
nies, and  of  the  truths  thereby  represented. 

The  Departure  of  the  Israelites. 

37.  Rameses]  See  note  on  ch.  i.  ii.  Ra- 
meses was  evidently  the  place  of  general  ren- 
dezvous, well  adapted  for  that  purpose  as 
the  principal  city  of  Goshen.  The  Israelites, 
by  whom  it  had  been  built,  were  probably 
settled  in  considerable  numbers  in  it  and  about 
it.  Pharaoh  with  his  army  and  court  were  at 
that  time  near  the  frontier,  and  Rameses, 
where  a large  garrison  was  kept,  was  pro- 
bably the  place  where  the  last  interview  with 
Moses  occurred.  Under  the  19th  dynasty  the 
Pharaohs  received  foreign  embassies,  trans- 
acted treaties,  and  held  their  court  in  this 
city,  which  was  considerably  enlarged  and 
embellished  by  Rameses  II.  A discussion  on 
the  route  of  the  Israelites  from  Rameses  to 
Sinai  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix  to  this 
book.  The  first  part  of  the  journey  appears 
to  have  followed  the  course  of  the  ancient 
canal.  The  site  of  Succoth  cannot  be  exactly 
determined,  but  it  lay  about  half-way  between 
Rameses  and  Etham.  It  could  not  therefore 
have  been  on  the  road  to  Palestine  which 
ran  north-east  of  the  lake  of  crocodiles  (Birket 
Timseh),  but  to  the  south  of  that  lake  by 
the  road  which  led  by  the  shortest  way  to 
the  edge  of  the  wilderness.  The  frontier  to 
the  east  of  the  road  appears  to  have  been 
covered  in  ancient  times  by  the  so-called 
bitter  lakes,  which  exfended  to  the  Gulf  of 
Suez.  The  name  Succoth  (i.e.  “tents”  or 
“booths”  in  Hebrew),  may  have  been  given 
by  the  Israelites,  but  the  same,  or  a similar 
word,  occurs  in  Egyptian  in  connection  with 


the  district.  Thus  in  De  Rouge,  ‘ Recher- 
ches,’  p.  50,  we  find  an  officer  of  state  in 
possession  of  a domain  called  Sechet,  or  So- 
chot,  in  the  time  of  Chufu.  That  domain  was 
certainly  in  lower  Egypt,  and  probably  at  no 
great  distance  from  Memphis. 

600,000]  This  includes  all  the  males  who 
could  mar^h.  The  total  number  of  the  Is- 
raelites should  therefore  be  calculated  not  from 
the  men  above  twenty  years  old,  but  from  the 
males  above  twelve  or  fourteen,  and  would 
therefore  amount  to  somewhat  more  than  two 
millions.  This  is  not  an  excessive  population 
for  Goshen,  nor  does  it  exceed  a reasonable 
estimate  of  the  increase  of  the  Israelites,  in- 
cluding their  numerous  dependents.  See 
Payne  Smith’s  ‘ Bampton  Lectures,’  1869, 
L.  III.  p.  88.  The  number  600,000  is  con- 
firmed by  many  distinct  statements  and  details, 
and  is  accepted  by  Ewald  and  other  critics. 

38.  a mixed  multitude]  They  consisted 
probably  of  remains  of  the  old  Semitic  popu- 
lation, whether  or  not  first'  brought  into  the 
district  by  the  Hyksos  is  uncertain.  As 
natural  objects  of  suspicion  and  dislike  to  the 
Egyptians  who  had  lately  become  masters  of 
the  country,  they  would  be  anxious  to  escape, 
the  more  especially  after  the  calamities  which 
preceded  the  Exodus. 

n-iery  much  cattle]  This  is  an  important  fact, 
both  as  shewing  that  the  oppression  of  the 
Israelites  had  not  extended  to  confiscation  of 
their  property,  and  as  bearing  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  their  maintenance  in  the  Wilderness. 

40.  'vjho  dwelt]  Read,  which  they  so- 
journed. The  obvious  intention  of  Moses 
is  to  state  the  duration  of  the  sojourn  in 
Egypt.  On  the  interpretation  and  chrono- 
logy see  note  below. , 

41.  At  the  end  of  this  verse  the  LXX. 
add  “ by  night.” 


300 


EXODUS.  XIL 


[v.  43—5 


43  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto 
Moses  and  Aaron,  This  is  the  ordi- 
nance of  the  passover:  There  shall 
no  stranger  eat  thereof : 

44  But  every  man’s  servant  that 
is  bought  for  money,  when  thou  hast 
circumcised  him,  then  shall  he  eat 
thereof. 

45  A foreigner  and  an  hired  ser- 
vant shall  not  eat  thereof. 

• Numb.  house  shall  it  be  eaten  ; 

thou  shalt  not  carry  forth  ought  of 
the  flesh  abroad  out  of  the  house  j 
-6  John  19.  -^^neither  shall  ye  break  a bone  thereof. 

47  All  the  congregation  of  Israel 
t Heb.  shall  ^ keep  it. 

48  And  when  a stranger  shall  so- 


journ with  thee,  and  will  keep  the 
passover  to  the  Lord,  let  all  his 
males  be  circumcised,  and  then  let 
him  come  near  and  keep  it;  and  he 
shall  be  as  one  that  is  born  in  the 
land : for  no  uncircumcised  person 
shall  eat  thereof. 

49  One  law  shall  be  to  him  that 
is  homeborn,  and  unto  the  stranger, 
that  sojourneth  among  you. 

50  Thus  did  all  the  children  of 
Israel ; as  the  Lord  commanded  Mo- 
ses and  Aaron,  so  did  they. 

51  And  it  came  to  pass  the  self- 
same day,  that  the  Lord  did  bring 
the  children  of  Israel  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt  by  their  armies. 


43.  And  the  Lord  said'\  The  following 
passage,  from  this  verse  to  v.  16  of  the  next 
chapter,  contains  additional  instructions  re- 
garding the  Passover.  Such  instructions  were 
needed  when  the  Israelites  were  j'oined  by  the 
“mixed  multitudes”  of  strangers;  and  they 
were  probably  given  at  Succoth,  on  the  morn- 
ing following  the  departure  from  Rameses. 
I'he  antiquity  of  this  section  is  admitted  by 
critics  of  all  schools.  The  first  point  which 
required  to  be  determined  was  the  condition 
of  participation  in  the  rite;  it  is  simple  and 
complete.  No  one  was  to  be  admitted  without 
being  circumcised:  all  were  to  be  admitted 
who  were  qualified  by  that  rite. 

no  stranger]  lit.  “ son  of  a stranger.”  The 
term  is  general;  it  includes  all  who  were 
aliens  from  Israel,  until  they  were  incorpo- 
rated into  the  nation  by  circumcision.  The 
Arabic  translator  is  probably  right  in  using 
a word  which  involves  the  idea  of  persistence 
in  a false  religion;  the  Targum  goes  farther, 
and  takes  a word  which  means  apostate, 

44.  sera'ant]  or  “ slave.”  It  seems  better 
to  retain  the  word  “servant,”  for  although 
the  servant  was,  strictly  speaking,  a slave, 
being  the  property  of  his  master,  his  condi- 
tion differed  very  widely  from  that  of  a slave 
in  heathen  countries,  or  those  Christian  na- 
tions wherein  slavery  is  legalized.  The  circum- 
cision of  the  slave,  thus  enj’oined  formally  on 
the  first  day  that  Israel  became  a nation,  in 
accordance  with  the  law  given  to  Abraham 
Gen.  xvii.  12,  made  him  a true  member  of  the 
family,  equally  entitled  to  all  religious  privi- 


leges. In  the  household  of  a priest  the  slave 
was  even  permitted  to  eat  the  consecrated 
food:  Lev.  xxii.  11. 

45.  A foreigner]  or  sojourner.  The 
Hebrew  means  one  who  resides  in  a country, 
not  having  a permanent  home,  nor  being  at- 
tached to  an  Israelitish  household.  A differ- 
ent word  is  used  -z;.  43. 

46,  In  one  house]  The  Targum  renders 
this  “in  one  company,”  a translation  which, 
though  not  literal,  expresses  the  true  meaning 
of  the  injunction.  Each  lamb  was  to  be 
entirely  consumed  by  the  members  of  one 
company,  whether  they  belonged  to  the  same 
household  or  not. 

break  a bone]  The  typical  significance  of 
this  injunction  is  recognized  by  St  John;  see 
marginal  reference.  It  is  not  easy  to  assign 
any  other  satisfactory  reason  for  it.  This 
victim  alone  was  exempt  from  the  general 
law  by  which  the  limbs  were  ordered  to  be 
separated  from  the  body. 

48,  ^Lvhen  a stranger  shall  sojouni]  or 
“ when  a stranger  shall  settle  with  thee.” 
It  is  not  easy  to  express  in  English  the  exact 
meaning  of  these  words.  The  sojourner  and 
the  hired  servant  did  not  come  under  the  defi- 
nition of  a permanent  settler.  When  circum- 
cised any  foreigner  became  one  of  the  chosen 
race. 

50.  Thus  did^  &e.]  This  verse  and  the  fol- 
lowing apply  apparently  to  the  stay  of  the 
people  at  Succoth,  where  they  may  have 
remained  a short  time,  completing  their  pre- 
paration for  final  departure  from  Egypt. 


301 


EXODUS.  XIL 


NOTES  on 

4.  The  variations  in  translating  this  verse 
do  not  affect  the  general  sense,  but  indicate 
some  difficulty  in  the  construction.  “ Each 
man  according  to  his  eating”  is  understood 
by  the  V ulg.  to  mean  the  number  which  may 
be  sufficient  to  consume  the  Iamb  : but  the 
evident  sense  is  that  the  head  of  the  family 
must  judge  what  quantity  each  person  will 
probably  consume,  a quantity  varying  of 
course  according  to  age,  strength,  and  other 
circumstances.  The  Hebrew  root  DD3,  with 
its  derivatives,  does  not  occur  in  any  book 
but  the  Pentateuch,  and  with  one  exception, 
Num.  xxxi.,  only  in  connection  with  this 
special  transaction,  nor  is  it  found  in  any  of 
the  Semitic  languages.  It  is  evidently  archaic, 
unknown  to  later  Hebrews  except  from  this 
book.  Gesenius  points  out  the  analogy  with 
other  roots  with  the  same  or  similar  initials, 
and  Fuerst  compares  the  Sanscrit  cas^  kshi, 
which  however  differ,  having,  as  well  as  the 
Egyptian  kesha^  the  sense  of  cutting,  wound- 
ing, &c. 

8.  Hebrew  JTlVD ; derived  by  Gesenius 
from  fi’D,  “cum  voluptate  hausit,  gustavit.” 
Brugsch,  ‘ D.  H.’  s.  v.,  suggests  an  Egyptian 
etymology.  The  cakes  offered  at  the  festival 
of  the  New  Year  to  Osiris  were  called  mest^ 
or  It  is  possible  that  the  word  was 

commonly  used  while  the  Israelites  were  ki 
Egypt  to  denote  sweet,  or  unleavened,  cakes 
used  exclusively  for  sacred  purposes.  Knobel 
and  Keil  agree  in  referring  maz-zoth  to  a word 
extant  in  Arabic,  in  the  sense  “pure:”  but  that 
sense  is  secondary  and  probably  not  ancient; 
the  root  has  the  meaning  assigned  above  to 
At  the  end  of  this  verse  the  LXX. 
and  Vulg.  omit  “it”  after  “eat.”  This  gives 
a preferable  construction  to  that  of  our  A.V.; 
and  the  authority  of  the  LXX.,  always  high 
in  the  Pentateuch,  is  especially  so  in  this  book. 

40.  The  rendering  of  the  Authorised  Ver- 
sion, “who  dwelt,”  is  peculiar.  It  has  no 
support  in  the  Ancient  Versions:  (the  LXX. 
have  fjv  KarcoKTja-av'^  the  Vulg.  qua  manse- 
runt;  thus  also  the  Arabic,  Syriac,  Chaldee 
and  Samaritan;)  nor  does  it  appear  to  be 
adopted  by  any  modern  commentator.  In 
fact  the  mention  of  the  sojourning  without 
reference  to  its  duration  would  be  beside  the 
mind  of  the  writer.  If  the  Hebrew  text  be 
taken  as  it  stands,  it  fixes  that  duration  to  430 
years;  and  this  is  accepted  by  the  majority  of 
critics  of  all  schools.  It  agrees  substantially 
with  Genesis  xv.  13,  14,  when  the  announce- 
ment was  first  made  to  Abraham,  “know  of  a 
surety  that  thy  seed  shall  be  a stranger  in  a 
land  that  is  not  theirs,  and  shall  serve  them ; 
and  they  shall  afflict  them  four  hundred  years; 
and  also  that  nation,  whom  they  shall  serve, 
will  I judge:  and  afterwards  shall  they  come 
out  with  great  substance.”  The  expressions 
here  used  apply  to  Egypt  and  not  to  Canaan, 


vv.  4,  8,  40. 

in  which  the  Patriarchs  were  certainly  not 
made  to  serve.  The  additional  statement  in 
v.  16  of  the  same  chapter  “in  the  fourth  gene- 
ration they  shall  come  hither  again”  pre- 
sents some  difficulty ; it  is  however  probably 
identical  in  sense  with  the  preceding  one, 
referring  to  the  time  during  which  the  people 
would  serve  in  a strange  land;  the  term  gene- 
ration is  understood  by  Gesenius  and  other 
Hebrew  scholars  to  be  equivalent  to  a cen- 
tury. 

The  correctness  of  the  Hebrew  text  has 
however  been  questioned.  The  LXX.  ac- 
cording to  the  Vatican  codex  inserts  after 
Egypt,  “and  in  the  land  of  Canaan:”  or  ac- 
cording to  the  Alexandrian  codex  and  Coptic 
Version,  ed.  De  Lagarde,  “which  they  and 
their  fathers  dwelt  in  the  land  of  Egypt  and 
the  land  of  Canaan.”  The  Samaritan  Penta- 
teuch has  “which  they  dwelt  in  the  land  of 
Canaan  and  the  land  of  Egypt.”  This  is 
supposed  by  some  to  represent  a various 
reading  in  the  original : but  the  authority  of 
both  witnesses  is  impaired  by  the  variations 
which  indicate  an  intention  to  meet  a diffi- 
culty, and  by  the  fact  that  the  most  ancient 
Greek  codices  omit  the  words  altogether  and 
agree  with  the  Hebrew  text.  For  this  we 
have  the  evidence  of  Theophilus  Ant.  who 
states  twice,  ‘ad  Aut.’  iii.  § 9 and  24,  that 
the  Israelites  sojourned  430  years  in  Egypt: 
the  Samaritan  text  and  that  of  one  late  Hebrew 
MS.  which  agrees  with  it  are  suspected  of 
interpolation.  Scholars  at  present  generally 
accept  the  Hebrew  as  genuine,  differing  only 
in  the  interpretation. 

. There  can  be  no  doubt  that  at  an  early 
time  the  Jews  felt  the  difficulty  of  reconciling 
this  statement  with  the  genealogies,  which 
they  held  to  be  complete.  If  Levi  were  the 
grandfather  of  Moses  on  the  mother’s  side 
through  Jochebed,  and  separated  only  by  two 
descents  on  the  father’s,  through  Kohath  and 
Amram,  it  is  clear  that  a space  of  430  years 
could  not  be  accounted  for.  Levi  was  past 
middle  age  when  he  went  into  Egypt;  Moses 
was  born  80  years  before  the  Exodus.  The 
difficulty  however  appears  to  be  insuperable 
even  on  the  hypothesis  that  430  years  in- 
cluded the  whole  interval  between  Abraham 
and  the  Exodus.  Isaac  was  born  25  years 
after  Abraham’s  arrival  in  Canaan,  Jacob  was 
born  in  Isaac’s  60th  year,  and  was  130  years 
old  when  he  entered  Egypt.  This  accounts 
for  215  years,  leaving  215  for  the  sojourn. 
But  in  order  to  make  out  215  years  it  is 
necessary  to  assume  that  Levi  was  95  years 
old  when  Jochebed  was  born,  and  that  Joche- 
bed was  85  years  old  when  she  became 
mother  of  Moses.  This  is  said  by  a com- 
mentator of  great  weight  not  to  be  im- 
probable; but  it  involves  two  miracles,  for 
which  there  is  no  authority  in  Scripture. 


302 


EXODUS.  XIII. 


[''•  1—3- 


In  the  later  Targum  on  Exodus  ii.  i a rab- 
binical tradition  is  recorded  that  Jochebed 
was  miraculously  restored  to  youth  at  the 
age  of  130  years.  But  even  these  assumptions 
would  not  remove  the  objection,  that  the 
m.ale  descendants  of  Kohath  (the  grandfather 
of  Moses  on  this  hypothesis)  amounted  to 
8600  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus;  see  Num.  iii. 
28.  The  Kohathites  were  then  divided  into 
four  families,  each  of  which  must  have  num- 
bered, including  females,  about  4300,  when 
Moses  was  80  years  of  age.  Whether  the 
longer  or  shorter  period  be  adopted  it  is 
equally  necessary  either  to  assume  a succes- 
sion of  miracles,  or  to  admit  that  an  indefi- 
nite number  of  links  in  the  genealogies  are 
omitted;  a fact  for  which  we  have  positive 
evidence  in  the  most  important  of  all  genealo- 
gies, that  of  our  Lord,  and  in  that  of  Ezra, 
which  therefore  there  can  be  no  irreverence 
in  assuming  in  a case  when  it  clears  up 
every  difliculty  in  the  narrative. 

The  Jewish  tradition  is  assumed  to  be  in 
favour  of  215  years;  this  may  be  true  in  re- 
ference to  the  later  Rabbis : but  it  is  far  from 
being  uniform.  Josephus  adopts  it  in  one 
passage,  ‘Ant.’  ii.  15.  2,  but  in  others  he 
distinctly  asserts  that  the  period  of  affliction 
in  Egypt  after  the  death  of  Joseph  lasted  400 
years;  see  ‘ Ant.’  11.  9.  i and  ‘ B.  J.’  v.  9.  4. 
The  evidence  is  worth  little,  being  self-con- 
tradictory, but  it  shews  that  both  opinions 
were  held  at  his  time.  In  the  New  Testa- 
ment St  Stephen’s  speech.  Acts  vii.  6,  recog- 


nizes 400  years  as  the  period  when  the  seed  of 
Abraham  should  be  in  bondage  and  evil  en- 
treated, terms  which  could  only  apply  to 
Egypt.  St  Paul  however  seems  to  support 
the  other  view,  Gal.  iii.  17,  when  he  says  that 
the  law  was  given  430  years  after  Abraham: 
but  the  period  accepted  generally  by  the  Jews 
in  his  time  sufficed  for  his  purpose,  and  a 
discussion  upon  a point  which  did  not  affect 
his  argument  would  have  been  out  of  place. 

It  may  be  possible  to  reconcile  the  num- 
ber of  the  Israelites  at  the  time  of  the  Exo- 
dus with  the  shorter  period;  but  it  certainly 
is  far  more  probable  if  we  accept  without  any 
reserve  the  statement  of  Moses  in  this  pas- 
sage, made  as  it  is  in  the  most  formal  and 
precise  terms,  with  the  express  purpose  of 
fixing  the  length  of  the  sojourn  permanently 
upon  the  national  mind. 

The  determination  of  the  date  of  the  Ex- 
odus rests  mainly  upon  the  statement  in 
I K.  vi.  I,  that  480  years  elapsed  between  the 
fourth  year  of  Solomon  and  the  time  when 
the  children  of  Israel  came  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt.  That  date  is  supported  by  all  the 
ancient  versions  (the  slight  deviation  in  the 
LXX.,  440  for  480,  being  accounted  for  by 
Winer  and  Thenius  in  loc.  as  a lapsus  calami, 
D = 4o  for  D = 8o),  it  is  accepted  by  able 
critics,  and  it  appears  to  the  writer  of  this 
note  to  accord  best  with  the  indications 
o£  time  in  the  historical  books ; but  the  sub- 
ject belongs  properly  to  the  commentatary  on 
Kings. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

I The  firstborn  are  sanctified  to  God.  3 The 
memorial  ofi  the pas507!Cr  is  commanded.  1 1 
The  firstlings  of  beasts  are  set  apart.  17  The 
Israelites  go  out  of  Egypt,  and  carry  JoseplC s 
bones  7vith  them.  20  They  come  to  Etham. 
2 1 God  guideth  them  by  a pillar  of  a cloud, 
and  a pillar  of  fire. 


A 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 


2 " Sanctify  unto  me  all  the  first- 
born,  whatsoever  openeth  the  womb  & 34-  19* 
among  the  children  of  Israel,  both  of  Numb^X  ’ 
man  and  of  beast : it  is  mine. 

3 ^ And  Moses  said  unto  the  peo-  Luke  2;  33. 
pie.  Remember  this  day,  in  which 

ye  came  out  from  Egypt,  out  of  the 
house  of  ^ bondage  ; for  by  strength  1 Heb. 
of  hand  the  Lord  brought  you  out 


Chap.  XIII.  The  instructions  in  the  first 
part  of  this  chapter  are  not  necessarily  con- 
nected with  the  rest  of  the  narrative,  and 
there  may  have  been  special  reasons  for  add- 
ing some  of  them,  together  with  the  grounds 
for  their  observance,  when  the  people  were 
preparing  for  the  invasion  of  Palestine.  This 
might  have  been  before  the  beginning  of  their 
long  wandering  in  the  wilderness  of  Tih,  at 
tlie  same  time  when  Moses  sent  the  spies  to 
explore  (lanaan.  Whether  written  later  or 
.not,  this  si'ction  contains  much  which  must 
have  been  orally  given  at  the  first  celebration 
of  the  Passover. 

2.  Sanctify  unto  me']  The  command  is 
addressed  to  Moses.  It  was  to  declare  the 


will  of  God  that  all  firstborn  were  to  be 
consecrated  to  him,  set  apart  from  all  other 
creatures.  The  command  is  expressly  based 
upon  the  Passover.  The  firstborn  exempt 
from  the  destruction  became  in  a new  and 
special  sense  the  exclusive  property  of  the 
Lord:  the  firstborn  of  man  as  His  ministers, 
the  firstborn  of  cattle  as  victims.  In  lieu  of 
the  firstborn  of  men  the  Levites  were  devoted 
to  the  temple  services.  The  consecration  of 
all  firstborn  is  admitted  to  be  peculiar  to  the 
Hebrews;  nor  can  any  satisfactory  reason  for 
such  a law  be  assigned  by  those  who  nffuse 
to  accept  the  Scriptural  statement,  which  they 
admit  to  be  explicit.  Knobel  refutes  the  the- 
ories of  other  writers. 


V.  4— I3-J 


EXODUS.  XIII. 


303 


from  this  place:  there. shall  no  leaven- 
ed bread  be  eaten. 

4 This  day  came  ye  out  in  the 
month  Abib. 

5 ^ And  it  shall  be  when  the  Lord 
shall  bring  thee  into  the  land  of  the 
Canaanites,  and  the  Hittites,  and  the 
Amorites,  and  the  Hivites,  and  the 
Jebusites,  which  he  sware  unto  thy 
fathers  to  give  thee,  a land  flowing 
with  milk  and  honey,  that  thou  shalt 
keep  this'service  in  this  month. 

6 Seven  days  thou  shalt  eat  un- 
leavened bread,  and  in  the  seventh 
day  shall  be  a feast  to  the  Lord. 

7 Unleavened  bread  shall  be  eaten 
seven  days;  and  there  shall  no  lea- 
vened bread  be  seen  with  thee,  nei- 
ther shall  there  be  leaven  seen  with 
thee  in  all  thy  quarters. 

8 ^1  And  thou  shalt  shew  thy  son 
in  that  day,  saying.  This  is  done  be- 
cause of  that  which  the  Lord  did 


unto  me  when  I came  forth  out  of 
Egypt. 

9 And  it  shall  be  for  a sign  unto 
thee  upon  thine  hand,  and  for  a 
memorial  between  thine  eyes,  that 
the  Lord’s  law  may  be  in  thy  mouth : 
for  with  a strong  hand  hath  the  Lord 
brought  thee  out  of  Egypt. 

10  Thou  shalt  therefore  keep  this 
ordinance  in  his  season  from  year  to 
year. 

11  And  it  shall  be  when  the 
Lord  shall  bring  thee  into  the  land 
of  the  Canaanites,  as  he  sware  unto 
thee  and  to  thy  fathers,  and  shall 
give  it  thee, 

12  ‘^That  thou  shalt  Uet  apart  ^ chap.  22. 
unto  the  Lord  all  that  openeth  the 
matrix,  and  every  firstling  that  com-  44- 
eth  of  a beast  which  thou  hast ; the  t Heb. 
males  shall  be  the  Lord’s.  ^pass\!ver. 

13  And  every  firstling  of  an  ass 

thou  shalt  redeem  with  a lamb ; and  11  Or,  kid. 


4.  Abib'\  It  is  uncertain  whether  this 
name  was  ancient  or  given  then  for  the  first 
time.  It  is  found  only  in  the  Pentateuch, 
twice  in  the  sense  of  young  wheat,  six  times 
as  the  name  of  the  first  month.  The  two 
former  instances  leave  little  doubt  as  to  the 
etymology,  viz.  the  month  when  the  wheat 
began  to  ripen.  Thus  the  LXX.,  Targ.  and 
Saadia.  In  Arabic  abbon  means  green  herbs. 
The  name  resembles  the  Egyptian  Epiphi, 
April,  and  may  possibly  have  been  derived 
from  it ; that  name  is  ancient.  See  Brugsch, 
‘ H.  E.’  p.  162. 

5.  the  Canaanites]  Five  nations  only 
are  named  in  this  passage,  whereas  six  are 
named  in  iii.  8,  and  ten  in  the  original  pro- 
mise to  Abraham,  Gen.  XV.  19 — 31.  The  LXX. 
add  the  Perizzites  and  Girgashites,  probably 
on  MSS.  authority.  The  first  word  Canaan- 
ite  is  generic,  and  includes  all  the  Hamite 
races  of  Palestine. 

9.  And  it  shall  be  for  a sign  unto  thee.,  &c.] 
Hebrew  writers  have  generally  regarded  this 
as  a formal  injunction  to  write  the  precepts 
on  slips  of  parchment,  and  to  fasten  them 
on  the  wrists  and  forehead;  but  other  com- 
mentators are  generally  agreed  that  it  is 
to  be  understood  metaphorically.  The  words 
appear  to  be  put  into  the  mouths  of  the 
parents.  They  were  to  keep  all  the  facts  of 
the  passover  constantly  in  mind,  and,  referring 
to  a custom  prevalent  ages  before  Moses  in 
EgypL,  to  have  them  present  as  though  they 
were  inscribed  on  papyrus  or  parchment 


fastened  on  the  wrists,  or  on  the  face  between 
the  eyes.  It  is  improbable  that  Moses  should 
have  adopted  that  custom,  which  was  scarcely 
separable  from  the  Egyptian  superstition  of 
amulets;  but  modern  Israelites  generally  al- 
lege this  precept  as  a justification  for  the  use 
of  phylacteries.  Moses  states  distinctly  the 
object  of  the  precept,  which  was  that  the  law 
of  Jehovah  should  be  in  their  mouth:  see 
•v.  16.  The  expression  may  have  been  pro- 
verbial in  the  time  of  Moses,  as  it  certainly  was 
at  a later  period;  see  Proverbs  vi.  20 — 22,  vii. 
3,  where  the  metaphorical  sense  is  not  ques- 
tioned. Jerome  gives  a clear  and  rational 
interpretation  in  his  commentary  on  Matthew 
xxiii.  5,  “ Prsecepta  mea  sint  in  manu  tua, 
ut  opere  compleantur,  sint  ante  oculos  tuos 
ut  nocte  et  die  mediteris  in  illis.” 

12.  thou  shalt  set  apart]  lit.  as  in  the 
margin  “cause  to  pass  over,”  but  the  sense 
is  correctly  expressed  in  the  text,  which  follows 
the  Old  Versions,  and  is  preferable  to  the 
marginal  rendering,  which  suggests  a refer- 
ence to  the  word  “ Passover.” 

13.  an  ass]  The  reason  of  the  injunction 
is  evidently  that  the  ass  could  not  be  offered 
in  sacrifice,  being  an  unclean  animal : possibly 
the  only  unclean  animal  domesticated  among 
the  Israelites  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus. 
The  principle  of  the  law  being  obvious,  it 
was  extended  to  the  horse  and  camel,  and 
generally  to  every  unclean  beast;  see  Num. 
xviii.  15.  The  mention  of  the  ass  only  would 
scarcely  have  occurred  to  an  Israelite  of  a 


304 


EXODUS.  XIII. 


[v.  14—19- 


if  thou  wilt  not  redeem  it,  then  thou 
shalt  break  his  neck ; and  all  the  first- 
born of  man  among  thy  children  shalt 
thou  redeem. 

14  ^ And  it  shall  be  when  thy  son 

i Heb.  asketh  thee  ^ in  time  to  come,  saying, 
tomorrow,  shalt  say 

unto  him.  By  strength  of  hand  the 
Lord  brought  us  out  from  Egypt,  from 
the  house  of  bondage : 

15  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Pha- 
raoh would  hardly  let  us  go,  that 
the  Lord  slew  all  the  firstborn  in 
the  land  of  Egypt,  both  the  firstborn 
of  man,  and  • the  firstborn  of  beast : 
therefore  I sacrifice  to  the  Lord  all 
that  openeth  the  matrix,  being  males ; 
but  all  the  firstborn  of  my  children  I 
redeem. 

16  And  it  shall  be  for  a token 


upon  thine  hand,  and  for  frontlets 
between  thine  eyes:  for  by  strength 
of  hand  the  Lord  brought  us  forth 
out  of  Egypt. 

17  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
Pharaoh  had  let  the  people  go,  that 
God  led  them  not  through  the  way  of 
the  land  of  the  Philistines,  although 
that  was  near;  for  God  said.  Lest 
peradventure  the  people  repent  when 
they  see  war,  and  they  return  to 
Egypt : 

18  But  God  led  the  people  about, 
through  the  way  of  the  wilderness  of 
the  Red  sea : and  the  children  of  Is- 
rael went  up  “ harnessed  out  of  the « Or, 
land  of  Egypt. 

19  And  Moses  took  the  bones  of 
Joseph  with  him:  for  he  had  straitly 
sworn  the  children  of  Israel,  saying. 


later  age.  It  has  been  observed  that  the  ass 
was  held  by  the  Egyptians  to  be  typhonic, 
i.  e.  in  a peculiar  sense  unclean : but  that  feeling 
appears  to  belong  to  a comparatively  later 
period;  in  early  monuments  the  ass  is  fre- 
quently represented,  and  in  the  ‘Ritual,’  c.40, 
it  is  even  a type  of  Osiris. 

thou  shalt  redeem\  The  lamb,  or  sheep, 
was  given  to  the  priest  for  the  service  of  the 
sanctuary. 

firstborn  of  man\  The  price  of  redemption 
was  fixed  at  five  shekels  of  the  sanctuary: 
Num.  iii.  47,  where  see  note. 

16.  it  shall  b/\  This  passage  confirms  the 
interpretation  given  above  on  -i;.  9. 

17 — 19.  These  verses  do  not  appear  to 
be  a continuation  of  the  narrative,  which  is 
resumed  at  v.  20.  It  is  not  improbable  that 
some  short  time  was  passed  at  Succoth,  and 
that  Moses  then  gave  final  injunctions  touch- 
ing the  celebration  of  the  Passover,  and  re- 
ceived general  instructions  as  to  the  ultimate 
direction  of  the  journey.  Succoth  may  very 
probably  have  been  the  head-quarters  of  the 
f lebrews  in  Goshen.  The  name  in  Hebrew 
indicates  an  assemblage  of  booths,  or  moveable 
huts  (see  ch.  xii.  37),  such  as  were  probably 
used  by  the  Israelites,  ever  mindful  of  their 
condition  as  sojourners  in  a strange  land:  the 
notice  in  2.’.  19  naturally  leaves  the  impression 
that  the  bones  of  Joseph  were  kept  there,  of 
course  in  the  charge  of  his  own  descendants. 

17.  the  ctwy  of  the  land  of  the  Philistines'] 
The  occupancy  of  southern  Palestine  by  the 
Philistines,  at  a mucli  earlier  period  than  is 
assigned  by  any  critics  to  the  Jfxodus,  is 
attested  by  the  narrative  in  Genesis  xxvi.  i. 


It  has  lately  been  questioned  on  the  ground 
that  the  inhabitants  of  Ascalon,  when  it 
was  captured  by  Rameses  II.  did  not  wear 
the  well-known  costume  of  the  Philistines, 
but  that  of  the  ancient  Canaanites,  and  that 
the  name  Pulisha,  i.e.  Philisfines,  occurs  first 
in  monuments  of  the  time  of  Rameses  III. 
Brugsch,  ‘Geog.  Ins.’  ii.  p.  86.  The  objection 
is  answered  in  the  Appendix  at  the  end  of 
the  volume:  here  it  may  sufiice  to  notice  that 
the  persons  represented  on  the  monuments  of 
Rameses  II.  were  probably  Israelites;  for  they 
actually  took  possession  of  the  cities  of  the 
Philistines,  who  did  not  recover  the  territory 
until  a considerable  time  had  elapsed  after  tlie 
death  of  Joshua.  The  warlike  character  of 
the  Philistines  is  equally  conspicuous  in  the 
Egyptian  and  Hebrew  records. 

18.  harnessed]  This  interpretation  of  the 
Hebrew  word  rests  on  the  authority  of  some 
ancient  versions,  and  a possible  etymology  is 
suggested  by  Rabbinical  writers.  It  seems, 
however,  more  probable  that  the  meaning  is 
marshalled  or  in  orderly  array.  See  note  below. 
The  objection  (grounded  on  the  rendering  in 
our  version)  that  the  Israelites  were  not  likely 
to  have  been  armed  is  unreasonable.  There  is 
not  the  least  indication  that  they  were  disarmed 
by  the  Egyptians,  and  as  occupying  a frontier 
district  frequently  assailed  by  the  nomads  of  the 
desert  they  would  of  necessity  be  accustomed 
to  the  use  of  arms.  The  fear  expressed  by 
Pharaoh  (see  ch.  i.  10)  that  they  might  at  any 
time  join  the  invaders  and  fight  against  Egypt 
was  t!ie  avowed  and  doubtless  the  true  motive 
for  the  crafty  measures  by  which  he  hoped  to 
subdue  their  spirit  and  prevent  their  increase. 


V.  20 2 2.] 


EXODUS,  xrn. 


305 


'’Gen.  50.  ^-00(1  will  suFcIy  visit  you;  and  ye 
Josh.  24.  shall  carry  up  my  bones  away  hence 
^"^Numb.  with  you. 

'Numb  ^ And  ^ they  took  their  journey 

DeuY'i  Succoth,  and  encamped  in  E- 

33.  ’ ’ tham,  in  the  edge  of  the  wilderness, 
fcorio'^’  21  And  ^the  Lord  went  before 


them  by  day  in  a pillar  of  a cloud,  to 
lead  them  the  way;  and  by  night  in 
a pillar  of  fire,  to  give  them  light ; to 
go  by  day  and  night: 

22  He  took  not  away  the  pillar  of 
the  cloud  by  day,  -''^nor  the  pillar 
fire  by  night,  yr<?/7z  before  the  people. 


20.  Ethani\  The  Egyptian  notices  of 
Etham  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix  at  the  end 
of  this  volume.  The  most  probable  result  of 
those  notices  is  that  Etham,  which  means  the 
house  or  sanctuary  of  Turn  (the  Sun  God 
worshipped  specially  by  that  name  in  lower 
ILgypt),  was  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  Hero- 
opolis,  called  by  the  Egyptians  the  fortress  of 
Zar,  or  Zalu  (/.  e.  of  foreigners) ; the  frontier 
city  where  the  Pharaohs  of  the  1 8th  dynasty 
reviewed  their  forces  when  about  to  enter  upon 
a campaign  on  Syria.  The  name  Pithom  has 
precisely  the  same  meaning  with  Etham,  and 
may  possibly  be  identified  with  it.  It  was 
at  this  point  that  the  Bedouins  of  the  adjoin- 
ing wilderness  came  into  contact  with  the 
Egyptians.  Under  the  19th  dynasty  we  find 
them  applying  in  a time  of  famine  for  admis- 
sion to  the  fertile  district  commanded  by  the 
fortress  called  the  sanctuary  of  Turn. 

21.  pillar  of  cloud']  The  Lord  Himself 
did  for  the  Israelites  by  preternatural  means 
that  which  armies  were  obliged  to  do  for 
themselves  by  natural  agents.  Passages  are 
quoted  from  classical  writers  which  shew 
that  the  Persians  and  Greeks  used  fire  and 


smoke  as  signals  in  their  marches.  Cuitius 
describes  the  practice  of  Alexander,  who  gave 
the  signal  for  departure  by  a fire  on  a tall 
pole  over  his  tent,  and  says,  observabatur 
ignis  noctu  fumus  interdiu.  Vcgetius  and 
Frontinus  mention  it  as  a general  custom, 
especially  among  the  Arabians.  The  success 
of  some  important  e.^pcditions,  as  of  Thrasybu- 
lus  and  Timoleon,  was  attributed  by  popular 
superstition  to  a divine  light  guiding  the  lead- 
ers. To  these  well-known  instances  may  be 
added  two  of  peculiar  interest,  as  bearing 
witness  to  a custom  known  to  all  the  contem- 
poraries of  Moses.  In  an  inscription  of  the 
Ancient  Empire  an  Egyptian  general  is  com- 
pared to  “a  flame  streaming  in  advance  of 
an  ai-my.”  (See  Chabas  ‘V.  E.’  p.  54;  the 
inscription  is  in  the  Denkmasler,  ii,  pi.  150, 
2).  Thus  too  in  a wellknown  papyrus, 
(Anast.  i)  the  commander  of  an  expedition 
is  called  ‘ ‘ A flame  in  the  darkness  at  the  head 
of  his  soldiers.”  By  this  sign  then  of  the 
pillar  of  cloud,  the  Lord  shewed  Himself  as 
their  leader  and  general.  “The  Lord  is  a 
man  of  war  . . . thy  right  hand,  O Lord, 
hath  dashed  in  pieces  the  enemy  ” (xv.). 


NOTE  on  V.  18. 


The  Hebrew  is  rendered  “armati” 

by  the  Vulg.,  I'TITD  by  Onkelos,  i.e.  accincti, 
expediti,  rather  than  armati.  as  it  is  rendered 
in  Walton’s  Polyglott.  This  would  suit  the 
etymology  proposed  by  Abulwalid,  Kimchi, 
and  Tanchum,  and  adopted  by  Kalisch,  viz. 

ilia,  abdomen.  The  sense  however  would 
be  not  “ full-armed,”  but  simply  “with  their 
loins  girded,”  as  men  prepared  for  a journey. 
Thus  in  Joshua  i.  14  it  is  rendered  by 

the  LXX.  The  Arabic  in  Walton  (by  Saadia) 

has  i.e.  instruct!,  marshalled;  and  this 

meaning  is  adopted  by  many  critics,  though 
different  etymologies  are  proposed.  Knobel 
says  that  it  must  signify  assembled,  arranged 
in  orderly  divisions,  in  contradistinction  from 
a disorganised  rabble.  He  derives  it  from 
Arabic  roots,  such  as  &c.  It  seems 

however  preferable  to  take  the  obvious  Hebrew 
etymology  from  i.  e.  five,  probably  con- 
nected with  agmen  instructum,  pr. 

quinquepartiturn,  which  is  pointed  at  by  the 
singular  rendering  of  the  LXX.  “in  the  fifth 
VOL.  i. 


generation.”  Ewald,  ‘ G.  L’ explains.it  “ar- 
ranged in  five  divisions,”  i.e.  van,  centre,  two 
wings  and  rear-guard.  The  promptitude  with 
which  so  vast  a multitude  was  marshalled  and 
led  forth  justifies  admiration,  but  is  not  mar- 
vellous, nor  without  parallels  in  ancient  and 
modem  history  (see  Introduction).  The  Israel- 
ites had  been  prepared  for  departure,  some  pre- 
liminary measures  must  have  been  taken  after 
each  of  the  plagues  when  Pharaoh  had  given  a 
temporary  assent  to  the  request  of  Moses,  see 
viii.  8,  28,  ix.  28,  x.  16,  four  several  occasions 
on  which  notice  must  have  been  given  to  the 
people.  It  must  also  be  borne  in  mind  that 
the  despotism  of  Pharaoh  had  supplied  the 
Israelites  with  native  officers  whom  they  were 
accustomed  to  obey,  and  with  whom  they 
wei-e  united  by  the  bond  of  a common  suffer-  ‘ 
ing  (see  ch.  v.  14—21).  Their  leader  had 
trie  experience  of  an  early  life  at  a warlike 
court,  and  of  long  years  passed  among  the 
fierce  tiloes  of  the  desert.  I'he  nation  more- 
over  has  shewn  in  every  age  a remarkable  talent 
for  prompt  and  systematic  organization. 

U 


3o6 


EXODUS.  XIV. 


[v.  1—3. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


I God  instriicicth  the  Israelites  iti  their  journey. 
5 Pharaoh  pnrsneth  after  them.  10  7 he 
Israelites  juuminr.  \ 3 Moses  comforteth  them. 
1 5 God  instructeth  Moses,  i y The  cloud  re- 
moveth  hehmd  the  camp.  21  The  Israelites 
pass  through  the  Red  sea,  23  which  drowneth 
the  Egyptians. 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 


2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
that  they  turn  .and  encamp  before 

Pi-hahiroth,  between  Migdol  and  the  ‘*Numix 
sea,  over  against  Baal-zephon  : before 
it  shall  ye  encamp  by  the  sea. 

3 For  Pharaoh  will  say  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  They  are  entangled 
in  the  land,  the  wilderness  hath  shut 
them  in. 


The  Passage  ever  the  Red  Sea. 

Chap.  XIV.  2.  That  they  turn\  The  nar- 
rative is  continued  from  ne.  ^o  of  the  preced- 
ing chapter.  The  people  were  then  at  Etham, 
or  Pitnom,  the  frontier  city  towards  the  wil- 
derness : they  are  now  commanded  to  change 
the  direction  of  their  march,  and  to  go  south- 
wards, to  the  west  of  the  Bitter  Lakes,  which 
completely  separated  them  from  the  desert: 
see  note  on  c.  xii,  37. 

Pi-hahiroth']  The  derivation  of  this  name 
is  doubtful.  If  it  is  Semitic,  like  the  two 
other  names  mentioned  in  connection  with  it, 
the  meaning  may  be  “mouth,  or  entrance 
of  the  holes  or  caverns, ” but  it  is  more  pro- 
bably Egyptian,  with  the  common  prefix  Pi, 
i.  e.  hcu.se.  In  an  ancient  papyrus,  we  read  of 
a place  called  Hir,  or  Pe-Hir,  where  there  was 
a large  well,  at  no  great  distance  from  Ra- 
ineses, which  it  supplied  with  garlands.  See 
Chabas,  ‘ Ml-1.  Eig.’  ii.  p.  123.  The  place  is 
generally  identified  with  Ajrud,  a fortress  with 
a very  large  well  of  good  water  (see  Niebuhr, 

‘ Voyage,’  i.  p.  175),  situate  at  the  foot  of  an 
elevation  commanding  the  plain  which  extends 
to  Sue/,,  .at  a distance  of  four  leagues.  The 
journey  from  Etham  might  occupy  two,  or 
even  three  days ; had  however  Etham  been,  as 
many  geographers  suppose,  half-way  between 
Mukfar  and  Ajrud  (see  Robinson’s  ‘ Chart’), 
Pharaoh  could  not  possibly  have  overtaken 
the  Israelites,  whether  his  head-quarters  were 
at  Zoan,  or  even  at  Rameses,  which  was  two 
days'  jouniey  from  Etham. 

MigdoT\  The  word  means  a tower,  or 
fort:  it  is  probably  to  be  identified  with  Bir 
Suweis,  about  two  miles  from  Suez.  The 
water  is  said  by  Niebuhr  to  be  scarcely  drink- 
aide;  according  to  Robinson,  p.  45,  it  is  used 
only  for  cooking  an<l  washing.  This  traveller 
obsei'\'es  justly,  that  if  the  wells  were  in  exist- 
ence at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  they  would 
mark  the  site  of  a town.  Now  M.  Chabas 
has  lately  shewn  that  .Maktal,  or  Magdal, 
an  Egyptian  fort  (which  on  other  grounds  he 
identifies  with  Migdol),  visited  by  Sethos  I.  on 
his  return  from  a campaign  in  Syria,  was  built 
over  a large  well  : sec  ‘ Voyage  d'un  Egypticn,’ 
p.  286.  'Phis  leaves  scarcely  any  room  for 
doubt  as  to  the  locality;  it  is  a point  of  im- 


portance with  reference  to  the  passage  over  the 
sea. 

Baal^z.ephon']  This  appears  to  have  been  the 
name  under  which  the  Phoenicians,  who  had  a 
settlement  in  lower  Egypt  at  a very  ancient  pe- 
riod, worshipped  their  chief  Deity.  The  corre- 
sponding Egyptian  Deity  was  Sutech,  who  is 
often  called  Bal  on  monuments  of  the  19th 
dynasty.  Sethos  I.  gave  a name  closely  con- 
nected with  this  to  a city  in  the  same  neigh- 
bourhood, which  Chabas,  1.  c.,  holds  to  be 
Baal-Zephon.  There  can  be  no  doubt  it  was 
near  Kolsum,  or  Suez.  In  the  time  of  Niebuhr 
there  were  considerable  ruins  close  to  Suez  on 
the  north.  From  the  text  it  is  clear  that  the 
encampment  of  the  Israelites  extended  over  the 
plain  from  Pi-hahiroth : their  head-quarters 
being  between  Bir  Suweis  and  the  sea  opposite 
to  Baal-Zephon.  At  Ajrud  the  road  branches 
off  in  two  directions,  one  leading  to  the  wil- 
derness by  a tract,  now  dry,  but  in  the  time  of 
Moses  probably  impassable,  see  next  note;  the 
other  leading  to  Suez,  which  was  doubtless 
followed  by  the  Israelites. 

3.  They  are  entangled,  &c.]-  The  mean- 
ing evidently  is,  in  that  direction  they  have  no 
egress  from  Egypt : the  latter  part  of  the  verse 
is  generally  rendered  as  in  our  Version,  “the 
wildemess  has  shut  them  in,”  but  the  sense 
would  rather  seem  to  be  “the  wildemess  is 
closed  to  them;”  see  note  below.  The  ori- 
ginal intention  of  Moses  was  to  go  towards 
Palestine  by  the  wilderness:  when  that  pur- 
pose was  changed  by  God’s  direction  and  they 
moved  southwards.  Pharaoh  on  receiving  in- 
formation was  of  course  aware  that  they  were 
completely  shut  in,  since  the  waters  of  the 
Red  Sea  then  extended  to  the  bitter  lakes.  It 
is  known  that  the  Red  Sea  at  some  remote 
period  extended  considerably  further  towards 
the  north  than  it  does  at  present.  In  the 
time  of  Moses  the  water  north  of  Kolsum 
joined  the  bitter  lakes,  though  at  present  the 
constant  accumulation  of  sand  has  covered 
the  intervening  space  to  the  extent  of  8000 
to  10000  yards,  not  however  rising  higher 
than  six  feet  above  the  level  of  the  lakes, 
and  from  40  to  50  feet  below  the  level  of  the 
Red  Sea.  xMr  Malan,  p.  5117,  obseiwes  that 
tht  lake  Timseh,  still  further  north,  is  full  of 


V.  4— II-] 


EXODUS.  XIV. 


307 


4 And  I will  harden  Pharaoh’s 
heart,  that  he  shall  follow  after  them ; 
and  I will  be  honoured  upon  Pharaoh, 
and  upon  all  his  host ; that  the  Egyp- 
tians may  know  that  I am  the  Lord. 
And  they  did  so. 

5 f And  it  was  told  the  king  of 
Egypt  that  the  people  fled:  and  the 
heart  of  Pharaoh  and  of  his  servants 
was  turned  against  the  people,  and 
they  said.  Why  have  we  done  this, 
that  we  have  let  Israel  go  from  serv- 
ing us  ? 

6 And  he  made  ready  his  chariot, 
and  took  his  people  with  him : 

7 And  he  took  six  hundred  chosen 
chariots,  and  all  the  chariots  of  Egypt, 
and  captains  over  every  one  of  them. 


8 And  the  Lord  hardened  the 
heart  of  Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt,  and 
he  pursued  after  the  children  of  Is- 
rael : and  the  children  of  Israel  went 
out  with  an  high  hand. 

9 But  the  “^Egyptians  pursued  after  ^ Josh.  24. 
them,  all  the  horses  and  chariots  offMac.  4. 
Pharaoh,  and  his  horsemen,  and  his  ^ 
army,  and  overtook  them  encamping 

by  the  sea,  beside  Pi-hahiroth,  before 
Baal-zephon. 

10  ^ And  when  Pharaoh  drew  nigh, 
the  children  of  Israel  lifted  up  their 
eyes,  and,  behold,  the  Egyptians, 
marched  after  them ; and  they  were 
sore  afraid  : and  the  children  of  Israel 
cried  out  unto  the  Lord. 

1 1 And  they  said  unto  Moses,  Be- 


the  Saris  or  Shari,  the  arundo  Egyptiaca,  from 
which  the  Red  Sea  takes  its  local  name. 

5.  the  people  fled]  This  was  a natural  in- 
ference from  the  change  of  direction,  which 
could  have  no  object  but  escape  from  Egypt 
by  the  pass  at  Suez.  Up  to  the  time  when 
that  information  reached  Pharaoh  both  he  and 
his  people  understood  that  the  Israelites  would 
return  after  keeping  a festival  in  the  district 
adjoining  Etham.  From  Etham  the  intelli- 
gence would  be  forwarded  by  the  commander 
of  the  garrison  to  Rameses  in  less  than  a day, 
and  the  cav.alry,  a highly  disciplined  force, 
would  of  course  be  ready  for  immediate  de- 
parture. 

7.  SIX  hundred  chosen  chariots]  The 
Egyptian  ai*my  comprised  large  numbers  of 
chariots,  each  drawn  by  two  horses,  with  two 
men,  one  bearing  the  shield  and  driving,  the 
other  fully  armed.  The  horses  were  thorough- 
bred, renowned  for  strength  and  spirit.  Cha- 
riots are  first  represented  on  the  monuments  of 
the  1 8th  dynasty:  they  were  used  by  Amosis 
I.  in  the  expedition  against  the  shepherd  kings, 
by  Thotmes  I.  against  Syria  and  Mesopo- 
tamia: under  Thotmes  III.  we  have  the  re- 
cord of  a battle  at  Megiddo  in  which  897 
war-chariots  were  captur^  from  the  confede- 
rated forces  of  northern  Palestine  and  Syria. 
By  “all  the  chariots  of  Egypt”  we  are  to  un- 
derstand all  that  were  stationed  in  lower  Egypt, 
most  of  them  probably  at  Rameses  and  other 
frontier  garrisons  near  the  head-quarters  of 
Pharaoh.  According  to  Diodorus  Siculus, 
I.  54,  the  Egyptians  had  27000  chariots  in  the 
time  of  Rameses  II. 

captains  o'ver  ensery  one  of  them]  Rather 
captains  over  theVliole  of  them.  Thus 


the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Saadia,  Syr.  The  word 
rendered  captains  (Shalishim,  lit.  third  or 
thirtieth)  is  supposed  by  Roediger,  Ges. 
‘Thes.’  s.  V.,  to  mean  the  warriors  in  the  cha- 
riots, but  the  Egyptians  never  put  more  than 
two  men  in  a chariot.  The  true  meaning 
is  captains  or  commanders.  The  word  may 
represent  an  Egyptian  title.  The  king  had 
about  him  a council  of  thirty,  each  of  whom 
bore  a title  corresponding  to  the  Roman  de- 
cemvir, viz.  Mapu,  a “thirty  man.”  See 
Pleyte,  ‘.^g.  Zeitschrift,’  1866,  p.  12,  and 
Chabas,  ‘ Voyage  d’un  Egyptien.’  The  word 
occurs  frequently  in  the  books  of  Kings.  David 
seems  to  have  organized  the  Shalishim  as  a 
distinct  corps,  see  2 Sam.  xxiii.  8,  where  it  is 
translated,  as  in  this  passage,  captains.  He 
probably  retained  the  old  name,  though  it  is 
possible  that  he  may  have  adopted  the  Egyp- 
tian system,  being  on  friendly  terms  with  the 
contemporai*y  dynasty,  which  gave  a queen  to 
Israel. 

9.  and  his  horsemen]  Horsemen  are  not 
represented  on  Egyptian  monuments,  even  on 
those  of  a later  age,  when  they  were  employed 
in  great  numbers ; the  omission  is  probably 
connected  with  the  strict  regulations  of  Egyp- 
tian art ; but  Diodci'us  Siculus,  whose  autho- 
rity is  not  questioned  on  this  point,  states  that 
Rameses  II.  had  a force  of  24000  cavalry,  in- 
dependent of  the  chariotry  ; Isaiah  makes  the 
same  distinction  between  the  chariots  and 
horsemen  of  Egypt,  c.  xxxi.  i.  The  technical 
expression  for  mounting  on  horseback  is  found 
in  ancient  papyri. 

beside  Pi-i  ^hiroth]  This  statement  is  urged 
as  an  objection  to  the  identification  with  Ajrud; 
but  the  encampment  of  the  great  host  of  Israel 
extended  over  many  miles. 

U 2 


EXODUS.  XIV. 


[v.  12 21. 


308 


cause  there  were  no  graves  in  Egypt, 
hast  thou  taken  us  away  to  die  in  the 
wilderness  ? wherefore  hast  thou  dealt 
thus  with  us,  to  carry  us  forth  out  of 
Egypt  ? 

« chap.  6.  11  ^ Is  not  this  the  word  that  we 

did  tell  thee  in  Egypt,  saying.  Let  us 
alone,  that  we  may  serve  the  Egyp- 
tians? For  it  had  been  better  for  us 
to  serve  the  Egyptians,  than  that  we 
should  die  in  the  wilderness. 

13  ^ And  Moses  said  unto  the 
people,  Fear  ye  not,  stand  still,  and 
see  the  salvation  of  the  Lord,  which 

M^here-  shcw  to  you  to  day : “ for  the 

Egyptians  whom  ye  have  seen  to  day, 

Egyptians  ye  shall  see  them  again  no  more  for 
ever. 

14  The  Lord  shall  fight  for  you, 
and  ye  shall  hold  your  peace. 

15  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Wherefore  criest  thou  unto  me  ? 
speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  that 
they  go  forward  : 

16  But  lift  thou  up  thy  rod,  and 
stretch  out  thine  hand  over  the  sea, 
and  divide  it;  and  the  children  of  Is- 
rael shall  go  on  dry  ground  through 
the  midst  of  the  sea. 


17  And  I,  behold,  I will  harden 
the  hearts  of  the  Egyptians,  and  they 
shall  follow  them:  and  I will  get  me 
honour  upon  Pharaoh,  and  upon  all 
his  host,  upon  his  chariots,  and  upon 
his  horsemen. 

18  And  the  Egyptians  shall  know 
that  I am  the  Lord,  when  I have 
gotten  me  honour  upon  Pharaoh, 
upon  his  chariots,  and  upon  his  horse- 
men. 

19  ^ And  the  angel  of  God,  which 
went  before  the  camp  of  Israel,  re- 
moved and  went  behind  them;  and 
the  pillar  of  the  cloud  went  from  be- 
fore their  face,  and  stood  behind 
them : 

20  And  it  came  between  the  camp 
of  the  Egyptians  and  the  camp  of 
Israel ; and  it  was  a cloud  and  dark- 
ness to  them^  but  it  gave  light  by  night 
to  these:  so  that  the  one  came  not 
near  the  other  all  the  night. 

21  And  Moses  stretched  out  his 

hand  over  the  sea;  and  the  Lord 
caused  the  sea  to  go  back  by  a strong 
east  wind  all  that  night,  and  made  ^ 
the  sea  dry  land^  and  the  waters  were  23.  ' 

‘'divided. 


11.  no  gra'ves  in  Egypt^  This  bitter  taunt 
was  probably  suggested  by  the  vast  extent  of 
cemeteries  in  Egypt,,  which  might  not  impro- 
perly be  called  the  land  of  tombs:  it  would 
scarcely  have  been  imagined  by  one  who  had 
not  dwelt  there. 

12.  Let  us  alone']  This  is  a gross  exag- 
geration, yet  not  without  a semblance  of  truth : 
for  although  the  Israelites  welcomed  the  mes- 
sage of  Moses  at  first,  they  gave  way  com- 
pletely at  the  first  serious  trial.  See  the  refer- 
ence in  marg.  The  whole  passage  foreshadows 
the  conduct  of  the  people  in  the  wilderness. 

13.  for  the  Egyptians  ^kom^  &c.]  Rather 
for  as  ye  have  seen  the  Egyptians  to- 
day ye  shall  see  them  again  no  more  for  ever. 
Our  A.V.  follows  the  Vulg.,  but  the  LXX., 
Targ.,  Saad.  give  the  true  sense,  ye  shall 
never  see  the  Egyptians  in  the  same  way, 
under  the  same  circumstances. 

15.  Wherefore  criest  thou  unto  me?]  Moses 
does  not  speak  of  his  intercession,  and  we 
only  know  of  it  from  this  answer  to  his 
prayer.  This  is  a characteristic  of  the  narra- 
tive, important  to  be  observed  with  reference 
to  other  omissions  less  easily  supplied. 


19.  the  angel  of  God]  Compare  ch.  xiii.  ai ; 
and  see  note  on  ch.  iii.  z. 

20.  The  words  in  Italics  are  accepted  as 
explanatory  by  some  commentators;  but  the 
LXX.  read  “and  the  night  passed”  instead 
of  “it  gave  light  by  night.”  The  sense  is 
good  and  the  reading  not  improbable. 

21.  a strong  east  nvind  ] It  is  thus  dis- 
tinctly stated  that  the  agency  by  which  the 
object  was  effected  was  natural.  It  is  clear 
that  Moses  takes  for  granted  that  a strong 
east  wind  blowing  through  the  night,  under 
given  circumstances,  would  make  the  passage 
quite  possible.  It  would  seem  to  be  scarcely 
practicable,  when  the  wind  blows  from  other 
quarters  (see  Tischendorf ’s  account,  ‘ Aus  dem- 
heiligen  Lande,’  p.  21).  Of  course  this  would 
not  explain  the  effect,  if  the  passage  had  been 
made,  ;is  v/as  formerly  supposed,  through  the 
deep  s'^a  near  the  Wady  Musa,  some  leagues 
south  of  Suez.  All  the  conditions  of  the  nar- 
rative are  satisfied  by  the  hypothesis,  that  the 
passage  took  place  near  Suez. 

the  nvaters  ^jere  dinjided]  i.e.  there  was  a 
complete  separation  between  t.he  water  of  the 
gulf  and  the  water  to  the  north  of  Kolsum. 


V.  2 2 28.] 


EXODUS.  XIV. 


309 


Psai.  78.  22  And  ‘'the  children  of  Israel  went 

I Cor.  10.  into  the  midst  of  the  sea  upon  the  dry 
Heb.  II.  ground:  and  the  waters  were  a wall 
29-  unto  them  on  their  right  hand,  and  on 

their  left. 

23  ^ And  the  Egyptians  pursued, 
and  went  in  after  them  to  the  midst 
of  the  sea,  even  all  Pharaoh’s  horses, 
his  chariots,  and  his  horsemen. 

24  And  it  came  to  pass,  that  in  the 
morning  watch  the  Lord  looked  unto 
the  host  of  the  Egyptians  through  the 
pillar  of  fire  and  of  the  cloud,  and 
troubled  the  host  of  the  Egyptians, 

25,  And  took  off  their  chariot  wheels, 

II  Or,  “that  they  drave  them  heavily:  so 

V^fni  to  go  the  Egyptians  said.  Let  us  flee 
heavily.  the  face  of  Israel ; for  the  Lord 


fighteth  for  them  against  the  Egyp- 
tians. 

26  H And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Stretch  out  thine  hand  over  the 
sea,  that  the  waters  may  come  again 
upon  the  Egyptians,  upon  their  cha- 
riots, and  upon  their  horsemen. 

27  And  Moses  stretched  forth  his 
hand  over  the  sea,  and  the  sea  returned 
to  his  strength  when  the  morning  ap- 
peared ; and  the  Egyptians  fled  against 

it;  and  the  Lord  ^overthrew  the  t Heb. 
Egyptians  in  the  midst  of  the  sea.  ^J^ookoff^ 

28  And  the  waters  returned,  and 
covered  the  chariots,  and  the  horse- 
men, and  all  the  host  of  Pharaoh  that 
came  into  the  sea  after  them ; there  re- 
mained not  so  much  as-^one  of  them. 


/ 


22.  fivere  a 'wall  unto  them]  The  waters 
served  the  purpose  of  an  intrenchment  and 
wall ; the  people  could  not  be  attacked  on 
either  flank  during  the  transit ; to  the  north 
was  the  water  covering  the  whole  district ; to 
the  south  was  the  Red  Sea.  For  the  idiom, 
compare  Nahum  iii.  8. 

23.  the  Egyptians  pursued~\  The  Egyp- 
tians might  be  aware  that  under  ordinary  cir- 
cumstances there  would  be  abundant  time  for 
the  passage  of  the  chariots  and  cavalry,  of 
which  the  force  chiefly  consisted. 

24.  in  the  morning  <watch'\  At  sunrise, 
a little  before  6 A.  m.  in  April. 

troubled^  Threw  them  into  confusion  by  a 
sudden  panic. 

25.  And  took  off  their  chariot  wheels'] 
This  translation  is  generally  accepted.  The 
LXX,  however  render  the  word  “bound”  or 
clogged  (truvefii/o-e  — "IDN'),  a probable  read- 
ing, and  perhaps  more  suited  to  the  context. 

26.  that  the  'waters  may  come]  A sud- 
den cessation  of  the  wind.at  sunrise,  coinciding 
with  a spring  tide  (it  was  full  moon)  would 
immediately  convert  the  low  flat  sand-banks 
first  into  a quicksand,  and  then  into  a mass 
of  waters,  in  a time  far  less  than  would  suffice 
for  the  escape  of  a single  chariot,  or  horseman 
loaded  with  heavy  corslet. 

27.  o'verthrew  the  Egyptians]  Better  as  in 
the  margin.  The  Lord  shook  them  off, 
hurled  them  from  their  chariots  into  the  sea. 
Thus  in  the  papyrus  quoted  above,  when  the 
chariot  is  broken  the  warrior  is  hurled  out 
with  such  force  that  his  armour  is  buried  in 
the  sand. 

28.  not  so  much  as  one  of  them]  The 


statement  is  explicit,  all  the  chariots  and  horse- 
men and  that  portion  of  the  infantry  which 
followed  them  into  the  bed  of  the  sea.  In  fact, 
as  has  been  shewn,  escape  would  be  impossible. 
A doubt  has  been  raised  whether  Pharaoh  him- 
self perished : but  independent  of  the  distinct 
statement  of  the  Psalmist,  Ps.  cxxxvi.  15,  his 
destruction  is  manifestly  assumed,  and  was  in 
fact  inevitable.  The  station  of  the  king  was 
in  the  vanguard : on  every  monument  the  Pha- 
raoh is  represented  as  the  leader  of  the  army, 
and  allowing  for  Egyptian  flattery  on  other 
occasions,  that  was  his  natural  place  in  the 
pursuit  of  fugitives  whom  he  hated  so  in- 
tensely. The  death  of  the  Pharaoh,  and 
the  entire  loss  of  the  chariotry  and  cavalry 
accounts  for  the  undisturbed  retreat  of  the 
Israelites  through  a district  then  subject  to 
Egypt  and  easily  accessible  to  their  forces. 
The  blow  to  Egypt  was  not  fatal,  for  the  loss 
of  men  might  not  amount  to  many  thousands ; 
but  falling  upon  their  king,  their  leaders  and 
the  portion  of  the  army  indispensable  for  the 
prosecution  of  foreign  wars,  it  crippled  them 
effectually.  If,  as  appears  probable,  Toth- 
mosis  II.  were  the  Pharaoh,  the  first  recorded 
expedition  into  the  Peninsula  took  place  17 
years  after  his  death ; and  twenty-two  years 
elapsed  before  any  measures  were  taken  to  re- 
cover the  lost  ascendancy  of  Egypt  in  Syria. 
So  complete,  so  marvellous  was  the  deliver- 
ance : thus  the  Israelites  were  baptized  to 
Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea.  When 
they  left  Baal-Zephon  they  were  separated 
finally  from  the  idolatry  of  Egypt : when  they 
passed  the  Red  Sea  their  independence  of  its 
power  was  sealed ; their  life  as  a nation  then 
began,  a life  inseparable  henceforth  from  belief 
in  Jehovah,  and  His  servant  Moses,  only  to  be 
merged  in  the  higher  life  revealed  by  His  Son. 


310 


EXODUS.  XV. 


29  But  the  children  of  Israel  walked 
upon  dry  land  in  the  midst  of  the 
sea;  and  the  w^aters  vjere  a wall  unto 
them  on  their  right  hand,  and  on 
their  left. 

30  Thus  the  Lord  saved  Israel 
that  day  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Egyp- 


[v.  29 — 2. 

tians;  and  Israel  saw  the  Egyptians 
dead  upon  the  sea  shore. 

31  And  Israel  saw  that  great  ^ work 
which  the  Lord  did  upon  the  Egyp- 
tians : and  the  people  feared  the  Lord, 
and  believed  the  Lord,  and  his  ser- 
vant Moses. 


NOTE  on  n).  3. 


The  Hebrew  has  "liD.  The 

LXX.  and  Vulg.  render  crvyKeKXeiKe, 

conclusit : but  it  is  not  followed  by  an  accu- 
sative in  the  Hebrew,  and  must  be  intransi- 
tive, as  it  is  taken  by  Saadia  , and  the 

Syr.  f conclusum  est.  Thus  in 


Judges  iii.  22,  “ The  fat  closed  upon  the  blade.” 
The  correct  rendering  seems  to  be  the  wilder- 
ness is  closed  to  them.  In  no  sense  could  the 
wilderness  be  a barrier;  the  direct  route  led 
them  into  it,  the  change  of  route  shut  them 
out  from  it. 


Wisd. 

O. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

I Moses'  song.  22  The  people  want  zuater. 
23  The  waters  at  Mar  ah  are  bitter.  2^  A 
tree  sweeteneth  them.  27  At  Elim  are  twelve 
ivells,  and  seventy  pab7i  trees. 

Then  sang  Moses  and  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  this  song  unto 


the  Lord,  and  spake,  saying,  I will 
sing  unto  the  Lord,  for  he  hath 
triumphed  gloriously;  the  horse  and 
his  rider  hath  he  thrown  into  the  sea. 

2 The  Lord  is  my  strength  and 
song,  and  he  is  become  my  salvation : 
he  is  my  God,  and  I will  prepare  him 


Chap.  XV.  1 — 18.  With  the  deliver- 
ance of  Israel  is  associated  the  development 
of  the  national  poetry,  which  finds  its  first 
and  perfect  expression  in  this  magnificent 
hymn.  It  is  said  to  have  been  sung  by  Moses 
and  the  people,  an  expression  which  evidently 
points  to  him  as  the  author.  That  it  was 
written  at  the  time  is  an  assertion  expressly- 
made  in  the  text,  and  it  is  supported  by  the 
strongest  internal  evidence.  The  style  is  ad- 
mitted, even  by  critics  who  question  its 
genuineness,  to  be  archaic  both  in  the  lan- 
guage, which  isequally  remarkable  for  grandeur, 
and  severe  simplicity,  and  in  the  general  struc- 
ture, which,  though  rhythmical  and  systematic, 
differs  materially  from  later  compositions,  in 
which  the  divisions  are  more  numerous  and 
the  arrangement  more  elaborate.  The  sub- 
ject matter  and  the  leading  thoughts  are  such 
as  belong  to  the  time  and  the  occasion;  un- 
like the  imitations  in  the  later  Psalms,  the 
song  abounds  in  allusions  to  incidents  passing 
under  the  eye  of  the  composer:  it  has  every 
mark  of  freshness  and  originality.  The  only 
objections  are  founded  on  the  prophetic  por- 
tion (15 — 17):  but  if  ever  there  was  a crisis 
calculated  to  elicit  the  spirit  of  prophecy,  it 
was  that  of  the  Exodus,  if  ever  a man  fitted 
to  express  that  spirit,  it  was  Moses.  Even 


objectors  admit  that  the  invasion  of  Palestine 
was  contemplated  by  Moses:  if  so  what  more 
natural  than  that  after  the  great  catastrophe, 
which  they  accept  as  an  historical  fact,  he 
should  anticipate  the  terror  of  the  nations 
through  whose  ten'itories  the  Israelites  would 
pass,  and  whose  destruction  was  an  inevitable 
condition  of  their  success.  In  every  age  this 
song  gave  the  tone  to  the  poetry  of  Israel; 
especially  at  great  critical  epochs  of  deliver- 
ance. In  the  book  of  Revelation  (xv.  3)  it 
is  associated  with  the  final  triumph  of  the 
Church,  when  the  saints  “having  the  harps 
of  God”  will  sing  “the  Song  of  Moses  the 
servant  of  God,  and  the  Song  of  the  Lamb.” 

The  division  of  the  Song  into  three  parts  is 
distinctly  marked:  i — 5,6 — 10,11 — 18:  each 
begins  with  an  ascription  of  praise  to  God; 
each  increases  in  length  and  varied  imagery 
unto  the  triumphant  close. 

First  Division.  1 — 10.  Ascription  of 
praise  and  brief  statement  of  the  transaction. 

1,  He  hath  triumphed  gloriously'\  This 
gives  the  true  meaning,  but  not  the  force  and 
grandeur  of  the  Hebrew,  literally  He  is  glori- 
ously glorious.  Among  the  Ancient  Versions 
the  LXX,  eVSo^cor  deto^ao-rai,  comes  near,  the 
Arabic  of  Saadia  is  very  fine 


V.  3—8.] 


EXODUS.  XV. 


311 


an  habitation;  my  father’s  God,  and 
I will  exalt  him. 

3 The  Lord  is  a man  of  war : the 
Lord  is  his  name. 

4 Pharaoh’s  chariots  and  his  host 
hath  he  cast  into  the  sea : his  chosen 
captains  also  are  drowned  in  the  Red 
sea. 

5 The  depths  have  covered  them : 
they  sank  into  the  bottom  as  a stone. 

6 Thy  right  hand,  O Lord,  is  be- 


come glorious  in  pov/cr ; thy  right 
hand,  O Lord,  hath  dashed  in  pieces 
the  enemy. 

7 And  in  the  greatness  of  thine  ex- 
cellency thou  hast  overthrown  them 
that  rose  up  against  thee ; thou  sentest 
forth  thy  wrath,  which  consumed  them 
as  stubble. 

8 And  with  the  blast  of  thy  nostrils 
the  waters  were  gathered  together,  the 
floods  stood  upright  as  an  heap,  and 


the  horse  and  his  rider']  The  word  “ rider” 
may  include  horseman,  but  applies  properly 
to  the  charioteer:  the  Egyptian  word  for 
horse  which  corresponds  exactly  to  the  He- 
brew, always  designates  the  swift,  high- 
bred horses  used  for  the  war-cars  of  nobles. 
Thus  in  the  papyrus  ‘ Anast.’  i,  “The  horses 
of  my  chariot  are  swift  as  jackals : their  eyes 
like  fire:  they  are  like  a hurricane  when  it 
bursts.” 

2.  The  Lord  is  my  strength  and  song^ 
My  strength  and  song  is  Jah.  This 
name  is  specially  associated  with  victory  by 
the  Psalmist,  Ps.  Ixviii.  4.  It  was  doubtless 
chosen  here  by  Moses  to  draw  attention  to 
the  promise  ratified  by  the  name  “ I am.” 
The  fonn  of  the  word  “song”  in  Hebrew 
is  archaic. 

I (will  prepare  Him  an  habitation]  I will 
glorify  Him.  Scholars  agree  that  the  He- 
brew word  means  to  celebrate  with  grateful, 
loving  adoration.  In  fact  this  sense  is  given 
by  most  of  the  ancient  Versions.  Our  Au- 
thorised Version  is  open  to  serious  objection, 
as  suggesting  a thought  (viz.  of  erecting  a 
temple)  which  could  hardly  have  been  in  the 
mind  of  Moses  at  that  time,  and  unsuited. to 
the  occasion.  It  is  one  of  many  instances  of 
undue  deference  to  Rabbinical  authorities  on 
the  part  of  our  translators.  The  Targum  of 
Onkelos,  who  is  followed  by  Kimchi,  has  “ I 
will  build  Him  a sanctuary.”  Thus  too  the 
interlinear  Latin  in  Walton’s  Polyglott.  The 
LXX.,  Vulg.'  and  Syr.  render  the  word  cor- 
rectly. Saadia  has  “ I will  take  refuge  with 
Him.” 

3.  a man  of  nvar]  Compare  Ps.  xxiv.  8. 
The  name  has  on  this  occasion  a peculiar 
fitness;  man  had  no  part  in  the  victory:  the 
battle  was  the  Lord’s. 

the  Lord  is  his  name]  A pregnant  expres- 
sion, implying  that  the  manifestation  of  might, 
by  which  the  salvation  of  Israel  was  effected, 
accorded  with  the  name  Jehovah,  the  most 
perfect  expression  of  the  Divine  Essence. 

4.  hath  He  cast]  The  Hebrew  is  very 
forcible,  “hurled,”  as  from  a sling.  See 


note  on  ch.  xiv.  27.  All  the  words  which  de- 
scribe the  fall  of  the  mailed  warriors  of  Egypt 
are  such  as  one  who  actually  witnessed  their 
overthrow  would  naturally  employ.  See  note 
on  the  next  verse. 

his  chosen  captains]  The  same  expression  is 
used  in  ch.  xiv.  7,  where  see  note.  It  desig- 
nates officers  of  the  highest  rank,  chosen  spe- 
cially to  attend  on  the  person  of  Pharaoh: 
probably  commanders  of  the  2000  Calasirians 
who  alternatively  with  the  Hermotybians 
formed  his  body-guard.  They  may  have  been 
for  the  most  part  personally  known  to  Moses. 

drowned]  The  original  is  more  graphic, 
“ plunged,  submerged,”  describing  the  over- 
throw in  the  rushing  tide. 

5.  as  a stone]  The  warriors  on  chariots 
are  always  represented  on  the  monuments 
with  heavy  coats  of  mail;  the  corslets  of 
“ chosen  captains  ” consisted  of  plates  of  highly 
tempered  bronze,  with  sleeves  reaching  nearly 
to  the  elbow,  covering  the  whole  body  and  the 
thighs  nearly  to  the  knee;  see  the  engraving 
of  the  corslet  of  Rameses  III.  in  Sir  G.  Wil- 
kinson, ‘ M.  and  C.’  i.  p.  366.  They  must 
have  sunk  at  once  like  a stone,  or  as  we  read 
in  V.  10,  like  lumps  of  lead.  Touches  like 
these  come  naturally  from  an  eye-witness. 

Second  Division.  6 — 10.  This  division 
presents  the  details  more  fully,  and  completes 
the  picture  by  describing  the  mode  in  which 
the  destruction  was  effected,  and  the  arrogance 
of  the  Egyptians  by  which  it  was  provoked. 

6.  is  become  glorious]  The  translation  is 
correct,  but  inadequately  represents  the  force 
and  beauty  of  the  Hebrew  word,  which  is 
archaic  in  fonm  and  usage. 

7.  thy  wrath]  lit.  Thy  burning,  i.e.  the 
fire  of  Thy  wrath,  a word  chosen  expressly 
with  reference  to  the  effect:  it  consumed  the 
enemy  suddenly,  completely,  like  fire  burning 
up  stubble.  The  simile  is  not  uncommon  in 
Egyptian : thus  in  the  poem  of  Pentaour  ad- 
dressed to  Rameses  II.  “The  people  were  as 
stubble  before  thy  chariot :”  but  the  superiority 
of  the  Hebrew  is  obvious — it  represents  the 


12 


EXODUS.  XV. 


[v.  9— II, 


the  depths  were  congealed  in  the  heart 
of  the  sea. 

9  The  enemy  said,  I will  pursue,  I 
will  overtake,  I will  divide  the  spoil ; 
my  lust  shall  be  satisfied  upon  them ; 
I will  draw  my  sword,  my  hand  shall 
l^l’ssess.  “ destroy  them. 


10  Thou  didst  blow  with  thy  wind, 
the  sea  covered  them : they  sank  as 
lead  in  the  mighty  waters. 

1 1 Who  is  like  unto  thee,  O Lord, 
among  the  " gods  ? who  is  like  thee, « Or, 
glorious  in  holiness,  fearful  in  praises, 
doing  wonders  ? 


flame  going  forth  from  the  Presence  of  God. 
The  Hebrew  for  stubble  is  also  Egyptian. 

8.  This  description  has  been  strangely  mis- 
represented as  though  it  were  irreconcileable 
vath  the  preceding  narrative.  It  differs  from 
that  as  lyric  poetry  differs  in  its  imagery 
from  prose;  and  as  inspired  poetry  it  brings 
us  into  contact  with  the  hidden  and  effectual 
causes  of  the  natural  phenomena,  which  it 
still  distinctly  recognizes.  The  blast  of  God’s 
nostrils  corresponds  to  the  natural  agency, 
the  east  wind  (ch.  xiv.  21),  which  drove  the 
waters  back.  On  each  side  the  Psalmist  de- 
scribes what  he  must  actually  have  seen;  on 
the  north  the  waters  rising  high,  overhanging 
the  sands,  but  kept  back  by  the  strong  wind: 
on  the  south  lying  in  massive  rollers,  kept 
down  by  the  same  agency  in  the  heart,  or  deep 
bed  of  the  Red  Sea.  In  both  descriptions  we 
have  precisely  the  same  effects ; in  the  former 
the  bearings  upon  the  passage  of  the  Israelites 
are  most  prominent;  in  this  the  scenery  is 
presented  in  the  form  which  impressed  the 
seer’s  imagination  most  vividly,  and  which 
fixes  itself  most  strongly  on  the  spirit  of  the 
reader. 

as  an  heap']  The  LXX.  render  this  “as  a 
wall,”  ojoret  rei^of.  The  Hebrew  word  pro- 
bably means  “a  dam.”  It  corresponds  to 
wall,  xiv.  22. 

9.  Tb/r  enemy  said]  The  abrupt,  gasping 
utterances;  the  haste,  cupidity  and  ferocity  of 
the  Egyptians,  the  confusion  and  disorder  of 
their  thoughts,  are  described  in  terms  recog- 
nized by  critics  of  all  schools  as  belonging  to 
the  highest  order  of  poetry;  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  they  enable  us  to  realize  the 
feelings  which  induced  Pharaoh  and  his  host 
to  pursue  the  Israelites  over  the  treacherous 
sandbanks. 

destroy  them]  Thus  Vulg.,  Targ.,  Saad. 
and  most  modern  critics.  The  margin  fol- 
lows the  LXX.  and  is  defensible. 

10.  Thou  didst  hlo^  qvith  thy  ^ind]  The 
solemn  majesty  of  these  few  words,  in  imme- 
diate contrast  with  the  tumult  and  confusion 
of  the  i)receding  verse,  needs  scarcely  be  no- 
ticed : it  is  important  to  observe  that  Moses 
hc.fc  states  distinctly  the  natural  agency  by 
which  the  destruction  was  e^ffected.  In  the 


direct  narrative,  xiv.  28,  we  read  only,  “the 
waters  returned,”  here  we  are  told  that  it  was 
because  the  wind  blew.  A sudden  change  in 
the  direction  of  the  wind  would  bring  back  at 
once  the  masses  of  water  heaped  up  on  the 
north.  If  the  tide  rose  at  the  same  time,  the 
waters  of  the  Red  Sea  would  meet  and  over- 
whelm the  host : but  this  is  not  said,  and  the 
Egyptians,  who  were  close  observers  of  na- 
tural phenomena,  would  probably  have  been 
aware  of  the  danger  of  attempting  the  passage 
had  flood-time  been  near  at  hand.  One  cause 
is  assigned  and  it  suffices  for  the  effect. 

they  sank  as  lead]  See  note  on  ns.  4.  The 
sudden  drowning  of  the  charioteers  as  they 
fell  headlong  in  their  heavy  panoply  must 
have  been  one  of  the  most  striking  features  of 
the  scene:  hence  the  repetition,  not  without  a 
variation,  which  gives  a more  exact  sim.ile: 
they  fell  like  masses  of  lead,  helpless,  motion- 
less, unable  for  a moment  to  struggle  with  the 
waters. 

Third  and  Last  Division.  After 
the  ascription  of  praise  the  seer  turns  to  the 
remoter,  but  certain  consequences  of  this 
unparalleled  event.  It  was  impossible  that 
a man  in  the  position  and  wfith  the  feelings  of 
Moses  should  not  revert  to  them,  and  at  once 
present  them  in  clear  strong  language  to  His 
people.  The  deliverance  was  the  earnest  of  a 
complete  fulfilment  of  old  promises,  it  was  a 
pledge  also  that  enemies,  whom  the  Israelites 
could  not  but  dread  as  their  superiors  in  the 
arts  and  resources  of  war,  would  be  dis- 
heartened, and  speedily  overcome,  and  that 
they  themselves  would  be  put  in  possession 
of  the  inheritance  of  Abraham. 

11.  among  the  gods]  The  marg.  has 
“mighty  ones,”  which  is  a possible  rendering, 
adopted  in  the  Vulg.  But  the  translation  is 
quite  correct,  and  justified  by  other  unmistake- 
able  passages;  thus  in  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  8,  “Amcrg 
the  gods  there  is  none  like  unto  Thee,”  an 
expression  which  by  no  means  admits  the  sub- 
stantial power  of  the  objects  of  heathen  wor- 
ship, in  which  the  Israelite  recognized  either 
evil  spirits  or  mere  phantoms  of  superstitious 
imagination;  see  especially  Deut.  xxxii.  16,  17. 
A llebrew  just  leaving  the  land  in  which 
Polytheism  attained  its  highest  development, 
with  gigantic  statues  and  temples  of  incom- 
parable grandeur,  might  well  on  such  an  occar 


V 12  — 16.] 


EXODUS.  XV. 


313 


12  Thou  stretchedst  out  thy  right 
hand,  the  earth  swallowed  them. 

13  Thou  in  thy  mercy  hast  led 
forth  the  people  which  thou  hast  re- 
deemed : thou  hast  guided  the}n  in  thy 
strength  unto  thy  holy  habitation. 

» Dent.  3.  14  The  ^people  shall  hear,  and  be 

Josh.  3.  9.  afraid : sorrow  shall  take  hold  on  the 
inhabitants  of  Palestina. 

15  Then  the  dukes  of  Edom  shall 


be  amazed  ; the  mighty  men  of  Moab, 
trembling  shall  take  hold  upon  them ; 
all  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan  shall 
melt  away. 

16  ‘^Fear  and  dread  shall  fall  upon  *• 
them  ; by  the  greatness  of  thine  arm  Josh.  2.  =1 
they  shall  be  as  still  as  a stone;  till 
thy  people  pass  over,  O Lord,  till  the 
people  pass  over,  which  thou  hast  pur- 
chased. 


sion  dwell  upon  this  consummation  of  the  long 
series  of  triumphs  by  which  the  “greatness 
beyond  compare”  of  Jehovah  was  once  for 
all  established. 

12.  the  earth  s^allo^ved  theni]  The  state- 
ment is  general,  not  dwelling  on  the  special 
mode  of  the  Egyptian  overthrow,  which  had 
already  been  fully  treated,  but  serving  to  mark 
the  transition  to  a different  subject,  viz.  the 
effects  of  the  deliverance  upon  Israel. 

13.  thou  hast  guided  them,  &c.]  Two  ob- 
jections are  made  to  this,  as  indicating  a later 
origin ; (i)  the  use  of  the  past  tense ; but  Moses 
naturally  and  correctly  speaks  of  the  guidance 
as  already  begun,  God  had  redeemed  the 
Israelites,  and  placed  them  in  the  way  to- 
wards Canaan.  (2)  The  words  “thy  holy 
habitation  ” are  supposed  to  refer  to  the  tempje 
at  Jerusalem.  It  would  not  however  be  an 
unsuitable  designation  for  Palestine,  regarded 
as  the  land  of  promise,  sanctified  by  mani- 
festations of  God  to  the  Patriarchs,  and  de- 
stined to  be  both  the  home  of  God’s  people, 
and  the  place  where  His  glory  and  purposes 
were  to  be  perfectly  revealed.  It  is  clear  that 
no  Hebrew  writing  before  the  time  of  Solomon 
would  have  introduced  a reference  to  the 
temple,  and  improbable  that  any  one  writing 
afterwards  would  have  put  an  expression  with 
that  meaning  into  the  mouth  of  Moses.  But 
it  is  possible  that  Moses  had  Mount  Moriah 
in  his  mind,  whether  in  remembrance  of  Abra- 
ham’s offering,  or  as  the  result  of  an  imme- 
diate inspiration.  If  so  it  would  be  an  instance 
of  that  not  uncommon  and  most  interesting 
form  of  prediction  in  which  events  separated 
by  a wide  interval  from  the  seer’s  time  are 
realized  as  impending.  Of  all  predictions  such 
are  least  likely  to  be  attributed  to  any  writer 
after  their  long  deferred  fulfilment. 

14.  Tihe  people']  or  the  peoples,  an  ex- 
pression now  justified  by  usage,  and  necessary 
in  this  passage  to  give  the  true  meaning. 

the  inhabitants  of  Palestina]  In  Hebrew  Pe- 
lasheth,  i.e.  the  country  of  the  Philistines. 
They  were  the  first  who  would  expect  an  in- 
vasion, and  the  first  whose  district  would 
have  been  invaded  but  for  the  faintheartedness 


of  the  Israelites.  It  is  obvious  that  the  order 
of  thoughts  would  have  been  very  different  had 
the  song  been  composed  at  a later  period, 
since  in  fact  Philistia  was  the  last  district 
occupied  by  the  Israelites. 

15.  the  dukes  of  Edom]  The  specific  name 
used  in  Genesis  xxxvi.  15,  where  see  note 
It  denotes  the'  chieftains,  not  the  kings  of 
Edom : see  also  Br  W.  Smith,  ‘ The  Penta- 
teuch,’ p.  385. 

the  mighty  men  of  Moab]  The  physical 
strength  and  great  stature  of  the  Moabites  are 
noted  in  other  passages:  see  Jer.  xlviii.  29,  41. 

Canaan]  The  name  in  this,  as  in  many  pas- 
sages of  Genesis,  designates  the  whole  of  Pa- 
lestine: and  is  used  of  course  with  reference  to 
the  promise  to  Abraham.  It  was  known  to 
the  Egyptians,  and  occurs  frequently  on  the 
monuments  as  Pa-kanana,  which  according  to 
M.  Chabas  designates  only  a large  fortress  in 
Syria,  but  as  most  Egyptologers  hold,  and  on 
very  solid  grounds,  applies,  if  not  to  the  whole 
of  Palestine,  yet  to  the  northern  district  under 
Lebanon,  which  the  Phoenicians  occupied  and 
called  Canaan. 

16.  shall  fall  upon  them]  Most  of  the 
ancient  versions  use  the  optative  fonn.  Let 
fear  and  dread  fall  upon  them,  l*et  them  be 
still,  i.e.  motionless,  as  a stone:  thus  LXX, 
V ulg.  Such  undoubtedly  may  be  the  meaning 
of  the  Hebrew,  but  the  future  is  equally,  if 
not  more  forcible;  and  the  prediction  is  so 
general  that  even  those,  who  reject  specific 
announcements  of  future  events,  might  accept 
it  as  a natural  expression  of  the  anticipations 
of  Moses.  An  objection  is  taken  by  some 
critics  to  the  expression  “ pass  over  ” as  apply- 
ing specially  to  the  passage  over  Jordan;  the 
prophecy  was  doubtless  then  fulfilled,  but  that 
event  could  not  have  been  in  the  mind  of  Moses, 
since  he  expected  that  the  entrance  would 
be  by  the  southern  frontier;  and  the  term 
which  he  uses  would  be  equally  applicable  to 
any  passing  over  the  physical  barriei-s  of  Ca- 
naan ; had  Indeed  the  song  been  composed 
after  that  passage  it  is  scarcely  possible  that 
some  allusion  would  not  have  been  made  to 
the  resemblance  between  the  two  miracles. 


EXODUS.  XV. 


[v.  17 22. 


17  Thou  shalt  bring  them  in,  and 
plant  them  in  the  mountain  of  thine 
inheritance,  in  the  place,  O Lord, 
which  thou  hast  made  for  thee  to  dwell 
in,  in  the  Sanctuary,  O Lord,  which 
thy  hands  have  established. 

18  The  Lord  shall  reign  for  ever 
and  ever. 

19  For  the  horse  of  Pharaoh  went 
in  with  his  chariots  and  with  his  horse- 
men into  the  sea,  and  the  Lord  brou.t^ht 
again  the  waters  of  the  sea  upon  them ; 
but  the  childrm  of  Israel  went  on 
dry  land  in  the  midst  of  the  sea. 


20  ^ And  Miriam  the  prophetess, 
the  sister  of  Aaron,  took  a timbrel  in 
her  hand;  and  all  the  women  went 
out  after  her  with  timbrels  and  with 
dances. 

21  And  Miriam  answered  them. 
Sing  ye  to  the  Lord,  for  he  hath 
triumphed  gloriously;  the  horse  and 
his  rider  hath  he  thrown  into  the  sea. 

22  So  Moses  brought  Israel  from 
the  Red  sea,  and  they  went  out  into 
the  wilderness  of  Shur;  and  they  went 
three  days  in  the  wilderness,  and  found 
no  water. 


17.  in  the  mountain  of  thine  inheritance^ 
See  note  on  v.  13.  The  expressions  in  this 
verse,  especially  the  word  Sanctuary,  are  in 
favour  of  the  explanation  given  in  the  latter 
part  of  that  note;  but  some  critics  (as  Smith 
‘Pentateuch,’  p.  403,  and  Bleek,  ‘ Einleitung,’ 
p.  274)  consider  that  Palestine  is  meant. 

The  psalm  closes,  not  with  the  conquest  of 
Canaan,  but  with  its  ultimate  and  crowning 
result,  the  settlement  of  the  people  of  Jehovah 
in  the  inheritance  which  he  had  promised,  and 
in  the  place  which  he  destined  for  His  Sanc- 
tuary. 

19.  For  the  horse^  &c.]  This  verse  does 
not  belong  to  the  hymn,  but  marks  the  transi- 
tion from  it  to  the  narrative.  Writers,  who 
attribute  different  portions  of  the  book  to 
various  authors,  consider  that  it  belongs  to  the 
original  composition.  It  is  however  obviously 
a summary  statement  of  the  cause  and  subject- 
matter  of  the  preceding  hymn,  and  as  such, 
assumes  its  existence. 

20  And  Miriam  the  prophetess']  The  part 
here  assigned  to  Miriam  and  the  women  of 
Israel  is  in  accordance  both  with  Egyptian 
and  Hebrew  customs.  The  men  are  repre- 
sented as  singing  the  hymn  in  chorus,  under 
the  guidance  of  Moses;  at  each  interval  Mi- 
riam and  the  women  sang  the  refrain,  mark- 
ing the  time  with  the  timbrel,  and  with  the 
measured  rhythmical  movements  always  as- 
sociated with  solemn  festivities.  Compare 
Judg.  xi.  34.  I Sam.  xviii.  6,  and  2 Sam.  vi.  5. 
A representation  of  women  dancing,  some 
with  l)oughs  in  their  hand,  others  playing  on 
timbrels,  or  tambourines  of  various  shapes, 
some  square  and  some  round,  is  given  by  Wil- 
kinson, ‘ .M.  and  C.'  i.  p.  93.  The  word  used 
in  this  passage  for  the  timbrel  is  Egyptian,  and 
judging  from  its  etymology  and  the  figures 
which  are  joined  with  it  in  the  inscriptions, 
it  was  probably  the  round  instrument.  See 
JirugscJ],  ‘D.  H.’  p.  1323,  and  1534. 


Miriam  is  called  a prophetess-,  evidently,  as 
appears  from  Numbers  xii.  2,  because  she  and 
Aaron  had  received  divine  communications. 
The  word  is  used  here  in  its  proper  sense  of 
uttering  words  suggested- by  the  Spirit  of  God. 
On  the  use  and  meaning  of  the  v/ord  see  note 
on  Genesis  xx.  7.  She  is  called  the  si.ster  of 
Aaron,  most  probably  to  indicate  her  special 
position  as  co-ordinate,  not  with  Moses  the 
leader  of  the  nation,  but  with  his  chief  aid  and 
instrument.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  this 
designation,  most  natural  in  the  mouth  of 
Moses,  who  would  be  careful  to  record  the 
names  of  his  brother  and  sister  on  such  an 
occasion,  was  not  likely  to  have  been  applied 
to  Miriam  by  a later  writer. 

22.  So  Hoses']  Lit.  And  Moses.  The  word 
so  gives  the  impression  of  a closer  connection 
with  the  preceding  verse  than  is  suggested  by 
the  Hebrew.'  The  history  of  the  journey 
from  the  Red  Sea  to  Sinai  begins  in  fact  with 
this  verse,  which  would  more  conveniently 
have  been  the  commencement  of  another 
chapter. 

from  the  Red  sea\  The  station  where  Moses 
and  his  people  halted  to  celebrate  their  de- 
liverance is  generally  admitted  to  be  the  Ayoun 
Musa,  i.e.  the  fountains  of  Moses.  It  is  the 
only  green  spot  near  the  passage  over  the  Red 
Sea.  There  are  several  wells  there  (17  ac- 
cording to  Dr  Stanley,  p.  67,  7 according  to 
Robinson,  p.  62).  Tischendorf,  w'hose  descrip- 
tion is  fuller  than  that  of  other  travellers  and 
gives  a more  pleasing  impression,  counted  19, 
and  observes  that  the  vegetation  indicates  a still 
largernumber.  ‘ Ausdem  heiligen  Lande,’p.  22. 
The  water,  like  all  the  w'ater  on  the  western 
coast  of  the  Peninsula,  is  dark-coloured  and 
brackish,  but  it  is  drinkable,  and  is  said  to  be 
highly  prized  by  the  peojde  of  Suez,  whose 
richer  inhabitants  formerly  built  country 
houses,  and  laid  out  gardens  in  the  place.  At 
present  the  German  consul  has  a garden  of 


V.  23 — 26.] 


EXODUS.  XV. 


315 


I That  is, 
bittenuss. 


* Ecclus. 
38-  5. 


23  H And  when  they  came  to 
Marah,  they  could  not  drink  of  the 
waters  of  Marah,  for  they  w^re  bitter  : 
therefore  the  name  of  it  was  called 
’ Marah. 

24  And  the  people  murmured 
against  Moses,  saying.  What  shall  we 
drink  ? 

25  And  he  cried  unto  the  Lord  ; 
and  the  Lord  shewed  him  a ^tree, 
which  when  he  had  cast  into  the 
waters,  the  waters  w'ere  made  sweet : 


there  he  made  for  them  a statute  and 
an  ordinance,  and  there  he  proved 
them, 

26  And  said.  If  thou  wilt  diligently 
hearken  to  the  voice  of  the  Lord  thy 
God,  and  wilt  do  that  which  is  right 
in  his  sight,  and  wilt  give  ear  to  his 
commandments,  and  keep  all  his  sta- 
tutes, I will  put  none  of  these  diseases 
upon  thee,  which  I have  brought  upon 
the  Egyptians : for  I am  the  Lord 
that  healeth  thee. 


considerable  extent  and  beauty,  described  by 
Tischendorf.  Wellsted  found  there  about 
twenty  clumps  of  palm-trees,  the  branches  of 
which  were  so  closely  interv^oven  that  they 
formed  a dense  impervious  shade,  affording 
shelter  to  the  Arabs.  According  to  M.  Monge 
(quoted  by  Robinson,  p.  62)  there  was  for- 
merly an  aqueduct  extending  to  the  sea  so  as 
to  form  a watering  place  for  ships.  In  the 
time  of  Moses  the  wells  were  probably  inclosed 
and  kept  with  great  care  by  the  Egyptians,  for 
the  use  of  the  frequent  convoys  to  and  from 
their  ancient  settlements  at  Sarbut  el  Khadem 
and  the  Wady  Mughara. 

the  qjuilderness  of  Sbur]  This  name  belongs 
to  the  whole  district  between  the  north-eastern 
frontier  of  Egypt  and  Palestine.  The  word 
is  undoubtedly  Egyptian,  whether  derived 
from  the  name  of-  the  fortress  on  the  frontier, 
called  the  Fort  of  Zor,  or  more  probably  from 
the  word  Khar,  which  designated  all  the 
country  between  Egypt  and  Syria  proper. 
Thus  in  a papyrus  of  the  19th  dynasty  (‘  Anast.’ 
III.  I,  1.  7)  we  read  “The  land  of  Khar  from 
Zor  to  Aup,”  a city  in  Syria.  ‘Kh’  and  ‘Sh’ 
are  constantly  interchanged  in  transcrip- 
tion: see  Chabas,  ‘V.  E.’  p.  97.  In  Numbers 
xxxiii.  8,  the  more  special  designation  is  used, 
viz.  “the  wilderness  of  Etham,”  a strong  corro- 
boration of  the  view  that  Etham  was  not  on 
the  west  of  the  Bitter  lakes,  but  at  their  north- 
ern extremity. 

three  days\  The  distance  between  Ayoun 
Musa  and  Huwara,  the  first  spot  where  any 
water  is  found  on  the  route,  is  33  geographical 
miles.  A small  fountain  Abu  Suweira.  near 
the  sea,  and  another  called  the  Cup  of  Sudr 
on  the  east,  some  hours  distant  from  the  road, 
were  of  course  known  to  Moses,  but  would 
be  of  little,  if  any  use  to  the  host.  The  whole 
district  is  a tract  of  sand,  or  rough  gravel ; 
the  wadys  are  depressions  in  the  desert,  with 
only  a few  scattered  herbs  and  shrubs,  wither- 
ed and  parched  by  drought:  the  road  after- 
wards continues  through  -hills  of  limestone 
equally  destitute  of  vegetation,  some  exhibit- 


ing an  abundance  of  crystallized  sulphate  of 
lime. 

23.  Marah‘\  The  identification  of  Ma- 
rah with  the  fount  of  Eluwara,  first  proposed 
by  Burckhardt,  is  now  generally  accepted. 
The  fountain  rises  from  a large  mound,  a 
whitish  petrifaction,  deposited  by  the  water. 
At  present  no  water  flows,  but  there  are  traces 
of  a running  stream,  and  in  the  time  of  Moses, 
when  the  road  was  kept  by  the  Egyptians  and 
vegetation  was' more  abundant,  the  source  was 
probably  far  more  copious.  The  water  is 
cohsidered  by  the  Arabians  to  be  the  worst  in 
the  whole  district.  Two  stunted  palm-trees 
now  stand  near  it,  and  the  ground  is  covered 
by  thickets  of  theghurkud  (Peganum  retusum, 
Forskal),  a low  bushy  thorny  shrub,  produ- 
cing a small  fruit  which  ripens  in  June,  not 
unlike  the  barberry,  very  juicy  and  slightly 
acidulous;  see  Robinson,  p.  66.  Burckhardt, 
‘Syria,’  p.  474,  suggested  that  the  juice  might 
possibly  be  used  to  sweeten  the  water,  but  no 
such  process  is  known  to  the  Bedouins,  and 
the  fruit  would  not  be  ripe  about  Easter, 
when  the  Israelites  reached  the  place.  Wellsted 
observes  that  when  he  tasted  the  water  and 
muttered  the  word  “Marah”  his  Bedouin  said 
“You  speak  the  word  of  truth:  they  are 
indeed  Mara.”  The  Arabic  word  Huwara 
means  “ruin,”  “destruction”  (Freytag);  but 
“bitter”  and  “deadly”  are  with  the  Arabs,  as 
with  the  Hebrews,  convertible  terms. 

25.  a tree'\  The  statement  evidently 
points  to  a natural  agency.  The  miracle  was 
nor  wrought  without  the  tree.  This  is  in 
accordance  with  the  whole  spirit  of  the  narra- 
tive. There  may  possibly  have  been  some 
resemblance  to  a mode  of  purifying  stagnant 
waters,  such  as  Josephus  and  Du  Boys  Aime 
describe,  by  thrusting  long  sticks  into  the 
bottom  of  a spring  and  eliciting  a fresh  supply: 
but  the  result  was  manifestly  supernatural. 

he  made^  &c.]  The  Lord  then  set  before  them 
the  fundamental  principle  of  implicit  trust,  to 
be  shewn  by  obedience.  The  healing  of  the 
water  was  a symbol  of  deliverance  from  phy- 
sical and  spiritual  evils. 


EXODUS.  XVI. 


[v.  27-5. 


3i^> 


'Numb.  27  ^ ‘^And  they  came  to  Elim, 
^ where  were  twelve  wells  of  water,  and 
three  score  and  ten  palm  trees:  and 
they  encamped  there  by  the  waters. 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

1 The  Israelites  come  to  Sin.  i They  murmur 
for  want  of  bread.  4 God  promiseth  them 
bread  from  heaven.  11  Quails  are  se'nt,  14 
and  manna.  16  The  ordering  of  manna. 

It  was  not  to  be  found  on  the  sabbath.  32 
A n omer  of  it  is  preserved. 

AND  they  took  their  journey  from 
Elim,  and  all  the  congregation 
of  the  children  of  Israel  came  unto 
the  wilderness  of  Sin,  which  is  be- 
tween Elim  and  Sinai,  on  the  fifteenth 
day  of  the  second  month  after  their 
departing  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt. 


2 And  the  whole  congregation  of 
the  children  of  Israel  murmured  against 
Moses  and  Aaron  in  the  wilderness : 

3 And  the  children  of  Israel  said 
unto  them.  Would  to  God  we  had 
died  by  the  hand  of  the  Lord  in  the 
land  of  Egypt,  when  we  sat  by  the 
flesh  pots,  and  when  we  did  eat  bread 
to  the  full ; for  ye  have  brought  us 
forth  into  this  wilderness,  to  kill  this  * 
whoje  assembly  with  hunger. 

4 ^ Then  said  the  Lord  unto  Mo- 
ses, Behold,  I will  rain  bread  from 
heaven  for  you ; and  the  people  shall 
go  out  and  gather  ^a  certain  rate  every 

day,  that  I may  prove  them,  whether  tio)i  of  a 
they  will  walk  in  my  law,  or  no. 

5 And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that 


27.  Elini]  At  a distance  of  two  hours’ 
journey  south  of  Huwara  is  the  large  and 
beautiful  valley  of  Gharandel  (Girondel,  Nie- 
buhr, p.  183^.  Ii.  the  rainy  season  a con- 
siderable torrent  flows  through  it,  discharging 
its  waters  in  the  Red  Sea.  Even  in  the  dry 
season  water  is  still  found,  which  though 
somewhat  brackish  after  long  drought  (Robin- 
son), is  generally  good,  and  according  to  all 
travellers  the  best  on  the  whole  journey  from 
Cairo  to  Sinai.  The  grass  there  grows  thick 
and  high,  there  is  abundance  of  brush- 
wood, with  tamarisks  and  acacias ; a few  palm- 
trees  still  remain,  relics  of  the  fair  grove  which 
once  covered  this  Oasis  of  the  western  side  of 
the  Peninsula.  The  only  objection  to  the 
identification  of  this  valley  with  Elim  is  the 
shortness  of  the  distance,  but  the  inducement 
for  the  encampment  is  obvious,  and  no  other 
site  corresponds  with  the  main  conditions  of  the 
narrative.  The  Israelites  remained  a consider- 
able time  in  this  neighbourhood,  since  they  did 
not  reach  the  wilderness  of  Sin  till  two  months 
and  a half  after  leaving  Suez.  They  would 
find  water  and  pasturage  in  the  district  between 
Elim  and  the  station  on  the  Red  Sea,  mentioned 
in  Numbers  xxxiii.  10:  which  appears  to  have 
Ix^en  at  the  further  end  of  the  Wadi  Tayibe, 
a journey  of  eight  hours,  near  the  headland  of 
Ras  Selima.  The  whole  valley  is  said  to  be 
beautiful,  full  of  tamarisks  and  other  shrubs, 
the  Tarfa-tree  and  the  Palm.  Water  is  found 
in  it,  though  far  inferior  to  that  in  Gharandel. 
The  station  at  the  Red  Sea  then  visited  by  the 
Israelites  was  of  considerable  importance,  the 
starting  point  for  the  roads  to  the  copper- 
mnies  of  the  Wadi  Mughara,  Sarbut  el  Kha- 
dem,  and  the  Wadi  Nasb. 

twelve  wells']  Read  springs;  the  He- 
brew denotes  natural  sources.  These  springs 
may  have  been  perennial  when  a richer  vege- 


tation clothed  the  adjacent  heights.  They  cer- 
tainly supplied  copious  streams  when  the  Is- 
raelites “encamped  there  by  the  waters.” 

Chap.  XVI.  1.  the  wilderness  of  6’i«] 
The  desert  tract,  called  Debbet  er  Ramleh, 
extends  nearly  across  the  peninsula  from  the 
Wady  Nasb  in  a south-easterly  direction,  be- 
tween the  limestone  district  of  El  Tih  and  the 
granite  of  Sinai.  The  journey  from  the  station 
at  Elim,  or  even  from  that  on  the  Red  Sea, 
could  be  performed  in  a day : at  that  time  the 
route  was  kept  in  good  condition  by  the 
Egyptians  who  worked  the  copper-mines  at 
Sarbut  el  Khadim.  The  text  seems  to  imply 
that  the  Israelites  proceeded  in  detachments, 
and  were  first  assembled  as  a complete  host 
when  they  reached  the  wilderness  of  Sin. 

2.  murmured]  The  want  of  food  was 
first  felt  after  six  weeks  from  the  time  of  the 
departure  from  Egypt,  see  v.  i:  we  have  no 
notice  previously  of  any  deficiency  of  bread. 

3.  by  the  hand  of  the  Lord]  This  evi- 
dently refers  to  the  plagues,  especially  the  last, 
in  Egypt:  the  death  which  befell  the  Egyp- 
tians appeared  to  the  people  preferable  to  the 
sufferings  of  famine. 

flesh  pots.,  and... bread]  These  expressions 
prove  that  the  sei'vile  labours  to  which  they 
had  been  subjected  did  not  involve  privation  : 
they  were  fed  abundantly,  either  by  the  offi- 
cials of  Pharaoh,  or  more  probably  by  the 
produce  of  their  own  fertile  district.  The 
word  used  for  flesh-pots  is  Egyptian,  the 
name  and  representation  are  given  in  Brugsch, 
‘ D.  H.’  p.  1264.  . 

4.  rain  bread  from  heaven\  This  marks 
at  the  outset  the  strictly  supernatural  character 
of  the  supply.  Without  such  supply  the  vast 
host  of  the  Israelites  could  not  have  subsisted 


V.  6 — 1 4-] 


EXODUS.  XVI. 


317 


on  the  sixth  day  they  shall  prepare 
that  whith  they  bring  in;  and.it  shall 
be  twice  as  much  as  they  gather  daily. 

6 And  Moses  and  Aaron  said  unto 
all  the  children  of  Israel,  At  even, 
then  ye  shall  know  that  the  Lord 
hath  brought  you  out  from  the  land 
of  Egypt : 

7 And  in  the  morning,  then  ye  shall 
see  the  glory  of  the  Lord  ; for  that 
he  heareth  your  murmurings  against 
the  Lord  : and  what  are  we,  that  ye 
murmur  against  us? 

8 And  Moses  said.  This  shall  be^ 
when  the  Lord  shall  give  you  in  the 
evening  flesh  to  eat,  and  in  the  morn- 
ing bread  to  the  f^ull ; for  that  the 
Lord  heareth  your  murmurings  which 
ye  murmur  against  him : and  what  are 
we?  your  murmurings  are  not  against 
us,  but  against  the  Lord. 

9 ^1  And  Moses  spake  unto  Aaron, 
Say  unto  all  the  congregation  of  the 


children  of  Israel,  Come  near  before 
the  Lord  : for  he  hath  heard  your 
murmurings. 

10  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  Aaron 
spake  unto  the  whole  congregation  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  that  they  looked 
toward  the  wilderness,  and,  behold, 

the  glory  of  the  Lord  "appeared  in  « chap.  13. 
the  cloud. 

11  ^1  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

12  I have  heard  the  murmurings 
of  the  children  of  Israel : speak  unto 
them,  saying.  At  even  ye  shall  eat 
flesh,  and  in  the  morning  ye  shall  be 
filled  with  bread ; and  ye  shall  know 
that  I am  the  Lord  your  God. 

13  And  it  came  to  pass,  that  at 
even  '^the  quails  came  up,  and  covered  *Numb. 
the  camp:  and  in  the  morning  the 

dew  lay  round  about  the  host.  n-  ?• 

14  And  when  ‘'the  dew  that  lay 
was  gone  up,  behold,  upon  the  face  of 


for  a considerable  time  in  any  part  of  the 
Peninsula. 

a certain  rate  e'very.  day]  Lit.  as  in  the 
margin,  “the  portion  of  a day  in  its  day:” 
i.  e.  the  quantity  sufficient  for  one  day’s  con- 
sumption : this  may  be  better  expressed  “ a 
day’s  portion  each  day.” 

that  I may  pr D’ve  them]  The  trial  consisted 
in  the  restriction  to  the  supply  of  their  daily 
wants. 

5.  it  shall  he  tnvice  as  much]  The  meaning 
evidently  is  that  they  should  collect  and  prepare 
a double  quantity,  not  (as  has  been  assumed, 
in  order  to  malce  out  a cor*j*adiction  with 
•V.  z 2)  that  the  quantity  collected  would  be 
miraculously  increased  afterwards. 

7.  the  glory  of  the  Loud]  Some  com- 
mentators understand  this  to  mean  the  mani- 
festation of  His  power  and  gooflness  in  sup- 
plying the  people  with  food ; but  it  refers  to 
the  visible  appearance  described  in  <1;.  10. 

8.  not  against  us]  i.  e.  according  to  a 
common  Hebrew  idiom,  not  so  much  against 
us  as  against  the  Lord;  the  murmuring  im- 
plied a distrust  of  the  people  in  the  divine 
mission  of  their  leaders,  notwithstanding  the 
previous  miracles. 

9.  The  preceding  paragraph  from  v.  3 
describes  the  conference  between  the  people 

^ and  their  leaders : the  result  was  a summons 
to  meet  Him  whom  they  represented,  i.  e.  to 


assemble  in  the  open  space  before  the  taber- 
nacle. 

10.  appeared  in  the  cloud]  Or,  “ was  seen  in 
a cloud.”  The  definite  article  would  imply  that 
the  cloud  was  the  same  which  is  often  men- 
tioned in  connection  with  the  tabernacle.  The 
people  saw  the  cloud  here  spoken  of  beyond 
the  camp. 

12.  flesh ..  .bread]  These  expressions  re- 
fer to  the  previous  murmuring  of  the  people, 
v.  3.  God  gives  them  in  His  own  way  that 
which  they  longed  for;  this  is  a clear  proof 
that  the  nan-ative  is  continuous  and  that  the 
preceding  passage  is  not  (as  Knobel  assumes) 
an  interpolation : see  also  notes  on  -w.  1 6 
and  27. 

13.  quails]  The  identification  of  the 
Hebrew,  “slav,”  with  the  common  quail 
may  be  assumed  as  certain.  The  name  is  ap- 
plied in  Arabic  to  that  bird : it  migrates  in 
immense  numbers  in  spring  from  the  south : it 
is  nowhere  more  common  than  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  Red  Sea.  When  exhausted 
by  a long  flight  it  is  easily  captured  even  with 
the  hand.  The  flesh  is  palatable  and  not  un- 
wholesome when  eaten  in  moderation.  In  this 
passage  we  read  of  a single  flight  so  dense 
that  it  covered  the  encampment.  The  miracle 
consisted  in  the  precise  time  of  the  arrival  and 
its  coincidence  with  the  announcement.  Other 
explanations  of  the  name  have  been  given,  but 
this  alone  meets  all  the  conditions. 

the  deqv  lay  round]  Lit.  “a  lying  of  dew 


3i8 


•EXODUS.  XVI.  [v.  15-20. 


B Or, 

H'l'tai  is 
this  ? or, 
It  is  a por- 
tion. 

J ohn  6. 

31* 

I Cor.  10. 
3- 


t Heb. 
by  the  poll, 
cr,  head. 
t Heb. 
souls. 


the  •wilderness  there  lay  a small  round 
thing,  as  small  as  the  hoar  frost  on 
the  ground. 

15  And  when  the  children  of  Israel 
saw  /V,  they  said  one  to  another,  "It 
is  manna : for  they  wist  not  what  it 
was.  And  Moses  said  unto  them, 
"^This  is  the  bread  which  the  Lord 
hath  given  you  to  eat. 

16  ^ This  is  the  thing  which  the 
Lord  hath  commanded,  Gather  of  it 
every  man  according  to  his  eating,  an 
omer  ^ for  every  man,  according  to  the 
number  of  your  ^ persons ; take  ye 


every  man  for  them  which  are  in  his 
tents.  , ^ 

17  And  the  children  of  Israel  did 
so,  and  gathered,  some  more,  some 
less. 

18  And  when  they  did  mete  it  with  ^ a Cor. 
an  omer,  ‘*’he  that  gathered  much  had 
nothing  over,  and  he  that  gathered 
little  had  no  lack ; they  gathered  every 
man  according  to  his  eating. 

19  And  Moses  said.  Let  no  man 
leave  of  it  till  the  morning. 

. 20  Notwithstanding  they  hearkened 
not  unto  Moses;  but  some  of  them 


round  the  camp.”  This  is  generally  under- 
stood to  mean  there  was  a heavy  fall  of  dew 
round  the  encampment.  Knobel  explains  it 
to  be  a dense  mist,  but  the  usage  seems  to  be 
that  which  is  recognized  by  the  Authorised 
Version  and  all  the  ancient  versions.  There 
are  many  indications  that  the  season  was  unu- 
sually humid,  natural  agencies  concurring  with 
supernatural  ipterpositions.  Manna  is  found 
in  abundance  in  wet  seasons,  in  dry  seasons  it 
ceases  altogether. 

On  Manna,  see  note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

14.  a small  round  thing]  The  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  is  questioned  (see  note  below), 
but  there  is  good  authority  for  our  version, 
which  is  true  to  nature:  manna  appears  in 
small,  compact  grains.  Here  we  have  a re- 
semblance in  shape  and  appearance,  but  natu- 
ral manna  is  not  found  on  the  open  plain, 
“ the  face  of  the  wilderness,”  but  on  dry  leaves, 
or  the  ground  under  the  tamarisk,  from  the 
trunk  and  branches  of  which  it  exudes. 

15.  It  is  mf.nnd\  This  rendering  is  dis- 
puted. The  Old  Versions  concur  in  render- 
ing the  phrase  “ What  is  this?”  But  oriental 
scholars  are  generally  agreed  that  this  explana- 
tion is  not  borne  out  by  ancient  usage,  and 
that  the  Israelites  said  “ this  is  many  The 
word  “ man”  they  explain  by  reference  to  the 
Arabic,  in  which  it  means  “gift.”  The  Egyp- 
tian language  seems  to  afford  the  true  solution. 
It  has  be-en  very  lately  shown  that  “man”  or 
man-hut,  /.  e.  white  manna,  was  the  name 
under  which  the  substance  was  known  to  the 
Egyptians,  and  therefore  to  the  Israelites; 
see  note  below.  When  they  saw  it  on  the 
ground  they  would  of  course  at  once  recog- 
nize it.  'Ehey  wist  not  what  it  was  : for  in 
fact  it  was  net  natural  manna,  Irut  a heavenly 
gift.  Our  Version  should  therefore  be  retained, 
and  the  passage  may  lx:  thus  explained.  When 
the  Israelites  saw  the  small  round  thing,  they 
said  at  once  “this  is  manna,”  but  with  an 


exclamation  of  surprise  at  finding  it  on  the 
open  plain,  in  such  immense  quantities,  under 
circumstances  so  unlike  what  they  could  have 
expected : in  fact  they  did  not  know  what  it 
really  was,  only  what  it  resembled. 

16.  according  to  his  eating']  This  refers 
to  -z;.  4 ; it  was  a trial  of  the  faith  of  the  people, 
since  they  were  to  gather  just  enough  for  a 
day’s  consumption.  The  reference  is  notice- 
able as  an  additional  argument  against  Kno- 
bel’s  assumption  of  an  interpolation  ; see  note 
on  n).  12. 

an  omer]  i.  e.  the  tenth  part  of  an  Ephah, 
see  'u.  36.  The  exact  quantity  cannot  be  de- 
termined, since  the  measures  varied  at  different 
times.  Josephus  makes  the  omer  equal  to  six 
cotyliE,  or  half-pints.  The  ephah  was  an 
Egyptian  measure,  supposed  to  be  about  a 
bushel  or  one-third  of  a hin.  See  Brugsch, 

‘ D.  H.’  pp.  49,  50.  The  word  omer,  in  this 
sense,  occurs  in  no  other  passage.  It  was 
probably  not  used  at  a later  period,  belong- 
ing, like  many  other  words,  to  the  time  of 
Moses.  It  is  found  in  old  Egyptian,  but  with 
the  meaning  “storehouse”  (see  Birch,  ‘D.  H.’ 
p.  363.  Brugsch  does  not  give  it).  See  Lev. 
xix.  36, 

man... per  sons]  Lit.  as  in  the  margin, 
head,  and  souls,  which  should  be  retained 
as  in  many  oUier  passages. 

17.  some  more.,  some  less]  It  is  evidently 
implied  that  the  people  were  in  part  at  least 
disobedient  and  failed  in  this  first  trial. 

18.  had  nothing  o-irr]  The  result  is  un- 

doubtedly represented  as  miraculous.  The 
Jewish  interpreters  understand  by  this  state- 
ment that  whatever  quantity  each  person  had 
gat  hen  d,  wl)en  he  measured  it  in  his  tent,  he 
found  that  he  had  just  as  many  omers  as  he 
needed  for  the  consumption  of  his  family:  and 
this  is  probably  the  true  meaning.  It  is  adopt- 
ed by  Knobel  and  Keil.  ^ 

20.  it  bred  qx'orms]  This  result  was  super- 


V.  21 2g.] 


EXODUS.  XVI. 


519 


left  of  it  until  the  morning,  and  it 
bred  worms,  and  stank:  and  Moses 
was  wroth  with  them. 

21  And  they  gathered  it  every 
morning,  every  man  according  to  his 
eating : and  when  the  sun  waxed  hot, 
it  melted. 

22  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  that  on 
the  sixth  day  they  gathered  twice  as 
much  bread,  two  omers  for  one  man: 
and  all  the  rulers  of  the  congregation 
came  and  told  Moses. 

23  And  he  said  unto  them.  This 
is  that  which  the  Lord  hath  said. 
To  morrow  is  the  rest  of  the  holy 
sabbath  unto  the  Lord:  bake  that 
which  ye  will  bake  to  day^  and  seethe 
that  ye  will  seethe;  and  that  which 
remaineth  over  lay  up  for  you  to  be 
kept  until  the  morning. 


24  And  they  laid  it  up  till  the  morn- 
ing, as  Moses  bade : and  it  did  not 
stink,  neither  was  there  any  worm 
therein. 

25  And  Moses  said.  Eat  that  to 
day ; for  to  day  is  a sabbath  unto  the 
Lord  : to  day  ye  shall  not  find  it  in 
the  field. 

26  Six  days  ye  shall  gather  it;  but 
on  the  seventh  day,  which  is  the  sab- 
bath, in  it  there  shall  be  none. 

27  H And  it  came  to  pass,  that 
there  went  out  some  of  the  people  on 
the  seventh  day  for  to  gather,  and 
they  found  none. 

28  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
How  long  refuse  ye  to  keep  my  com- 
mandments and  my  laws  ? 

29  See,  for  that  the  Lord  hath  given 
you  the  sabbath,  therefore  he  giveth 


natural : no  such  tendency  to  rapid  decompo- 
sition is  recorded  of  common  manna. 

21.  it  melted~\  This  refers  to  the  manna 
which  was  not  gathered.  It  is  noted  in  all 
accounts  of  common  manna  that  it  is  melted 
by  the  heat  of  the  sun. 

22.  t^vice  as  much  bread'\  This  was  in 
accordance  with  God’s  command  to  Moses 
v.-s,  which  it  is  not  probable  he  had  omitted 
to  communicate  to  the  people,  though  the  fact 
is  unnoticed  in  the  narrative.  The  rulers  of 
the  congregation  appear  to  have  applied  to 
Moses  for  instructions  as  to  what  was  to  be 
done  under  these  circumstances,  fearing  pos- 
sibly the  recurrence  of  the  result  mentioned 
above,  v.  20.  Knobel  supposes  that  the  people 
acted  unconsciously,  God  permitting  them  to 
gather  a double  quantity,  but  the  other  expla- 
nation is  far  more  natural. 

From  this  passage  and  from  'v.  5 it  is  infer- 
red that  the  seventh  day  was  previously  known 
to  the  people  as  a day  separate  from  all  others, 
and  if  so,  it  must  have  been  observed  as  an 
ancient  and  primeval  institution.  No  other 
account  of  the  command  j^given  without  any 
special  explanation),  or  of  the  conduct  of  the 
people,  who  collected  the  manna,  is  satisfactory: 
thus  Rosenmuller,  and  others.  It  is  at  the 
same  time  evident  that  Moses  took  this  oppor- 
tunity of  enforcing  a strict  and  more  solemn 
observance  of  the  day. 

23.  To  morro2V  is  the  rest  of  the  holy 
sabbath  unto  the  Lord'\  Or,  To-morrow  is 
a rest,  a Sabbath  holy  to  Jehovah: 
i.e.  to-morrow  must  be  a day  of  rest,  ob- 
served strictly  as  a sabbath,  or  festal  rest,  holy 
to  Jehovah.  It  is  at  once  a statement,  and  an 


injunction.  The  people  knew  it  as  the  Sab- 
bath, they  were  to  observe  it  as  a great  fes- 
tival. 

bake^  &c.]  These  directions  shew  that  the 
manna  thus  given  differed  essentially  from  the 
natural  product.  Here  and  in  Numbers  xi.  8 
it  is  treated  in  a way  which  shews  it  had  the 
properties  of  corn,  could  be  ground  in  a 
mortar,  baked  and  boiled.  Ordinary  manna 
is  used  as  honey,  it  cannot  be  ground,  it  melts 
when  exposed  to  a moderate  heat  forming  a 
substance  like  barley  sugar,  called  manna  tabu- 
lata.  In  Persia  it  is  boiled  with  water  and 
brought  to  the  consistency  of  honey.  The 
Arabs  also  boil  the  leaves  to  which  it  adheres, 
and  the  manna  thus  dissolved  floats  on  the 
water  as  a glutinous  or  oily  substance  (Rosen- 
miiller,  Niebuhr,  &c.).  It  is  obvious  that 
these  accounts  are  inapplicable  to  the  manna 
from  heaven,  which  had  the  characteristics 
and  nutritive  properties  of  bread. 

25.  Eat  that  to  day']  The  practical  ob- 
servance of  the  Sabbath  was  thus  formally  in- 
stituted before  the  giving  of  the  law.  The 
people  were  to  abstain  from  the  ordinary 
work  of  every-day  life  : they  were  not  to  col- 
lect food,  nor,  asdt  would  seem,  even  to  pre- 
pare it  as  on  other  days. 

27.  there  nvent  out  some  of  the  people] 
This  was  an  act  of  wilful  disobedience.  It 
is  remarkable,  being  the  first  violation  of  the 
express  command,  that  it  was  not  visited  by  a 
signal  chastisement : the  rest  and  peace  of  the 
“Holy  Sabbath”  were  not  disturbed  by  a 
manifestation  of  wrath. 

28.  Ho2V  long]  The  reference  to  1;.  4 is 
obvious.  The  prohibition  involved  a trial  of 


320 


EXODUS.  XVI. 


[v.  30— 3^- 


you  on  the  sixth  day  the  bread  of  two 
days ; abide  ye  every  man  in  his  place, 
let  no  man  go  out  of  his  place  on  the 
seventh  day. 

30  So  the  people  rested  on  the 
seventh  day. 

31  And  the  house  of  Israel  called 
the  name  thereof  Manna : and  it  was 
like  coriander  seed,  white ; and  the 
taste  of  it  was  like  wafers  7nade  with 
honey. 

32  ^ And  Moses  said,  This  is  the 
thing  which  the  Lord  commandeth. 
Fill  an  omer  of  it  to  be  kept  for  your 
generations;  that  they  may  see  the 
bread  wherewith  I have  fed  you  in 


faith,  in  which  as  usual  the  people  were  found 
wanting.  Every  miracle  formed  some  part,  so 
to  speak,  of  an  educational  process. 

29.  abide  ye  e-very  man  in  his  place^  This 
is  an  adcfitional  injunction.  They  were  to 
remain  within  the  camp.  The  expression  in 
Hebrew  is  peculiar  and  seems  almost  to  enjoin 
a position  of  complete  repose,  “in  his  place,” 
lit.  under  himself,  as  the  Oriental  sits  with  his 
legs  drawn  up  under  him.  The  prohibition 
must  however  be  understood  with  reference  to 
its  immediate  object ; they  were  not  to  go  forth 
from  their  place  in  order  to  gather  manna, 
which  was  on  other  days  without  the  camp. 
The  spirit  of  the  law  is  sacred  rest.  The 
Lord  gave  them  this  Sabbath,  as  a blessing 
and  privilege.  It  was  “made  for  man.”  A 
Jewish  sect  called  Masbothei,  i.e.  Sabbatarians, 
took  this  text  as  a command  that  no  man 
should  change  his  position  from  the  morning 
to  the  evening  of  the  Sabbath;  see  Routh  on 
‘ Hegesippus,’  R.  S.  i.  p.  27,5. 

31.  Manna]  This  refers  of  course  to 
their  first  exclamation,  confirmed  after  a 
week's  experience.  It  was  not  indeed  the 
common  manna,  as  they  then  seem  to  have 
believed,  but  the  properties  which  are  noted 
in  this  passage  are  common  to  it  and  the  natu- 
ral product ; in  si/e,  form  and  colour  it  re- 
sembled the  seed  of  the  white  coriander,  a 
small  round  grain  of  a whitish  or  yellowish 
grey.  I'he  wafer  made  with  honey  is  called 
by  the  LXX.  fy^pts'  eV  pcXtrt,  i.e.  according 
to  Athenxus  a cake  of  meal,  oil  and  honey. 

32.  Fill  an  omer]  This  was  probably 
done  at  the  end  of  the  first  week ; but  the 
order  to  Aaron  may  have  lx?en  repeated  when 
the  tabernacle  was  fitted  up  with  its  appur- 
tenances. 

33.  a pot]  The  word  here  used  occurs 
in  no  other  passage.  It  corresponds  in  form 
and  use  to  the  Egyptian  for  a casket  or  vase 


the  wilderness,  when  I brought  you 
forth  from  the  land  of  Egypt. 

33  And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron, 

Take  a pot,  and  put  an  omer  full  of 
manna  therein,  and  lay  it  up  before  the 
Lord,  to  be  kept  for  your  generations. 

34  As  the  Lord  commanded  Mo- 
ses, so  Aaron  laid  it  up  before  the 
Testimony,  to  be  kept. 

35  And  the  children  of  Israel  did 

eat  manna  forty  years,  ^ until  they  /'josh.  5. 
came  to  a land  inhabited;  they  did  Neh.  9.  15. 
eat  manna,  until  they  came  unto  the 
borders  of  the  land  of  Canaan. 

36  Now  an  omer  is  the  tenth  part 
of  an  ephah. 


in  which  oblations  were  presented.  Br.  D.  H. 
p.  1644. 

35.  did  eat  manna  forty  years]  This 
does  not  necessarily  imply  that  the  Israelites 
were  fed  exclusively  on  manna,  or  that  the 
supply  was  continuous  during  forty  years : 
but  that  whenever  it  might  be  needed,  owing 
to  the  total  or  partial  failure  of  other  food,  it 
was  given  until  they  entered  the  promised  land. 
They  had  numerous  flocks  and  herds,  which 
w'ere  not  slaughtered  (see  Numbers  xi.  22), 
but  which  gave  them  milk,  cheese  and  of 
course  a limited  supply  of  flesh:  nor  is  there 
any  reason  to  suppose  that  during  a consider- 
able part  of  that  time  they  may  not  have 
cultivated  some  spots  of  fertile  ground  in 
the  wilderness.  We  may  assume,  as  in  most 
cases  of  miracle,  that  the  supernatural  supply 
was  commensurate  with  their  actual  necessity. 
Dr  W.  Smith,  p.  365,  observes  the  peculiarity 
of  the  expression.  Moses  gives  a complete 
history  of  manna  till  the  end  of  his  own  life. 
The  manna  was  not  withheld  in  fact  until  the 
Israelites  had  passed  the  Jordan.  Moses  writes 
as  a historian,  not  as  a prophet.  What  he 
knew  as  fact  was  that  it  lasted  until  he  penned 
this  passage.  A later  writer  would  have  been 
more  specific. 

36.  an  omer]  This  definition  of  an  omer 
has  been  attributed  to  a later  hand,  a gloss 
inserted  to  explain  an  obsolete  word,  “omer” 
occurring  only  in  this  passage  as  the  name  of 
a measure;  on  the  other  hand,  it  has  been 
argued  that  Mose.s,  as  a legislator,  would  be 
careful  to  define  what  was  probably  a new 
measure ; both  omer  and  ephah  are  Egyptian 
words. 

Note  on  Manna. 

It  is  well  to  bring  together  the  facts 
which  are  certainly  known  from  ancient  and 
modern  authorities.  They  leave  no  doubt, 
on  the  one  hand,  as  to  the  connection  between 


EXODUS.  XVI. 


321 


the  manna  of  Exodus  and  the  natural  produc- 
tion: or  on  the  other,  as  to  the  supernatural 
character  of  the  former.  Both  points  are 
admitted  alike  by  critics  who  believe,  or  dis- 
believe the  sacred  narrative : the  only  question 
between  them  is  the  truth  of  the  writer;  his 
intention  and  meaning  are  unmistakeable. 

The  manna  of  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  is  the 
sweet  juice  of  the  Tarfa,  a species  of  tamarisk. 
It  exudes  from  the  trunk  and  branches  in  hot 
weather,  and  forms  small  round  white  grains. 
In  cool  weather  it  preserves  its  consistency, 
in  hot  weather  it  melts  rapidly.  It  is  either 
gathered  from  the  twigs  of  the  tamarisk,  or 
from  the  fallen  leaves  underneath  the  tree. 
The  colour  is  a greyish  yellow.  It  begins  to 
exude  in  May,  and  lasts  about  six  weeks. 
The  Arabs  cleanse  it  from  leaves  and  dirt, 
boil  it  down,  strain  it  through  coarse  stuff 
and  keep  it  in  leather  bags:  they  use  it  as 
honey  with  bread.  Its  taste  is  sweet,  with  a 
slight  aromatic  flavour:  travellers  generally 
compare  it  with  honey.  According  to  Ehren- 
berg  it  is  produced  by  the  puncture  of  an 
insect.  It  is  abundant  in  rainy  seasons,  many 
years  it  ceases  altogether.  The  whole  quan- 
tity now  produced  in  a single  year  does  not 
exceed  600  or  700  pounds.  It  is  found  in  the 
district  between  the  Wady  Gharandel,  i.e.  Elim, 
and  Sinai,  in  the  Wady  Sheich,  and  in  some 
other  parts  of  the  Peninsula.  For  each  of 
these  statements  we  have  the  concurrent  testi- 
mony of  travellers.  Seetzen  in  1807  was  the 
first  who  described  the  natural  product  with 
scientific  accuracy : see  Kruse’s  notes  on  Seet- 
zen, Vol.  IV.  p.  416.  The  resemblance  in 
colour,  shape,  taste,  and  in  the  time  and  place 
of  the  appearance  is  exact.  The  name  is  also 
that  now  given  to  the  product,  well  known 
as  its  Arabic  designation,  and,  as  we  have 
shewn,  found  also  on  Egyptian  monuments. 

The  differences  however  are  equally  unmis- 
takeable. I.  The  manna  of  Exodus  was  not 
found  under  the  tamarisk  tree,  but  on  the 
surface  of  the  wilderness,  after  the  disappear- 
ance of  the  morning  dew.  2.  The  quantity 
which  was  gathered  in  a single  day  far  ex- 
ceeded the  annual  produce  at  present,  and 
probably  at  the  time  of  Moses.  3.  The  supply 
ceased  on  the  Sabbath-day.  4.  The  properties 
differed  from  common  manna;  it  could  be 
ground,  baked,  and  in  other  respects  treated 
like  meal.  It  was  not  used  merely  as  a con- 
diment, or  medicine,  but  had  the  nutritive 
qualities  of  bread.  5.  It  was  found  after 
leaving  the  district  where  it  is  now  produced, 
until  the  Israelites  reached  the  land  of  Canaan. 

It  is  to  be  obsei'ved  that  we  have  all  the 
conditions  and  characteristics  of  Divine  inter- 
positions. (i)  The  condition  of  a recognized 
necessity:  for  all  writers  agree  that  under  any 
conceivable  circumstances  the  preservation  of 
the  Israelites  would  otherwise  have  been  im- 
possible. (2)  The  condition  of  a harmony 


with  a Divine  purpose,  the  preservation  of  a 
peculiar  people  on  which  the  whole  scheme 
of  providential  government  and  the  salvation 
of  mankind  depended.  (3)  We  have  the  usual 
characteristics  of  harmony  between  the  natu- 
ral order  of  events  and  the  supernatural  trans- 
action. God  fed  His  people  not  with  the 
food  v/hich  belonged  to  other  regions,  but 
with  such  as  appertained  to  the  district.  The 
local  colouring  is  unmistakeable.  We  may 
not  attempt  to  give  an  explanation  how  the 
change  was  effected;  to  such  a question  we 
have  but  to  answer  that  we  know  nothing. 
One  thing  certain  is,  that  if  Moses  wrote  this 
narrative,  it  is  impossible  that  he  could  be 
deceived,  and  equally  impossible  that  he  could 
have  deceived  contemporaries  and  eye-wit- 
nesses. As  for  ourselves,  we  must  be  content 
to  bear  the  reproach  that  we  are  satisfied  with 
a reference  to  the  Almightiness  of  Jehovah, 
in  which  alone  faith  finds  any  explanation  of 
the  mystery  of  the  universe. 

DSDnt?.  LXX.  coarei  Kopiov  XevKov,  Vulg. 
quasi  pilo  tusum.  Ch.  P]'7pD,  ‘"ind  Syr. 

decorticatum.  Saad. 

round.  These  renderings  seem  to  be  conjectu- 
ral. . Gesenius  derives  the  word  from  > 

Ghal.  D?]n  to  peel:  and  explains  the  phrase. 
“ a small  thing,  as  something  peeled.”  This 
explanation  has  in  its  favour  the  Egyptian 
usage,  in  which  “heseb”  means  “peel.” 
Brugsch,  ‘ D.  H.’  p.  994.  Knobel  points  out 
that  in  that  case  a particle  of  comparison 
would  be  required,  and  compares 

frost,  hoar-frost,  understanding  it  to  describe 
a small  compact  granular  substance.  In  this 
he  is  followed  by  Keil. 

P is  the  Chaldaic  form  for  HO,  what? 
but  there  is  no  vestige  of  the  use  in  the  ancient 
language.  Thus  Gesenius  and  Knobel ; Keil 
assumes  it  to  be  the  popular,  and  old  Semitic 
form,  but  gives  no  proof.  The  meaning  “ gift” 
was  first  suggested  by  Kimchi,  pS“n 
gift  and  portion.  Gesenius  derives  it  from 
iTD,  to  distribute  or  apportion.  The  Arabic 

(mann)  is  adduced  in  support  of  the 
meaning  “gift,”  but  as  Keil  points  out  it  is 
probably  taken  from  the  Hebrew  Manna. 
Kalisch  mentions  the  conjecture  of  Rashbam 
that  the  word  was  probably  Egyptian,  for 
v/hich,  as  he  observes  truly,  no  proof  could 
be  adduced.  The  conjecture  was  a happy 
one,  and  the  proof  is  now  found.  Brugsch 
gives  the  word,  see  ‘D.  H.’  p.  655.  “ Men- 

nu,”  “identical  with  the  Flebrew  ID,  Arabic 
^ It  is  found  among  other  articles  in  a 

basket  of  oblations  at  Apollinopolis.  Under 
another  form  it  appears  as  Mannu-hut,  ?.V. 
white  Manna,  and  is  described  as  the  pro- 
duct of  a t>ee,  probably  a species  of  Tamarisk. 


VoL.  I. 


X 


322 


EXODUS.  XVII. 


Numb. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

I The  people  miirmiir  for  water  at  Rephidhn. 
5 God  sendeth  him  for  water  to  the  rock  in 
Ploreb.  8 Amalck  is  overcome  by  the  holding 
up  of  Moses'  hands.  1 5 Moses  buildeth  the 
altar  jehovah-nissi. 

AND  all  the  congregation  of  the 
children  of  Israel  journeyed 
from  the  wilderness  of  Sin,  after  their 
journeys,  according  to  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord,  and  pitched  in 
Rephidim  : and  there  was  no  water  for 
the  people  to  drink. 

2 Wherefore  '^the  people  did  chide 
with  Moses,  and  said.  Give  us  water 
that  we  may  drink.  And  Moses  said 
unto  them.  Why  chide  ye  with  me? 
v/herefore  do  ye  tempt  the  Lord  ? 

3 And  the  people  thirsted  there  for 
watejr ; and  the  people  murmured 
against  Moses,  and  said.  Wherefore 
IS  this  that  thou  hast  brought  us  up  out 


[v.  1—7. 

of  Egypt,  to  kill  us  and  our  children 
and  our  cattle  with  thirst  ? 

4 And  Moses  cried  unto  the  Lord, 
saying.  What  shall  I do  unto  this 
people  ? they  be  almost  ready  to  stone 
me. 

5 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 

Go  on  before  the  people,  and  take 
with  thee  of  the  elders  of  Israel ; and 

thy  rod,  wherewith  ^thou  smotest  the  *chap.  7. 
river,  take  in  thine  hand,  and  go. 

6 “^Behold,  I will  stand  before  thee  c Numb, 
there  upon  the  rock  in  Horeb;  and  p”v>i'73. 
thou  shalt  smite  the  rock,  and  there  ^5-^^ 
shall  come  water  out  of  it,  that  the  wisd.  n. 
people  may  drink.  And  Moses  did  tcor.  10. 
so  in  the  sight  of  the  elders  of 
Israel. 

7 And  he  called  the  name  of  the is 
place  " Massah,  and  Meribah,  because  11  ThS?s”’ 
of  the  chiding  of  the  children  of  Israel, 


Chap.  XVII.  1.  according  to  their  jour- 
ney s'\  The  Israelites  rested  at  two  stations 
before  they  reached  Rephidim,  viz.  Dophkah 
andAlush:  see  Numbers xxxiii.  12 — 14.  Ac- 
cording to  Knobel,  whose  view  is  adopted 
by  Keil,  and  appears,  on  the  whole,  to 
accord  best  with  the  Biblical  notices  and 
the  accounts  of  travellers,  Dophkah  was  in 
the  Wady  Seih,  a day’s  journey  from  the 
Wady  Nasb;  traces  of  the  ancient  name  were 
found  by  Seetzen  at  a place  called  El  Tabbacha 
in  a rocky  pass,  El  Kineh,  where  Egyptian 
antiquities  still  remain,  indicating  the  ancient 
route.  The  wilderness  of  Sin  properly  speak- 
ing ends  here,  the  sandstone  ceases,  and  is  re- 
placed by  the  porphyry  and  granite  which 
belong  to  the  central  formation  of  the  Sinaitic 
group.  Alush  lay  on  the  way  towards  Re- 
phidim; the  identiti cation  v»'ith  Ash  is  doubt- 
ful, the  distance  from  Horeb  exceeding  a day’s 
march.  Alush  may  have  been  near  the  entrance 
to  the  Wady  Sheich. 

Rephidim']  On  the  identification  of  Re- 
phidim see  note  at  the  end  of  this  book. 

.2.  tempt  the  Lord]  It  is  a general  cha- 
racteristic of  the  Israelites  that  the  miracles, 
wliich  met  each  need  as  it  arose,  failed  to  pro- 
duce a habit  of  faith:  but  the  severity  of  the 
trial,  the  faintness  and  anguish  of  tliirst  in 
the  burning  desert,  must  not  be  overlooked  in 
appreciating  their  conduct.  “ I thirst”  was 
the  only  expression  of  bodily  suffering  wrung 
from  our  Lord  on  the  Cross. 

4.  they  he  almost  ready  to  stone  me]  Lit. 
yet  a little  and  they  will  stone  me. 
The  Authorised  Version  gives  the  meaning. 


but  not  the  liveliness  and  force  of  the  He- 
brew. 

6.  the  rock  in  Horeb]  The  name  Horeb 
signifies  “dry,  parched,”  and  evidently  points 
to  a distinct  miracle.  At  what  point  Moses 
struck  the  rock  cannot  be  determined ; but  it 
would  seem  to  have  been  in  the  presence  of 
the  Elders  as  selected  witnesses,  not  in  the 
sight  of  the  people,  and  therefore  not  near  the 
summit. 

It  is  questioned  whether  the  water  thus 
supplied  ceased  with  the  immediate  occasion. 
St  Paul  calls  it  “a  spiritual  drink,”  and  adds, 
“that  all  the  Israelites  drank  of  the  spiritual 
rock  which  followed  them,  and  that  rock  was 
Christ.”  I Cor.  x.  4.  The  interpretation  of 
that  passage  belongs  to  the  New  Testament: 
but  the  general  meaning  appears  to  be  that 
their  wants  were  ever  supplied  from  Him,  of 
whom  the  rock  was  but  a symbol,  and  who 
accompanied  them  in  all  their  wanderings. 
Two  traditions  of  the  Rabbins  are  notice- 
able: one,  that  the  rock  thus  smitten  actually 
followed  the  Israelites,  another,  that  the  stream 
of  water  went  with  them.  There  is  no  justi- 
fication for  these  fables  in  the  sacred  narrative. 
The  repetition  of  the  miracle  (see  Numbers 
XX.  ii)  excludes  the  second,  the  first  needs  no 
refutation. 

7.  Massah]  The  word  is  derived  from  that 
which  is  used  by  Moses,  ns.  2.  Meribah,  as 
is  stated  in  the  margin,  means  “chiding,” 
referring  also  to  1;.  2.  The  names  were  re- 
tained from  that  time,  nor  are  Rephidim  and 
Kadesh  mentioned  by  lakn*  writers:  they 
belong  to  the  time  of  Moses.  On  the  im- 


<^Deut.  2; 
17- 

Wisd.  II. 

^Called 
Jrsus, 
Acts  7.  4; 


V.  8-13.]  EXODUS.  XVII. 


323 


and  because  they  tempted  the  Lord, 
saying,  Is  the  Lord  among  us,  or  not  ? 

8 ^Then  came  Amalek,  and 
foughc  with  Israel  in  Rephidim. 

9 And  Moses  said  unto  ‘'Joshua, 
Choose  us  out  men,  and  go  out,  fight 
with  Amalek : to  morrow  I will  stand 
on  the  top  of  the  hill  with  the  rod  of 
God  in  mine  hand. 

10  So  Joshua  did  as  Moses  had  said 
to  him,  and  fought  with  Amalek  : and 
Moses,  Aaron,  and  Hur  went  up  to 
the  top  of  the  hill. 

1 1 And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Mo- 


ses held  up  his  hand,  that  Israel  pre- 
vailed: and  when  he  let  down  his 
hand,  Amalek  prevailed. 

12  But  Moses’ hands  heavy; 
and  they  took  a stone,  and  pu^  it  un- 
der him,  and  he  sat  thereon ; and 
Aaron  and  Hur  stayed  up  his  hands, 
the  one  on  the  one  side,  and  the  other 
on  the  other  side ; and  his  hands  were 
steady  until  the  going  down  of  the 
sun. 

13  And  Joshua  discomfited  Amalek 
and  his  people  with  the  edge  of  the 
sword. 


portance  of  this  lessen  see  our  Lord's  words, 
Matt.  iv.  7. 

8.  T/jen  came  Amalek\  The  attack  upon 
the  Israelites  was  made  under  circumstances, 
at  a time  and  place,  fully  explained  by  what 
is  known  of  the  Peninsula.  It  occurred  about 
two  months  after  the  Exodus,  towards  the 
end  of  May  or  early  in  June,  when  the  Be- 
douins leave  the  lower  plains  in  order  to  find 
pasture  for  their  flocks  on  the  cooler  heights. 
The  approach  of  the  Israelites  to  Sinai  would 
of  course  attract  notice,  and  no  cause  of  war- 
fare is  more  common  than  a dispute  for  the 
right  of  pasturage.  The  Amalekites  were  at 
that  time  the  most  powerful  race  in  the  Pen- 
insula, which  from  the  earliest  ages  was 
peopled  by  fierce  and  warlike  tribes,  with 
whom  the  Pharaohs,  from  the  third  dynasty 
downwards,  were  engaged  inconstant  struggles. 
It  may  be  conjectured  that  reports  of  the 
marvellous  supply  of  water  may  have  reached 
the  natives  and  accelerated  their  movements. 
On  this  occasion  Amalek  took  the  position, 
recognized  in  the  Sacred  History,  as  the  chief 
of  the  heathens,  Num.  xxiv.  20;  the  first 
among  the  heathens  who  attacked  God’s  peo- 
ple, and  as  such  marked  out  for  punishment, 
see  I Sam.  xv.  a,  especially  merited  by  them  as 
descendants  of  the  elder  brother  of  Jacob, 
and  therefore  near  kinsmen  of  the  Israelites. 

9.  Joshua']  This  is  the  first  mention  of  the 
great  follower  and  successor  of  Moses.  He 
died  at  the  age  of  no,  some  65  years  after  this 
transaction.  His  original  name  was  Hosea, 
but  Moses  calls  him  by  the  full  name,  which 
was  first  given  about  forty  years  afterwards, 
as  that  by  which  he  was  to  be  known  to 
succeeding  generations.  From  this  it  may 
perhaps  be  inferred  that  this  portion  of  Ex- 
odus was  written,  or  revised,  towards  the  end 
of  the  sojourn  in  the  wilderness.  A later 
writer,  mindful  of  the  change  of  namie,  would 
probably  have  avoided  the  appearance  of  an 
anachronism. 

the  rod  of  God]  By  using  the  same  rod 


Moses  gave  the  people  an  unmistakeable  and 
much  needed  proof  that  victory  over  hu- 
man enemies  was  to  be  attributed  altogether 
to  the  divine  power  which  had  delivered  them 
from  Egypt,  and  saved  them  from  perishing 
in  the  wilderness.  The  hill,  on  which  Moses 
stood  during  the  combat,  Knobel  supposed 
to  be  the  height  now  called  Feria  on  the  north 
side  of  the  plain  Er  Rahah ; on  its  top  is  a 
level  tract  with  good  pasturage  and  planta- 
tions. The  conjecture  may  shew  the  vivid 
impression  of  reality  made  by  the  narrative 
upon  a critic  who  believes  this  very  portion  to 
be  the  product  of  a later  age. 

10.  Hur]  Hur  is  mentioned  in  one  other 
passage  in  connection  with  Aaron,  ch.  xxiv.  14. 
He  was  grandfather  of  Bezaleel,  the  great 
sculptor  and  artificer  of  the  tabernacle,  see 
ch.  xxxi.  2- — 5,  and  belonged  to  the  tribe  of 
Judah.  From  the  book  of  Chronicles  we 
learn  that  the  name  of  his  father  was  Caleb, 
of  his  mother,  Ephrath.  That  he  was  a 
person  of  high  station  and  of  advanced  years 
is  evident,  but  the  traditions  that  he  was  the 
husband  of  Miriam  (Josephus),  or  her  son  by 
Caleb  (Jarchi),  would  seem  to  be  mere  con- 
jecture; such  a connection  would  scarcely 
have  been  unnoticed  in  the  account  of  Bezaleel. 

11.  The  act  represents  the  efficacy  of  in- 
tercessory prayer — offered  doubtless  by  Moses 
— a point  of  great  moment  to  the  Israelites 
at  that  time  and  to  the  Church  in  all  ages. 
This  interpretation  would  seem  too  obvious  to 
insist  upon,  but  it  has-been  contested  by  Kurtz, 
who  regards  the  lifting  of  Moses’  hands  as  the 
attitude  of  a general  directing  the  battle. 

12.  until  the  going  do^vn  of  the  sun]  The 
length  of  this  first  great  battle  indicates  the 
strength  and  obstinacy  of  the  assailants,  ic 
was  no  mere  raid  of  Bedouins,  but  a delibe- 
rate attack  of  the  Amalekites,  who,  as  we 
have  seen,  were  thoroughly  trained  in  warfare 
by  their  struggles  with  Ifgypt. 

13.  ^ith  the  edge  of  the  s^ivord]  This 

X 2 


324 


EXODUS.  XVII.  [V.  14-16. 


14  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Write  this  for  a memorial  in  a book, 
and  rehearse  it  in  the  ears  of  Joshua : 

/"Numb,  for  M will  utterly  put  out  the  re- 
15.  membrance  of  Amalek  from  under 
heaven. 

15  And  Moses  built  an  altar,  and 


called  the  name  of  it  " J^^ovah- 

niSSl  ; tnybamter. 

16  For  he  said, " Because  ^ the  Lord  “ Or, 
hath  sworn  that  the  Lord  will  have  the  hand 
war  with  Amalek  from  generation  to  ilagai'ni 
generation.  throne 

C’  of  the 

Lord,  therefore,  &=c.  t Heb.  the  hand  jtpon  the  throve  of  tJie  LORQ, 


expression  always  denotes  a great  slaughter  of 
the  enemy. 

14.  in  a booU\  It  should  be  rendered  in 
the  book.  The  plain  and  obvious  meaning 
is  that  the  account  of  this  battle,  and  of  the 
command  to  destroy  the  Amalekites,  was  to 
be  recorded  in  the  book  which  contained  the 
history  of  God's  dealings  with  His  people. 
In  this  explanation  nearly  all  critics  are  agreed. 
See  Introduction  to  the  Pentateuch,  p.  i,  and 
note  below.  Moses  was  further  instructed  to 
impress  the  command  specially  on  the  mind  of 
Joshua,  as  the  leader  to  whom  the  first  step 
towards  its  accomplishment  would  be  entrusted 
on  the  conquest  of  Canaan.  The  work  was 
not  actually  completed  until  the  reign  of  Heze- 
kiah,  when  500  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon  “smote 
the  rest  of  the  Amalekites  that  were  escaped” 
and  retained  possession  of  Mount  Seir,  when 
the  bock  of  Chronicles  was  written,  i Chron. 
iv.  43.  This  is  a point  to  be  especially  noticed. 
True  prophecy  deals  often  with  the  remote 
future,  regardless  of  delays  in  its  fulfilment; 
but  certainly  no  one  writing  at  a later  time, 
while  the  Amalekites  still  existed  as  a nation, 
would  have  invented  the  prediction. 

15.  yebo'vah-nbsi]  i.e.  as  in  the  margin, 
“Jehovah  my  banner.”  As  a proper  name  the 
Hebrew  word  is  rightly  preserved.  The  mean- 
ing is  evidently  that  the  name  of  Jehovah  is 
the  true  banner  under  which  victory  is  certain ; 
so  to  speak,  the  motto  or  inscription  on  the 
banners  of  the  host.  Inscriptions  on  the  royal 
standard  were  well  known.  Each  of  the  Pha- 
raohs on  his  accession  adopted  one  in  addition 
to  his  official  name. 

16.  Because  the  Lord  hath  s^orn\  This 
rendering  is  incorrect,  but  the  Hebrew  is 


obscure  and  the  true  meaning  is  very  doubt- 
ful. As  the  Hebrew  text  now  stands  the 
literal  interpretation  is  “for  hand  on  throne 
of  Jah,”  which  may  mean,  as  our  margin 
and  as  Ciericus  and  Rosenmiiller  explain  it, 
“because  his  hand  {i.e.  the  hand  of  Amalek) 
is  against  the  throne  of  God,  therefore  the 
Lord  hath  war  with  Amalek  from  generation 
to  generation;”  and  this  on  the  whole,  seems 
to  be  the  most  satisfactory  explanation.  It 
expresses  a certain  fact,  and  keeps  most  closely 
to  the  Hebrew.  The  word  rendered  “throne” 
occurs  in  the  exact  form  in  no  other  passage, 
but  it  may  be  an  archaic  form  of  the  very 
common  word  from  which  it  differs  but 
slightly  (d2  for  and  which  is  found  in 

the  Samaritan.  Our  translators  follow  the 
general  sense  given  by  the  Targum  of  Onkelos 
and  Saadia,  who  agree  in  regarding  the  ex- 
pression as  a solemn  asseveration  by  the  throne 
of  God.  To  this  however  the  objections  are 
insuperable;  it  has  no  parallel  in  Scriptural 
usage:  God  swears  by  Himself,  not  by  His 
Throne. 

An  alteration,  slight  in  form,  but  consider- 
able in  meaning,  has  been  proposed  with  much 
confidence,  viz.  “Nes,”  standard  for  “Kes,” 
throne ; thus  connecting  the  name  of  the  altar 
with  the  sentence.  But  conjectural  emenda- 
tions are  not  to  be  adopted  without  necessity, 
and  the  obvious  a priori  probability  of  such  a 
reading  makes  it  improbable  that  one  so  far 
more  difficult  should  have  been  substituted  for 
it.  One  of  the  surest  canons  of  criticism  mili- 
tates against  its  reception.  The  text  as  it 
stands  was  undoubtedly  that  which  was  alone 
known  to  the  Targumists,  the  Samaritan,  the 
Syriac,  the  Latin  and  the  Arabic  translators. 
Tile  LXX.  appear  to  have  had  a different 
reading,  eV  xfipi  RpyefsaLa  rroXe/xji. 


NOTE  on  -u.  14. 


Rosenmtiller  expresses  himself  without  any 
doubt.  In  his  note  on  the  passage  he  says 
“Memoriale  in  libro  quern  scribere  incepisti:” 
and  in  the  Prolegg.  p.  5,  “Moses dicit  se divino 
jussu  (insidias)  inscripsisse  libro,  incerpto  haud 
dubie,  et  in  cpio  jam  plura  exaraverat,  quod 
cum  articulo  "ippS  (non  scripsit,  quo  in- 

miit  se  de  certo  quodam  et  satis  noto  libro 
locjui.”  Thus  Keil,  “the  book  appointed  for 
the  record  of  the  gUrious  works  of  God;”  and 


Kalisch,  who  renders  it  “the  book:”  he  quotes  ’ 
Aben-Ezra  to  prove  that  a particular  book 
was  referred  to,  and  compares  other  passages 
(Exod.  xxiv.  4,  7,  xxxiv.  27;  Num.  xxxiii.  i,  2, 
xxxvi.  13;  IDeiit.  xxviii.  61).  Knobel  however 
proposes  a different  interpretation,  taking  “in 
the  book”  to  mean  simply,  “in  writing.”  He 
refers  to  Num.  v.  23 ; i S.  x.  25  ; J.er.  xxxii.  10; 
and  Job  xix.  23:  which  prove  that  this 
expression  might  mean  “a  book”  generally, 


V.  1—9.] 


EXODUS.  XVIII. 


325 


provided  no  particular  book  were  already  in 
existence.  It  is  not  however  by  any  means 
equivalent  to  our  expression  “in  writing,” 
which  would  be  a strange  tautology  “write  in 
writing,”  but  in  each  case  a book  or  schedule 
is  meant:  whether  a book  already  begun,  or 
then  to  be  begun,  is  a question  to  be  deter- 
mined by  the  context.  The  argument  for  the 
positive  existence  of  “a  book”  is  not  mate- 
rially affected  by  the  proposed  change:  but 
all  probability  is  in  favour  of  the  natural  and 
obvious  impression  that  Moses  was  command- 
ed to  record  this  particular  transaction  in  “the 


book”  which  related  the  history  of  God’s 
dealings  with  His  people.  The  evidence  for 
the  existence  of  books  of  considerable  extent  is 
stated  in  the  Introduction  to  the  Pentateuch. 
To  this  it  may  be  added  that  under  the  ancient 
Empire,  functionaries  of  the  highest  rank  held 
the  office  of  governor  of  the  Palace  and  of  the 
“house  of  manuscripts;”  see  De  Rouge, 
‘Recherches,’  pp.  73,  85.  The  tutelary  Deity 
of  writing  was  called  Saph  or  Sapheh  (a 
name  apparently  connected  with  the  Hebrew 
“ sepher”)  : a Pharaoh  of  the  5th  Dynasty  bears 
the  style  “beloved  of  Saph.”  1. c.  p.  84. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

I Jethro  hringeth  to  Moses  his  wife  and  two 
sons.  7 Moses  e7itertaineth  hi?n.  13  Je- 
thro's coiuisel  is  accepted.  27  Jethro  departeth. 

2- T T /"HEN  "Jethro,  the  priest  of 
V V Midian,  Moses’  father  in  law, 
heard  of  all  that  God  had  done  for 
Moses,  and  for  Israel  his  people,  and 
that  the  Lord  had  brought  Israel  out 
of  Egypt; 

2 Then  Jethro,  Moses’  father  in 
law,  took  Zipporah,  Moses’  wife,  after 
he  had  sent  her  back, 

3 And  her  two  sons ; of  which  the 
* chap.  2.  ^name  of  the  owo.  was  "Gershom;  for 
« That  is,  he  said,  I have  been  an  alien  in  a 
^//^""^^"strange  land : 

4 And  the  name  of  the  other  was 
" Eliezer ; for  the  God  of  my  father, 

an  help.  Said  vjas  mine  help,  and  delivered 
me  from  the  sword  of  Pharaoh : 


5 And  Jethro,  Moses’  father  in  lav/, 
came  with  his  sons  and  his  wife  unto 
Moses  into  the  wilderness,  where  he 
encamped  at  the  mount  of  God  : 

6 And  he  said  unto  Moses,  I thy 
father  in  law  Jethro  am  come  unto 
thee,  and  thy  wife,  and  her  two  sons 
v/ith  her. 

7 ^ And  Moses  went  out  to  meet 
his  father  in  law,  and  did  obeisance, 
and  kissed  him ; and  they  asked  each 
other  of  their  ^ welfare ; and  they  came  t Heb. 

. 1 peace. 

into  the  tent. 

8 And  Moses  told  his  father  in  law 
all  that  the  Lord  had  done  unto 
Pharaoh  and  to  the  Egyptians  for 
Israel’s  sake,  and  all  the  travail  that 
had  ^ come  upon  them  by  the  way,  and  f Heb. 
how  the  Lord  delivered  them. 

9 And  Jethro  rejoiced  for  all  the 
goodness  which  the  Lord  had  done 


Chap.  XVIII.  The  events  recorded  in  this 
chapter  could  not  have  occupied  many  days, 
fifteen  only  elapsed  between  the  arrival  of  the 
Israelites  in  the  wilderness  of  Spi  and  their 
final  arrival  at  Sinai,  see  ch.  xvi.  i,  and  xix.  i. 
This  leaves  however  sufficient  time  for  the  in- 
terview and  transactions  between  Moses  and 
Jethro. 

1.  Jethro']  See  note  on  ch.  ii.  18.  For  “father 
inlaw”  the  Vulgate  has  cognatus,  an  indefi- 
nite expression.  Jethro  was  in  all  probability 
the  “brother  in  law”  of  Moses.  On  the 
parting  from  Zipporah,  see  note  on  ch.  iv.  26. 

This  chapter,  which  abounds  in  personal  • 
reminiscences  (and  gives  a vivid  impression  of  the 
affectionate  and  confiding  character  of  Moses), 
stands  rather  apart  from  the  general  narrative. 
It  may  have  been  and  probably  was  written  on 
a separate  roll.  The  repetition  of  particulars 
well  known  to  the  reader  is  a general  charac- 
teristic of  such  distinct  portions. 


5.  into  the  ivildemess]  i.  e.  according  to 
the  view  which  seems  on  the  whole  most 
probable,  on  the  plain  near  the  northern  sum- 
mit of  Horeb,  the  mount  of  God.  It  is 
described  by  Robinson,  i.  p.  88,  as  a naked 
desert, — wild  and  desolate.  The  exact  spe- 
cification of  the  locality  may  indicate  a pre-  • 
vious  engagement  between  Moses  and  Jethro 

to  meet  at  this  place.  The  valley  which 
opens  upon  Er  Rahah  on  the  left  of  Horeb 
is  called  by  the  Arabs  Wady  Shueib,  i.e.  the  ^ 
vale  of  Hobab. 

6.  The  LXX.  read,  “And  it  was  told  to 
Moses,  saying,  Lo,  thy  father  in  law  Jether 
is  come.”  This  suits  the  context,  and  is 
probably  the  true  reading. 

7.  did  obeisance]  As  to  an  elder,  the  priest, 
if  not  the  chief,  of  a great  tribe. 

asked  each  other  of  their  welfare]  Or, 
addressed  each  other  with  the  customary  salu- 
tation, “Peace  be  unto  you.” 


326 


EXODUS.  XVIIL 


[v.  lo — 1 6. 


to  Israel,  whom  he  had  delivered  out 
of  the  hand  of  the  Egyptians. 

10  And  Jethro  said,  Blessed  be  the 
Lord,  who  hath  delivered  you  out 
of  the  hand  of  the  Egyptians,  and  out 
of  the  hand  of  Pharaoh,  who  hath  de- 
livered the  people  from  under  the  hand 
of  the  Egyptians. 

11  Now  I know  that  the  Lord  is 
c chap.  I.  greater  than  all  gods  : ‘^for  in  the  thing 
10,^10, 22.  -yyhei-ein  they  dealt  proudly  he  was 
Sc  14.  18.  above  them. 

12  And  Jethro,  Moses’  father  in 
law,  took  a burnt  offering  and  sacrifices 
for  God:  and  Aaron  came,  and  all 
the  elders  of  Israel,  to  eat  bread  with 
Moses’  father  in  law  before  God. 

13  H And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 


morrow,  that  Moses  sat  to  judge  the 
people : and  the  people  stood  by 
Moses  from  the  morning  unto  the 

evenino;. 

14  And  when  Moses’  father  in  lav/ 
saw  all  that  he  did  to  the  people,  he 
said.  What  is  this  thing  that  thou 
doest  to  the  people  ? why  sittest  thou 
thyself  alone,  and  all  the  people  stand 
by  thee  from  morning  unto  even 

15  And  Moses  said  unto  his  father 
in  law.  Because  the  people  come  unto 
me  to  inquire  of  God : 

16  When  they  have  a matter,  they 
come  unto  me;  and  I judge  between 

^ one  and  another,  and  I do  makenieb. 
the?n  know  the  statutes  of  God,  and  nmaas 
his  laws. 


11.  greater  than  all  gods^  This  does  not 
prove  that  Jethro  recognized  the  existence 
or  power  of  other  Deities,  for  the  expression 
is  not  uncommon  in  the  mouth  of  Hebrew 
monotheists,  and  corresponds  exactly  to  the 
tei'rns  in  which  Moses  had  himself  celebrated 
the  overthrow  of  the  Egyptians ; see  note  on 
ch.  XV,  II.  It  simply  indicates  a conviction  of 
the  incomparable  might  and  majesty  of  Jeho- 
vah. 

for  in.. .abo've  them]  Lit.  For  (this  is  sheavn) 
in  the  matter  wherein  they  dealt 
proudly  against  them.  The  construction 
depends  upon  the  previous  clause ; the  meaning 
is,  for  I know  the  greatness  of  Jehovah  by  the 
very  transaction  whei'ein  the  Egyptians  dealt 
haughtily  and  cruelly  against  the  Israelites. 
Jethro  refers  especially  to  the  destruction  of 
the  Egyptian  host  in  the  Red  Sea,  and  very 
probably  to  the  words  in  which  Moses  him- 
self had  celebrated  that  event;  see  ch.  xv.  ii. 

12.  a burnt  offering  and  sacrifices]  This 
verse  clearly  shews  that  Jethro  was  recognized 
as  a priest  of  the  true  God.  The  identity  of 
religious  faith  could  not  be  more  conclusively 
proved  than  by  the  participation  in  the  sacri- 
ficial feast.  I'his  passage  is  of  great  import- 
ance in  its  bearings  upon  the  relation  between 
the  Israelites  and  their  congeners,  and  upon 
the  state  of  religion  among  the  descendants  of 
Abraham. 

13.  In  the  following  passage  the  change 
in  the  organization  of  the  people,  by  which 
the  burden  of  judicial  procetxlings  was  trans- 
fern'd  in  great  part  from  Moses  to  subordinate 
officers,  is  attributed  entirely  to  the  counsel  of 
Jethro.  'I'his  is  important  for  several  reasons. 
It  is  certain  that  no  late  writer  would  have  in- 


vented such  a stoiy.  and  most  improbable  that 
tradition  would  have  long  preserved  the  me- 
mory of  a transaction  which  to  Israelites  might 
naturally  seem  derogatory  to  their  legislator. 
Nothing  however  can  be  more  characteristic 
of  Moses,’  who  combines  on  all  occasions 
distrust  of  himself,  and  singular  openness  to 
impressions,  with  the  wisdom  and  sound 
judgment  which  chooses  the  best  course  when 
pointed  out.  It  is  remiarkable  that  an  institu- 
tion so  novel  and  important  should  have  pre- 
ceded the  promulgation  of  the  Sinaitic  law. 

fro7n  the  tnorning  unto  the  evening]  It  may 
be  assumed  as  at  least  probable  that  numerous 
cases  of  difficulty  arose  out  of  the  division  of 
the  sjioil  of  the  Amialekites:  this  was  more- 
over the  first  station  at  which  the  Israelites 
appear  to  have  rested  long  after  their  departure 
from  Elim,  and  causes  would  of  course  ac- 
cumulate during  the  journey. 

15.  to  inquire  of  God]  The  decisions  of 
Moses  were  doubtless  accepted  by  the  people 
as  oracles.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  he  consulted,  or  that  the  people  expected 
him  to  consult,  the  Lord  by  Urim  andThum- 
mim,  which  are  first  mentioned  xxviii.  3c, 
where  see  note.  The  internal  prompting  of 
the  Spirit  was  a sufficient  guidance  for  him, 
and  a sufficient  authority  for  the  people. 

16.  the  statutes  of  God,  and  his  la^vs] 
This  would  seem  to  imply  that  in  deciding 
each  particular  case  Moses  explained  the  prin- 
ciples of  right  and  justice  on  which  his 
decision  rested.  It  became,  so  to  speak,  a 
precedent;  he  can  scarcely'  be  supposed  to 
refer  to  any  existing  code,  the  necessity  for 
which  must,  however,  have  soon  become  appa- 
rent, preparing  the  people  for  the  legislation 
given  within  a few  days  at  Sinai. 


V.  17—27.] 


EXODUS.  XVIII. 


327 


f Heb. 
Fading 
ihou  wilt 
fade. 

Deut.  I. 
9- 


17  And  Moses’  father  in  law  said 
unto  him,  The  thing  that  thou  doest 
is  not  good.  ' 

18  ^Thou  wilt  surely  wear  away, 
both  thou,  and  this  people  that  is  with 
thee : for  this  thing  is  too  heavy  for 
thee ; '^thou  art  not  able  to  perform  it 
thyself  alone. 

19  Hearken  now  unto  my  voice,  I 
will  give  thee  counsel,  and  God  shall 
be  with  thee  : Be  thou  for  the  people 
to  God-ward,  that  thou  mayest  bring 
the  causes  unto  God : 

20  And  thou  shalt  teach  them 
ordinances  and  laws,  and  shalt  shew 
them  the  way  wherein  they  must  walk, 
and  the  work  that  they  must  do. 

21  Moreover  thou  shalt  provide  out 
of  all  the  people  able  men,  such  as 
fear  God,  men  of  truth,  hating  covet- 
ousness; and  place  such  over  them,' 
to  be  rulers  of  thousands,  and  rulers  of 
hundreds,  rulers  of  fifties,  and  rulers 
of  tens : 

22  And  let  them  judge  the  people 


at  all  seasons : and  it  shall  be,  that 
every  great  matter  they  shall  bring 
unto  thee,  but  every  small  matter  they 
shall  judge:  so  shall  it  be  easier  for 
thyself,  and  they  shall  bear  the  burden 
with  thee. 

23  If  thou  shalt  do  this  thing,  and 
God  command  thee  so.,  then  thou  shalt 
be  able  to  endure,  and  all  this  people 
shall  also  go  to  their  place  in  peace. 

24  So  Moses  hearkened  to  the  voice 
of  his  father  in  law,  and  did  all  that 
he  had  said. 

25  And  Moses  chose  able  men  out 
of  all  Israel,  and  made  them  heads 
over  the  people,  rulers  of  thoasands, 
rulers  of  hundreds,  rulers  of  fifties, 
and  rulers  of  tens. 

26  And  they  judged  the  people  at 
all  seasons : the  hard  causes  they 
brought  unto  Moses,  but  every  small 
matter  they  judged  themselves. 

27  ^ And  Moses  let  his  father  in 
law  depart ; and  he  went  his  way  into 
his  own  land. 


18.  Thou  nvilt  surely  nvear  a'way'\  This 
expresses  the  true  sense:  the  Hebrew  word 
implies  decay  and  exhaustion. 

19.  counsel]  In  this  counsel  Jethro  draws 
a distinction,  probably  not  previously  recog- 
nized, between  the  functions  of  the  legislator 
and  the  judge.  Moses  as  legislator  stands  be- 
tween the  people  and  God.  He  brings  the 
cause  to  God,  and  learns  from  Him  the  prin- 
ciple by  which  it  is  to  be  determined : and  in 
the  next  place,  sets  before  the  people  the  whole 
system  of  ordinances  and  laws  by  which  they 
are  to  be  henceforth  guided.  As  judge  Moses 
decides  all  difficult  cases  in  the  last  resort, 
leaving  questions  of  detail  to  offxcei's  chosen 
by  himself  from  the  people. 

to  God-qvard]  lit.  “before  God,”  standing 
between  them  and  God,  both  as  His  minister, 
or  representative:  and  also  as  the  representa- 
tive of  the  people,  their  agent,  so  to  speak,  or 
deputy  before  God. 

20.  teach  them]  The  Hebrew  word  is 
emphatic,  and  signifies  “enlightenment.”  The 
text  gives  four  distinct  points,  {a)  the  ‘ ‘ ordi- 
nances,” or  specific  enactments,  {h)  “the laws,” 
or  general  regulations,  (c)  “the  way, ’’the  general 
course  of  duty,  (i)  “the  work,”  each  spe- 
cific act. 

21.  able  men]  This  gives  the  true  force 
of  the  Hebrew,  literally  “men  of  might;” 
i.e.  strength  of  character  and  ability.  The 


qualifications  are  remarkably  complete,  ability, 
piety,  truthfulness  and  unselfishness.  The  re- 
commendation leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  faith 
of  Jethro,  though,  with  the  usual  care  observed 
by  Moses  in  relating  the  v/ords  of  pious  Gen- 
tiles, he  is  represented  as  using  the  general  ex- 
pression God,  not  the  revealed  name  Jehovah. 
From  Deut.  i.  13,  it  appears  that  Moses  left 
the  selection  of  the  persons  to  the  people,  an 
example  followed  by  the  Apostles;  see  Acts 
vi.  3- 

rulers  of  thousands,  &c.]  This  minute  classi- 
fication of  the  people  is  thoroughly  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Semitic  character,  and  was 
retained  in  after  ages.  The  numbers  appear  to 
be  conventional,  corresponding  nearly,  but  not 
exactly,  to  the  military,  or  civil  divisions  of 
the  people.  The  number  “ten”  denotes  in 
Arabic,  and  may  have  denoted  in  Hebrew, 
a family;  the  largest  division  1000  is  used  as 
an  equivalent  of  a gens  under  one  head,  Num. 
i.  16,  X.  4;  Josh.  xxii.  14. 

The  word  “rulers,”  sometimes  rendered 
“princes,”  is  general,  including  all  ranks  of 
officials  placed  in  command.  The  same  word 
is  used  regularly  on  Egyptian  monuments  of 
the  time  of  Moses:  see  note  on  ch.  i.  ii. 

23.  to  their  place]  i.e.  to  Canaan,  which 
is  thus  recognized  by  Jethro  as  the  appointed 
and  true  home  of  Israel. 

27.  into  his  Q<vjn  land]  Midian.  This 


328 


EXODUS.  XIX. 


[v.  I — 6. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

I The  people  come  to  Sinai.  3 God's  message 
hy  Moses  unto  the  people  out  of  the  mount. 
8 The  people's  answer  returned  agam.  10 
• The  people  are  prepared  against  the  third  day. 

12  The  motentain  ?mist  not  be  touched.  16 
The  fearful  presentee  of  God  upon  the  7noimt. 

IN  the  third  month,  when  the 
children  of  Israel  were  gone  forth 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  the  same 
. day  came  they  jnio  the  wilderness  of 
Sinai. 

2  For  they  were  departed  from 
Rephidim,  and  were  come  to  the  desert 
of  Sinai,  and  had  pitched  in  the  wil- 
derness; and  there  Israel  camped  be- 
fore the  mount. 

3  ^57.  ^ « Moses  went  up  unto  God, 


and  the  Lord  called  unto  him  out  of 
the  mountain,  saying.  Thus  shalt  thou 
say  to  the  house  of  Jacob,  and  tell  the 
children  of  Israel ; 

4 ^ Ye  have  seen  what  I did  unto  * Deut.  29. 
the  Egyptians,  and  how  I bare  you  on 
eagles’  v/ings,  and  brought  you  unto 
myself. 

5 Now '^therefore,  if  ye  will  obey  Deut.  5. 

my  voice  indeed,  and  keep  my  cove- 
nant, then  ye  shall  be  a peculiar  trea- 
sure unto  me  above  all  people : for  ^all  ^Deut.  10. 
the  earth  is  mine : ^ i4ai.  24.  i. 

6 And  ye  shall  be  unto  me  a ^king-  ^ Pet-  2. 
dom  of  priests,  and  an  holy  nation.  liev.  1.  6. 
These  are  the  words  which  thou  shalt 
speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel. 


expression  is  favourable  to  the  view  that  the 
home  of  Midian  was  on  the  east  of  the  Red 
Sea,  and  not  in  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai.  If  the 
identity  of  Jethro  with  Hobab  be  assumed,  he 
must  have  returned  and  met  Moses  once  more 
after  the  departure  from  Sinai.  See  Numbers 
X.  29 — 32.  It  seems  however  far  more  proba- 
ble that  Hobab  was  his  brother.  See  note  on 
ch.  ii.  18. 

Chap.  XIX.  1.  In  the  third  month~\  This 
expression  does  not  determine  the  exact  day : 
the  word  “month”  is  not  found  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch in  the  sense  of  new  moon,  or  the 
first  day  of  the  month,  which  has  been  at- 
tributed to  it  in  this  passage  by  many  eminent 
critics.  Still  the  natural  impression  made  by 
this  statement  is  that  the  arrival  of  the  Israel- 
ites coincided  with  the  beginning  of  the  third 
month. 

the  nvilderness  of  Sinai]  See  note  at  the  end 
of  the  book. 

3.  Moses  nvent  up  unto  God]  This  seems 
to  imply  that  the  voice  was  heard  by  Moses 
as  he  was  ascending  the  mount. 

house  of  Jacob]  This  expression  does  not 
occur  elsewhere  in  tf.e  Pentateuch.  It  has  a 
45eculiar  fitness  h.ere,  referring  doubtless  to  the 
special  premises  made  to  the  Patriarch. 

4.  on  eagles'  ru;if?gj]  Bochart,  after  quoting 
passages  from  jTlian,  Appian  and  other 
writers,  observes  that  Moses  gives  a perfect 
explanation  of  the  simile  in  Deuteronomy 
xxxii.  II.  He  adds  “It  is  to  be  obscived  that 
both  in  the  law  ard  in  Ih.e  gospel  the  Church 
is  com.parcd  to  fledgelings  which  the  mother 
cherishes  and  protects  under  her  wings:  but 
in  the  law  that  mother  is  an  eagle,  in  the 
gospel  a hen ; thus  shadowing  forth  the  di- 
versity of  administration  under  each  Cove- 
nant: tne  one  ot  power,  which  G(jd  manifest- 


ed when  He  brought  His  people  out  of  Egypt 
with  a mighty  hand  and  an  outstretched  aim, 
and  led  them  into  the  promised  land;  the 
other  of  grace,  when  Christ  came  in  humility 
and  took  the  form  of  a servant  and  became 
obedient  unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the 
Cross.”  Bochart  however,  remarks,  that  the 
simile  of  an  eagle  is  applied  to  Christ  when 
He  vindicates  His  people  from  the  Dragon, 
Rev.  xii.  14.  See  Hierozoicon,  lib.  il.  ch.  22, 
§ 3 ancl  4. 

5.  a peculiar  treasure]  This  expresses 
the  true  sense  of  the  Hebrew  word,  which 
designates  a costly  possession  acquired  with 
exertion,  and  carefully  guarded.  The  peculiar 
relation  in  which  Israel  stands,  taken  out  of 
the  Heathen  world  and  consecrated  to  God, 
as  his  slaves,  subjects,  and  children,  determines 
their  privileges,  and  is  the  foundation  of  their 
duties.  The  same  principle  applies  even  in 
a stronger  sense  to  the  Church.  See  Acts 
XX.  28;  I Cor.  vi.  20;  I Pet.  ii.  9. 

all  the  earth  is  mine]  This  is  added, ’as  we 
m.ay  believe,  to  impress  upon  the  Jews  that 
their  God  was  no  mere  national  Deity,  a point 
of  great  practical  importance. 

6.  a kingdom  of  priests]  The  exact 
meaning  of  this  expression,  as  it  was  under- 
stood by  all  the  ancient  translators,  and  as  it 
is  explained  in  the  New  Testament,  is  that 
Israel  collectively  is  a royal  and  priestly  race: 
a dynasty  of  priests,  each  true  member  unitir.g 
in  himself  the  attributes  of  a king  and  priest. 
The  word  “kingdom”  is  not  taken  in  the 
modern  sense,  as  a collective  name  for  the 
subjects  of  a king,  but  in  the  old  Hebrew  sense 
of  “royalty,”  or  “dynasty.”  Thus  nearly  all 
ancient  and  modern  commentators  explain  the 
words.  (The  LXX.  fiacrikeiov  UpaTevfxa,  Tar- 
gum  Onk.  kings  and  priests ; Jonathan,  crown- 
ed kings  and  ministering  priests.) 


V.  7 — 


EXODUS.  XIX. 


329 


7 ^ And  Moses  came  and  called 
for  the  elders  of  the  people,  and  laid 
before  their  faces  all  these  words 
which  the  Lord  commanded  him. 

/ chap.  24.  g And  all  the  people  answered 

iK^ut.  5.  together,  and  said,  All  that  the  Lord 
& 26. 17.  spoken  we  will  do.  And  Moses 

returned  the  words  of  the  people  unto 
the  Lord. 

9 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Lo,  I come  unto  thee  in  a thick 
cloud,  that  the  people  may  hear  when 
I speak  with  thee,  and  believe  thee 
for  ever.  And  Moses  told  the  words 
of  the  people  unto  the  Lord. 

10  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Go  unto  the  people,  and  sanctify 
them  to  day  and  to  morrow,  and  let 
them  wash  their  clothes, 

1 1 And  be  ready  against  the  third 
day : for  the  third  day  the  Lord  will 
come  down  in  the  sight  of  all  the 
people  upon  mount  Sinai. 

12  And  thou  shalt  set  bounds  un- 
to the  people  round  about,  saying. 


Take  heed  to  yourselves,  that  ye  go 
not  up  into  ,the  mount,  or  touch  the 
border  of  it:  ^whosoever  toucheth  ^ 12. 
the  mount  shall  be  surely  put  to 
death : 

13  There  shall  not  an  hand  touch 
it,  but  he  shall  surely  be  stoned,  or 
shot  through ; whether  it  be  beast  or 
man,  it  shall  not  live : when  the 

■ trumpet  soundeth  long,  they  shall  ti  Or, 
come  up  to  the  mount.  comet. 

14  ^ And  Moses  v/ent  down  from 
the  mount  unto  the  people,  and  sanc- 
tified the  people ; and  they  v/ashed 
their  clothes. 

15  And  he  said  unto  the  people. 

Be  ready  against  the  third  day : come 
not  at  your  wives. 

16  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
third  day  in  the  morning,  that  there 
v/ere  thunders  and  lightnings,  and  a 
thick  cloud  upon  the  mount,  and  the 
voice  of  the  trumpet  exceeding  loud ; 
so  that  all  the  people  that  was  in  the 
camp  trembled. 


a}t  holy  nation]  The  holiness  of  Israel  con- 
sisted in  its  special  consecration  to  God;  it 
was  a sacred  nation,  sacred  by  adoption,  by 
covenant,  and  by  participation  in  all  means  of 
grace.  The  radical  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 
“Khodesh”  appears  to  be  clean,  clear 

from  all  pollution  bodily  or  spiritual,”  rather 
than,  as  many  critics  have  assumed,  “sepa- 
rate and  set  apart.”  The  distinction  between 
official  consecration,  and  internal  holiness  is 
secondary,  and  scarcely  seemis  to  have  lain 
within  the  scope  of  the  Hebrew  mind:  the 
ideas  were  inseparable. 

8.  All  that  the  Lord^  &c.J  By  this  answer 
the  people  accepted  the  covenant.  It  was  the 
preliminary  condition  of  their  complete  admis- 
sion into  the  state  of  a royal  priesthood. 

9.  in  a thick  cloud]  Or  “in  the  darkness 
of  cloud,”  i.e.  in  the  midst  of  the  dense  cloud 
which  indicated  the  Presence  of  Jehovah.  The 
people  were  to  hear  the  voice  of  God,  dis- 
tinctly announcing  the  fundamental  principles 
of  the  eternal  law. 

10.  sanctify  theni]  The  injunction  in- 
volves bodily  purification  and  undoubtedly 
also  spiritual  preparation.  Thus  Heb.  x.  22, 
“our  hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience, 
and  our  bodies  washed  with  pure  water.”  The 
washing  of  the  clothes  was  an  outward  symbol 
well  understood  in  all  nations.  The  sup}>ly 


of  water  in  the  region  about  Sinai  is  repeatedly 
stated  by  Burckhardt  and  other  travellers  to 
be  abundant.  In  Deut.  ix.  21,  we  read  of  the 
brook  descending  from  the  mount. 

11.  the  third  day]  The  significance  of  the 
expression  “third  day”  scarcely  needs  to  be 
pointed  out;  whether  this  third  day  fell  on 
the  Jewish  or  Christian  Sabbath  is  quite  un- 
certain ; but  it  can  scarcely  have  corresponded 
to  the  day  of  Pentecost,  as  Bp.  Wordsworth 
holds  on  the  authority  of  an  ancient  and 
widely  accredited  tradition : more  than  60  days 
had  elapsed  since  the  Passover,  See  the  article 
on  Pentecost  in  Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’ 

12.  set  bounds  unto  the  people]  The  access 
to  the  base  of  the  mountain  is  evidently  shewn 
to  have  been  otherwise  unimpeded.  Dr  Stan- 
ley speaks  of  the  low  line  of  alluvial  mounds 
at  the  foot  of  the  cliff  of  Ras  Safsafeh  as 
exactly  answering  to  the  bounds  which  v/ere 
to  keep  the  people  off  from  touching  the  mount ; 
but  the  bounds  here  spoken  of  were  to  be  set 
up  by  Moses. 

13.  touch  it]  Rather  “touch  him.”  The 
person  was  not  to  be  touched,  since  the  contact 
v/ould  be  pollution.  He  was  to  be  stoned  or 
shot  with  an  arrow;  or  probably  with  a jave- 
lin, as  was  customary  in  later  times. 

ojjhcn  the  trumpet^  &c.]  When  the  trumpet 
sounded  those  wljo  were  specially  called  might 
ascend. 


350 


h Deut. 


tHeb. 

contest. 


EXODUS.  XIX.  b-i7-2. 


17  And  Moses  brought  forth  the 
people  out  of  the  camp  to  meet  with 
God;  and  they  stood  at  the  nether 
part  of  the  mount. 

18  And  mount  Sinai  was  altoge- 
ther on  a smoke,  because  the  Lord 
descended  upon  it  in  lire:  and  the 
smoke  thereof  ascended  as  the  smoke 
of  a furnace,  and  the  whole  mount 
quaked  greatly. 

19  And  when  the  voice  of  the 
trumpet  sounded  long,  and  waxed 
louder  and  louder,  Moses  spake,  and 
God  answered  him  by  a voice. 

20  And  the  Lord  came  down  up- 
on mount  Sinai,  on  the  top  of  the 
mount:  and  the  Lord  called  Moses 
up  to  the  top  of  the  mount ; and  Mo- 
ses went  up. 

21  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Go  down,  ^charge  the  people,  lest 
they  break  through  unto  the  Lord  to 
gaze,  and  many  of  them  perish. 

22  And  let  the  priests  also,  which 
come  near  to  the  Lord,  sanctify 


themselves,  lest  the  Lord  break  forth 
upon  them. 

23  And  Moses  said  unto  the  Lord, 

The  people  cannot  come  up  to  mount 
Sinai : for  thou  chargedst  us,  saying. 

Set  bounds  about  the  mount,  and  sanc- 
tify it. 

24  And  the  Lord  said  unto  him. 

Away,  get  thee  down,  and  thou  shalt 
come  up,  thou,  and  Aaron  with  thee : 
but  let  not  the  priests  and  the  peo- 
ple break  through  to  come  up  unto  the  . 
Lord,  lest  he  break  forth  upon  them. 

25  So  Moses  went  down  unto  the 
people,  and  spake  unto  them. 

CHAPTER  XX. 

I The  ten  commandments.  18  The  people  are 
afraid.  10  Moses  comfendeth  them.  22  Idola- 
tiy  is  forbidden.  Of  what  sort  the  altar 
should  be. 

And  God  spake  all  these  words, 

^ saying,  ^ ^ 

2 " I am  the  Lord  thy  God,  v/hich  ^ 
have  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of  10.  ' ' 

Egypt,  out  of  the  house  of  ' bondage,  saiants. 


17.  out  of  the  camp^  The  encampment 
must  liave  extended  far  and  wide  over  the 
plain  in  front  of  the  mountain.  From  one 
entrance  of  the  plain  to  the  other  there  is 
space  for  the  whole  host  of  the  Israelites.  This 
is  a point  which  has  been  determined  by  accu- 
rate measurement  of  the  valley.  See  note  at 
the  end  of  Exodus. 

18.  a furnace]  The  word  is  Egyptian, 
and  occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch. 

22.  the  priests  also]  I'he  Eevitical  priest- 
hood was  not  yet  instituted,  but  sacrifices 
had  hitherto  been  offered  by  persons  who 
were  recognized  as  having  the  right  or  autho- 
rity : according  to  the  very  probable  account 
of  Rabbinical  writers  these  were  the  first- 
born, or  the  heads  of  families,  until  they  were 
supei'seded  by  the  Aaronic  priesthood. 

The  Tex  Commandments. 

ClIAE.  XX.  I — 17. 

On  the  Ten  Commanduients,  taken  as  a 
whole,  see  Note  after  o).  21.  I'he  account 
of  tlie  delivery  of  them  in  chap.  xix.  and  in 
mv.  18 — 21  of  this  chap,  is  in  accordance 
with  their  imjiortance  as  the  recognized  basis 
of  the  Covenant  between  Jehovah  and  His 
ancient  jieople  (Exod.-xxxiv.  27,  28;  Deut. 
iv.  13;  I K.  viii.  21,  &c.),  and  as  the  Divine 
testimony  against  tlie  sinful  tendencies  in  man 
for  all  ages.  Jewish  writers  liave  speculated 
as  to  the  mode  in  which  the  Divine  com- 


munication was  made  to  the  people  (Philo, 
‘de  Orac.’  c.  9;  Palestine  Targum,  &c.).  It 
may  be  noticed  that,  while  it  is  here  said  that 
“God  spake  all  these  words,”  and  in  Deut. 
V.  4,  that  He  “spake  face  to  face,”  in  the  New 
Testament  the  giving  of  the  Law  is  spoken  of  as 
having  been  through  the  ministration  of  angels 
(Acts  vii.  53;  Gal.  iii.  19;  Heb.  ii.  2).  We 
can  only  reconcile  these  contrasts  of  language 
by  keeping  in  mind  that  God  is  a Spirit,  and 
that  He  is  essentially  present  in  the  agents 
who  are  performing  His  will.  A similar  dif- 
ficulty was  felt  by  some  in  St  Augustin’s 
time  in  reconciling  Gen,  i.  i with  John  i.  3. 
(‘Cont.  Adimant.  Man.’  c.  i.) — Josephus  ap- 
pears as  the  only  witness  for  the  superstition, 
which  was  probably  common  amongst  the 
Pharisees  of  his  day,  that  it  was  not  lawful  to 
utter  the  very  words  in  which  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments were  originally  expressed  (‘Ant.’ 
III.  5,  § 4).  It  is  remarkable  that  there  seems 
to  be  no  trace  of  this  in  the  rabbinists. — The 
Two  Tables  of  stone  on  which  the  Com- 
mandm.ents  were  inscribed  are  mentioned  ch. 
xxiv.  12,  xxxi.  18. 

2.  avhich  haaoe  brought  thee  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt out  of  the  house  of  bondage]  It  was  a 
rabbinical  question.  Why,  on  this  occasion, 
was  not  THE  Lord  ratlier  proclaimed  as  “the 
Creator  of  Heaven  and  Earth”?  The  true 
answer  evidently  is,  That  the  'Pen  Command- 
ments M'ere  at  this  time  addressed  by  Jehovah 


V.  3—5-] 


EXODUS.  XX. 


33 


3 I'hou  shalt  have  no  other  gods 
before  me. 

» Lev.  26.  4 ^ Thou  shalt  not  make  unto  thee 

Psai.  97. 7.  any  graven  image,  or  any  likeness  of 
any  thmg  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or 
that  is  in  the  earth  beneath,  or  that  is 
in  the  water  under  the  earth : 


5 Thou  shalt  not  bow  down  thy-  • 
self  to  them,  nor  serve  them:  for  I 
the  Lord  thy  God  ain  a jealous 
God,  visiting  the  iniquity  of  the  fa- 
thers upon  the  children  unto  the  third 
and  fourth  generation  of  them  that 
hate  me; 


not  merely  to  human  creatures,  but  to  the 
people  whom  He  had  redeemed,  to  those  who 
had  been  in  bondage,  but  were  now  free  men. 
(Exod.  vi.  6,  7,  xix.  5.)  The  Command- 
ments are  expressed  in  absolute  terms.  They 
are  not  sanctioned  by  ouHvard  penalties,  as  if 
for  slaves,  but  are  addressed  at  once  to  the 
conscience,  as  for  free  men.  The  well-being 
of  the  nation  called  for  the  infliction  of  penal- 
ties, and  therefore  statutes  were  passed  to 
punish  offenders  who  blasphemed  the  name  of 
Jehovah,  who  profaned  the  Sabbath,  or  who 
committed  murder  or  adultery.  (See  on  Lev. 
xviii.  24 — 30.)  But  these  penal  statutes  were 
not  to  be  the  ground  of  obedience  for  the  true 
Israelite  according  to  the  Covenant.  He  was 
to  know  Jehovah  as  his  Redeemer,  and  was 
to  obey  Him  as  such.  (Cf.  Rom.  xiii.  5 ; 
see  Note  after  2;.  21,  § V.) 

3.  before  me\  Uiter^Wy^  before  my  face.  The 
meaning  is  that  no  god  should  be  worshipped 
in  addition  to  Jehovah.  Cf.  2;.  23.  The  render- 
ing in  our  Prayer-Book,  but  me.,  with  that  of 
the  LXX.  TiKriv  e’juou,  does  not  so  well  repre- 
sent the  Hebrew.  The  polytheism  which  was 
the  besetting  sin  of  the  Israelites  in  later  times 
did  not  exclude  Jehovah,  but  it  associated 
Him  with  false  deities.  See  Note  on  xxxiv.  13. 

4.  granjen  image~\  Any  sort  of  image  is 
here  intended.  The  Hebrew  word  {pesel^ 
strictly  means  a carved  image,  mostly  denot- 
ing one  of  wood  or  stone,  and  in  some  places 
it  is  distinguished  from  a molten  image  of 
metal  (massekafS) : but  as  molten  images  were 
finished  up  with  a graver  or  carving  tool,  pesel 
is  sometimes  applied  to  them  (Is.  xl.  19,  xliv. 
loj  Jer.  x.  14,  &:c.),  and  is  frequently  used, 
as  it  is  here,  for  a general  name  for  images  of 
all  sorts. 

or  any  likeness^  This  may  be  rendered,  even 
anylikeness.  What  follows  in  the  verse 
expresses  the  whole  material  creation ; it  is 
expanded  in  detail  in  Deut.  iv.  16 — 19. 

5.  Thou  shalt  not  boqv  do^jun  thyself  to  them, 
nor  sern)e  theni]  The  antecedent  to  them  in 
each  clause  appears  to  be  the  likenesses  of 
things  in  heaven  and  earth  spoken  of  in  the 
preceding  verse.  It  has  been  observed  that, 
according  to  the  Hebrew  idiom,  these  clauses 
may  have  a strict  grammatical  connection 
with  “Thou  shalt  not  make,”  &c.  in  2;.  4. 
The  meaning  certainly  is  to  prohibit  the  making 
of  the  likeness  of  any  material  thing,  in  order  to 


worship  it.  For  a similar  form  of  expression, 
see  Num.  xxii.  12.  As  the  First  Command- 
ment forbids  the  worship  of  any  false  god, 
seen  or  unseen,  it  is  here  forbidden  to  worship 
an  image  of  any  sort,  whether  the  figure  of  a 
false  deity  or  one  iq  any  way  symbolical  of 
Jehovah  (see  on  xxxii.  4).  The  spintual  acts 
of  worship  were  symbolized  in  the  furniture 
and  ritual  of  the  Tabernacle  and  the  Altar, 
and  for  this  end  the  forms  of  living  things 
might  be  employed  as  in  the  case  of  the  Che- 
rubim (see  on  xxv.  18):  but  the  presence  of 
the  invisible  God  was  to  be  marked  by  no 
symbol  of  Himself,  but  by  His  words  written 
on  stones,  preserved  in  the  Ark  in  the  Holy 
of  Holies  and  covered  by  the  Mercy-seat. 
On  the  repudiation  of  images  of  the  Deity 
by  the  ancient  Persians,  see  Herodot.  i.  13 1; 
Strabo,  xv.  p.  732;  and  by  the  earliest  legis- 
lators of  Rome,  see  Plut.  ‘Numa,’  8;  Au- 
gustin. ‘de  Civ.  Dei,’  iv.  31. 

The  Jews,  not  recognizing  the  connection 
between  ‘V'v.  4 and  5,  have  imagined  uk  4 to 
be  a prohibition  of  the  exercise  of  the  arts  of 
painting  and  sculpture.  Considering  the  Che- 
rubim of  the  Mercy-seat  and  of  the  curtains 
of  the  Tabernacle,  the  pomt^granates  of  the 
High-priest’s  robe,  and  the  fruits  and  flowers 
of  the  Candlestick,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
sculptures  of  the  Temple  in  later  times  (i  K. 
vi.  23  sq.,  vii.  27  sq.),  any  such  notion  as  this 
must  show  the  prejudiced  and  fragmentary 
way  in  which  they  were  tempted  to  study  the 
Scriptures.  Philo  declares  that  Moses  con- 
demned to  perpetual  banishment  the  cheating 
arts  (em^ovXoi  re'xi'aO  of  painters  and  sculp- 
tors (‘Quis  div.  rer.  heres.’  c.  35;  ‘de  Orac.’ 
c.  29).  Josephus  charges  Solomon  with  a 
breach  of  the  Law,  on  account  of  the  ’oxen 
which  supported  the  brazen  sea,  and  the  lions 
which  adorned  his  throne  (‘Ant.’  viii.  7,  § 5) : 
and  in  direct  contradiction  of  Exod.  xxvi.  31, 
he  denies  that  the  vail  which  concealed  the 
Most  Holy  Place  was  ornamented  with  living 
creatures.  (‘Ant.’ iii.  6,  § 4.)  This  preju- 
dice, from  the  time  when  the  pharisaic  tend- 
ency began  to  work  on  the  mind  of  the 
nation,  must  have  effectually  checked  the  pro- 
gress of  the  imitative  arts. 

for  I the  Lord  thy^  God  am  a jealous  God'\ 
Deut. vi.  15  ; Josh.xxiv.  19;  Is. xlii.  8,  xlviii.  ir ; 
Nahum  i.  2.  This  reason  applies  to  the  First, 
as  well  as  to  the  Second  Commandment.  The 
truth  expressed  in  it  was  declared  more  fully 


332 


EXODUS.-  XX. 


[v.  6 — 8. 


6 And  shewing  mercy  unto  thou- 

Lev.  19.  sands  of  them  that  love  me,  and  keep 
)eut  commandments. 

7 ^ Thou  shalt  not  take  the 
3*^“-  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in 


vain;  for  the  Lord  will  not  hold 
him  guiltless  that  taketh  his  name  in 
vain. 

8  Remember  the  sabbath  day,  to 
keep  it  holy. 


to  Moses  when  the  name  of  Jehovah  was  pro- 
claimed to  him  after  he  had  interceded  for 
Israel  on  account  of  the  golden  calf  (xxxiv. 
6,  7 ; see  note). 

'I'isiiing  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the 
childreri]  The  visitation  here  spoken  of  can 
hardly  be  any  other  than  that  which  we  are 
accustomed  to  witness  ip  the  common  experi- 
ence of  life.  (Cf.  xxxiv.  7;  Jer.  xxxii.  18.) 
Sons  and  remote  descendants  inherit  the  con- 
sequences of  their  fathers’  sins,  in  disease, 
poverty,  captivity,  with  all  the  influences  of 
bad  example  and  evil  communications.  (See 
Lev.  xxvi.  39;  Lam.  v.  7 sq.)  The  “in- 
herited curse”  seems  to  fall  often  most  heavily 
on  the  least  guilty  persons,  as  is  abundantly 
proved  in  all  history  and  is  pointedly  illustrated 
in  Greek  tragedy.  But  such  suffering  must 
always  be  free  from  the  sting  of  conscience ; it 
is  not  like  the  visitation  for  sin  on  the  in- 
dividual by  whom  the  sin  has  been  committed. 
The  suffering,  or  loss  of  advantages,  entailed 
on  the  unoffending  son,  is  a condition  under 
which  he  has  to  carry  on  the  struggle  of 
life,  and,  like  all  other  inevitable  conditions 
imposed  upon  men,  it  cannot  tend  to  his 
ultim.ate  disadvantage,  if  he  struggles  Vv^ell 
and  perseveres  to  the  end.  He  m.ay  never 
attaiii  in  this  world  to  a high  standard  of 
knowledge,  or  of  outward  conduct,  compared 
with  others,  but  the  Searcher  of  hearts  will 
regard  him  with  favour,  not  in  proportion  to 
his  visible  conduct,  but  to  his  unseen  struggles. 
As  regards  the  administration  of  justice  by 
earthly  tribunals,  the  Law  holds  good,  “The 
fathers  shall  not  be  put  to  death  for  the 
children,  neither  shall  the  children  be  put  to 
death  for  the  fathers;  every  man  shall  be  put 
to  death  for  his  own  sin”  (Deut.  xxiv.  16). 
The  same  principle  is  carried  out  in  spiritual 
matters  by  the  Supreme  Judge.  The  Israelites 
in  a later  age  made  a confusion  in  the  use  of 
their  common  proverb,  “The  fathers  have 
eaten  sour  grapes,  and  the  children’s  teeth  are 
set  on  edge.”  I'here  would  have  been  truth 
in  this  saying  had  it  been  used  only  in  reference 
to  the  mere  natural  consecjuences  of  their 
fathers’  sins.  In  this  sense  their  teeth  were 
set  on  edge  by  the  sour  grapes  their  fathers 
liad  eaten.  But  the  Prophets  pointed  out  the 
falsehood  involved  in  the  jiroverb  as  it  was 
understood  by  the  people.  'Phey  showed  that 
it  was  utterly  false  when  applied  to  the  spiritual 
relation  in  which  each  person  stands  in  the 
judgment  of  Him  who  is  no  respecter  of  per- 
sons. (Jcr.  xxxi.  29,  30;  E'/ek.  xviii.  2 — 4sq.) 


A nother  explanation  of  the  words  appears  in 
the  TargumiS,  and  is  favoured  by  some  of  the 
Fathers  and  other  commentators,  Christian  and 
Jewish.  It  assumes  that  the  words  refer  only 
to  the  children  who  go  on  sinning  so  as  to  fill 
up  the  measure  of  their  fathers’  iniquities  in 
the  manner  spoken  of  Lev.  xxvi.  39 ; Is.  Ixv.  7 ; 
Jer.  xvi.  10 — 13;  Matt,  xxiii.  29—32.  (See 
Hengst.  ‘Pent.’  Vol.  ii.  p.  446.)  But  this 
seems  unworthily  to  reduce  the  Divine  words 
to  a mere  truism.  It  makes  them  say  in  an 
awkward  mannner  no  more  than  that  the 
guilty  sons  shall  be  punished  as  well  as  the 
guilty  fathers. 

6.  unto  thousands']  unto  the  thousandth 
generation.  Jehovah's  visitations  of  chas- 
tisement extend  to  the  third  and  fourth  genera- 
tion, his  visitations  of  mercy  to  the  thousandth ; 
that  is,  for  ever.  That  this  is  the  true  ren- 
dering seems  to  follow  from  Deut.  vii.  9. 
Cf.  2 S.  vii.  15,  16.  So  S)n-.,  Onk.,  Leo  Juda, 
Geneva  French,  Rosen.,  Zunz,  Schott.  Kno- 
bel,  Keil,  Herx..  and  Wogue.  Our  version  is 
supported  by  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Saadia,  Luther, 
and  de  Wette. 

7.  O ur  translators  have  followed  the  LXX., 
Aquila,  the  Vulgate,  Augustin  (‘Serm.’  viii.), 
and  Theodoret  (‘Queest.  in  Exod.’  41),  in 
making  the  Third  Commandment  bear  upon 
any  profime  and  idle  utterance  of  the  name  of 
God.  Saadia,  the  Syriac,  some  of  the  Rabbin- 
ists,  and  the  greater  number  of  the  critics  of 
our  day,  give  it  the  sense.  Thou  shalt  not  swear 
falsely  by  the  7iame  of  Jeho'vah  thy  God.  The 
Hebrew  word  which  answers  to  in  vain  may 
be  rendered  either  way.  The  two  abuses  of 
the  sacred  name  seem  to  be  distinguished  in 
Lev.  xix.  12.  C)ur  Version  is  probably  right  in 
giving  the  rendering  which  is  more  inclusive. 
To  swear  fiilsely  is  undoubtedly  a profanation 
of  the  name  of  God;  and  looking  at  the  matter 
on  its  practical  side,  the  man  who,  in  a right 
spirit,  avoids  the  idle  use  of  the  Name  will  be 
incapable  of  swearing  falsely.  Hence  there 
may  be  a reference  to  this  Commandment,  as 
well  as  to  Lev.  xix.  12,  in  Matt.  v.  33.  The 
caution  that  a breach  of  this  Commandm.ent 
incurs  guilt  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah  is  especially 
apj^ropriate,  in  consequence  of  the  ease  witli 
which  the  temptation  to  take  God's  name  in 
vain  besets  men  in  their  common  intercourse 
with  each  other. 

8.  Ke7ncmber  the  sabbath  day]  These  words 
have  been  taken  to  refer  to  the  observance  of 
the  Sabbath  day  as  an  old  usage  dating  back 


V.  9 12.] 


EXODUS. 


XX. 


333 


diap.  23.  Q t/SJx  days  shalt  thou  labour,  and 
JCzek.  20,  do  all  thy  work  : 

Jvjkei3.  10  But  the  seventh  day  is  the  sab- 
bath  of  the  Lord  thy  God : i?2  it 
thou  shalt  not  do  any  work,  thou, 
nor  . thy  son,  nor  thy  daughter,  thy 
manservant,  nor  thy  maidservant,  nor- 
thy  cattle,  nor  thy  stranger  that  is 
within  thy  gates: 


1 1 For  ‘^in  six  days  the  Lord  made  *• 
heaven  and  earth,  the  sea,  and  all  that 

in  them  L,  and  rested  the  seventh 
day:  wherefore  the  Lord  blessed  the 
sabbath  day,  and  hallowed, it. 

12  -^Honour  thy  father  and  thy-^J^eut.  5. 
mother : that  thy  days  may  be  long  M’att.  15. 
upon  the  land  which  the  Lord  thy  f^ph.  o.  2. 
God  giveth  thee. 


to  the  Patriarchs,  or  even  to  the  creation  of 
the  world.  There  is  however  no  distinct  evi- 
dence that  the  Sabbath,  as  a formal  ordi- 
nance, was  recognized  before  the  time  of  Mo- 
ses. The  expressions  of  Nehemiah  (ix.  14), 
of  Ezekiel  (xx.  10,  ii,  12),  and,  perhaps,  of 
Moses  himself  (Deut.  v.  15),  may  be  taken 
to  intimate  that  the  obseiwance  was  regarded 
as  originating  in  the  Law  given  on  Mount 
Sinai,  The  most  ancient  testimonies  favour 
this  view.  (See  Note  at  end  of  this  Chapter. 
Also  note  on  Gen.  ii.  2.)  It  is  now  generally 
admitted  that  the  attempts  to  trace  the  observ- 
ance in  heathen  antiquity  have  failed.  It  has 
been  alleged  that  the  word  remember  may  be 
reasonably  explained  in  one  of  two  ways  with- 
out adopting  the  inference  that  has  been  men- 
tioned ; it  may  either  be  used  in  the  sense  of 
keep  in  mind  what  is  here  enjoined  for  the  first 
time,  or  it  may  refer  back  to  what  is  related  in 
ch.  xvi.  where  the  Sabbath  day  is  first  noticed, 
in  giving  the  law  for  collecting  the  manna. 

to  keep  it  holy\  See  Note  after  ‘v.  21,  § I. 

10.  the  sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  Cod']  a 
Sa'D’oath  to  Jehovali  thy  God.  It  may  be 
observed  that  the  word  sabbath  (more  pro- 
perly, shabbath)  has  no  etymological  connec- 
tion with  sheba\  the  Hebrew  for  se^en.  The 
proper  meaning  of  sabbath  is,  rest  after  labour. 

thy  stranger  that  is  within  thy  gates']  The 
Hebrew  word  geer  does  not  mean  a stranger 
(that  is  an  unknown  person),  but,  according 
to  its  mere  derivation,  a lodger.,  or  sojourner. 
In  this  place  it  denotes  one  who  had  come 
from  another  people  to  take  up  his  pennanent 
abode  among  the  Israelites,  and  who  might 
have  been  well  known  to  his  neighbours.  Our 
vrord  foreigner.,  in  its  common  use,  seems  best 
to  answer  to  it  here.  The  LXX.  renders  geer 
by  Trpou-rjXvTos  {^proselyte].,  napoiKo?,  and 
That  the  word  did  not  primarily  refer  to 
foreign  domestic  servants  (though  all  such 
were  included  under  it)  is  to  be  inferred  from 
the  term  used  for  gates  {sha^ arimj.,  signifying 
not  the  doors  of  a private  dwelling,  but  the 
gates  of  a town  or  camp. 

11.  therefore  the  Lord  blessed  the  sabbath 
day]  Our  Communion  Service  and  Catechism 
follow  the  reading  of  the  LXX.  and  the  earlier 
i'.nglish  Vei-sions,  in  calling  this  the  seventh 


day  instead  of  the  sabbath  day.  On  the  m.ean- 
ing  of  the  verse,  see  Note  after  ‘i'.  21. 

12.  Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother]  Ac- 
cording to  our  usage,  the  Fifth  Command- 
ment is  placed  as  the  first  in  the  second  table ; 
and  this  is  necessarily  involved  in  the  common 
division  of  the  Commandments  into  our  duty 
towards  God  and  our  duty  towards  men. 
But  the  more  ancient,  and  probably  the  better, 
division  allots  five  Commandments  to  each 
Table.  The  connection  between  the  first  four 
Commandments  and  the  Fifth  exists  in  the 
truth  that  all  faith  in  God  centres  in  the  filial 
feeling.  Our  parents  stand  between  us  and 
God  in  a way  in  which  no  other  beings  can. 
It  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  honouring  of 
parents  and  the  keeping  of  the  Sabbath  day, 
which  is  the  same  as  honouring  God,  are  com- 
bined in  one  precept  in  Lev.  xix.  3. — In  con- 
nection with  this,  it  may  be  obsei*ved  that  the 
Fifth  Commandment  and  the  fimt  part  of  the 
Fourth  are  the  only  portions  of  the  Decalogue 
which  are  expressed  in  a positive  form.  See 
Note  after  'l'.  2i,§IV.  On  the  maintenance 
of  parental  authority,  see  xxi.  15,  17;  Deut. 
xxi,  18 — 21. 

that  thy  days  may  be  long  up07i  the  layid] 
Filial  respect  is  the  ground  of  national  per- 
manence. When  the  Jews  were  about  to  be 
cast  out  of  their  land,  the  rebuke  of  the  pro- 
phet was,  that  they  had  not  walked  in  the  old 
paths  and  had  not  respected  the  voice  of  their 
fathers  as  the  sons  of  Jonadab  had  done  (Jer. 
vi.  16,  XXXV.  18,  19).  And  when  in  later 
times  the  land  had  been  restored  to  them, 
and  they  were  about  to  be  cast  out  of  it  a 
second  time,  the  great  sin  of  vrhich  they  were 
convicted  was,  that  they  had  set  aside  this 
Fifth  Commandment  for  the  sake  of  their  own 
traditions.  (Matt.  xv.  4 — 6 ; Mark  vii.  10,  ii.) 
Every  other  nation  that  has  a history  bears 
vritness  to  the  same  truth.  Rome  owed  her 
strength,  as  well  as  the  permanence  of  her  in- 
fluence after  she  had  politically  perished,  to 
her  steady  maintenance  of  the  patria  potestas 
(Maine,  ‘Ancient  Law,’  p.  135).  China  has 
mainly  owed  her  long  duration  to  the  simple 
way  in  which  she  has  uniformly  acknowledged 
the  authority  of  fathers.  The  Divine  words 
were  addressed  emphatically  to  Israel,  but  they 


EXODUS.  XX. 


[v.  13—19. 


334 

s Matt.  5.  13^  Thou  shalt  not  kill. 

14  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adul- 
tery. 

15  Thou  shalt  not  steal. 

16  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  wit- 
ness against  thy  neighbour. 

h Rom.  7.  17^'  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy 

neighbour’s  house,  thou  shalt  not 
covet  thy  neighbour’s  wife,  nor  his 
manservant,  nor  his  maidservant,  nor 


his  ox,  nor  his  ass,  nor  any  thing  that 
is  thy  neighbour’s. 

18  ^ And  ^all  the  people  saw  the  * Heb.  la. 
thunderings,  and  the  lightnings,  and 

the  noise  of  the  trumpet,  and  the 
mountain  smoking:  and  when  the 
people  saw  /V,  they  removed,  and 
stood  afar  off. 

19  And  they  said  unto  Moses,  Deut.  5. 
Speak  thou  with  us,  and  we  will  16. 


set  forth  a universal  principle  of  national  life. 
St  Paul  calls  this  Commandment,  “the  first 
commandment  with  promise”  (Eph.  vi.  a); 
the  promise  is  fulfilled  in  God's  government 
of  the  whole  world.  The  narrow  view  which 
Selden  and  others  have  taken  of  the  Com- 
mandment, that  it  implied  no  more  than  a 
prediction  that  the  children  of  Israel  should 
possess  the  land  of  Canaan  on  the  condition 
stated,  is  alien  to  the  spirit  of  the  Decalogue. 
(See  Note  after  nj.  21,  § VI.) 

13,  14.  The  Sixth  and  Seventh  Command- 
ments are  amongst  those  utterances  of  the 
Law  which  our  Saviour,  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  took  to  illustrate  the  relation  in  which 
the  Gospel  stands  to  the  Law.  Whatever 
range  of  meaning  we  are  to  give  to  the  expres- 
sion in  Matt.  v.  17,  that  Christ  came  not  to 
destroy  but  to  fulfil  (TrXrjpcoaraL),  we  can 
hardly  exclude  from  it,  in  its  bearing  on  the 
discourse  that  follows  in  ‘-j-u.  18 — 48,  the  sense, 
to  set  forth  perfectly  in  the  way  of  teaching. 
(Cf.  Rom.  XV.  19;  Col.  i.  25.)  The  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  failed  perfectly  to  set  forth  the 
Law,  in  their  teaching  as  well  as  in  their  prac- 
tice ; they  taught  the  mere  words  in  their 
dry  external  relations;  “they  gave  the  husk 
without  the  kernel.”  Their  righteousness, 
both  that  which  they  taught  and  that  which 
they  practised,  therefore  fell  short  of  the  true 
standard  (Matt,  v,  20).  If  this  view  of  the 
word  fulfil  is  admitted,  our  Saviour’s  words 
respecting  these  Commandments  {y'u.  21 — 32) 
cannot  be  taken  as  an  external  supplement  to 
the  Law,  or  as  a new  adaptation  of  it  to  a 
changed  order  of  things,  but  as  a perfect  un- 
folding, in  the  most  practical  form,  of  the 
meaning  which  the  Commandments  had  from 
the  beginning,  and  which  had  been,  with 
different  degrees  of  distinctness,  shadowed 
forth  to  all  who  wisely  and  devoutly  obeyed 
the  Law  under  the  Old  Dispensation,  The 
pa.ssage  in  St  Matthew  (v.  21—32)  is  there- 
fore the  best  comment  on  these  two  verses  of 
Exodus.  St  Augustin  says  that  the  purpose 
of  Clirist’s  coming  was,  uon  ut  Left  adderentur 
qua  deerant^  sed  ut  ferent  qua  scripta  erant. 
‘Cont.  Faust.’  xvii.  6. 

15,  The  right  of  property  is  sanctioned 


in  the  Eighth  Commandment  by  an  external 
rule;  its  deeper  meaning  is  involved  in  the 
Tenth  Commandment. 

17.  As  the  Sixth,  Seventh,  and  Eighth 
Commandments  forbid  us  to  injure  our  neigh- 
bour in  deed,  the  Ninth  forbids  us  to  injure 
him  in  word,  and  the  Tenth,  in  thought.  No 
human  eye  can  see  the  coveting  heart;  it  is 
witnessed  only  by  him  who  possesses  it  and 
by  Him  to  whom  all  things  are  naked  and 
open.  But  it  is  the  root  of  all  sins  against 
our  neighbour  in  word  or  in  deed  (Jam.  i. 
14,  15).  The  man  who  is  acceptable  before 
God,  walking  uprightly,  not  backbiting  with 
his  tongue,  nor  doing  evil  to  his  neighbour, 
is  he  who  “ speaketh  the  truth  in  his 
HEART.”  Ps.  XV.  2,  3.  St  Paul  speaks  of  the 
operation  of  this  Commandment  on  his  own 
heart  as  the  means  of  revealing  to  him  the 
holiness  of  the  Law  (Rom.  vii.  7).  The  direct 
connection  cf  the  Commandments  of  the 
Second  Table  with  the  principle  of  love  be- 
tween man  and  man,  is  affirmed  Matt.  xxii. 
39,  40;  Rom.  xiii.  9,  10;  Gal.  v.  14.— On  the 
variations  bet vr ecu  this  and  the  parallel  place 
in  Dent.  v.  21,  see  Note  after  u).  21,  §11. 

There  is  a curious  interpolation  in  the 
Samaritan  text  following  the  Tenth  Com- 
mandment. The  Israelites  are  commanded  to 
set  up  on  Mount  Geri/.im  two  great  plastered 
stones  with  the  words  of  the  Law  inscribed 
on  them,  to  build  there  an  Altar,  and  to  sacri- 
fice upon  it  Burnt-offerings  and  Peace-offer- 
ings. The  passage  is  evidently  made  up  from 
Deut.  xxvii.  2 — 7,  with  some  expressions 
from  Deut.  xi.  30,  Gcri/.im  being  substituted 
for  Ebal.  See  on  Deut.  xxvii.  2 — 7, 

18 — 21.  This  narrative  is  amplified  in 
Deut.  V.  22—31.  The  people  had  realized  the 
terrors  cf  the  voice  of  Jehovah  in  the  utter- 
ance of  the  Ten  Words  of  the  Testimony, 
and  they  feared  for  their  lives.  Though 
Moses  encouraged  them,  they  were  permitted 
to  withdraw  and  to  stand  afar  off,  at  their 
tent  doors  (see  Deut.  v.  30).  It  would  appear, 
according  to  xix.  24,  that  Aaron  on  this 
occasion  accompanied  Moses  in  drawing  near 
to  the  thick  darkness.  Cf.  xxiv.  18. 


V.  20,  21.] 


EXODUS.  XX. 


335 


hear:  but  not  God  speak  with 
us,  lest  we  die. 

20  And  Moses  said  unto  the  peo- 
ple, Fear  not:  for  God  is  come  to 
prove  you,  and  that  his  fear  rnay 


be  before  your  faces,  that  ye  sin 
not. 

21  And  the  people  stood  afar  off, 
and  Moses  drew  near  unto  the  thick 
darkness  where  God  was. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xx.  vv.  i — 17. 


On  The  Ten  Commandments. 

I.  The  Name.  IT.  What  was  written  on  the 
Stones?  III.  The  Division  into  Ten.  IV. 
The  Tioo  Tables.  V.  The  Co?nmandments 
as  A Testimony.  VI.  Breadth  of  their 
meaning. 

§1- 

The  Hebrew  name  which  is  rendered  in 
our  Version^  the  Ten  Commandments 
noby)  occurs  in  Exod.  xxxiv. 
a8;  Deut.  iv.  13,  x.  4.  It  literally  means  the 
Ten  Words as  it  stands  in  the  margin  of  our 
Bible;  LXX.  o\  deKa  Xoyoi,  or  rd  pf 
p-ara’.!  Vulg.  decern  werha.  But  the  Hebrew 
substantive  “1 3*^  often  denotes  a mandate 
(Josh.  i.  13;  Esth.  i.  19);  and  the  common 
English  rendering  may  be  therefore  justified. 
In  Ex.  xxiv.  T2,  the  Ten  Commandments  are 
called  the  Law,  even  the  Command- 
ment: the  latter  word  (njV^)  occurs  in  its 
plural  form  in  the  Second  Commandment, 
Ex.  XX.  6;  Deut.  v.  10.  They  are  elsewhere 
called  THE  Words  of  the  Covenant 
fEx.  xxxiv.  28,  where  the  strict  rendering 
would  be,  the  Words  of  the  Coaeenant .,  eaoen 
the  Ten  Words),  THE  Tables  OF  the  Cove- 
nant (Deut.  ix.  9,  II,  15),  and  simply  the 
Covenant  (Deut.  iv.  13:  i K.  viii.  21; 
2 Chron.  vi.  ii);  also  the  Two  Tables 
(Deut.  ix.  10,  17).  But  the  most  frequent 
name  for  them  in  the  Old  Testament  is,  the 
Testimony^  (H-nyri,  LXX.  rd  paprvpLov 

or  rd  p.apTvpia),  or  THE  TWO  TABLES  OF 
THE  Testimony 2.  In  the  New  Testament 
they  are  called  simply  THE  Commandments^ 
(at  ivToXai).  The  name  Decalogue  (d  de- 
KdXoyos-)  is  found  first  in  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, and  was  commonly  used  by  the 
Fathers  v/ho  followed  him. 

We  thus  know  that  the  Tables  were  two, 
and  that  the  Com.mandments  were  ten,  in 
number.  But  the  Scriptures  do  not,  by  any 
direct  statemients,  enable  us  to  determine  v.uth 
precision  how  tfie  Ten  Commandments  are 
severally  to  be  made  out,  nor  how  they  are  to 
be  allotted  to  the  Two  Tables.  On  each  of 
these  points  various  opinions  have  been  held. 

^ Ex.  xvi.  34,  XXV.  16,  21,  XXX.  6,  xl.  20  ; 
Lev.  xvi.  1 3,  &c.  &c. 

Ex.  xxxi.  18,  xxxii.  15,  xxxiv.  29. 

^ Matt.  xix.  17;  Mark  x.  19  ; Luke  xviii.  20; 
Rom.  xiii.  9. 


But  there  is  a question  which  rightly  claims 
precedence  of  these:  What  actually  were  the 
Words  of  Jehovah  that  were  engraven  on  the 
Tables  of  Stone?  We  have  two  distinct  state- 
ments, one  in  Exodus  (xx.  i — 17)  and  one  in 
Deuteronomy  (v.  6 — 21),  apparently  of  equal 
authority,  but  differing  from  each  other  in 
several  weighty  particulars.  Each  is  said,  with 
reiterated  emphasis,  to  contain  the  words  that 
were  actually  spoken  by  the  Lord,  and  written 
by  Him.  upon  the  stones'^. 

The  variations  which  are  of  most  import- 
ance are  in  the  Commandm.ents  which  we  com- 
monly call  the  Fourth,  the  Fifth,  and  the  Tenth. 
The  two  copies  of  these  are  here  placed  side 
by  side.  Thq  expressions  in  Deuteronomy 
which  differ  in  the  original  Hebrew  from  the 
corresponding  ones  in  Exodus,  are  in  italics, 
and  the  additional  clauses  are  in  brackets. 


EXODU.S  XX. 

IV.  (100:.  8 — II.) 

Remember  the  sab- 
bath day,  to  keep  it 
holy.  Six  days  shalt 
thou  labour,  and  do 
all  thy  work:  But  the 
seventh  day  is  the  sab- 
bath of  the  Lord  thy 
God:  in  it  thou  shalt 
not  do  any  work,  thou, 
nor  thy  son,  nor  thy 
daughter,  thy  man- 
servant, nor  thy  maid- 
servant, nor  thy  cattle, 
nor  thy  stranger  that 
is  within  thy  gates : 
For  in  six  days  the 
Lord  made  heaven 
and  earth,  the  sea,  and 
all  that  in  them  is,  and 
rested  the  seventh  day : 
wherefore  the  Lord 
blessed  the  sabbath 
day,  and  hallowed  it. 


Deut.  v. 

IV.  (gunj.  12 — 15.) 

Keep  the  sabbath 
day  to  sanctify  it,  [as 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
commanded  theei\  Six 
days  thou  shalt  labour, 
and  do  all  thy  work: 
But  the  seventh  day 
is  the  sabbath  of  the 
Lord  thy  God:  in  it 
thou  shalt  not  do  any 
work,  thou,  nor  thy 
son,  nor  thy  daughter, 
nor  thy  manseivant, 
nor  thy  maidservant, 
[nor  thhie  ox,  nor  thine 
assd\  nor  any  of  thy 
cattle,  nor  thy  stranger 
that  is  within  thy 
gates ; [that  thy  man- 
servant  and  thy  7natd- 
servant  may  rest  as 
vuell  as  thou.']  Atzd 
renmnber  that  thou 
voast  a servant  in  the 
land  of  Egypt,  and 
that  the  Lord  thy  God 
brought  thee  out  thence 
through  a mighty  hand 
and  by  a stretched  out 


^ Ex.  x.x.  I,  xxiv.  12,  xxxi.  18,  xxxii.  15,  16; 
Deut.  V.  4,  5,  22,  iv.  13,  ix.  10. 


336 


EXODUS.  XX. 


V.  12.) 

Honour  thy  father 
and  th)  mother:  that 
thy  days  may  be  long 
upon  the  land  which 
the  Lord  thy  God 
giveth  thee. 


X.  (^..  17.) 

TI10U  shalt  not  covet 
t!iy  neighbour's  house, 
thou  shalt  not  covet 
tiiy  neighbour’s  wife, 
nor  his  manservant, 
nor  his  maidservant, 
nor  his  ox,  nor  his  ass, 
nor  any  thing  that  is 
thy  neighbour’s. 


arm  : therefore  the 
Lord  thy  God  com- 
manded thee  to  keep  the 
sabbath  day.  ■ 

V.  (“z;.  16.) 

Honour  thy  father 
and  thy  mother,  [as 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
commanded  thee'\  ; that 
thy  days  may  be  pro- 
longed, [and  that  it 
may  go  ^ell  ^iththee^, 
in  the  land  which 
the  Lord  thy  God 
giveth  thee. 

X.  (yv.  21.) 

Neither  shalt  thou 
desire  thy  neighbour’s 
wife,  7ieither  shalt  thou 
conjet  thy  neighbour’s 
house,  [his  fielcf.^  or 
his  manservant,  or  his 
maidservant,  his  ox,  or 
his  ass,  or  any  thing 
that  is  thy  neighbour’s. 


In  the  Fourth  Commandment,  it  will  be 
S;en  that  in  Deuteronomy: — • 

(1)  “Keep  the  Sabbath  day,”  is 

read  instead  of  “Remember  (“I'OJ)  the  Sab- 
bath day.” 

(2)  Three  fresh  clauses  are  inserted: — 

“As  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  commanded 

thee.” 

“Nor  thine  ox  nor  thine  ass.” 

“That  thy  manservant  and  thy  maid- 
servant may  rest  as  well  as  thou.” 

(3)  A different  reason  is  given  for  the  Com.- 
niandment,  referring  to  the  deliverance  of  the 
Israelites  from  Egypt,  instead  of  the  rest  of 
God  after  the  six  works  of  Creation. 

In  the  Fifth,  Deuteronomy  inserts  the  same 
expression  as  it  does  in  the  P’ourth,  “ as  the 
Lord  thy  God  hath  comm.anded  thee;”  and 
also  the  words,  “ t’nat  it  may  go  well  with  thee.” 

In  the  Tenth,  it  transposes  “thy  neighbours 
house,”  and  “thy  neighbour’s  wife;”  it  inserts 
“ his  held,”  and  it  makes  the  two  parts  of  the 
Commandment  more  distinct  by  the  use  of  a 
different  verb  in  the  imperative  mood  in  each. 
The  verb  rendered  desire  is  the  same 

that  is  rendered  co'vet  in  Exodus,  but  the  one 
here  rendered  co'vet  is  a different  one 

it  should  also  be  obsen'ed  that,  in  Deut.  v. 
verses  17,  iS,  19,  20,  21  are  linked  together  by 
the  copulative  conjunction.  The  few  other 
slight  variations  do  not  affect  the  sense. 

It  has  been  generally  assumed  that  the  whole 
of  one  or  other  of  these  copies  was  written  on 
the  'J'ablcs.  Most  commentators  have  sup- 
posed that  tlie  original  document  is  in  Exodus, 
and  that  the  author  of  Deuteronomy  wrote 
from  memory,  with  variations  suggested  at 
the  time.  Others  have  conceived  that  Deu- 


teronomy m.ust  furnish  the  more  correct  form 
since  the  Tables  must  have  been  in  actual 
existence  when  the  book  was  written.  But 
neither  of  these  views  can  be  fairly  reconciled 
with  the  statements  in  Exodus  and  Deutero- 
nom‘y  to  which  reference  has  been  made.  If 
either  copy,  as  a whole,  represents  what  Avas 
written  on  the  Tables,  it  is*  obvious  that  the 
other  cannot  do  so. 

A conjecture  which  seems  to  deserve  respect 
has  been  put  forth  by  Ewald.  He  supposes 
that  the  original  Commandments  were  all  in 
the  same  terse  and  simple  form  of  expression 
as  appears  (both  in  Exodus  and  Deutero- 
nomy) in  the  First,  Sixth,  Seventh,  Eighth,, 
and  Ninth,  such  as  would  be  most  suitable  for 
recollection,  and  that  the  passages  in  each  copy 
in  which  the  most  important  variations  are 
found  were  comments  added  when  the  Books 
were  written.  It  is  not  necessary  to  involve 
this  theory  with  any  question  as  to  the  author- 
ship of  the  Books,  or  with  any  doubt  as  to  the 
comments  beii^  the  words  of  God^  given  by 
Moses  as  much  as  the  Commandments,  strictly 
so  called,  that  were  written  on  the  Tables. 
In  reference  to  the  most  important  of  the 
differences,  that  relating  to  the  reason  for  the 
observance  of  the  Sabbath  day,  the  thoughts 
are  in  no  degree  discordant,  and  each  sets 
forth  what  is  entirely  worthy  of,  and  consistent 
with,  the  Divine  Law^.  Slighter  verbal  or 
literal  variations,  with  no  important  difference 
of  meaning  (such  as  keep  for  remetnber').^  may 
perhaps  be  ascribed  to  copyists  ^ 

It  may  be  supposed  then  that  the  Ten  Words 
of  Jeliovah,  with  the  prefatory  sentence,  were 
to  this  efiect,  assuming  that  each  Table  con- 
tained Five  Commandments.  See  § IV. 

1 am  Jehouah  thy  God  <ivho  ha’ve  brought 
thee  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt.,  out  of  the  house 
of  bondage. 

First  Table. 

i.  Thou  shah  hause  jio  other  God^  before  tne. 

ii.  Thou  shalt  7iot  7nake  to  thee  any  graueen 

image. 

iii.  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  Jehousah 

thy  God  m usahi. 

iv.  Thou  shalt  re77ie77iber  the  Sabbath  day,  to 

keep  it  holy. 

V.  Thou  shalt  honour  thy  father  and  thy 

mother. 

^ See  fix.  XX.  I, 

* See  the  following  Note,  § III. 

What  is  assumed,  on  the  theory  here  stated, 
to  be  the  comment  on  both  the  First  and  Second 
Commandments  (“For  I the  Lord  thy  God  am 
a jealous  God,”  &c.  See  on  Lx.  xx.  5)  occurs 
in  a somewhat  different  and  more  diffuse  form 
in  Ex.  xxxiv.  6,  7.  Docs  not  a comparison  of 
the  two  passages  tend  to  confirm  the  suj^position 
that  the  words  are  not  a part  of  the  original  Ten 
Commandments,  but  that  they  were  quoted  here 
in  a condensed  form  by  Moses,  as  bearing  on  the 
two  Commandments,  when  the  book  of  Exodus 
was  put  together?  See  on  Ex.  xx.  3. 


EXODUS.  XX. 


Second  Table. 

vi.  Thou  shah  not  kill. 

vii.  Thou  shah  not  commit  adultery. 

viii.  Thou  shah  not  steal. 

ix.  Thou  shah  not  bear  false  witness. 

X.  Thou  shah  not  co-vet. 

A practical  illustration  from  the  usage  of 
different  ages  may  tend,  to  shew  the  proba- 
bility that  the  Ten  Commandments  were 
familiarly  known  in  such  a compendious  form 
as  this,  at  a time  when  they  were  used  not 
only  as  the  common  watchwords  of  duty,  but 
as  the  axioms  of  the  Law  in  its  actual  opera- 
tion. In  those  copies  of  tlie  Commandments 
which  have  been  used  in  different  branches  of 
the  Church  for  the  instruction  of  its  members, 
the  form  has  almost  always  been  more  or  less 
abbreviated  of  a part,  or  the  whole,  of  those 
which  are  the  most  expanded  in  Exodus  and 
Deuteronomy;  namely,  the  Second,  Third, 
Fourth,  Fifth,  and  Tenth h The  earliest  book 
of  Christian  instruction  in  which  they  are 
given  at  full  length  as  they  stand  in  Exodus, 
appears  to  be  “the  Prymer  in  English,”  of 
about  A.D.  1400,  printed  in  Maskell’s  ‘Monu- 
mentaRitualia”(Vol.  ii.p,  177).  They  are  also 
given  in  full  in  the  Primer  of  Edward  VI.  (a.d. 
1553).  When  they  were  first  introduced  into 
our  Communion  Service  in  the  Second  Prayer 
Book  of  Edward  VI.  (a.d.  1552),  the  words 
in  the  introductory  sentence,  “which  have 
brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  out 
of  the  house  of  bondage,”  were  unfortunately 
omitted,  and  have  not  been  restored  in  suc- 
ceeding editions.  But  they  are  not  only 
retained  in  our  Catechism,  but  are  made  a 
special  topic  of  instruction  in  connection  with 
the  Commandments  in  Nowell’s  larger  Cate- 
chism 2. 

§111. 

The  mode  in  which  the  Commandments 
are  divided  into  Ten  in  our  own  Service  Book 
agrees  with  the  most  ancient  authorities,  Jew- 
ish as  well  as  Christian,  and  the  usage  of  the 
Eastern  Church.  It  appears  to  be  based  on 
the  clearest  view  of  the  subject  m.atter,  as  it  is 
set  forth  in  the  sacred  text’h 

^ Snip.  Sev.  ‘Sac.  Hist.’  lib.  i.  ‘Synopsis 
Sac.  Script.’  ascribed  to  St  Athanasius.  Suidas 
%.  irXaliv.  King  Alfred’s  ‘ Laws.’  ‘The  Luthe- 
ran Cat.’  (in  which  what  are  here  called  the 
sacred  writers’  comments  are  named  appendices). 
‘The  Institution/  &c.  and  ‘The  Erudition/  &c. 
of  Henry  VIII.  The  Catechism  of  Edward  VI. 
The  Douay •Catechism.  The  Catechism  of  the 
Greek  Church,  &c.  &c. 

2 p.  23.  Edit.  Jacobson. 

2 This  division  is  recognized  in  Philo,  ‘de 
Orac.’  c.  12,  22,  31 ; ‘Quis  rer.  div.  heres.’  c.  35. 
Joseph. ‘Ant.’  iii.  5,  §5.  Origen  ‘Plom.  in  Exod.’ 
VIII.  Jerome ‘in  Ephes.’ VI.  2.  Sulp.  Sev.  ‘Sac. 
Hist.’  I.  ‘ Synopsis  .S.  S.’  ascribed  to  Athanasius. 
Suidas  s.  irXa^ly.  The  Catechism  of  the  Greek 
Church.  ‘The  Institution,’  &c.  and  ‘The  Eru- 
VOL.  I. 


But  another  arrangement,  which  is  first 
found  distinctly  stated  in  St  AugustiiH,  de- 
mands attention  from  its  having  been  univer- 
sally adopted  by  the  Western  Church  until 
the  Reformation.  The  Second  Command- 
ment is  added  to  the  First  (or,  in  some  of  the 
abridged  forms,  omitted  altogether),  and  the 
number  ten  is  made  out  by  treating  the  Tenth 
as  two  Commandments.  St  Augustin,  fol- 
lowing Deuteronomy,  and  the  LXX.  in  Exo- 
dus (see  below),  makes  the  Ninth  “Thoushalt 
not  covet  thy  neighbour’s  wife,”  and  the 
Tenth  “Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neigh- 
bour’s house,”  &c.:  while  others,  following 
the  Hebrew  text  of  Exodus,  reverse  this  order. 
In  some  forms  used  by  the  Western  Church 
the  whole  paragraph  on  coveting  is  kept  entire, 
but  it  is  headed  as  “the  Ninth  and  Tenth 
Commandments®.”  The  general  arrangement 
here  spoken  of  was  .used  by  the  Church  in 
Britain  before  the  Reformation®,  and  is  still  re- 
tained by  the  Lutheran  as  well  as  the  Romish 
Church. 

An  arrangement  unlike  either  of  these  may 
be  traced  to  the  fourth  century,  is  distinctly 
set  forth  in  the  Targum  of  Palestine  (w^hich 
probably  belongs  to  the  seventh  century), 
and  has  been  adopted  by  Maimonides,  Aben- 
Ezra,  and  other  Jewish  authorities  down  to 
the  present  day.  The  First  Word  is  identified 
with  “I  am  the  Lord  thy  God  which  brought 
thee  out  of  t’ne  land  of  Egypt”  (which  cannot 
of  course  be  properly  called  a Commandment), 
and  the  Second  Word  is  made,  as  in  the  ar- 
rangement last  mentioned,  to  include  wiiat 
w^e  reckon  as  the  first  and  Second  Com- 
mandments. 

The  subject  m.atter  itself  seems  to  suggest 
grave  and  obvious  objections  to  the  two  latter 
arrangements.  There  is  a clear  distinction 
between  polytheism  and  idolatry  which  en- 
titles each  to  a distinct  Commandment:  and 
the  sin  of  coveting  our  neighbour’s  possessions 
is^  essentially  the  same  in  its  nature,  whatever 
may  be  the  object  coveted. 

It  is  worthy  of  notice  in  regard  to  the  se- 
quence of  the  Commandments,  that  the  LXX. 
in  Ex.  XX.  (according  to  the  Vatican  text)  and 
Suidas  (s.  TvXah'iv)  place  vii.  and  viii.  before  vi., 
and  transpose  the  house  and  the  vjife  in  x.;  and 
that  Philo  places  vii.  before  vi.  according  to 

clition,’  &c.  of  Henry  VIII.  The  Primer  of 
1553,  &c.  Sec. — The  testimony  of  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  ‘ Stromat.  ’ VI.  § 137,  is  ambiguous, 
and  has  been  quoted  both  for  and  against  the 
arrangement ; see  Suicer  s.  dcKdXoyos,  and  Kurtz, 
‘Old  Covenant,’  III.  124. 

^ ‘Queest.  in  Exod.’  Lxxr.  Serm.  vni.  ix. 
&c. 

® The  Trent  and  Lutheran  Catechisms. 

® King  Alfred’s  ‘Law^s.’ — The  ‘Speculum’ of 
St  Edmund,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (1234 — 
1242),  and  the  ‘Treatises’  of  Richard  Hampole 
(circ.  1340).  published  by  the  Early  English  Text 
Society. — The  Primer  of  1300,  Sec.  Sec.  ‘ 

Y 


EXODUS.  XX. 


338 

the  order  recognized  in  Mark  x.  19;  Luke 
xviii.  20;  Rom.  xiii.  9;  James  ii.  ii.  The 
usual  order  is  preserved  by  the  other  ancient 
versions  in  Exodus,  and  by  the  LXX.  in 
Deut.  V. ; as  it  is  also,  as  regards  vi.  and  vii., 
in  Matt.  v.  21,  27,  xix.  t8. 

§ IV. 

The  distribution  of  the  Commandments  be- 
tween the  Two  Tables  which  is  most  familiar 
to  us,  allotting  four  to  the  First  Table  and 
six  to  the  Second,  is  first  mentioned  by  St 
Augustine,  though  it  is  not  approved  by  him. 
It  is  based  on  a distinction  that  lies  on  the 
surface,  and  that  easily  adapts  itself  to  mo- 
dern ethical  systems,  between  our  duty  to- 
wards God  and  our  duty  towards  our  neigh- 
bour b The  division  approved  by  St  Augus- 
tine was,  in  relation  to  the  matter  in  each 
Table,  the  same;  but  as  he  united  the  First 
and  Second  Commandments  into  one,  and  di- 
vided the  Tenth  into  two,  he  made  the  First 
Table  to  comprise  three  Commandments,  and 
the  Second  Table,  seven.  He  mystically  as- 
sociated the  first  of  these  numbers  with  the 
Persons  of  the  Trinity,  and  the  latter  with  the 
Sabbatical  institution  b 

But  the  more  symmetrical  arrangement 
which  allots  five  Commandments  to  each  Table 
is  supported  by  the  most  ancient  authorities^, 
and  is  approved  by  several  modern  critics.  It 
is  also  countenanced  by  Rom.  xiii.  9,  where  the 
complete  Second  Table  appears  to  be  spoken 
of  as  not  including  the  Fifth  Commandment. 

Philo  places  the  Fifth  Commandment  last 
in  the  First  Table,  and  calls  it  a link  between 
the  Two  Tables.  On  the  reason  of  this  desig- 
nation of  his,  see  on  Ex.  xx.  12.  The  real 
distinction  between  the  Tables  appears  to  be 
that  the  F'irst  relates  to  the  duties  which  arise 
from  our  Filial  relations,  the  Second  to  those 
which  arise  from  our  Fraternal  relations'*. 
But  as  the  Commandments  represent  the  es- 
sence of  law,  they  assume  the  strict  form  of 
law.  They  are  expressed,  almost  exclusively, 
in  the  prohibitory  form,  because  it  belongs  to 
law  to  say  what  a man  shall  not  do,  rather 
than  what  he  shall  do.  The  Commandments 
therefore  set  forth  neither  of  the  relations  that 
have  been  mentioned  on  the  positive  side. 
They  contain  no  injunctions  to  love  God,  like 
that  in  Deut.  vi.  5,  x.  12,  &c.;  nor  to  love  our 
brethren,  like  that  in  Lev.  xix.  18;  nor  do 
they  tell  us  to  lo've  our  parents. 

* See  on  Exod.  xx.  12. 

^ ‘ Quocst.  in  Exod.  ’71.  The  notion  is  adopted 
ki  the  ‘Speculum’  of  St  FMmund.  See  p.  337, 
note  6. 

^ Philo,  ‘de  Orac.’  25;  ‘ Quis  rer.  div.  heres.’ 
35.  Josephus  ‘ Ant.’  in.  5,  § 8 and  §5.  Ire- 
nieus,  ‘Adv.  hacres.’  ii.  24,  §4.  Gregor.  Naz. 
‘Carrn.  Var.’  xxxv. 

^ Knobel  observes  that  the  subject  of  the  First 
Table  is  pUtas,  that  of  the  Second  Table,  probi- 

tas. 


§V. 

The  name  most  frequently  used  by  Moses 
for  the  Decalogue  (nnyn)  signifies  something 
strongly  affirmed,  literally,  something  spoken 
again  and  again : it  is  therefore  properly 
rendered  in  our  version  The  Testimony 
(see  § I.).  Taking  this  in  connection  with 
the  prohibitory  foriji  of  the  Commandments, 
the  name  must  have  been  understood  as  the 
Testimony  of  Jehovah  against  the  tendency  to 
transgress  in  those  to  whom  the  document 
was  addressed.  When  Moses  laid  up  the 
completed  Book  of  the  Law,  of  which  the 
Commandments  were  the  central  point,  by 
the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  his  de- 
clared purpose  was  “that  it  may  be  there  for  a 
witness  against  thee;  for  I know  thy  rebellion 
and  thy  stiff  neck”  (Deut.  xxxi.  26,  27)^ 

It  was  by  the  Law,  as  it  was  represented  in 
these  Commandments,  that  there  came  “the 
knowledge  of  sin^.”  The  disturbance  of  the 
conscience  which  results  from  doing  wrong, 
when  there  is  no  expressed  law,  is  a vague 
discomfort  to  the  person  with  no  clear  appre- 
hension as  to  its  cause.  But  when  the  voice 
of  the  Lord  has  given  forth  the  Law  in  words 
intelligible  to  the  mind,  then  comes  the  know- 
ledge of  sin,  as  the  transgression  of  righteous 
obligation  to  a gracious  God^. 

And  this  knowledge  of  sin  necessarily  in- 
volves a consciousness  of  condemnation. 
Hence  the  Tables  given  to  Moses  were  1.‘  a 
ministration  of  condemnation” — “a  ministra- 
tion of  death  written  and  engraven  on  stones” 
(2  Cor.  iii.  7,  9;  cf.  Eph.  ii.  15).  Yet  was 
this  ministration  of  condemnation  a true  reve- 
lation of  Him  who  had  redeemed  His  people 
in  love,  and  it  is,  in  the  truest  sense,  a de- 
mand on  them  for  the  tribute  of  their  love®. 

It  is  love  in  the  creature  which  alone  can  obey 
the  Law  in  reality  and  with  acceptance'-*. 

The  relation  in  which  the  condemning 
strictness  of  the  Law  stood  to  the  forgiving 
mercy  of  Jehovah  was  distinctly  shewn  in  the  - 

® Hengstenberg  takes  nearly  the  same  view 
as  is  here  given  of  the  application  of  the  word 
nnP,  and  of  the  relation  of  the  Mercy  seat  to 
the  Decalogue.  ‘Pentateuch,’  Vol.  ir.  p.  524. 

**  Rom.  iii.  20,  vii.  7 ; cf.  note  on  Ex.  xx.  17. 

" On  the  mode  in  which  this  was  figured  in 
the  Sacrifices  of  the  Law,  see  notes  on  Lev.  iv. 

^ “For  though  the  Law,  being  love,  may 
seem  to  reveal  God  who  is  love,  yet  is  it  rather  a 
demand  for  love  than  a revelation  of  love  ; and 
though  it  might  have  been,  in  the  light  of  high 
intelligence,  and  where  there  was  no  darkening 
of  sin,  concluded  that  love  alone  could  demand 
love,  yet  does  the  mere  demand  never  so  speak 
to  sinners ; but  ‘ by  the  Law  is  the  knowledge 
of  sin:’  wherefore  ‘the  Law  worketh  wrath.’ ” 
Campbell,  ‘The  Nature  of  the  Atonement,’  p.  41. 
Cf.  Rom.  vii.  7 — 14. 

Matt.  xxii.  37 — 40;  Markxii.  29—31;  Luke 
X.  26,  27  ; Rom.  xiii.  8,  10;  Gal.  v,  4;  Jam. 
ii.  8.  See  on  Ex.  xx.  2. 


EXODUS.  XX. 


339 


symbolism  of  the  Sanctuary.  When  the  Ta- 
bles of  the  Law  were  deposited  in  the  Ark  of 
the  Covenant,  they  were  covered  by  the  Mer- 
cy seat,  which,  in  accordance  with  its  name, 
was  the  sign  of  the  Divine  lovingkindness  (see 
Note  on  ch.  xxv.  17).  The  Cherubim  which 
were  on  the  Mercy  seat  appear  to  have  figured 
the  highest  condition  of  created  intelligence  in 
the  act  of  humble  adoration  and  service,  and 
so  to  have  expressed  the  condition  on  which 
were  obtained  forgiveness,  deliverance  from 
the  letter  that  killeth  (z  Cor.  hi.  6),  and  com- 
munion with  Jehovah.  This  view  of  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  Ark  and  what  pertained  to  it 
seems  aptly  to  suit  the  words  in  which  the 
arrangement  of  the  symbols  is  prescribed; 
“and  thou  shalt  put  the  mercy  seat  above 
upon  the  ark ; and  in  the  ark  thou  shalt  put 
the  testimony  that  I shall  give  thee.  And 
there  I will  meet  with  thee,  and  I will  com- 
mune with  thee  from  above  the  mercy  seat, 
from  between  the  two  cherubims  which  are 
upon  the  ark  of  the  testimony,”  Ex.  xxv. 
21,  22. 

The  Ark,  as  the  outward  and  visible  sign 
of  the  Covenant  between  Jehovah  and  His 
people,  thus  expressed,  in  a way  suited  to  the 
time  and  the  occasion,  the  Divine  purpose  in 
the  Atonement.  The  Law  was  the  charac- 
teristic feature  in  the  dispensation  which  was 
then  present;  and  accordingly  the  essence  of 
the  Law  was  expressed,  not  in  a symbol,  but 
in  plain  words  written  by  the  finger  of  God. 
But  the  sentence  of  condemnation  implied  in 
the  Commandments  could  not  be  exhibited  in 
its  naked  severity  as  the  basis  of  the  Covenant. 
It  was  enclosed  in  the  Ark,  and  over  it  the 
Divine  mercy  was  symbolized  in  such  shadowy 
outline  as  was  to  edify  the  faithful  believers 


until  the  fulness  of  the  time  came,  when  the 
Son  was  sent  “whom  God  hath  set  forth  to 
be  .1  propitiation  (^IXacrTijpiov,  a rnsrey  seat)  * 
through  faith  in  his  blood,  to  declare  his 
righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins  that 
are  past,  through  the  forbearance  of  God ; to 
declare,  I say,  at  this  time  His  righteousness: 
that  He  might  be  just,  and  the  justifier  of  him 
that  believeth  in  Jesus”  (Rom.  iii.  25,  26). 

The  significance  of  the  whole  Sanctuary 
may  be  said  to  be  concentrated  in  the  Tables 
of  the  Law,  and  the  Mercy  seat.  The  other 
holy  things,  with  every  external  arrangement, 
were  subordinated  to  them 2.  And  hence  the 
place  in  which  they  were  deposited  was  the 
Holy  of  Holies,  closely  shut  off  by  the  vail, 
entered  by  no  one  but  the  High-priest,  and 
by  him  only  once  in  the  year.  Ex.  xl.  20,  21; 
Lev.  xvi.  2. 

§ VI. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  Decalogue,  in 
respect  to  its  subject-matter,  does  not  set 
forth  what  is  local,  or  temporary,  or  peculiar 
to  a single  nation 3.  Its  two  Tables  are  a 
standing  declaration  of  the  true  relation  be- 
tween morality  and  religion  for  all  nations 
and  agesk  The  Fourth  Commandment  is,  in 
its  principle,  no  exception  to  this^.  The 
Decalogue  belonged  to  the  Israelites,  not  be- 
cause the  truths  expressed  in  it  were  exclu- 
sively theirs,  but  because  it  was  revealed  to 
them  in  a special  manner  (see  on  Ex.  xx.  2). 
The  breadth  of  meaning  which  rightly  belongs 
to  it  may  be  compared  to  that  of  the  Lord’s 
Prayer,  whfoh,  though  it  was  especially  given 
by  Christ  to  His  followers  for  their  own  use, 
contains  nothing  unsuitable  for  any  believer 
in  One  God. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xx.  v.  8. 


On  The  Sabbath  Day. 

I.  The  Sabbath  according  to  the  Law ; II.  ac- 
cording to  Tradition.  III.  Its  connection 
with  the  Creation.  IV.  Its  relation  to  Sun- 
day, V.  Its  connection  7vith  the  deliverance 
from  Egypt.  VI.  Its  compass  of  meaning. 

§1. 

That  the  formal  observance  of  the  Sabbath 
day  originated  in  the  Law  of  Moses  appears 
to  have  been  the  opinion  of  Philo  and  of  most 

^ .See  Note  on  ch.  xxv.  17. 

See  Note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xl.  § III. 

^ Philo  seems  to  have  been  impressed  with 
this  when  he  lays  an  emphasis  on  the  fact  that 
the  Ten  Commandments  were  given  by  Him 
who  was  the  Father  of  the  Universe  (6  Trar^p  run' 
bXuv),  the  God  of  the  lVo7'ld  (Geos  Kcap-ov),  ‘ de 
decern  Orac.’  q,  10. 

^ “ It  was  the  boast  of  Josephus  (‘Cont.  Ap.’ 

II.  17),  that  whereas  other  legislators  had  made 
religion  to  be  a part  of  virtue,  Moses  had  made 


of  the  Fathers  and  Rabbinists®,  and  is  held  by 
many  modern  critics k But  see  note  on 
Gen.  ii.  3. 

In  what  way  was  the  Sabbath  day  to  be 
kept  holy  in  accordance  wnth  the  Fourth 
Commandment?  It  is  expressly  said  that  the 
ordinary  work  of  life  should  be  intermitted 
by  the  whole  community,  not  only  the  mas- 
ters, servants,  and  foreign  residents®,  but  also 
the  cattle;  and  the  period  of  this  intermission 

virtue  to  be  a part  of  religion.”  Stanley,  ‘Jewish 
Church,’  Vol.  I.  175. 

^ See  Note  ‘ On  the  Sabbath  day,’  § IV. 

® Philo,  ‘de  Orac.’  c.  20.  Justin  Martyr, 

‘ Dialog,  cum  Tryph.’  § [9.  Irenseus,  iv.  16. 
Tertullian,  ‘ Adv.  Jud.’  2,  4.  Otho,  ‘ Rabb. 
Lex.’  p.  603. 

7 See  Hengst.  ‘On  the  Lord’s  Day,’  p.  7 ; 
Ewald,  ‘Alterthiim.’  p.  3 ; ‘Hist,  of  Israel,’ i. 
576.  Hessey,  ‘Sunday,’ 'Lect.  IV.,  &c.  On  the 
word  Remember  in  Ex.  xx.  8,  see  note. 

® See  on  Ex*  xx.  10. 


Y 2 


EXODUS.  XX. 


340 

was  from  the  evening  of  the  sixth  day  of  the 
week  to  the  evening  of  the  seventh  The 
following  occupations  are  expressly  mentioned 
as  unlawful  in  different  parts  of  the  Old 
Testament ; sowing  and  reaping  (Ex.  xxxiv. 
21),  pressing  grapes,  and  bearing  burdens  of 
all  kinds  (Neh.  xiii,  15;  Jer.  xvii,  21),  holding 
of  markets  and  all  kinds  of  trade  (Neh.  xiii. 
15;  Amos  viii.  5),  gathering  wood,  and  kin- 
dling a fire  for  cooking  (Ex.  xxxv.  3 ; Num. 
XV.  32).  The  Sabbath  was  to  be  a day  of 
enjoyment  like  other  festivals  (Isa.  Iviii.  13; 
Hos.  ii.  ii),  and  such  restrictions  as  were 
imposed  could  have  been  unacceptable  to 
none  but  the  disobedient  and  the  avaricious, 
such  as  are  spoken  of  in  Amos  viii.  5,  6. 

In  the  service  of  the  Sanctuary,  the  Morn- 
ing and  Evening  Sacrifices  were  doubled 2,  the 
Shewbread  was  changed^,  and,  after  the 
courses  of  the  Priests  and  Levites  had  been 
instituted  by  David,  each  course  in  its  turn 
commenced  its  duties  on  the  Sabbath  day*. 
When  the  Temple  was  built,  there  is  reason 
to  believe  that  there  was  a special  musical  ser- 
vice for  the  day 

The  term  Holy  Con-vocation^  which  belongs 
to  the  Sabbath  day  in  common  with  certain 
other  Festival  days,  would  seem  to  imply  that 
there  was  a meeting  together  of  the  people  for 
a religious  purpose®.  From  the  mode  in 
which  the  commands  to  keep  the  Sabbath  day 
and  to  reverence  the  Sanctuary  are  associated, 
it  may  be  inferred  with  probability  that  there 
was  such  a meeting  in  the  Coprt  of  the  Sanc- 
tuary ^ At  later  periods,  in  places  remote 
from  the  Temple,  we  know  that  it  was  a cus- 
tom to  resort  on  this  day  to  public  teachers, 
and  to  hear  the  reading  of  the  Old  Testament, 
with  addresses  of  exposition  and  exhortation, 
in  the  Synagogues®.  It  is  not  unreasonable  to 
suppose  that  some  usage  of  this  kind  may 
have  been  observed  at  the  Sanctuary  itself 
from  the  first  institution  of  the  Sabbath®. 

■ * See  Lev.  xxiii.  32. 

Nuni.  xxviii.  9 ; 2 Chro.  xxxi.  3 ; Ezek.  xlvi. 

4* 

® Lev.  xxiv.  8 ; 1 Chro.  ix.  32  ; Matt.  xii.  4, 

&c. 

* 2 K.  xi.  5 ; 2 Chro.  xxiii.  4 ; cf.  i Chro. 
ix.  25. 

" This  is  favoured  by  a comparison  of  the 
lieading  of  I’s.  Ixxxi.  with  v.  3 of  the  Psalm 
itself,  as  well  as  by  the  Talmud. 

® I.ev.  xxiii.  2,  3. 

^ Lev.  xix.  30;  Ezek.  xxiii.  38. 

® 2 K.  iv.  23  ; Luke  iv.  13,  16  ; Acts  xiii.  14, 

15,  27,  XV.  21. 

® There  may  be  references  to  such  a custom 
Lev.  X.  1 1 ; Leut.  xxxiii.  10.  The  earlie.st  and 
best  Jewish  traditions  state  that  one  great  object 
of  the  .Sabbath  day  was  to  furnish  means  and 
opportunity  for  spiritual  edification.  Philo,  ‘ de 
Orac.’  c.  20.  ‘Vit.  Mos.’  ill.  27.  Jos.  ‘Ant.’ 
>^VI.  2.  § 3.  ‘ Cont.  .‘\p.’  I.  20,  II.  18.  For  rab- 
binical authorities  to  the  same  effect,  see  Cart- 
wright on  I-ix.  XX.  8,  in  the  ‘ Critici  Sacri.’ 


Such  are  the  particulars  that  can  be  gather- 
ed out  of  the  Scriptures  as  to  the  mode  of 
observing  the  Sabbath  day.  In  the  time  of 
the  Legislator  an  entire  rest  from  the  work 
of  daily  life  was  to  reign  throughout  the 
Camp:  and  it  may  be  conjectured  that  the 
people  assembled  before  the  Altar  at  the  hours 
of  the  Morning  and  Evening  Sacrifices  for 
prayer  and  contemplation,  and  to  listen  to  the 
reading  of  portions  of  the  Divine  Law,  per- 
haps from  the  lips  of  Moses  himself. 

The  notices  of  the  Sabbath  day  in  the  Pro- 
phets are  most  frequently  accompanied  by 
complaint  or  A^  arning  respecting  its  neglect 
and  desecration*®.  But  in  the  time  of  Isaiah 
(i.  13)  a parade  of  observing  it  had  become  a 
cloak  for  hypocrisy,  probably  under  a kindred 
influence  to  that  which  turned  the  public  fasts 
into  occasions  for  strife  and  debate  (Isa.  Iviii. 
4).  These  diverse  abuses  may  have  co-existed 
as  belonging  to  two  opposite  parties  in  the 
community,  both  being  in  the  wrong. 

§n. 

In  another  age,  after _ the  Captivity,  the 
Pharisees  multiplied  the  restraints  of  the  Sab- 
bath day  to  a most  burdensome  extent.  It 
was  forbidden  to  pluck  an  ear  of  corn  and 
rub  out  the  grains  to  satisfy  hunger  in  passing 
through  a cornfield  (Matt.  xii.  2) ; or  to  re- 
lieve the  sick  (Matt.  xii.  10;  Luke  xiii.  14). 
1 1 was  however  permitted  to  lead  an  ox  or  an 
ass  to  water,  or  to  lift  out  an  animal  that  had 
fallen  into  a pit  (Matt.  xii.  ii;  Luke  xiv.  5), 
to  administer  circumcision,  if  the  eighth  day 
after  the  birth  of  a child  fell  on  a Sabbath 
(Joh.  vii.  22),  and  to  invite  guests  to  a social 
meal  (Luke  xiv.  i).  According  to  rabbinical 
authorities,  it  was  forbidden  to  travel  more 
than  2000  cubits  on  the  Sabbath**,  to  kill  the 
most  offensive  kinds  of  vennin,  to  write  two 
letters  of  the  alphabet,  to  use  a wooden  leg  or 
a crutch,  to  carry  a purse,  or,  for  a woman, 
to  carry  a seal-ring  or  a smelling  bottle,  to 
wear  a high  head-dress  or  a false  tooth. 
Amongst  other  restraints  laid  upon  animals, 
the  fat-tailed  sheep  was  not  allowed  to  use  the 
little  truck  on  which  the  tail  was  borne  to 
save  the  animal  from  suffering.  These  are  a 
portion  of  39  prohibitions  of  the  same  kind*^. 

*•*  Is.  Ivi.  2 — 6,  Iviii.  13;  Jer.  xvii.  21,  27; 
Ezek.  XX.  13,  16,  20  ; Amos  viii.  5,  &c. 

**  On  the  Sabbath-day’s  journey,  see  Joseph. 

‘ Ant.’  XIII.  8.  § 4 with  the  Note  on  Ex.  xvi. 
29:  also  Walther,  ‘ de  Itin.  Sabb.’  in  ‘ Thes. 
Fhilolog.’  II.  p.  417.  Winer,  ‘ E.  B.’  s.  ‘ Sab- 
bathsweg.’ 

*"^  Mishna,  ‘ de  Sabbatho.’  We  are  told  by 
a eulogist  of  the  Talmud  that  the  rabbinical 
Sabbath  was  not  “ a thing  of  grim  austerity  ” 
(‘Quarterly  Rev.’  Dec.  1867.)  Its  austerity  was 
indeed  somewhat  mitigated  by  qualifying  regula- 
tions. Though  the  Jew  could  not  light  a fire  on 
the  Sabbath,  "he  was  formally  permitted,  at  the 
latest  moment  of  the  eve  of  the  Sabbath,  to  pack 


EXODUS.  XX. 


34T 


Connected  with  this  trifling  of  the  Pharisees 
and  the  Rabbinists,  is  the  notion  that  the  in- 
tention of  the  Law  was,  that  the  Sabbath 
should  be,  as  nearly  as  possible,  a day  of  mere 
inaction.  This  has  been  held  not  only  by 
Jewish  writers',  but  by  some  Christians  in 
the  time  of  S.  Chrysostom 2,  and  by  critics  of 
more  modern  date  (Spencer,  Vitringa,  Ld  Clerc). 
Our  Lord  decides  this  very  point  by  declaring 
that  there  is  a kind  of  work  which  is  proper 
for  the  Sabbath  day^.  See  the  next  section. 

§111. 

In  examining  the  two  distinct  grounds  for 
the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  day  which 
ai-e  assigned  by  Moses  the  first  step  is  to 
trace  the  nature  of  the  connection  between 
the  Day  and  the  Creation  of  the  world. 
What  is  clearly  stated  is,  that  the  Day  was 
hallowed  by  the  Divine  Law  as  a memorial 
of  the  rest  of  God  when  the  Creation  of  the 
world  was  completed^.  Man  was  to  rest  be- 
cause God  had  rested.  But  the  rest. of  man 
can  only  partially  resemble  the  rest  of  God. 
“The  Creator  of  the  ends  of  the  earth  faint- 
eth  not,  neither  is  weary®.”  His  work  in  the 
world  did  not  cease  at  the  close  of  the  six 
days,  nor  has  it  ever  been  remitted  since  7, 
His  hand  must  be  ever  holding  the  corners  of 
the  earth  and  the  strength  of  the  hills®.  His 
rest  cannot  therefore  be  like  that  inaction 
which  belongs  to  night  and  sleep,  which  man, 
in  common  with  all  animals,  requires  for  the 
restoration  of  his  wasted  powers.  But  yet  a 
man  may  have  conscious  experience,  after  well 
performed  work,  of  a restful  condition  that 
bears  an  analogy  to  the  occasion  on  which 
“ God  saw  every  thing  that  He  had  made, 
and,  behold,  it  was  very  goodV’  And  this 
Sabbath  feeling  is  only  to  be  enjoyed  by  those 
whose  work,  performed  in  a spirit  of  trustful 
dependence,  has  kept  pace  with  the  day  during 
the  week ; those  who  obey  not  only  the  com- 
mand, “Remember  the  Sabbath  day,”  but 
also  the  command,  “Six  days  shalt  thou  la- 
bour'®.” 

up  hot  food  in  such  a way  as  to  keep  it  hot  as 
long  as  possible  (‘de  Sabb.’  iv.  i.  2).  Under 
particular  conditions,  the  sick  might  be  relieved 
(Mish.  ‘ VIII.  6).  Fasting  on  the  Sabbath 

was  strictly  prohibited  (Otho,  ‘Rab.  Lex.’  p.  608  ; 
cf.  Judith  viii.  6).  Whether  or  not  a Sabbath  re- 
gulated by  rabbinical  rules  was,  on  the  whole, 
grimly  austere,  we  need  not  scruple  to  call  the 
rules  themselves  grossly  absurd. 

' Buxtorf.  ‘Synag.  Jud.’  cxvi. 

^ ‘ Horn,  in  Matt.’  XXXI. 

^ Matt.  xii.  12  ; Mark  iii.  4,  &c. 

^ See  Ex.  XX.  ii  ; Deut.  v.  15;  Note  ‘On 
the  Ten  Commandments,’  § II. 

® Ex.  XX.  II,  xxxi.  17.  Cf.  Gen.  ii.  3. 

® Is.  xl.  28. 

^ See  John  v.  17. 

® Ps.  xcv.  4,  5. 

^ Gen.  i.  31. 

Moses  (says  Philo)  iKeXevffev  tovs  /xeWovTUi 


The  true  rest  of  man  then  is  so  far  like  the 
rest  of  the  Creator,  that  it  is  remote  in  its 
nature  from  the  sleep  of  insensibility  as  it  is 
from  the  ordinary  struggle  of  the  world.  The 
weekly  Sabbath,  as  representing  that  state, 
was  “a  shadow  of  things  to  come",”  a fore- 
taste of  the  life  in  which  there  is  to  be  no 
more  toilsome  fatigue  (7701/0?'^),  that  life  which 
is  the  true  keeping  of  Sabbath  (o-a(3l3aTiafx6s) 
into  which  our  Saviour  entered  as  our  fore- 
runner when  He  ceased  from  His  works  on 
earth,  as  God  had  ceased  from  His  works  on 
the  seventh  day  (Heb.  iv.  9,  10). 

The  works  of  the  Creation  are  described 
as  culminating  in  the  creation  of  man.  The 
Sabbath  crowned  the  completed  works,  and 
as  it  was  revealed  to  the  Israelite,  it  reminded 
him  of  “the  fact  of  his  relation  to  God,  of 
his  being'  made  in  the  image  of  God ; it  was 
to  teach  him  to  regard  the  universe  not  chiefly 
as  under  the  government  of  sun  or  moon,  or 
as  regulated  by  their  courses;  but  as  an  order 
which  the  unseen  God  had  created,  which  in- 
cluded Sun,  Moon,  Stars,  Earth,  and  all  the 
living  creatures  that  inhabit  them.  The 
week,  then,  was  especially  to  raise  the  Jew 
above  the  thought  of  Time,  to  make  him  feel 
that  though  he  was  subject  to  its  laws,  he  yet 
stood  in  direct  connection  with  an  eternal 
law ; with  a Being  who  is,  and  was,  and  is  to 
come'®.”  Philo  aptly  calls  the  day  the  irnag- 
ing  forth  {eKfiaydou)  of  the  first  beginning. 
Some  of  the  wisest  Jewish  teachers  (Aben- 
Ezra,  Abarbanel)  have  said  that  he  who 
breaks  the  Sabbath  denies  the  Creation.  The 
Sabbath,  in  this  connection,  became  to  the 
Israelite  the  central  point  of  religious  observ- 
ance, and  represented  every  appropriation  of 
time  to  the  public  recognition  of  Jehovah. 
Hence  the  injunction  to  observe  it  appears  to 
be  essentially  connected  with  the  warning 
against  idolatry". 

§IV. 

But  this  great  idea  did  not  exclusively  be- 
long to  the  Israelite,  although  it  was  revealed 
to  him,  above  all  men,  in  its  true  relation  to 
God  and  man.  Real  worship  for  every  man, 
always  and  everywhere,  is  of  course  based  on 
the  truth  of  a Creator  distinct  from  the  Crea- 
tion. A nd  thus  the  Law  of  the  Sabbath  was 
the  expression  of  a universal  truth.  Hence,  the 
Commandment  bears  its  meaning  for  all  man- 
kind. The  day  which  we  observe,  in  accord- 
ance with  ecclesiastical  usage,  holds  another 
place  in  the  week,  and  its  connection  with 

h TavT-T)  ^7]u  Trj  iroXiTeig.,  Kaddirep  eu  rots  d'XXots, 
Kal  Kara  rovd'  eirecrdaL  (9e<p,  irpos  p.€v  'ipya  rpe- 
Tropiivovs  ecp'  -qp-lpas  dvixovras  Kai  (piXoao- 
(povvTas  T-p  e^86p.r]  /cat  Oeospiais  /xev  rOiv  ryjs  (pdaews 
crxoXdfoi/xas,  /c.t.X.  ‘ de  decern  Orac.’  c.  20. 

" Col.  ii.  16,  17. 

'2  Cf.  Rev.  xiv.  13. 

Maurice  ‘On  the  Old  Testament,’  Serm.  I. 

See  Lev.  xix,  3.  4 ; Ezek.  xx.  16,  20. 


EXODUS.  XX. 


the  Creation  of  the  world  has  thus  been  put 
into  the  background.  But  the  meaning  of 
the  Lord’s  day  cannot  be  separated  from  the 
great  meaning  of  the  Sabbath.  As  the  Sab- 
bath reminded  the  believer  under  the  Old 
Covenant  that  God  had  rested  after  He  had 
created  man  and  breathed  into  him  the  breath 
of  life  before  sin  had  brought  death  into  the 
world,  so  the  Sunday  now  reminds  the  be- 
liever that  Christ  rested  after  He  had  over- 
come death,  that  he  might  restore  all  who 
believe  in  Him  to  a new  life,  that  they  may 
become  the  sons  of  God  by  adoption  L What 
therefore  the  Sunday,  as  a commemoration  of 
the  Resurrection,  is  to  the  dispensation  of 
Christ,  the  Sabbath,  in  respect  to  its  connec- 
tion with  the  rest  of  God,  was  to  the  dispen- 
tion  of  Moses.  On  this  ground  then  there  is 
reason  enough  why  the  Fourth,  as  well  as 
the  other  Commandments,  should  be  address- 
ed to  Christian  congregations  and  should  hold 
its  place  in  our  Service. 

§v. 

It  was  at  a later  period  that  the  inspired 
I.egislator  set  forth  a second  ground  on  which, 
obedience  to  the  Commandment  was  required. 
It  was  said  to. the  Israelite  that  he  should  ob- 
serve the  Day  in  order  that  his  manservant 
and  his  maidservant  might  rest  as  well  as  he ; 
and  the  words  were  added;  “and  remember 
that  thou  wast  a servant  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  that  the  Lord  thy  God  brought  thee  out 
thence  thiough  a mighty  hand  and  a stretched 
out  arm:  therefore  the  Lord  thy  God  com- 
manded thee  to  keep  the  Sabbath  day*-*.”  By 
the  command  that  the  manservants  and  the 
maidservants  were  to  rest  on  the  Day  as  well 
as  their  masters,  witness  was  borne  to  the 
equal  position  which  every  Israelite  might 
claim  in  the  pres^'iice  of  Jehovah.  The  Sab- 
bath was  thus  made  a distinguishing  badge, 
a sacramental  bond,  for  the  whole  people,  ac- 
cording to  the  words,  “it  is  a sign  between 
me  and  you  throughout  your  generations; 
that  ye  may  know  that  I am  the  Lord  that 
doth  'sanctify  you^.”  The  wealthy  Israelite, 
in  remembrance  of  what  he  himself,  or  his 
forefathers,  had  suffered  in  Egypt,  was  to 
realize  the  fact  on  this  Day  that  the  poorest 
of  his  brethren  had  enjoyed  the  same  deliver- 
ance's, and  had  the  same  share  in  the  Co- 
venant, as  himself.  The  whole  nation,  as  one 
man,  was  to  enjoy  rest.  He  who  outraged 
the  Sabbath,  either  by  working  himself,  or  by 

* Rom.  iv.  25,  vi.  4,  viii.  13,  15. 

® Deut.  v.  14,  i.s. 

3 Kx.  xxxi.  13,  17  ; cf.  Lev.  xx.  8 ; Is.  Ivi.  2, 
4;  Ezek.  XX.  12.  20,  xxii.  8,  26. 


suffering  his  sen'ants  to  work,  broke  the  Co- 
venant with  Jehovah,  and  at  the  same  time 
cut  himself  off  from  his  people  so  as  to  incur 
the  sentence  of  death 

This  latter  ground  for  the  observance  of 
the  Sabbath  day  furnishes  a not  less  strict  an- 
alogy with  the  Sunday  than  that  which  has 
been  noticed.  What  the  Sabbath  was  to 
“the  kingdom  of  priests,  the  holy  nation 
on  the  score  that  they  had  been  redeemed 
from  the  bondage  of  Egypt  and  made  free 
men,  such  the  Sunday  is  to  “ the  chosen  gene- 
ration, the  royal  priesthood,  the  holy  nation, 
the  peculiar  people®,”  as  those  whom  Christ 
has  redeemed  from  the  bondage  of  corruption, 
and  brought  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the 
children  of  God". 

§ VI. 

In  order  rightly  to  apprehend  the  compass 
of  the  Fourth  Commandment  in  reference  to 
the  public  worship  of  the  Israelites,  it  should 
be  kept 'in  view  that  the  Sabbath  did  not 
stand  by  itself,  as  an  insulated  observance. 
Not  only  did  the  original  ground  of  the 
Weekly  Sabbath  connect  it  with  all  true  wor- 
ship, but  it  formed  the  centre  of  an  organ- 
ized system  including  the  Sabbatical  year,  and 
the  Jubilee  year«.  Besides  this,  the  recur- 
rence of  the  Sabbatical  number  in  the  cycle 
of  yearly  festivals  is  so  frequent  and  distinct, 
as  plainly  to  indicate  a set  purpose.  Without 
laying  stress  on  the  mystical  meaning  of  the 
number  senjen^  as  Philo,  Bahr,  and  others 
have  done,  it  is  evident  that  the  number  was 
the  Divinely  appointed  symbol,  repeated  again 
and  again  in  the  public  services,  suggesting 
the  connection  between  the  entire  range  of  the 
Ceremonial  Law  and  the  consecrated  Seventh 
Day.  And  this  may  be  compared  with  the 
important  remark  of  Biihr,  that  the  ritual  of 
the  Sabbath  day,  in  spite  of  the  superlative 
sanctity  of  the  Day,  was  not,  like  that  of 
other  Festivals,  distinguished  by  offerings  or 
rites  of  a peculiar  kind,  but  only  by  a dou- 
bling of  the  common  daily  sacrifices.  It  was 
thus  not  so  much  cut  off  from  the  Week  as 
marked  out  as  the  Day  of  Days,  and  so  sym- 
bolized the  sanctification  of  the  daily  life  of 
the  people.  In  whichever  way  we  regard  it, 
the  Fourth  Commandment  appears  to  have 
stood  to  the  Israelite  as  an  injunction  in  the 
broadest  sense  to  maintain  the  national  Wor- 
ship of  Jehovah. 

**  Ex.  xxxi.  14,  15— XXXV.  2 ; Jer.  xvii.  21—27. 

" Ex.  xix.  6. 

® i Pet.  ii.  9. 

7 Roin.  viii.  21. 

® Lev.  XXV. 


V.  22 I.J 


EXODUS.  XX.  XXL 


343 


22  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto 
Moses,  Thus  thou  shalt  say  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  Ye  ha^e  seen 
that  I have  talked  with  you  from 

* heaven. 

23  Ye  shall  not  make  with  me 
gods  of  silver,  neither  shall  ye  make 
unto  you  gods  of  gold. 

24  H An  altar  of  earth  thou  shalt 
make  unto  me,  and  shalt  sacrifice 
thereon  thy  burnt  offerings,  and  thy 
peace  offerings,  thy  sheep,  and  thine 
oxen : in  all  places  where  I record  my 

/Dent.  27.  j Yvill  come  unto  thee,  and  I 

31.  will  bless  thee. 

build  them  25  And  ^if  thou  wilt  make  me  an 

Nmh  hew-  shalt  not  ^ build 


it  of  hewn  stone : for  if  thou  lift 
up  thy  tool  upon  it,  thou  hast  pol- 
luted it. 

26  Neither  shalt  thou  go  up  by 
steps  unto  mine  altar,  that  thy  naked- 
ness be  not  discovered  thereon. 

CHAPTER  XXL 

I Laivs  for  menso'vants.  5 For  the  sei^jant 
luhose  ear  is  bored.  7 For  womeiiservants.  • 
12  For  maiislatighter.  16  For  stealers  of 
7nen.  1 7 For  cursors  of  parents.  1 8 For 
s miters.  22  For  a hurt  by  chance.  28  For 
an  ox  that  goreth.  33  For  him  that  is  an 
occasion  of  harm. 

N’  OW  these  are  the  judgments 
which  thou  shalt  set  before 

them. 


The  Book  of  the  Covenant. 

Ch.  XX.  22 — xxiii.  33. 

Introductory  Note. 

Now  follows  a series  of  laws,  some  of 
them  addressed  simply  to  the  conscience,  like 
the  Ten  Commandments,  and  others  having 
the  sanction  of  a penalty  attached.  The  con- 
text seems  to  make  it  clear  that  v/e  may  idefl- 
tify  this  series  with  what  was  written  by 
Moses  in  the  book  called  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant,  and  read  by  him  in  the  audience 
of  the  people  (see  xxiv.  4,  7).  There  has 
been  a difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  compass 
of  matter  contained  in  this  Book.  But  the 
weight  of  authority  is  in  favour  of  its  com- 
prising the  last  five  verses  of  ch.  xx.  with 
chaps,  xxi,  xxii,  xxiii  (de  Wette,  Ewald, 
Hupfeld,  Knobel,  Keil,  Herxheimer,  &;c.). 
A few  would  add  the  Ten  Commandments 
(Hengst.,  Kurtz,  &c,).  Some  Jewish  Com- 
mentators imagine  that  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant  included  very  considerable  por- 
tions of  Genesis  and  of  the  earlier  part  of 
Exodus. 

Adopting  the  conclusion  as  by  far  the  most 
probable  one,  that  the  Book  of  the  Cove- 
nant included  from  ch,  xx.  22  to  xxiii.  33,  it 
is  evident  that  the  document  cannot  be  re- 
garded as  a strictly  systematic  whole.  Por- 
tions of  it  were  probably  traditional  rules 
handed  down  from  the  Patriarchs,  and  re- 
tained by  the  Israelites  in  Egypt.  Probable 
traces  of  prns-Mosaic  antiquity  may  be  seen  in 
XX,  24 — 26,  xxi.  6,  xxiii.  19,  &c.  Some  of 
the  laws  relate  to  habits  of  fixed  abode,  not 
(at  least  if  taken  in  their  strict  form)  to  such 
a mode  of  life  as  that  of  the  Israelites  in  their 
march  through  the  Wilderness  (see  xxii.  5,6, 
29,  xxiii.  10,  ii):  some,  especially  those  re- 
lating to  slavery,  would  seem  to  have  been 
modifications  of  ancient  usages  (see  on  xxi. 


20,  21).  These  more  or  less  ancient  maxims 
may  have  been  associated  with  notes  of  such 
decisions  on  cases  of  difference  as  had  been  up 
to  this  time  pronounced  by  Moses  and  the 
judges  whom  he  had  appointed  by  the  advice 
of  Jethro,  See  xviii.  13—26. 

In  whatever  way  these  laws  may  have  ori- 
ginated, as  they  are  here  brought  together, 
they  are  clearly  enforced  by  Jehovah  as  con- 
ditions of  conduct  for  the  covenanted  people. 
The  adoption  of  Patriarchal  maxims  accords 
with  the  spirit  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  as 
expressed  in  the  Fifth  Commandment, 

Chap.  XX.  22—26.  Nothing  could  be 
more  appropriate  as  the  commencement  of  the 
Book  of  the  Covenant  than  these  regulations 
for  public  worship. 

23.  Assuming  this  to  be  an  old  formula, 
its  meaning  is  brought  out  more  compre- 
hensively in  the  Second  Commandment,  and 
is  strengthened  by  the  fact  declared  in  -v.  22, 
that  Jehovah  had  now  spoken  from  Heaven. 

24 — 26,  These  must  have  been  old  and 
accepted  rules  for  the  building  of  altars,  and 
they  are  not  inconsistent  with  the  directions 
for  the  construction  of  the  Altar  of  the 
Court  of  the  Tabernacle,  ch.  xxvii.  i — 8. 
There  is  no  good  reason  to  doubt  that  they 
were  observed  in  “the  Brazen  Altar,”  as  it  is 
called,  although  no  reference  is  made  to  them 
in  connection  with  it.  That  Altar,  according 
to  the  directions  that  are  given,  must  indeed 
have  been  rather  an  altar  case.,  with  a mass  of 
earth  or  stone  within,  when  it  was  put  to  use. 
See  notes  on  xxvii.  i — 8,  and  cf.  losli.  xxfu 
26 — 28. 

Chap.  XXI.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant, 
continued, 

1.  judgments']  i.e.  decisions  of  the  Law.  It 
is  worthy  of  remark  that  these  judgments 


i 


344 


EXODUS.  XXL 


[v.  2 II. 


«^Lev.  25.  2 ^ If  thou  buy  an  Hebrew  ser- 

Deut.  15.  vant,  six  years  he  shall  serve : and  in 
jir.  34. 14.  the  seventh  he  shall  go  out  free  for 
nothing. 

tHeb.  2 If  he  came  in  ^ by  himself,  he 
shall  go  out  by  himself:  if  he  were 
married,  then  his  wife  shall  go  out 
with  him. 

4 If  his  master  have  given  him  a 
wife,  and  she  have  born  him  sons  or 
daughters;  the  wife  and  her  children 
shall  be  her  master’s,  and  he  shall  go 
out  by  himself. 

tHeb.  5 And  if  the  servant  ^ shall  plainly 
ThaiUay.  say,  I love  my  master,  my  wife,  and 
my  children  ; I will  not  go  out  free : 

6  Then  his  master  shall  bring  him 
unto  the  judges;  he  shall  also  bring 
him  to  the  door,  or  unto  the  door 
post;  and  his  master  shall  bore  his 


ear  through  with  an  aul;  and  he  shall 
serve  him  for  ever. 

7 ^ And  if  a man  sell  his  daugh- 
ter to  be  a maidservant,  she  shall  not 
go  out  as  the  menservants  do. 

8 If  she  ^ please  not  her  master, 

who  hath  betrothed  her  to  himself,  tke  eyes  of, 
then  shall  he  let  her  be  redeemed : to 
sell  her  unto  a strange  nation  he  shall 
have  no  power,  seeing  he  hath  dealt 
deceitfully  with  her. 

9 And  if  he  have  betrothed  her 
unto  his  son,  he  shall  deal  with  her 
after  the  manner  of  daughters. 

10  If  he  take  him  another  voife-, 
her  food,  her  raiment,  and  her  duty 
of  marriage,  shall  he  not  diminish. 

1 1 And  if  he  do  not  these  three 
unto  her,  then  shall  she  go  out  free 
without  money. 


begin  with  some  that  relate  to  slavery  {ynj. 
2 — 16);  other  judgments  on  the  same  subject 
occur  in  20,  21,  26,  27. 

2.  A Hebrew  might*  be  sold  as  a bond- 
man  in  consequence  either  of  debt  (Lev.  xxv. 
39)  or  of  the  commission  of  theft  (Ex.  xxii, 
3).  But  his  servitude  could  not  be  enforced 
for  more  than  six  full  years.  The  law  is 
more  fully  expressed  in  Deut.  xv.  12- — 18, 
where  it  enjoins  that  the  bondman  should 
not  be  sent  away  at  the  end  of  his  period  of 
service  without  a liberal  supply  of  provisions; 
and  it  is  further  supplemented  by  other  regu- 
lations, especially  in  reference  to  the  Jubilee, 
in  Lev.  xxv.  39—43,  47 — 55.  Foreign  slaves 
arc  expressly  spoken  of  Lev.  xxv.  44,  46. 

3.  If  a married  man  became  a bondman, 
his  rights  in  regard  to  his  wife  were  respected: 
but  if  a single  bondman  accepted  at  the  hand 
of  his  master  a bondwoman  as  his  wife,  the 
master  did  not  lose  his  claim  to  the  woman, 
or  her  children,  at  the  expiration  of  the  hus- 
band’s term  of  service.  Such  wives,  it  may 
he  presumed,  were  always  foreign  slaves. 

5,  6.  But  if  the  bondman  loved  his  wife 
so  as  to  be  unwilling  to  give  her  up,  or  if  he 
was  strongly  enough  attached  to  his  master’s 
service,  he  might,  by  submitting  to  a certain 
ceremony,  prolong  his  term  “forever;”  that 
is,  most  probably,  till  the  next  Jobilcc,  when 
every  Hebrew  was  set  free.  So  Josejdius 
(‘Ant.’  IV.  8,  § 28)  and  the  Rabbinists  un- 
derstood the  phrase.  See  i.ev.  xxv.  40,  50. 
The  custom  of  boring  the  ear  as  a mark  of 
slavery  appears  to  have  been  a common  one 
in  ancient  times,  obscrvtxl  in  many  nations. 
See  Xenoph.  ‘ Anab.’  iii,  i,  § 31;  Plaut. 


‘ Poenul.’  V.  ii.  21;  Juvenal,  i.  104;  Pint. 
‘ Cicero,’  c.  26,  &c. 

6.  unto  the  judges']  Literally,  before  the. 
g§ds  (elohim).  The  w^ord  does  not  denote 
judges  in  a direct  way,  but  it  is  to  be  under- 
stood as  the  name  of  God,  in  its  ordinary 
plural  form,  God  being  the  source  of  all 
justice.  (So  Gesen.,  de  Wette,  Knobel, 
f iirst,  Herxh.,  &c.)  LXX.  7rpo?  to  KpLr-qpiov 
Tov  Qeov.  The  name  in  this  connection 
ahvays  has  the  definite  article  prefixed.  See 
xxii.  8,  9,  &c. 

7.  A man  might,  in  accordance  with  ex- 
isting custom,  sell  his  daughter  to  another 
man  with  a view  to  her  becoming  an  inferior 
wnfe,  or  concubine.  In  this  case,  she  \vas  not 
“to  go  out,”  like  the  bondman;  that  is,  she 
w^as  not  to  be  dismissed  at  the  end  of  the 
sixth  year.  But  women  wdio  were  bound  in 
any  other  way,  would  appear  to  have  been 
under  the  same  conditions  as  bondmen.  See 
Deut.  XV.  17. 

8.  shad  he  let  her  he  redeemed^  More 
strictly,  he  shall  cause  her  to  he  re- 
deemed. The  meaning  seems  to  be  that  he 
should  either  return  her  to  her  father  as  set 
free,  or  find  another  Hebrew  master  for  her 
who  wa)uld  grant  her  the  same  privileges  as 
she  wmuld  have  had  if  she  had  remained  with 
himself.  The  latter  sentence  of  the  verse  ap- 
pears to  signify  that,  although  he  was  not 
forced  to  keep*  literal  faith  wfitli  the  woman 
by  making  her  his  concubine,  he  was  not  per- 
mitted to  sell  her  to  a foreigner.  Even  in 
the  case  of  a foreign  captive  who  had  been 
accepted  as  a concubine,  and  had  displeased 
her  master,  she  could  not  be  sold  as  a slave, 


V.  12 — 20.] 


EXODUS.  XXL 


* Lev.  24.  12  ^ '^He  that  smiteth  a man,  so 

that  he  die,  shall  be  surely  put  to  death. 

13  And  if  a man  lie  not  in  wait, 
but  God  deliver  him  into  his  hand; 

f Deut.  19.  then  I will  appoint  thee  a place  whi- 
3-  ther  he  shall  flee. 

14  But  if  a man  come  presump- 
tuously upon  his  neighbour,  to  slay 
him  with  guile;  thou  shalt  take  him 
from  mine  altar,  that  he  may  die. 

15  ^ And  he  that  smiteth  his  fa- 
ther, or  his  mother,  shall  be  surely 
put  to  death. 

16  ^ And  he  that  stealeth  a man, 
and  selleth  him,  or  if  he  be  found 
in  his  hand,  he  shall  surely  be  put 
to  death. 


345 

17  ^ And  ‘^he  that  curseth  his Lev.  20. 

father,  or  his  mother,  shall  surely  be  frov.  20. 
put  to  death.  ^ 

18  ^ And  if  men  strive  tojjether,  , 

j . I . , o ’ Mark  7.  10. 

and  one  smite  another  with  a stone,  n Or, 
or  with  his  flst,  and  he  die  not,  but 
keepeth  his  bed  : 

19  If  he  rise  again,  and  walk  a- 
broad  upon  his  staff,  then  shall  he 
that  smote  hi?n  be  quit  : only  he 
shall  pay  for  Uhe  loss  of  his  time,  tHeb. 
and  shall  cause  hi?n  to  be  thoroughly 
healed. 

20  ^ And  if  a man  smite  his  ser- 

vant, or  his  maid,  with  a rod,  and  he 
die  under  his  hand;  he  shall  be  surely 
'punished.  ' 


\ 


but  was  entitled  to  her  freedom.  See  Deut. 
xxi.  14. 

11.  if  he  do  not  these  three  unto  her^  Most 
commentators  refer  these  three  things  to  the 
food,  raiment,  and  duty  of  marriage,  men- 
tioned in  V.  10.  But  Knobel  and  others  pre- 
fer the  interpretation  of  most  of  the  Rabbin- 
ists,  which  seems  on  the  whole  best  to  suit 
the  context,  that  the  words  express  a choice 
of  one  of  three  things,  in  which  case  their 
sense  is,  if  he  do  neither  of  these  three  things. 
The  man  was  to  give  the  woman,  whom  he 
had  purchased  from  her  father,  her  freedom, 
unless  (i)  he  caused  her  to  be  redeemed  by  a 
Hebrew  master  (gj.  8) ; or,  (ii)  gave  her  to 
his  son,  and  treated  her  as  a daughter  (-t’.  9) ; 
or,  (iii)  in  the  event  of  his  taking  another 
wife  (g).  10),  unless  he  allowed  her  to  retain 
her  place  and  privileges.  These  rules  (yu. 
7 — ii)  are  to  be  regarded  as  mitigations  of 
the  then  existing  usages  of  concubinage.  The 
form  in  which  they  are  expressed  confirms 
this  view. 

12.  No  distinction  is  expressly  made  here 
or  elsewhere  between  the  murder  of  a free 
man  and  that  of  a bondman.  See  on  nj.  20. 
The  law  was  afterv/ards  expressly  declared  to 
relate  also  to  foreigners.  Lev.  xxiv.  1-7,  21,  22 ; 
cf.  Gen.  ix.  6. 

13.  14.  There  was  no  place  of  safety  for 
the  guilty  murderer,  not  even  the  Altar  of 
Jehovah.  Thus  all  superstitious  notions  con- 
nected with  the  right  of  sanctuary  were  ex- 
cluded. Adonijah  and  Joab  appear  to  have 
vainly  trusted  that  the  vulgar  feeling  would 
protect  them,  if  they  took  hold  of  the  horns 
of  the  Altar  on  v/hich  atonement  with  blood 
was  made  (i  K.  i.  50,  ii.  28;  Lev.  iv.  7). 
But  for  one  who  killed  a man  “ at  unawares,” 
that  is,  without  intending  to  do  it,  the  Law 
afterwards  appointed  places  of  refuge,  Num. 


XXXV.  6 — 34;  Deut.  iv.  41 — 43,  xix.  2 — 10; 
Josh.  XX.  2 — 9.  It  is  very  probable  that 
there  was  some  provision  answering  to  the 
Cities  of  Refuge,  that  may  have  been  based 
upon  old  usage,  in  the  Gamp  in  the  Wil- 
derness. 

15,  16,  17.  The  following  offences  were 
to  be  punished  with  death : — 

Striking  a parent,  cf.  Deut.  xxvii.  16. 

Cursing  a parent,  cf.  Lev.  xx.  9. 

Kidnapping,  whether  with  a view  tg  retain 
the  person  stolen,  or  to  sell  him,  cf.  Deut. 
xxiv.  7. 

18,  19.  If  one  man  injured  another  in  a 
quarrel  so  as  to  oblige  him  to  keep  his  bed, 
he  who  had  inflicted  the  injury  was  set  free 
from  the  liability  to  a criminal  charge  (such 
as  might  be  based  upon  2;.  12)  when  the  in- 
jured man  had  so  far  recovered  as  to  be  able 
to  walk  with  a staff:  but  he  was  required  to 
compensate  the  latter  for  the  loss  of  his  time 
until  his  recovery  was  complete,  and  for  the 
cost  of  his  healing. 

20,  21.  The  Jewish  authorities  appear 
to  be  right  in  referring  this  law,  like  those 
in  vu.  26,  27,  32,  to  foreign  slaves  (see  Lev. 
XXV.  44 — 46).  All  Hebrew  bondmen  Vv'ere 
treated,  in  regard  to  life  and  limb,  like  free- 
men, and  the  Law  would  take  this  for  grant- 
ed. The  master  was  permitted  to  retain  the 
power  of  chastising  his  alien  slave  with  a rod, 
but  the  indulgence  of  unbridled  temper  was 
so  far  kept  in  check  by  his  incurring  punish- 
ment if  the  slave  died  under  his  hand.  If 
however  the  slave  survived  the  castigation  a 
day  or  two,  it  was  assumed  that  the  offence 
of  the  master  had  not  been  so  heinous,  and  he 
did  not  become  amenable  to  the  law,  because 
the  loss  of  the  slave  who,  by  old  custom, 
was  recognized  as  his  property,  was  account- 
ed, under  the  circumstances,  as  a punish- 


34*3  EXODUS.  XXI.  k 21-31. 


21  Notwithstanding,  if  he  continue 
a day  or  two,  he  shall  not  be  punish- 
ed : for  he  is  his  money. 

22  ^ If  men  strive,  .and  hurt  a 
woman  with  child,  so  that  her  fruit 
depart  from  her^  and  yet  no  mischief 
follow : he  shall  be  surely  punished, 
according  as  the  woman’s  husband 
will  lay  upon  him ; and  he  shall  pay 
as  the  judges  determine. 

23  And  if  any  mischief  follow,  then 
thou  shalt  give  life  for  life, 

^ Lev.  24.  24  ^ Eye  for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth, 

Deut.  19.  hand  for  hand,  foot  for  foot. 

Matt.  5.  25  Burning  for  burning,  wound  for 

3^-  wound,  stripe  for  stripe. 

26  ^ And  if  a man  smite  the  eye 
of  his  servant,  or  the  eye  of  his  maid, 
that  it  perish ; he  shall  let  him  go  free 
for  his  eye’s  sake. 

27  And  if  he  smite  out  his  man- 
servant’s tooth,  or  his  maidservant’s 


tooth ; he  shall  let  him  go  free  for  his 
tooth’s  sake. 

28  ^ If  an  ox  gore  a man  or  a 
woman,  that  they  die:  then  -^the  ox Gen. p 5. 
shall  be  surely  stoned,  and  his  flesh 

shall  not  be  eaten ; but  the  owner  of 
the  ox  shall  be  quit. 

29  But  if  the  ox  were  wont  to 
push  with  his  horn  in  tim.e  past,  and 
it  hath  been  testified  to  his  owner, 
and  he  hath  not  kept  him  in,  but 
that  he  hath  killed  a man  or  a wo- 
man ; the  ox  shall  be  stoned,  and  his 
owner  also  shall  be  put  to  death. 

30  If  there  be  laid  on  him  a sum 
of  money,  then  he  shall  give  for  the 
ransom  of  his  life  whatsoever  is  laid 
upon  him. 

31  Whether  he  have  gored  a son, 
or  have  goied  a daughter,  according 

to  this  judgment  shall  it  be  done  unto  ^ 
him. 


ment.  It  is  not  said  how  the  master  was  to 
be  treated  in  the  event  of  the  immediate  death 
of  the  slave.  It  may  have  been  left  to  the  deci- 
sion of  the  judges  as  to  whether  the  case  should 
come  under  the  law  of  v.  12,  or  some  second- 
ary punishment  should  be  inflicted, — The 
protection  here  afforded  to  the  life  of  a slave 
may  seem  to  us  but  a slight  one;  but  it  is  the 
very  earliest  trace  of  such  protection  in  legis- 
lation, and  it  stands  in  strong  and  favourable 
contrast  with  the  old  laws  of  Greece,  Rome, 
and  other  nations.  The  same  may  be  said  of 
'vnj.  26,  27,  32.  These  regulations  were  most 
likely,  as  much  as  was  feasible  at  the  time,  to 
mitigate  the  cruelty  of  ancient  practice;  they 
were  as  much  as  the  hardness  of  the  hearts  of 
the  people  would  bear.  Matt.  xix.  8.  See 
.Air  Goldwin  Smith's  admirable  essay,  “Does 
the  Bible  sanction  American  Slavery f’’ 

22  — 25.  The  sense  is  rather  obscure. 
The  rule  would  seem  to  refer  to  a case  in 
which  the  wife  of  a man  engaged  in  a quarrel 
interfered.  If  the  violence  did  no  more  than 
occasion  premature  birth,  he  who  inflicted  it 
was  punished  by  a hoe  to  be  proposed  by  the 
husband,  and  approved  by  the  magistrates. 
But  if  the  injury  was  more  serious,  so  as  to 
affect  life  or  limb,  a penalty  was  to  be  inflict- 
ed in  accordance  with  the  law  of  suffering 
like  for  like,  the  jus  talionis. — This  law  is  re- 
peated in  substance,  Lev.  xxiv,  19,  20,  21; 
Deut.  xix.  21;  cp.  (}cn.  ix.  6.  It  has  its  root 
in  a simple  conception  of  justice,  and  is  found 
in  the  laws  of  many  ancient  nations.  It  was 
ascribed  to  Rhadamanthus  (Arist.  ‘ Kthic.’  V. 


5).  It  was  recognized  in  the  laws  of  Solon 
(Diog.  Laert.  i,  57),  in  the  Laws  of  the 
Twelve  Tables  (Aul.  Gell.  x.  i;  Festus,  s. 
talio)^  by  the  ancient  Indians  (Strab.  xv.  p. 
710),  and  by  the  Thurians  (Diod.  Sic.  xii. 
17).  It  appears  to  be  regarded  in  this  place 
as  a maxim  for  the  magistrate  in  awarding 
the  amount  of  compensation  to  be  paid  for 
the  infliction  of  personal  injury.  The  sum 
was  to  be  as  nearly  as  possible  the  worth  in 
money  of  the  power  lost  by  the  injured  per- 
son. This  view  appears  to  be  in  accordance 
with  Jewish  tradition  (Mishna,  ‘ Baba  Kama,’ 
VIII.  i).  Michaelis  has  some  good  remarks 
on  the  jus  taliouis  (‘  Laws  of  Moses,’  Vol.  ill. 
p.  448). — Our  Lord  quotes  2;.  24  as  represent- 
ing the  form  of  the  Law,  in  order  to  illustrate 
the  distinction  between  the  Letter  and  the 
Spirit  (Matt.  v.  38).  The  tendency  of  the 
leaching  of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  was  to 
confound  the  obligations  of  the  conscience 
with  the  external  requirements  of  the  Law. 
I'he  Law,  in  its  place,  was  still  to  be  “holy 
and  just  and  good,”  but  its  direct  purpose 
was  to  protect  the  community,  not  to  guide 
the  heart  of  the  believer,  who  was  not  to  exact 
eye  for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth,  but  to  love  his 
enemies,  and  to  forgive  all  injuries. 

26,  27.  When  a master  inflicted  a per- 
manent injury  on  the  person  of  his  bondser- 
vant, freedom  was  the  proper  equivalent  for 
the  disabled  or  lost  member. 

28 — 31.  If  an  ox  killed  a person,  the  ani- 
mal was  slain  as  a tribute  to  the  sanctity  of 
human  life  (Gen.  ix.  6;  cf.  Gen.  iv.  ii).  It 


V.  32—4.] 


347 


EXODUS.  XXL  XXIl! 


32  If  the  ox  shall  push  a man- 
servant or  a maidservant  *,  he  shall 
give  unto  their  master  thirty  shekels 
of  silver,  and  the  ox  shall  be  stoned. 

33  ^ And  if  a man  shall  open  a 
pit,  or  if  a man  shall  dig  a pit,  and 
not  cover  it,  and  an  ox  or  an  ass  fall 
therein ; 

34  The  owner  of  the  pit  shall  make 
it  good,  and  give  money  unto  the 
owner  of  them;  and  the  dead  beast 
shall  be  his. 

35  ^ And  if  one  man’s  ox  hurt 
another’s,  that  he  die ; then  they  shall 
sell  the  live  ox,  and  divide  the  money 
of  it ; and  the  dead  ox  also  they  shall 
divide. 

36  Or  if  it  be  known  that  the  ox 
hath  used  to  push  in  time  past,  and 
his  owner  hath  not  kept  him  in;  he 
shall  surely  pay  ox  for  ox;  and  the 
dead  shall  be  his  own. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

I 0/  theft.  5 Of  damage.  7 Of  trespasses. 
14  Of  borrowing.  16  Of  foriiication.  18 
Of  witchcraft.  19  Of  beastiality.  20  Of 
idolatry.  2 1 Of  strangers,  widows,  and 
fatherless.  25  Of  nsiuy.  26  Of  pledges.  28 
Of  reverence  to  magistrates.  29  Of  the  first- 
fruits. 


I 


F a man  shall  steal  an  ox,  or  a 
sheep,  and  kill  it,  or  sell  it ; hen  Or,  goat. 
shall  restore  five  oxen  for  an  ox,  and 
four  sheep  for  a sheep.  2 Sam. 

2 ^ If  a thief  be  found  breaking  ^ 
up,  and  be  smitten  that  he  die,  there 
shall  no  blood  be  shed  for  him. 

3 If  the  sun  be  risen  upon  him, 
there  shall  be  blood  shed  for  him ; for 
he  should  make  full  restitution ; if  he 
have  nothing,  then  he  shall  be  sold 
for  his  theft. 

4 If  the  theft  be  certainly  found 
in  his  hand  alive,  whether  it  be  ox,  or 
ass,  or  sheep ; he  shall  restore  double. 


was  stoned,  and  its  flesh  was  treated  as  car- 
rion. In  ordinary  cases,  the  owner  suffered 
only  the  loss  of  his  beast.  But  if  the  ox  had 
been  previously  known  to  be  vicious,  the 
guilty  negligence  of  its  owner,  in  not  keeping 
it  under  restraint,  was  reckoned,  prima  facie, 
as  a capital  offence.  His  life  might  however 
be  commuted  for  a fine  to  be  determined  by 
the  judges;  and,  as  we  may  infer  with  proba- 
bility, to  be  agreed  to  by  the  parents  or  near 
relations  of  the  slain  person. 

32.  If  the  slain  person  was  a glave,  the 
ox  was  to  be  stoned  to  death,  and  its  owner 
v/as  to  pay  to  the  master  of  the  slain  person 
what  appears  to  have  been  the  standard  price 
of  a slave,  thirty  shekels  of  silver.  See  on 
Lev.  XXV.  44 — 46,  xxvii.  3. 

33,  34.  If  a man  either  left  his  pit  (or 
well)  exposed,  or  dug  a new  one  without 
protecting  it,  and  an  animal  fell  therein,  he 
was  to  pay  the  'value  of  the  animal  to  its 
owner,  but  was  allowed  to  appropriate  the 
carcase.  The  usual  mode  of  protecting  a 
well  was  probably  then,  as  it  is  now  in  the 
East,  by  building  round  it  a low  circular 
wall. 

35,  36.  The  dead  ox  in  this  case,  as  well 
as  in  the  preceding  one,  must  have  been  worth 
no  more  than  the  price  of  the  hide,  as  the 
flesh  could  not  be  eaten.  See  Lev.  xvii.  i — 6. 
There  is  here  the  same  sort  of  prudent  re- 
straint laid  upon  the  owners  of  vicious  ani- 
mals as  in  2,'.  29. 

Chap.  XXII.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant, 
continued. 


1.  The  theft  of  an  ox  appears  to  have  been 
regarded  as  a greater  crime  than  the  theft  of 
a sheep,  not  from  the  mere  consideration  of 
value,  but  because  it  shewed  a stronger  pur- 
pose in  wickedness  to  take  the  larger  and  more 
powerful  animal.  It  m.ay  have  been  on  similar 
moral  ground  that  the  thief,  when  he  had 
proved  his  persistency  in  crime  by  adding  to 
his  theft  the  slaughter,  or  sale,  of  the  animal, 
was  to  restore  four  times  its  value  in  the  case 
of  a sheep  (cf.  2 S.  xii.  6),  and  five  times  its 
value  in  the  case  of  an  ox;  but  if  the  animal 
was  still  in  his  possession  alive  (see  ao.  4)  he 
had  to  make  only  twofold  restitution. 

2.  breaking  up'\  breaking  in. 

3.  4.  If  a thief,  in  breaking  into  a dwell- 
ing in  the  night,  was  slain,  the  person  who 
slew  him  did  not  incur  the  guilt  of  blood ; but 
if  the  same  occurred  in  daylight,  the  slayer 
was  guilty  in  accordance  with  xxi.  12.  The 
distinction  may  have  been  based  on  the  fact 
that  in  the  light  of  day  there  was  a fair  chance 
of  identifying  and  apprehending  the  thief,  or, 
at  least,  his  design  would  be  apparent : but  in 
the  darkness  of  night  there  could  be  no  reck- 
oning as  to  how  far  his  purpose  might  extend, 
and  there  would  be  a great  probability  of  his 
escaping  unrecognized.  When  a thief  was  ap- 
prehended in  the  act,  he  could  be  forced  to 
make  restitution  if  he  had  the  means,  and  if 
not  he  was  to  be  sold  as  a bondslave.  The 
latter  punishment  may  be  likened  to  our  penal 
servitude;  and,  in  the  case  of  a Hebrew,  it 
could  not  be  prolonged  beyond  six  years. 
See  xxi.  2. 


348 


EXODUS.  XXII. 


[v-  5—17- 


5 ^ If  a man  shall  cause  a field 
or  vineyard  to  be  eaten,  and  shall  put 
in  his  beast,  and  shall  feed  in  another 
man’s  field;  of  the  best  of  his  own 
field,  and  of  the  best  of  his  own  vine- 
yard, shall  he  make  restitution. 

6 ^ If  fire  break  out,  and  catch  in 
thorns,  so  that  the  stacks  of  corn, 
or  the  standing  corn,  or  the  field,  be 
consumed  therewith;  he  that  kindled 
the  fire  shall  surely  make  restitution. 

7 ^ If  a man  shall  deliver  unto 
his  neighbour  money  or  stuff'  to  keep, 
and  it  be  stolen  out  of  the  man’s 
house ; if  the  thief  be  found,  let  him 
pay  double. 

8 If  the  thief  be  not  found,  then 
the  master  of  the  house  shall  be 
brought  unto  the  judges,  to  see  whe- 
ther he  have  put  his  hand  unto  his 
neighbour’s  goods. 

9 For  all  manner  of  trespass,  whe- 
ther it  be  for  ox,  for  ass,  for  sheep, 
for  raiment,  or  for  any  manner  of 
lost  thing,  which  another  challengeth 
to  be  his,  the  cause  of  both  parties 
shall  come  before  the  judges;  a7id 
whom  the  judges  shall  condemn,  he 
shall  pay  double  unto  his  neighbour. 

10  If  a man  deliver  unto  his  neigh- 
bour an  ass,  or  an  ox,  or  a sheep,  or 


any  beast,  to  keep;  and  it  die,  or 
be  hurt,  or  driven  away,  no  man  see- 
ing it: 

1 1 Then  shall  an  oath  of  the  Lord 
be  between  them  both,  that  he  hath 
not  put  his  hand  unto  his  neighbour’s 
goods;  and  the  owner  of  it  shall  ac- 
cept thereof^  and  he  shall  not  make  it 
good. 

12  And  '^if  it  be  stolen  from  him,  *Gen.  31. 
he  shall  make  restitution  unto  the 
owner  thereof. 

13  If  it  be  torn  in  pieces,  then  let 
him  bring  it  for  witness,  and  he  shall 
not  make  good  that  which  was  torn. 

14  ^ And  if  a man  borrow  ought 
of  his  neighbour,  and  it  be  hurt,  or 
die,  the  owner  thereof  being  not  with 
it,  he  shall  surely  make  it  good. 

15  But  if  the  owner  thereof  be 
with  it,  he  shall  not  make  it  good : 
if  it  be  an  hired  things  it  came  for 
his  hire. 

16  ^ And  if  a man  entice  a maid  ‘^Deui.  23. 
that  is  not  betrothed,  and  lie  with 

her,  he  shall  surely  endow  her  to  be 
his  wife. 

17  If  her  father . utterly  refuse  to 
give  her  unto  him,  he  shall  ^ pay  ' Heb. 
money  according  to  the  dowry  of 
virgins. 


4.  See  on  t;.  I. 

5.  shall  put  in  his  beast ^ and  shall  feed'] 
Rather,  shall  let  his  heast  go  loose, 
and  it  shall  feed.  (Thus  the  LXX., 
Vulg.,  Syr.,  Luther,  Zunz,  &c,)  He  who 
had  allowed  his  beast  to  stray  and  consume 
the  pasture  or  the  grapes  of  his  neighbour, 
had  to  restore  out  of  the  best  of  his  posses- 
sions a like  quantity  of  produce,  without 
regard  to  the  quality  of  that  which  had  been 
consumed. 

7.  pay  double]  Cf.  nj.  4. 

8.  It  would  appear  that  if  the  master  of 
the  house  could  clear  himself  of  imputation, 
the  loss  of  the  pledged  article  fell  upon  its 
owner. 

judges]  See  on  xxi.  6. 

9.  all  manner  of  trespass]  In  every  case 
of  theft,  he  who  was  accused,  and  he  who 
had  lost  the  stolen  jiroperty,  were  both  to  ap- 
pear before  the  judges  (xviii.  25,  26)  : the 
convicted  thief,  under  ordinary  circumstances, 
was  to  pay  double.  See  'v'v.  4,  7. 

10 — 13.  'J'his  law  appears  to  relate  chief- 
ly to  herdsmen  employed  by  the  owners  of 


cattle.  It  implies  that,  if  he  to  whom  the 
creatures*  were  entrusted  could  prove  that  he 
had  taken  all  reasonable  care  and  precaution, 
the  risk  of  loss  or  injury  fell  upon  the  owner: 
and  if  no  witness  could  be  produced,  the  oath 
of  the  herdsman  himself  that  he  had  performed 
his  duty  was  accepted.  But  when  an  animal 
was  stolen  (yv.  12),  it  was  presumed  either 
that  the  herdsman  might  have  prevented  it,  or 
that  he  could  find  the  thief/ and  bring  him  to 
justice  (see  u.  4).  When  an  animal  was  killed 
by  a wild  beast,  the  keeper  had  to  produce 
the  mangled  carcase,  not  only  in  proof  of  the 
fact,  but  to  shew  that  he  had,  by  Ins  vigilance 
and  courage,  deprived  the  wild  beast  of  its 
prey. 

14,  15.  If  a man  borrowed,  or  hired,  an 
animal,  it  was  at  his  risk,  unless  the  owner 
accompanied  it. 

15,  it  came  for  his  hire]  These  words 
are  obscure,  but  they  probably  mean  that  the 
sum  paid-for  hiring  was  regarded  as  covering 
the  risk  of  accident. 

16,  17.  The  man  who  seduced  a girl  that 
was  not  betrothed  had  to  forlvit  for  her  bene- 


V.  j8 — 29.] 


EXODUS.  XXIL 


349 


18  ^ Thou  shalt  not  suffer  a witch 
to  live. 

19  ^ Whosoever  lieth  with  a beast 
shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

^Dcut.  13.  20  ^ He  that  sacrificeth  unto  any 

! Mac.2^'  god,  save  unto  the  Lord  only,  he 
24-  shall  be  utterly  destroyed. 

‘ Lev.  19.  21  IT  ^Thou  shalt  neither  vex  a 

stranger,  nor  oppress  him  : for  ye  were 
strangers  in  the  land  of  Egypt. 

/zech.  7.  22  H -^Ye  shall  not  afflict  any 

widow,  or  fatherless  child. 

23  If  thou  afflict  them  in  any  wise, 
and  they  cry  at  all  unto  me,  I will 
surely  hear  their  cry ; 

24  And  my  wrath  shall  wax  hot, 
and  I will  kill  you  with  the  sword; 

r Lev.  25.  and  your  wives  shall  be  widows,  and 

i)eut.  23.  your  children  fatherless. 

rtai.  15.5.  25  ^ ^If  thou  lend  money  to  any 


af  my  people  that  is  poor  by  thee, 
thou  shalt  not  be  to  him  as  an 
usurer,  neither  shalt  thou  lay  upon 
him  usury. 

26  If  thou  at  all  take  thy  neigh- 
bour’s raiment  to  pledge,  thou  shalt 
deliver  it  unto  him  by  that  the  sun 
goeth  down : 

27  For  that his  covering  only,  it  is 
his  raiment  for  his  skin  ; wherein  shall 
he  sleep?  and  it  shall  come  to  pass, 
when  he  crieth  unto  me,  that  I will 
hear;  for  I am  gracious. 

28  ^ ^^Thou  shalt  not  revile  the =’3- 
gods,  nor  curse  the  ruler  of  thy  n Or, 

people.  fHek 

29  ^ Thou  shalt  not  delay  ta  offer 

the  ' first  of  thy  ripe  fruits,  and  of  |,Heb. 
thy  Hiquors:  ^ the  firstborn  of  thy  * chap.  13. 
sons  shalt  thou  give  unto  me.  & 3^; 


fit  a proper  sum  for  a dowry  (see  on  Deut. 
xxii.  28,  29),  and  to  marry  her^  if  her  father 
would  allow  him  to  do  so.  The  seducer  of  a 
betrothed  girl  was  to  be  stoned.  See  Deut. 
xxii.  23,  27. 

18.  Tkou  shalt  not  suffer  a 'witch  to  llx'e'] 
The  practice  of  witchcraft  by  both  sexes  is 
condemned  in  Lev.  xx.  27 ; Deut.  xviii.  9 — i2i. 
Wizards  alone  are  mentioned  Lev.  xix.  31. 
The  witch  is  here  named  to  represent  the 
class.  This  is  the  earliest  denunciation  of 
witchcraft  in  the  Law.  In  every  form  of 
witchcraft  there  is  an  appeal  to  a power  not 
acting  in  subordination  to  the  Divine  Law. 
From  all  such  notions  and  tendencies  true 
worship  is  designed  to  deliver  us.  The  prac- 
tice of  witchcraft  was  therefore  an  act  of  re- 
bellion against  Jehovah,  and,  as  such,  was  a 
capital  crime.  The  passages  bearing  on  the 
subject  in  the  Prophets,  as  well  as  those  in 
the  Law,  carry  a lesson  for  all  ages.  Isa.  viii. 
19,  xix.  3,  xliv.  25,  xlvii.  12,  13,  &c. 

19.  See  Lev.  xviii.  23. 

20.  This  was  probably  an  old  formula, 
the  sense  of  which,  on  its  ethical  side,  is  com- 
prised in  the  First  and  Second  Command- 
ments. 

shall  be  utterly  destroyed]  The  Hebrew 
word  here  used  is  cherem  (i.c.  demoted].  See 
on  Lev.  xxvii.  28. 

21.  a stranger]  More  properly,  a fo- 
reigner (Heb.  geer')^  one  who  dwells  in  a 
land  to  which  he  does  not  belong.  See  on 
XX.  10.  The  command  is  repeated  xxiii.  9. 
See  also  Lev.  xix.  33,  34;  Deut.  x.  17 — 19. 

22 — 24.  The  meaning  of  the  word  ren- 


dered afflict^  includes  all  cold  and  contemp- 
tuous treatment.  See  Deut.  x.  18.  The  same 
duty  is  enforced  with  the  promise  of  a bless- 
ing, Deut.  xiv.  29. 

25.  See  on  Lev.  xxv.  35 — 43 ; cf.  Deut. 
xxiii.  19. 

26,  27.  The  law  regarding  pledges  is 
expanded  Deut.  xxiv.  6,  10 — ’13. 

28.  the  gads]  Heb.  elohim.  See  on  xxi.  6. 

This  passage  has  been  understood  in  three 
different  ways:  (i)  Some  of  the  best  modern 
autlu.)nties  take  it  as  the  name  of  God  (as  in 
Gen.  i.  i),  and  this  certainly  seems  best  to 
represent  the  Hebrew,  and  to  suit  the  con- 
text. So  de  Wette,  Knobel,  Schott,  Keil, 
Benisch,  &c.  (2)  Our  Version  follows  the 

LXX.,  Vulg.,  Luther,  Cranmer,  &c. ; it  is  also 
countenanced  by  Philo  (‘  Vit.  Mos.’  iii.  26), 
and  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  iv.  8.  §10;  ‘ Contr. 
Ap.’  II.  34),  who  make  a boast  of  the  libe- 
rality of  the  sentiment  as  regards  the  gods  of 
other  nations.  (3)  The  word  is  rendered  as 
judges  by  the  Targums,  Saadia,  the  Syriac, 
Theodoret,  Geneva  Fr.  and  Eng.,  Zunz, 
Herxh.,  &c.,  and  this  makes  good  sense,  but 
it  is  rightly  objected  that  elohim^  to  have  the 
meaning  according  to  which  alone  it  could  be 
so  rendered,  should  have  the  article  prefixed. 
See  on  xxi.  6. 

curse  the  ruler ^ &c.]  Acts  xxiii.  5. 

29,  30.  The  offering  of  Firstfruits  ap- 
pears to  have  been  a custom  of  primitive  an- 
tiquity, and  was  connected  with  the  earliest 
acts  of  sacrifice.  See  Gen.  iv.  3,  4.  The  re- 
ferences to  it  here  and  in  xxiii.  19  had  proba- 
bly been  handed  down  from  patriarchal  times. 
The  specific  law  relating  to  the  firstbom  of 


350 


EXODUS.  XXIIL 


[v.  30—9. 


* Lev.  25 
8. 

Ezek.  44 
3J- 


UOr, 

receive. 


»Heb. 

ans^ver. 


30  Likewise  shalt  thou  do  with 
thine  oxen,  and  v/ith  thy  sheep : seven 
days  it  shall  be  with  his  dam ; on  the 
eighth  day  thou  shalt  give  it  me. 

31  ^ And  ye  shall  be  holy  men 
unto  me:  ^’neither  shall  ye  eat  any 
flesh  that  is  torn  of  beasts  in  the 
held;  ye  shall  cast  it  to  the  dogs. 

CHAPTER  XXIIL 

I Of  slander  and  false  zoitness.  3,  6 Of  justice. 
4 Of  charitableness.  10  Of  the  year  of  rest. 

1 2 Of  the  sabbath.  1 3 Of  idolatry.  \ Of 
the  three  feasts.  18  Of  the  blood  and  the  fat 
of  the  sacrifice.  20  An  Angel  is  promised, 
ZL'ith  a blessifig,  if  they  obey  him. 

Thou  shalt  not  'Haise  a Else 
report : put  not  thine  hand  with 
the  wicked  to  be  an  unrighteous  wit- 
ness. 

2 ^1  Thou  shalt  not  follow  a mul- 
titude to  do  evil;  neither  shalt  thou 
^ speak  in  a cause  to  decline  after  many 
to  wrest  judgment: 


3 ^ Neither  shalt  thou  counte- 
nance a poor  man  in  his  cause. 

4 II  If  thou  meet  thine  enemy’s 
ox  or  his  ass  going  astray,  thou  shalt 
surely  bring  it  back  to  him  again. 

5 If  thou  see  the  ass  of  him  that  "Deut.  22, 
hateth  thee  lying  under  his  burden, 

II  and  wouldest  forbear  to  help  him,  "Or. 
thou  shalt  surely  help  with  him.  tj'* 

6 Thou  shalt  not  wrest  the  judg- 

ment  of  thy  poor  in  his  cause.  zvonidest 

7 Keep  thee  far  from  a false  mat-  leave  thy' 
ter;  and  the  innocent  and  righteous 

slav  thou  not:  for  I will  not  justify 
the  wicked.  leave 

8 ^ And  thou  shalt  take  no  gift : 
for  the  gift  blindeth  ^ the  wise,  and 
perverteth  the  words  of  the  righteous.  Ecdus.  20 

9 ^ Also  thou  shalt  not  oppress  a f Heb. 
stranger : for  ye  know  the  ^ heart  of  a 
stranger,  seeing  ye  were  strangers  in 

the  land  of  Egypt. 


living  creatures  was  brought  out  in  a strong 
light  in  connection  with  the  deliverance  from 
Egypt  (xiii.  2,  12,  13).  Regarding  “the 
eighth  day,”  see  Lev.  xxii.  27.  The  fonn  for 
offering  Firstfruits  is  described  Dent.  xxvi. 
2 — II.  But  besides  these  usages  exclusively 
referring  to  Firstfruits,  there  were  others  em- 
bodying the  same  religious  idea  in  the  rites  of 
the  festivals  of  the  Passover  and  Pentecost. 
See  on  Lev.  xxiii. 

the  first  of  thy  ripe  fruits.,  and  of  thy  liquor  s'\, 
The  literal  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  is  given 
in  the  margin  (“thy  fulness  and  thy  tear”), 
and  is  retained  in  Luther's  version.  First- 
fruits  (□’’"i'lIiD,  xxiii.  19)  are  not  here  men- 
tioned by  name;  but  the  connection  clearly 
shows  that  they  are  meant.  The  latter  of  the 
two  Hebrew  substantives  (yiDl)  does  not 
occur  elsewhere.  But  according  to  its  ety- 
mology, it  means  that  which  drops  like  a 
tear.  The  J.XX.  has  arrapya^  dkcovns.  Kal 
XjpoG  aov.  Vulg.  decimas  tuas  et  primitias 
tuas.  d'hese  renderings,  as  well  as  that  in 
our  Bible  (which  nearly  follows  Onk.  and 
the  Syr.),^  are  of  course  paraphrases  rather 
than  versions. 

31.  'Fhe  sanctification  of  the  nation  was 
emphatically  symbolized  by  strictness  of  diet  as 
regards  both  the  kind  of  animal,  and  the  mode 
of  slaughtering.  See  Lev.  chaps,  xi.  and  xvii. 

CnAi*.  XXIII.  The  Book  of  the  Cove- 
nant, concluded. 

1—3.  'Fhese  four  commands,  addressed 
to  the  conscience  without  sanction  of  punish- 
ment, are  so  many  illustrations  of  the  Ninth 


Commandmertt,  mainly  in  reference  to  the 
giving  of  evidence  in  legal  causes.  It  is  for- 
bidden : — 

1.  To  circulate  a false  report  (cf.  Lev. 
xix.  16). 

2.  To  join  hand  in  hand  with  another 
in  bearing  false  witness. 

3.  To  follow  a majority  in  favouring  an 
unrighteous  cause. 

4.  To  shew  partiality  to  a man's  cause 
because  he  is  poor  (cf.  Lev.  xix.  15). 

2.  This  verse  might  be  more  strictly  ren- 
dered, Thou  shalt  not  follozv  the  many  to  e^vil ; 
neither  shalt  thou  bear  Q.vitness  in  a cause  so  as 
to  incline  after  the  many  to  perasert  justice. 

3.  countenance']  Rather,  to  show  par- 
tiality to. 

4.  5.  So  far  was  the  spirit  of  the  Law 
from  encouraging  personal  revenge  that  it 
would  not  allow  a man  to  neglect  an  oppor- 
tunity of  saving  his  enemy  from  loss.  On 
the  apparently  different  spirit  expressed  in 
Ueut.  xxiii.  6,  and  on  the  reference  to  the 
subject  in  Matt.  v.  43,  see  in  loc.  Cf.  Deut. 
xxii.  I — 4. 

5.  (ivouldest  forbear  to  help  him,  «&c.]  The 
words  are  rather  difficult,  but  the  sense  ap- 
pears to  be: — If  thou  see  the  ass  of  thine  enemy 
lying  do^vn  under  his  burden,  tbou  shalt  forbear 
to  pass  by  him ; thou  shalt  help  him  in  loosening 
the  girths  of  the  ass.  The  passage  is  rendered 
to  this  effect  by  Saadia,  Gesenius,  Knobel,  &c. 

6 — 9.  These  verses  comprise  four  pre- 
cepts, which  are  evidently  addressed  to  those 
in  authority  as  judges; — 


V.  10 — 14-] 


EXODUS.  XXIII. 


351 


c Lev.  25. 
3- 


I Or, 

olive  trees. 
chap.  20. 

8. 

Deut.  5. 

Luke  13. 
14. 


10  And  ^six  years  thou  shalt  sov/ 
thy  land,  and  shalt  gather  in  the  fruits 
thereof : 

1 1 But  the  seventh  year  thou  shalt 
let  it  rest  and  lie  still;  that  the  poor 
of  thy  people  may  eat : and  what 
they  leave  the  beasts  of  the  field  shall 
eat.  In  like  manner  thou  shalt  deal 
with  thy  vineyard,  and  with  thy  ^ olive- 
yard. 

12  '^Six  days  thou  shalt  do  thy  work, 


and  on  the  seventh  day  thou  shalt 
rest ; that  thine  ox  and  thine  ass  may 
rest,  and  the  son  of  thy  handmaid, 
and  the  stranger,  may  be  refreshed. 

13  And  in  all  things  that  I have 
said  unto  you  be  circumspect;  and 
make  no  mention  of  the  name  .of 
other  gods,  neither  let  it  be  heard 
out  of  thy  mouth. 

14  ^ ^ Three  times  thou  shalt  keep 
a feast  unto  me  in  the  year. 


1.  To  do  justice  to  the  poor. — Compar- 
ing 'v.  6 with  -t;.  3,  it  was  the  part  of  the 
judge  to  defend  the  poor  against  the  oppres- 
sion of  the  rich,  and  the  part  of  the  witness 
to  take  care  lest  his  feelings  of  natural  pity 
should  tempt  him  to  falsify  his  evidence. 

2.  To  be  cautious  of  inflicting  capital 
punishment  on  one  whose  guilt  was  not 
clearly  proved. — A doubtful  case  was  rather 
to  be  left  to  God  Himself,  who  would  “ not 
justify  the  wicked,”  nor  suffer  him  to  go  un- 
punished though  he  might  be  acquitted  by 
an  earthly  tribunal.  2).  7. 

3.  To  take  no  bribe  or  present  which 
might  in  any  way  pervert  judgment  (-i;.  8); 
cf.  Num.  xvi.  15;  I S.  xii.  3. 

4.  To  vindicate  the  rights  of  the  stranger 
(gu.  9) — rather,  the  foreigner.  See  on  xx.  10. 
This  verse  is  a repetition  of  xxii.  21,  but  the 
precept  is  there  addressed  to  the  people  at 
large,  while  it  is  here  addressed  to  the  judges 
in  reference  to  their  official  duties.  This  is 
Knobel’s  explanation;  but  Bleek  and  others, 
overlooking  the  very  distinct  contexts,  take 
the  repetition  as  merely  redundant. — The 
word  rendered  heart  is  more  strictly  soul 

and  would  be  better  represented  here 
by  feelings.  Gf.  on  xxviii.  3 and  on  Lev. 
xvii.  II. 

10 — 12.  This  is  the  first  mention  of  the 
Sabbatical  year;  the  law  for  it  is  given  at 
length  Lev.  xxv.  2.  Both  the  Sabbatical  year 
and  the  weekly  Sabbath  are  here  spoken  of 
exclusively  in  their  relation  to  the  poor,  as 
bearing  testimony  to  the  equality  of  the  people 
in  their  Covenant  with  Jehovah.  In  the  first 
of  these  institutions,  the  proprietor  of  the  soil 
gave  up  his  rights  for  the  year  to  the  whole 
community  of  living  creatures,  not  excepting 
the  beasts:  in  the  latter,  the  master  gave  up 
his  claim  for  the  day  to  the  services  of  his 
servants  and  cattle.  See  Note  ‘ On  the 
Sabbath  day,’  § V.  after  ch.  xx. 

11.  thou  shalt  let  it  rest  and  lie  stiir\  Some 
understand  this  expression  to  relate  to  the 
crops,  not  to  the  land,  so  as  to  mean,  thou 
shalt  lea-ve  them  {i.e.  the  crops)  and  gi-ve  them 
up  to  the  poor^  See.  (Kranold,  Hupfeld,  Da- 


vidson.) The  words,  if  they  stood  by  them- 
selves, might  bear  this  interpretation  as  well 
as  that  given  in  our  version,  and  neither  in- 
terpretation is  opposed  to  Lev.  xxv.  2 — 5,  where 
it  is  said  that  the  land  was  to  remain  untilled. 
But  it  has  been  presumed  without  the  least 
authority  that  the  writer  of  Leviticus  made  a 
mistake,  and  that  the  original  law,  as  it  is 
here  given,  was  not  intended  to  prevent  the 
land  from  being  tilled  as  usual,  but  only  to 
forbid  that  the  crops  should  be  harvested  by 
the  proprietor,  in  order  that  the  poor  might 
gather  them  for  themselves.  See  on  Lev.  xxv. 
2.  It  has  also  been  objected  that  this  origi- 
nal law  could  not  have  been  written  by 
Moses  in  the  wilderness,  where,  of  course,  it 
could  not  have  been  observed,  and  that  this 
difficulty  occurred  to  the  writer  of  Leviticus, 
and  induced  him  to  prefix  the  words  “ when 
ye  come  into  the  land  which  I give  you.” 
But  surely  this  difficulty,  if  we  admit  it  to 
have  a real  existence,  would  have  been  avoided 
by  any  one  writing  a clever  fictitious  narra- 
tive with  a view  to  deceive  his  own,  or  later 
ages.  It  seems  easier  and  more  reasonable  to 
regard  Moses  as  having  legislated  and  written 
with  the  deep  conviction  ever  in  his  mind 
that  the  promise  of  the  possession  of  the 
land  made  to  Abraham  was  sure  of  fulfil- 
ment. See  on  20,  31. 

12.  maj  be  refreshed']^  Literally,  may  take 
breath. 

13.  Cf.  Deut.  iv.  9,  vi.  13,  14  ; Josh.  xxii.  5. 

14 — 17.  This  is  the  first  mention  of  the 
three  great  Yearly  Festivals.  The  Feast  of  Un- 
leavened Bread,  in  its  connection  with  the 
Paschal  Lamb,  is  spoken  of  in  ch.  xii.,  xiii. : 
but  the  two  others  are  here  first  named.  The 
whole  three  are  spoken  of  as  if  they  were 
familiarly  known  to  the  people.  The  points 
that  are  especially  enjoined  are  that  every 
male  Israelite  should  attend  them  at  the  Sanc- 
tuary (cf.  xxxiv.  23),  and  that  he  should  take 
with  him  an  offering  for  Jehovah.  He  was, 
on  each  occasion,  to  present  himself  before 
his  King  with  his  tribute  in  his  hand.  That 
the  latter  condition  belonged  to  all  the  Feasts, 


352 


EXODUS.  XXIII. 


[v.  15—19. 


:hap.  13.  -/^Thou  shalt  keep  the  feast  of 

^ unleavened  bread:  (thou  shalt  eat  un- 

leavened bread  seven  days,  as  I com- 
manded thee,  in  the  time  appointed 
of  the  month  Abib;  for  in  it  thou 
irDeut.  16.  earnest  out  from  Egypt : s and  none 
Eccius.  35.  shall  appear  before  me  empty  :) 

4-  16  And  the  feast  of  harvest,  the 

firstfruits  of  thy  labours,  which  thou 
hast  sown  in  the  field : and  the  feast 
of  ingathering,  which  is  in  the  end  of 


the  year,  when  thou  hast  gathered  in 
thy  labours  out  of  the  field. 

17  Three  times  in  the  year  all  thy 
males  shall  appear  before  the  Lord 
God. 

18  Thou  shalt  not  offer  the  blood 
of  my  sacrifice  with  leavened  bread; 
neither  shall  the  fat  of  my  “ sacrifice  “ Or, /mst. 
remain  until  the  morning. 

19  ^^The  first  of  the  firstfruits  of chap.  34. 
thy  land  thou  shalt  bring  into  the 


though  it  is  here  stated  only  in  regard  to 
the  Passover,  cannot  be  doubted.  See  Deut. 
xvi.  16, 

15,  16.  On  the  Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread, 
or  the  Passover,  see  xii.  i — 28,'  43 — 50,  xiii. 
3 — 16,  xxxiv.  18 — 20;  Lev.  xxiii.  4 — 14. 
bn  the  Feast  of  the  ^Firstfruits  of  Harvest, 
called  also  the  Feast  of  Weeks,  and  the 
Feast  of  Pentecost,  see  xxxiv.  22;  Lev.  xxiii. 
15 — 21.  On  the  Feast  of  Ingathering,  called 
also  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  see  Lev.  xxiii. 
34—36,  39—43- 

16.  in  the  end  of  the  year\  Cf.  xxxiv.  22. 
The  year  here  spoken  of  must  have  been  the 
civil  or  agrarian  year,  which  began  after  har- 
vest, when  the  ground  was  prepared  for  sow- 
ing. Cf.  Lev.  xxiii.  39  ; Deut.  xvi.  13 — 15. 
The  sacred  year  began  in  spring,  with  the 
month  Abib,  or  Nisan.  ^ See  on  Exod.  xii.  2, 
and  on  Lev.  xxv.  9. 

rivhm  thou  hast  gathered^  Rather,  when  thou 
satherest  in.  The  Hebrew  does  not  im- 
ply that  the  gathering  in  was  to  be  completed 
before  the  Feast  was  held.  In  some  years 
the  harvest  must  have  fallen  later  than  in 
others.  It  was  perhaps  rarely  completed  be- 
fore the  time  appointed  for  the  Feast.  And 
hence  the  fitness  of  the  expression,  “ which  is 
in  the  end  of  the  year,”  as  explained  in  the 
preceding  note. 

18,  19.  These  verses  comprise  three 
maxims,  each  of  which,  according  to  the  best 
interpretation,  appears  to  relate  to  one  of 
the  Festivals,  in  due  order,  as  named  in  'w. 

14—17. 

18.  the  blood  of  my  sacrifice']  It  is  gene- 
rally considered  that  this  must  refer  to  the 
Paschal  Lamb.  The  blood  that  was  sprin- 
kled on  the  door-posts,  or  (after  the  first  occa- 
sion) on  the  Altar,  emphatically  represented 
“the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord’.s  passover.”  See 
xii.  7,  II,  13,  22,  23,  27.  _ . 

the  fat  of  my  sacrifice]  Strictly,  the  fat 
of  my  feast.  In  the  parallel  passage  xxxiv. 
25,  what  appears  to  be  the  ecjuivalent  expres- 
sion is,  “ the  sacrifee  of  the  feast  of  the  pass- 
over.”  It  has  been  inferred  with  great  pro- 


bability that  the  fat  of  my  feast  means  not 
literally  the  fat  of  the  Paschal  Lamb,  but  the 
best  part  of  the  feast,  that  is,  the  Paschal 
Lamb  itself  (Knobel,  Keil).  This  explana- 
tion best  accords  with  xii.  10,  where  there  is 
no  mention  of  the  fat.  If  we  take  the  words 
in  their  mere  literal  sense,  they  must  refer  to 
the  fat  of  the  sacrifices  in  general,  which, 
when  the  ritual  of  the  sacrifices  was  arranged, 
was  burnt  upon  the  Altar  by  the  Priests  (Lev. 
i.  8,  iii.  3—5). 

19.  T^he  first  of  the  firstfruits  of  thy  land] 
This  most  probably  means  the  best^  or  chief 
of  the  Firstfruits,  &c.  As  the  preceding  pre- 
cept appears  to  refer  to  the  Passover,  so  it  is 
likely  that  this  refers  to  Pentecost,  as  espe- 
cially to  the  offering  of  what  are  called  in 
*2'.  16  “the  firstfruits  of  thy  labours;”  that  is, 
the  two  wave  loaves  described  Lev.  xxiii.  17. 
They  are  called  in  Leviticus,  “ the  firstfruits 
unto  the  Lord;”  and  it  is  reasonable  that 
they  should  here  be  designated  the  chief  of 
the  Firstfruits.  If,  with  Keil  and  others,  we 
suppose  the  precept  to  relate  to  the  offerings 
of  Firstfruits  in  general,  the  command  is  no 
more  than  a repetition  of  xxii.  29. 

Thou  shalt  not  seethe  a kid  in  his  mother's 
milk]  This  precept  is  repeated  xxxiv.  26; 
Deut.  xiv.  21.  There  has  been  much  dis- 
cussion a*s  to  its  meaning.  St  Augustine 
and  somiC  more  recent  commentators  have 
given  up  the  explanation  of  it  in  despair.  If 
we  are  to  connect  the  first  of  the  two  pre- 
ceding precepts  with  the  Passover,  and  the 
second  with  Pentecost,  it  seems  reasonable  to 
connect  this  with  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 
The  only  explanation  which  accords  with  this 
connection  is  one  which  refers  to  some  sort  of 
superstitious  custom  connected  with  the  har- 
vest. Abarbanel  speaks  of  such  a custom,  in 
which  a kid  was  seethed  in  its  mother’s  milk 
to  propitiate  in  some  way  the  deities.  But 
the  subject  is  more  pointedly  illustrated  in  an 
ancient  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  by  a 
Karaite  Jew,  from  the  manuscript  of  which  a 
quotation  is  given  by  Cudworth  (‘  On  the 
I.ord’s  Supper,’  p.  36).  It  is  there  said  to  have 
been  a prevalent  usage  to  boil  a kid  in  its 


V.  20 23-] 


EXODUS.  XXIII. 


353 


Deut^^i^^'  Lord  thy  God.  ^ Thoii 

21.  shalt  not  seethe  a kid  in  his  mother’s 
milk. 

-frchap.  33.  20  ^ ^ Behold,  I send  an  Angel 

before  thee,  to  keep  thee  in  the  way, 
and  to  bring  thee  into  the  place  which 
I have  prepared. 

21  Beware  of  him,  and  obey  his 
voice,  pi*ovoke  him  not;  for  he  will 
not  pardon  your  transgressions : for 
my  name  is  in  him. 


22  But  if  thou  shalt  indeed  obey 
his  voice,  and  do  all  that  I speak; 
then  I will  be  an  enemy  unto  thine 
enemies,  and  “ an  adversary  unto  thine  “ ov, 

1 . ■'  / luill 

adversaries.  a/jikt 

23  '^For  mine  Angel  shall  go  be- 
fore  thee,  and  "'bring  thee  in  unto^'^^^'’^ 
the  Amorites,  and  the  Hittites,  and  2.'^ 
the  Perizzites,  and  the  Canaanites, 

'and  the  Hivites,  and  the  Jebusites: 
and  I will  cut  them  off. 


mother’s  milk,  when  all  the  crops  were  ga- 
thered in,  and  to  sprinkle  with  the  milk  the 
fruit  trees,  fields  and  gardens,  as  a charm  to 
improve  the  crops  of  the  coming  year.  The 
explanation  based  upon  this  is  preferred  by 
Bochart,  John  Gregory,  Grotius,  Knobel  and 
others.  The  command,  so  understood,  is  a 
caution  against  the  practice  of  magic.  See  on 
xxii.  18.  But  in  a matter  so  doubtful,  it  is 
but  fair  to  give  such  other  explanations  as 
seem  most  worthy  of  notice. 

1.  It  has  been  taken  as  a prohibition  of 
the  eating  of  flesh  and  milk  together  (the 
Targums,  Erpenius).  This  is  countenanced 
by  the  traditional  custom  of  the  Jews  (‘  Mish- 
na,’  Cholin  viii.  i;  Maimon.  ‘de  Cit.  Vel.’ 
9;  Buxtorf,  ‘Syn.  Jud.’  p.  596J. 

2.  It  has  been  supposed  to  forbid  the 
eating  of  a kid  before  it  has  been  weaned 
from  its  mother — Luther,  Calvin,  Fagius, 
&c. 

3.  It  has  been  referred  to  a custom  now 
existing  among  the  Arabs,  which  is  certainly 
of  great  antiquity,  of  preparing  a gross  sort 
of  food  by  stewing  a kid  in  milk,  with  the 
addition  of  certain  ingredients  of  a stimu- 
lating nature,  which  is  commonly  called  in 
Arabic,  “a  kid  in  his  mother’s  milk.”  Aben- 
Ezra,  Keil,  Thomson  (‘  The  Land  and  the 
Book,’  ch.  VIII.),  &c. 

4.  It  has  been  brought  into  connection 
with  the  prohibitions  to  .slaughter  a cow  and 
a calf,  or  a ewe  and  her  lamb,  on  the  same 
day  (Lev.  xxii.  28),  and  to  take  a bird  along 
with  her  young  in  the  nest  (Dent.  xxii.  6). 
It  is  thus  understood  as  a protest  against 
cruelty  and  outraging  the  order  of  nature  {ne 
commisceatur  germen  cum  radicibus).  Theo- 
doret,  Vatablus,  Ewald,  &c.  See  Bochart, 

‘ Hieroz.’  1.  ii,  c.  52. 

20—33.  These  verses  appear  to  form 
the  conclusion  of  the  Bock  of  the  Covenant. 
They  contain  promis'^s  of  the  constant  pre- 
sence and  guidance  of  Jehovah  {yv.  20 — 22), 
of  the  driving  out  of  the  nations  of  the  Cana- 
anites by  degrees  (23 — 30),  and  of  the  subse- 
quent enlargement  of  Hebrew  dominion  (2;. 
31).  But  these  promises  are  accompanied  by 
VOL,  I. 


solemn  exhortations  and  threatenings.— Cf. 
xxxiv.  10 — 17,  where  similar  promises  and 
warnings  are  prefixed  to  the  shorter  compen- 
dium of  Law  which  was  written  down  after 
the  renewal  of  the  Tables. 

20,  21.  an  Angel... for  my  name  is  in  him'] 
The  Angel  appears  to  mean  the  presence  and 
the  power  of  Jehovah  Himself,  manifested  in 
the  work  of  leading  and  delivering  His  people, 
and  maintaining  His  Covenant  with  them. 
Cf.  xxxii.  34,  xxxiii.  2,  15,  16,  and  the  notes; 
see  also  on  Gen.  xii.  7. 

20.  the  place  'which  I ha've  prepared]  The 
promise  of  the  Land  may  be  seen  to  inspire 
the  legislation  and  conduct  of  Moses  through- 
out his  career.  'There  is  no  trace  of  uncer- 
tainty as  to  the  ultimate  aim  of  his  mission. 
He  had  been  called  to  lead  the  people  to  the 
home  prepared  for  them,  according  to  the 
promise  first  made  to  Abraham,  and  to  disci- 
pline them  in  their  passage  through  the  wil- 
derness to  become  a strong  nation. 

22.  and  an.  ad'veNary  unto  thine  ad^krsa-‘ 
ries]  The  rendering  in  the  margin  is  the 
better  one.  Cf.  Deut.  xx.  4. 

23.  The  nations  here  mentioned  are  those 
only  that  inhabited  the  land  strictly  called  the 
Land  of  Canaan,  lying  between  the  Jordan 
and  the  Great  Sea.  See  Num.  xxxiv.  2 ; cf. 
Exod.  xxxiv.  II. 

I will  cut  them  off]  It  has  been  too  abso- 
lutely taken  for  granted  that  it  was  the  Divine 
will  that  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan  should  be 
utterly  exterminated.  We  know  that,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  great  numbers  of  the  Canaanite 
families  lived  on,  and  intermarried  with  the 
Israelites  (see  Judg.  i.,  ii.,  with  such  cases  as 
those  of  the  Sidonians,  of  Araunah,  of  Uriah, 
of  the  family  of  Rahab,  &c.).  The  national 
existence  of  the  Canaanites  was  indeed  to  be 
utterly  destroyed,  every  trace  of  their  idola- 
tries was  to  be  blotted  out,  no  social  inter- 
course was  to  he  held  with  them  while  they 
served  other  gods,  nor  were  alliances  of  any 
kind  to  be  formed  with  them.  These  com- 
mands are  emphatically  repeated  and  expand- 
ed in  Deuteronomy  (vii. ; xii.  i — 4,  29 — 31). 

Z 


354 


EXODUS.  XXIII. 


« Deut. 
25- 


o Deut. 
14. 


i Heb. 
fleck. 


[v.  24—31. 


24  Thou  shalt  not  bow  down  to 
their  gods,  nor  serve  them,  nor  do 

7.  after  their  works : " but  thou  shalt 
utterly  overthrow  them,  and  quite 
break  down  their  images. 

25  And  ye  shall  serve  the  Lord 
your  God,  and  he  shall  bless  thy  bread, 
and  thy  water;  and  I will  take  sick- 
ness away  from  the  .midst  of  thee. 

7 26  ^ '’There  shall  nothing  cast 

their  young,  nor  be  barren,  in  thy 
land:  the  number  of  thy  days  I will 
fulfil. 

27  I will  send  my  fear  before  thee, 
and  will  destroy  all  the  people  to 
whom  thou  shalt  come,  and  I will 
make  all  thine  enemies  turn  their 
^ backs  unto  thee. 


28  And  will  send  hornets  before  24. 
thee,  which  shall  drive  out  the  Hivite, 

the  Canaanite,  and  the  Hittite,  from 
before  thee. 

29  I will  not  drive  them  out  from 
before  thee  in  one  year;  lest  the  land 
become  desolate,  and  the  beast  of  the 
field  multiply  against  thee. 

30  By  little  and  little  I will  drive 
them  out  from  before  thee,  until  thou 
be  increased,  and  inherit  the  land. 

31  And  I will  set  thy  bounds  from 
the  Red  sea  even  unto  the  sea  of  the 
Philistines,  and  from  the  desert  unto 
the  river:  for  I will  deliver  the  in- 
habitants of  the  land  into  your  hand; 
and  thou  shalt  drive  them  out  before 
thee. 


They  were  often  broken  by  the  Israelites,  who 
had  to  suffer  for  their  transgression  (Num. 
xxxiii.  55;  Judg.  ii.  3).  But  it  is  alike  con- 
trary to  the  spirit  of  the  Divine  Law,  and  to 
the  facts  bearing  on  the  subject  scattered  in  the 
history,  to  suppose  that  any  obstacle  was  put 
in  the  way  of  well  disposed  individuals  of  the 
denounced  nations  who  left  their  sins  and 
were  willing  to  join  the  service  of  Jehovah. 
The  Law,  as  it  was  addressed  to  the  Israelites, 
never  forgets  the  stranger  (rather,  the  fo- 
reigner, LXX.  7rpo(ri]\vTos)  who  had  volun- 
tarily come  within  their  gates.  See  xx.  10. 
The  spiritual  blessings  of  the  Covenant  were 
always  open  to  those  who  sincerely  and  ear- 
nestly desired  to  possess  them.  Lev.  xix.  34, 
xxiv.  22.  A narrowness  and  cruelty  in  this 
and  other  respects  has  been  very  generally 
ascribed  to  the  Law  of  Moses,  from  which  it 
has  been  justly  vindicated  by  Salvador,  ‘His- 
toire  des  Institutions  de  Moi'se,’  Vol.  i.  p.  447. 

24.  Cf.  Num.  xxxiii.  52;  Deut.  vii.  5, 
16,  xii.  29,  30,  XX.  18. 

27.  dcjtroy']  Rather,  overthrow.  See  on 
•v.  23;  cf.  XV.  14;  Deut.  ii.  25;  Josh.  ii.  ii. 

28.  hornets']  Cf.  Deut.  vii.  20;  Josh, 
xxiv,  T2.  'Lhe  Hebrew  word  is  in  the  singu- 
lar number,  used  for  the  species— the  hornet. 
Bochart  (‘  Hiero/.’  lib.  iv.  c.  13)  has  collected 
instances  from  ancient  authorities  of  large 
bodies  of  men  being  driven  away  by  noxious 
insects  and  other  small  creatures;  and  the 
author  of  the  Book  of  Wisdom  (xii.  8,  9) 
with  some  of  the  commentators  have  supposed 
that  hornets  are  literally  meant  (see  ‘ Crit. 
Sac.’).  But  there  seems  to  be  no  reasonable 
doubt  that  the  word  is  used  figuratively  for  a 
cause  of  terror  and  discouragement.  Bees 
are  spoken  of  in  the  like  sense,  Deut.  i.  44; 


Ps,  cxviii.  12.  The  passage  has  been  thus  un- 
derstood by  most  critics, 

29.  beast  of  the  field]  The  term  is  ap- 
plied to  any  wild  animal ; here  it  means  a 
destructive  one,  as  it  does  also  Deut.  vii.  22: 
cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  22;  2 K.  xvii.  25;  Job  v.  22; 
Ezek.  xiv.  15. 

31.  In  ns.  23,  the  limits  of  the  Land  of 
Canaan,  strictly  so  called,  are  indicated;  to 
this,  when  the  Israelites  were  about  to  take 
possession  of  it,  were  added  the  regions  of 
Gilead  and  Bashan  on  the  left  side  of  the  Jor- 
dan (Num.  xxxii.  33 — 42 ; Josh.  xiii.  29 — 32). 
These  two  portions  made  up  the  Holy  Land, 
of  which  the  limits  were  recognized,  with  in- 
considerable variations,  till  the  final  overthrow 
of  the  Jewish  polity.  But  in  this  verse  the 
utmost  extent  of  Hebrew  dominion,  as  it 
existed  in  the  time  of  David  and  Solo- 
mon, is  set  forth.  The  kingdom  then  reached 
-to  Eloth  and  Ezion-geber  on  the  ^Elanitic 
Gulf  of  the  Red  Sea  (i  K.  ix.  26),  and  to 
Tiphsah  on  the  “ River,”  that  is,  the  River 
Euphrates  (i  K.  iv.  24),  having  for  its  western 
boundary  “ the  Sea  of  the  Philistines,”  that  is, 
the  Mediterranean,  and  for  its  southern  boun- 
dary “ the  desert,”  that  is,  the  wildernesses  of 
Shur  and  Paran  (cf.  Gen.  xv.  18;  Deut.  i.  7, 
xi.  2\\  Josh.  i.  4).  Hengstenberg  thinks  that 
these  broad  descriptions  of  the  Land  are  to  be 
taken  as  rhetorical,  and  not  as  the  strict 
terms  of  the  promise  (‘  Pentateuch,’  ii.  p.  217). 
He  considers  this  to  be  the  right  way  of  meet- 
ing those  who  reject  the  genuineness  of  the 
narrative  on  the  ground  of  the  improbability 
that  Moses  should  have  foretold  the  extent  of 
the  conquests  of  David  and  Solomon.  But 
the  cavils  of  such  objectors  may  be  met  more 
simply  and  effectively  by  urging  that  if  Moses 


V.  32—7-] 


EXODUS.  XXIII.  XXIV. 


355 


» chap.  34.  ^2  ^Thou  shalt  make  no  covenant 

Deut.  7. 2.  with  them,  nor  with  their  gods. 

33  They  shall  not  dv/ell  in  thy 
land,  lest  they  make  thee  sin  against 
'■Deut.  7.  rne : for  if  thou  serve  their  gods,  ^it 
jo'sh.  23.  will  surely  be  a snare  unto  thee. 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

I Moses  is  called  icp  into  the  mountain.  3 The 
, people  promise  obedience.  4 A/oses  buildcth  an 

altar.,  and  tivelve  pillars.  6 He  sprinkleth  the 
blood  of  the  covenant.  9 The  glory  of  God 
appcareth.  14  Aaron  and  Hur  have  the 
charge  of  the  people.  15  Moses  goeth  into  the 
mountain,  where  he  co7itbiueth  forty  days  and 
forty  nights. 

AND  he  said  unto  Moses,  Come 
±\^  up  unto  the  Lord,  thou,  and 
Aaron,  Nadab,  and  Abihu,  and  se- 
venty of  the  elders  of  Israel ; and  wor- 
ship ye  afar  off. 

2  And  Moses  alone  shall  come 
near  the  Lord  : but  they  shall  not 
come  nigh ; neither  shall  the  people 
go  up  with  him. 


3 ^ And  Moses  came  and  told  the 

people  all  the  words  of  the  Lord, 
and  all  the  judgments:  and  all  the 
people  answered  with  one  voice,  and 
said,  All  the  words  which  the  Lord  " 
hath  said  will  we  do.  & 24. 3, 7 

4 And  Moses  wrote  all  the  words 
of  the  Lord,  and  rose  up  early  in  the 
morning,  and  builded  an  altar  under 
the  hill,  and  twelve  pillars,  according 
to  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel. 

5 And  he  sent  young  men  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  which  offered  burnt 
offerings,  and  sacrificed  peace  offer- 
ings of  oxen  unto  the  Lord. 

6 And  Moses  took  half  of  the 
blood,  and  put  it  in  basons;  and  half 
of  the  blood  he  sprinkled  on  the  altar. 

7 And  he  took  the  book  of  the 
covenant,  and  read  in  the  audience  of 

the  people : and  they  said,  ^ All  that  ^ ver.  3. 
the  Lord  hath  said  will  we  do,  and 
be  obedient. 


was  acquainted  with  the  geography  of  the 
region  (which  can  hardly  be  called  in  ques- 
tion), he  might  certainly  have  foreseen  that 
the  Hebrew  power,  when  it  became  very 
strong  in  the  Land  of  Canaan,  could  not  fail 
to  exercise  domination  over  all  the  country 
from  the  Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean  and 
the  Red  Sea. 

CHAP.  XXIV. 

Tbe  Sealing  of  the  Co-venant. 

1—8. 

1,  2.  It  is  not  easy  to  trace  the  proper 
coni'kection  of  these  two  verses  as  they  stand 
here.  Ev/ald,  with  great  probability,  thinks 
that  their  right  place  is  between  verseS  8 and 
9 in  this  chapter  (‘Hist,  of  Israel,’  p.  529). — 
It  has  been  suggested  that  they  may  relate  to 
what  was  said  to  Moses  immediately  after  the 
utterance  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  ch.  xx. 
19  (Knobel).^ — If  they  are  here  placed  in  due 
order  of  time  (as  Rosenmuller,  Keil  and 
'others  suppose),  the  direction  to  Moses  con- 
tained in  them  was  delivered  on  the  mount 
(see  XX.  21),  but  its  fulfilment  was  deferred 
till  after  he  had  come  down  from  the  mount 
and  done  all  that  is  recorded  in  •vo).  3 — 8. 

3,  4.  The  narrative  in  these  verses  seems 
naturally  to  follow  the  end  of  the  preceding 
chapter.  Moses  leaves  the  mount  and  re- 
peats the  words  of  the  Book  of  the  Cove- 
nant to  the  people,  they  give  their  assent,  and 
the  next  morning  he  arranges  the  ceremony 
for  the  formal  ratification  of  the  Covenant. 


4.  t^juel’ve  pillars']  As  the  altar  was  a 
symbol  of  the  presence  of  Jehovah,  so  these 
twelve  pillars  represented  the  presence  of  the 
Twelve  Tribes  with  whom  He  was  making 
the  Covenant.  Keil  suggests  that  the  pillars 
were  perhaps  arranged  as  boundary  stones 
for  the  spot  consecrated  for  the  occasion. 

5.  young  r7ien  of  the  children  of  Israel]  The 
Targums  and  Saadia  call  these  the  firstborn 
sons.  There  is  no  fair  ground  for  this  inter- 
pretation. Moses  was  on  this  occasion  per- 
forming the  office  of  a priest  (the  fomily  of 
Aaron  not  being  yet  consecrated),  and  he 
employed  young  men  whose  strength  and  skill 
qualified  them  to  slaughter  and  prepare  the 
sacrifices.  The  Law  did  not  regard  these  acts 
as  necessarily  belonging  to  the  priests,  and  it  is 
probable  that  they  were  regarded  in  the  same 
way  in  earlier  times,  when  the  sacerdotal 
character  belonged  especially  to  the  firstborn 
sons.  See  on  Lev.  i.  5,  and  Exod.  xxviii.  i. 

burnt  offerings... peace  offerings]  The  Burnt 
offerings  figured  the  dedication  of  the  nation 
to  Jehovah,  and  the  Peace  offerings  their 
communion  with  Jehovah  and  with  each 
other. 

6.  he  sprinkled]  Rather,  he  cast.  See  on 
Lev.  i,  5.  The  same  word  is  used  -v.  8. 

7.  the  book  of  the  coneenant]  See  o).  4, 
and  Introd.  note  on  xx.  22.  The  people  had 
to  repeat  their  assent  to  the  Book  of  the  Cove- 
nant before  the  blood  was  thrown  upon  them. 
Cf.  2 K.  xxiii.  2,  21;  2 Chron.  xxxiv.  30. 

Z 2 


356 


EXODUS.  XXIV. 


^V.  8 12. 


8 And  Moses  took  the  blood,  and 
sprinkled  it  on  the  people,  and  said, 

firet.  I.  Behold  ‘^the  blood  of  the  covenant, 
Heb.g.  20.  which  the  Lord  hath  made  with  you 
concerning  all  these  words. 

9 ^ Then  went  up  Moses,  and 
Aaron,  Nadab,  and  Abihu,  and  se- 
venty of  the  elders  of  Israel : 

10  And  they  saw  the  God  of  Is- 


rael : and  there  was  under  his  feet  as 
it  were  a paved  work  of  a sapphire 
stone,  and  as  it  were  the  body  of 
heaven  in  his  clearness. 

1 1 And  upon  the  nobles  of  the 
children  of  Israel  he  laid  not  his 
hand : also  they  saw  God,  and  did 
eat  and  drink. 

12  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 


S.  the  blood  of  the  con)enant\  It  should  be 
observed  that  the  blood  v^hich  sealed  the  Co- 
venant was  the  blood  of  Burnt  offerings  and 
Peace  offerings.  The  Sin  offering  had  not  yet 
been  instituted.  That  more  complicated  view 
of  human  nature  which  gave  to  the  Sin  offer- 
ing its  meaning,  had  yet  to  be  developed  by 
the  Law,  which  was  now  only  receiving  its 
ratification.  The  Covenant  between  Jehovah 
and  His  people  therefore  took  precedence  of 
the  operation  of  the  Law,  by  which  came  the 
knowledge  of  sin.  Rom.  iii.  20;  Note  on  the 
Ten  Commandments,  § V. 

Half  of  the  blood  had  been  put  into  basins, 
and  half  of  it  had  been  cast  upon  the  Altar. 
The  Book  of  the  Covenant  was  then  read,  and 
after  that  the  blood  in  the  basins  was  cast 
“ uix)n  the  people.”  It  was  cast  either  upon 
the  elders,  or  those  who  stood  foremost ; or, 
as  Abarbanel  and  others  have  supposed,  upon 
the  twelve  pillars  representing  the  Twelve 
Tribes,  as  the  first  half  had  been  cast  upon 
the  altar,  which  witnessed  the  presence  of 
Jehovah.  The  blood  thus  divided  between 
the  two  parties  to  the  Covenant  signified  the 
sacramental  union  between  the  Lord  and  His 
people.  Cf.  Ps.  1.  5;  Zech.  ix.  ii. 

The  instances  from  classical  antiquity  ad- 
duced as  parallels  to  this  sacrifice  of  Moses 
by  Biihr,  Knobel  and  Kalisch,  in  which  ani- 
mals were  slaughtered  on  the  making  of  co- 
venants, are  cither  those  in  which  the  animal 
was  slain  to  signify  the  punishment  due  to 
the  party  that  might  break  tlie  covenant 
(Horn.  ‘II.’  III.  298,  XIX.  252;  Liv.  ‘Hist.’ 
I.  24,  XXI.  45);  those  in  which  confederates 
dipped  their  hands,  or  their  weapon-,  in  the 
same  blood  (Alsch.  ‘ Sept.  c.  'Pheb.’  43 ; 
Xenoph.  ‘ Anab.’  11.  2,  §9);  or  those  in 
which  the  contracting  parties  tasted  each 
others  blood  (Herodot.  i.  74,  iv.  70;  Tac. 

‘ Annal.’  xii.  47).  All  these  usages  are  based 
upon  ideas  which  are  but  very  superficially 
related  to  the  subject;  they  have  indeed  no 
true  connection  whatever  with  the  idea  of 
sacrifice  as  the  seal  of  a covenant  between 
God  and  man.  See  on  Kx.  xxix.  20. 

The  Feast  of  the  Peace  offerin^^s. 

9— II. 

9.  It  would  appear  that  Moses,  Aaron 
with  his  two  sons,  and  seventy  of  the  ciders 


(xix.  7)  went  a short  distance  up  the  moun- 
tain to  eat  the  meal  of  the  Covenant  (cf. 
Gen.  xxxi.  43 — 47),  which  must  have  con- 
sisted of  the  flesh  of  the  Peace  offerings 
{y.  5.).  Joshua  is  not  named  here,  but  he 
accompanied  xMoses  as  his  servant.  See  -v.  13. 

10.  And  they  smv  the  God  of  IsraeF]  As 
they  ate  the  sacrificial  feast,  the  presence  of 
Jehovah  was  manifested  to  them  with  special 
distinctness.  In  the  act  of  solemn  worship, 
they  perceived  that  he  was  present  with  them, 
as  their  Lord  and  their  Deliverer.  It  is  idle 
to  speculate,  as  Keil  and  others  have  done, 
on  the  mode  of  this  revelation.  That  no 
visible  form  was  presented  to  their  bodily  eyes, 
we  are  expressly  informed,  Deut.  iv.  12;  see 
on  xxxiii.  20;  cf.  Isa.  vi.  i. 

there  <ivaj  under  his  feet  as  it  'were  a paojed 
work  of  a sapphire  stone ^ and  as  it  were  the 
body  of  he ansen  in  his  clearness^  Rather,  under 
Flis  feet^  it  was  like  a work  of  bright  sajsphire 
sto7ie^  and  like  the  heu'^jen  itself  in  clearness. 
On  the  sapphire,  see  xxviii.  18;  cf.  Ezek.  i. 
26.  The  pure  blue  of  the  heaven  above  them 
lent  its  influence  to  help  the  inner  sense  to 
realize  the  vision  which  no  mortal  eye  could 
behold. 

Tl.  he  laid  not  his  hancT]  i.e.  he  did  not 
smite  them.  It  was  believed  that  a mortal 
could  not  survive  the  sight  of  God  (Gen. 
xxxii.  30;  Ex.  xxxiii.  20;  Judg.  vi.  22,.xiii. 
22):  but  these  rulers  of  Israel  were  permitted 
to  cat  and  drink,  while  they  were  enjoying  in 
an  extraordinary  degree  the  sense  of  the 
Divine  presence,  and  took  no  harm,  “ When 
the  heads  of  the  people  venture  to  draw  near 
their  God,  they  find  his  presence  no  more  a 
source  of  disturbance  and  dread,  but  radiant 
in  all  the  bright  loveliness  of  supernal  glory; 
a beautiful  sign  that  the  higher  religion  and 
state  of  conformity  to  law,  now  established, 
shall  work  onwards  to  eternal  blessedness.” 
Ewald,  ‘ Hist,  of  Israel,’  Vol.  i.  p.  529. 

Moses  goes  up  to  recei’ve  the  Tables. 

12 — 18. 

12.  tables  of  stone.,  and  a law.,  arid  com- 
mandments'] Maimonides  and  many  of  the 
Jews  understand  the  tables  of  stone  to  denote 
the  Ten  Commandments;  the  law,  the  Law 
written  in  the  Pentateuch ; and  the  command- 


V.  13— 1-] 


EXODUS.  XXIV.  XXV. 


357 


ses,  Come  up  to  me  into  the  mount, 
and  be  there ; and  I will  give  thee 
tables  of  stone,  and  a law,  and  com- 
mandments which  I have  written; 
that  thou  mayest  teach  them. 

13  And  Moses  rose  up,  and  his 
minister  Joshua:  and  Moses  went  up 
into  the  mount  of  God. 

14  And  he  said  unto  the  elders. 
Tarry  ye  here  for  us,  until  we  come 
again  unto  you : and,  behold,  Aaron 
and  Hur  (U’e  with  you:  if  any  man 
have  any  matters  to  do,  let  him  come 
unto  them. 

15  And  Moses  went  up  into  the 
mount,  and  a cloud  covered  the 
mount. 

16  And  the  glory  of  the  Lord 
abode  upon  mount  Sinai,  and  the 


cloud  covered  it  six  days : and  the 
seventh  day  he  called  unto  Moses  out 
of  the  midst  of  the  cloud. 

17  And  the  sight  of  the  glory  of 
the  Lord  was  like  devouring  fire  on 
the  top  of  the  mount  in  the  eyes  of 
the  children  of  Israel. 

18  And  Moses  went  into  the  midst 

of  the  cloud,  and  gat  him  up  into  the 
mount : and  "^iMoses  was  in  the  mount  ‘^chap. 
forty  days  and  forty  nights.  g 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

r What  the  Israelites  must  offer  for  the  making 
of  the  tabernacle.  10  The  form  of  the  ark. 

17  The  7nercy  seat,  ivith  the  cherubitns.  23 
The  table,  with  the  fiu'nitnre  thereof  31  The 
candlestick,  with  the  instrnnients  thereof 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses,  saying. 


ments  (it  should  be  the  commandment'),  the 
oral  or  traditional  law  which  was  in  after 
ages  put  into  writing  in  the  Mishna  and  the 
Gemara.  Ewald  takes  the  words  to  mean 
the  Ten  Commandments,  and  “ other  sacred 
books  of  the  Law”  (‘  H.  of  I.’  r.  p.  606).  But 
it  is  more  probable  that  the  Ten  Command- 
ments alone  are  spoken  of,  and  that  the  mean- 
ing is,  the  Tables  of  stone  eeoith  the  Lam,  eneen 
the  Commandment.  So  Knobel,  Keil,  Herx. 
See  Note  on  the  Ten  Commandments,  § I, 

that  thou  tnayest  teach  them~\  More  strictly, 
to  teach  them.  The  promise  of  the  Tables 
is  fulfilled  after  the  directions  for  the  Taber- 
nacle have  been  given,  xxxi.  18. 

13.  Joshua']  See  on  9;  cf.  xxxii.  17; 
xxxiii.  II. 

mount  of  God]  See  on  iii.  i. 

14.  It  need  not  be  supposed  that  the 
Elders  were  required  to  remain  on  the  very 
spot  where  Moses  parted  with  them,  but 
simply  that  they  were  to  advance  no  further. 
Aaron  and  Hur  were  to  represent  the  autho- 
rity of  Moses 'during  his  absence. 

15.  Moses  ment  up]  Moses  appears  to  have 
left  Joshua  and  gone  up  alone  into  the  cloud. 
See  -V,  2. 

16.  Cf  xix.  18  sq. 

18.  During  this  period  of  forty  days,  and 
the  second  period  when  the  Tables  were  re- 
newed, Moses  neither  ate  bread  nor  drank 
water.  Deut.  ix.  9;  Exod.  xxxiv.  28.  Elijah 
in  like  manner  fasted  for  forty  days,  when  he 
visited  the  same  spot  (i  K.  xix.  8).  The 
two  who  met  our  Saviour  on  the  Mount  of 
Transfiguration,  the  one  as  representing  the 
l.aw,  the  other  as  representing  the  Prophets, 
thus  shadowed  forth  in  their  own  experience 


the  Fast  of  Forty  days  in  the  wilderness  of 
Judaea. 

The  Ark  and  the  Tabernacle. 

Chap.  XXV.  XXVI. 

Jehovah  had  redeemed  the  Israelites  from 
bondage.  He  had  made  a Covenant  with  them 
and  had  given  them  a Law.  He  had  pro- 
mised, on  condition  of  their  obedience,  to 
accept  them  as  His  own  “ peculiar  treasure,” 
as  “a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a holy  nation” 
(xix.  5,  6).  And  now  He  was  ready  visibly 
to  testify  that  He  made  his  abode  with  them. 
He  claimed  to  have  a dwelling  for  Himself, 
which  was  to  be  in  external  form  a tent  of 
goats’  hair,  to  take  its  place  among  their  own 
tents,  formed  out  of  the  same  material  (on 
Ex.  xxvi.  7).  The  special  mark  of  His  pre- 
sence within  the  Tent  was  to  be  the  Ark  or 
chest  containing  the  Ten  Commandments  on 
two  tables  of  stone  (Ex.  xxxi.  18),  symbolizing 
the  divine  Law  of  holiness,  covered  by  the 
Mercy  seat,  the  type  of  reconciliation. — Moses 
was  divinely  taught  regarding  the  construc- 
tion and  arrangement  of  every  part  of  the 
Sanctuary.  The  directions  which  were  given 
him  are  comprised  in  Ex.  xxv.  i — xxxi.  ii. 
The  account  of  the  performance  of  the  work, 
expressed  generally  in  the  same  terms,  is  given 
Ex.  XXXV.  20— xl.  33. 

The  meaning  of  the  Tabernacle,  with  the 
relation  in  which  it  stood  to  the  Tables  of 
the  Law,  is  considered  more  at  length  in  the 
Note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xl. 

Chap.  XXV.  1 — 9.  Moses  is  command- 
ed to  invite  the  people  to  bring  their  gifts  for 
the  construction  and  service  of  the  Sanctuary 
and  for  the  dresses  of  the  Priests. 


358 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


[v.  2—4. 


f Heb.  2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
that  they  ^ bring  me  an  "offering:  "of 
"O*'.  , every  man  that  ^iveth  it  willingly 

heave  of-  ^ in  1 

fering.  With  his  heart  ye  snail  take  my 

” chap.  35.  offering. 


3 And  this  Is  the  offering  which  ye 
shall  take  of  themj  gold,  and  silver, 
and  brass, 

4 And  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet, 

and  " fine  linen,  and  goats’  hair^  “ Or,  sUk. 


2.  an  offering]  The  Hebrew  word  is 
tcrwnah,  which  occurs  here  for  the  first  time. 
On  the  marginal  rendering  “heave  offering,” 
see  note  on  Ex.  xxix.  27.  The  word  in  this 
place  appears  to  denote  no  more  than  offerings 
in  its  general  sense,  being  equivalent  to  korban. 
It  is  used  with  the  same  compass  of  meaning 
Ex.  XXX.  13,  XXXV.  5,  &c.  In  Num.  xviii.  24, 
tithes  are  called  a terumah. 

that  gi'veth  it  willingly  ^vith  his  heart]  Liter- 
ally, whose  heart  shall  freely  give  it. 
The  public  service  of  Jehovah  was  to  be  insti- 
tuted by  freewill  offerings,  not  by  an  enforced 
tax.  Cf.  I Chron.  xxix.  3,  9,  14;  Ezra  ii. 
68,  69;  2 Cor.  viii.  ii,  12,  ix.  7.  On  the 
zeal  with  which  the  people  responded  to  the 
call,  see  Ex.  xxxv.  21 — 29,  xxxvi.  5 — 7. 

my  offering]  The  recipient  of  the  offering 
is  here  denoted  by  the  possessive  case,  accord- 
ing to  the  common  Hebrew  idiom.  Ex.  xxx. 
13,  xxxv.  5,  21,  24,  &:c. 

3.  gold^  and  sih'er^  and  brass]  The  sup- 
ply of  these  metals  possessed  by  the  Israelites 
at  this  time  probably- included  what  they  had 
inherited  from  their  forefathers,  what  they  had 
obtained  from  the  Egyptians  (Ex.  xii.  35), 
and  what  may  have  been  found  amongst  the 
spoils  of  the  Amalekites  (Ex.  xvii.  8 — 13). 
But  with  their  abundant  flocks  and  herds,  it 
can  hardly  be  doubted  that  they  had  carried 
on  important  traffic  with  the  trading  caravans 
that  traversed  the  wilderness,  some  of  which, 
most  likely,  in  the  earliest  times  were  fur- 
nished with  silver,  with  the  gold  of  Cphir 
(or  gold  of  Sheba,  as  it  seems  to  have  been 
indifferently  called),  and  with  the  bronze  of 
Phoenicia  and  Egypt  (Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  28; 
Dcut.  xxxiii.  25  ; i K.  ix.  28,  x.  15 ; i Chron. 
xxix.  4 ; 2 Chron.  ix.  14  ; Job  xxii.  24,  xxviii. 
16;  Ps.  xlv.  9). — Cf.  note  on  Ex.  xxxviii.  24. 

brass]  I'he  Hebrew  word  nehosheth  [see 
on  2 K.  xviii.  4]  must  mean  pure  copper  in 
such  passages  as  Deut.  viii.  9,  xxxiii.  25 ; 
Job  xxviii.  2.  But  it  commonly  denotes  (as 
it  does  most  likely  in  this  place)  the  hardened 
alloy  of  copper  and  tin,  more  strictly  called 
bronze  than  brass,  which  was  so  largely  used 
for  weapons  and  implements  before  the  art  of 
working  iron  was  well  understood.  On  the 
bronze  of  the  I'igyptians  see  Wilkinson's 
‘Popular  Account,’  Vol.  i.  p.  148,  ii.  p.  152, 
and  He  Rougemont,  ‘Age  du  Bronze,’  p.  180. 
'Phe  latter  writer  proves  that  the  Egyptians 
were  well  acquainted  with  bronze  and  with  the 
art  of  working  in  all  the  common  metals, 


except  iron,  under  the  fourth  dynasty,  ages 
before  the  time  of  Abrahani. 

4.  blue^  and  purple^  and  scarlet]  The 
names  of  the  colours  are  used  for  the  material 
which  was  dyed  with  them.  The  Jewish  tra- 
dition has  been  very  generally  received  that 
this  material  was  wool.  Cf.  Heb.  ix.  19 
with  Lev.  xiv.  4,  49,  Sac.  But  the  question 
is  not  quite  without  difficulty.  See  on  xxviii, 
5,  and  Lev.  xix.  19. — The  material,  having 
been  spun  and  dyed  by  the  women,  appears 
to  have  been  delivered  in  the  state  of  yarn. 
The  Egyptians  were  well  skilled  in  the  art 
of  dyeing  (Wilkinson,  11.  p,  83).  The  weav- 
ing and  embroidering  were  left  to  Aholiab 
and  his  assistants.  Ex.  xxxv.,  cf.  nj.  25  with 
•V.  3j,  The  Egyptians  in  like  manner  used 
to  dye  the  threads  of  their  stuffs  before  Aveav- 
ing  them.,  and  to  employ  women  in  spinning, 
and  men  in  weaving  and  embroidering.  (Wil- 
kinson, ‘Ancient  Egyptians,’  ii,  p.  79  sq.). 
Respecting  the  names  of  the  colours,  see  Note 
at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

ffie  Imen]  The  word  shesh^  which  is  here 
used,  is  Egyptian  (Birch  in  Bunsen’s  ‘Egypt,’ 
Vol.  V.  p.  571).  It  is  rendered  by  the  LXX. 
^v(T(ros,  which  must  be  allied  to  butz,  the 
name  of  the  “fine  linen”  of  Syria,  in  Ezek. 
xxvii.  16,  which  was  that  used  in  the  time  of 
Solomon  for  the  hangings  of  the  Temple  and 
for  other  purposes  (i  Chron.  xv.  27 ; 2 Chron. 
ii.  14,  iii.  14,  V.  12).  That  the  word  shesh 
denoted  the  fine  flax,  or  the  manufactured 
linen,  for  which  Egypt  was  famous  [see  Ezek. 
xxvii.  7,  where  the  original  word  is  shesh: 
but  in  Prov.  vii.  16  “fine  linen  of  Egypt”  is 
a mistranslation,  see  note  in  loc.],  and  Avhich 
the  Egyptians  were  in  the  habit  of  using  for 
dresses  of  state  (Gen.  xli,  42);  and  not  cotton^ 
as  some  have  imagined,  nor  silk  [as  the  word 
shesh  is  rendered  Prov.  xxxi.  22,  and  in  the 
margin  here  and  elsewhere],  is  now  clearly 
proved.  Wilkinson,  ‘Pop.  Account,’  See.  ii. 
p.  73,  and  his  note  to  Herodot.  ii.  86.  The 
linen  cloth  of  Persia  is  mentioned,  Esth.  i.  6, 
by  its  Persian  name  karpas  (the  parent  of 
KapTTao-oi  and  carbasusf  which  in  our  version 
is  wrongly  rendered  green,  as  the  name  of  a 
colour.  The  occurrence  of  these  three  native 
names,  shesh,  butz,  and  karpas,  for  the  same 
article  produced  in  three  different  countries, 
in  strict  consistency  with  the  narratives  in 
which  they  occur,  is  worthy  of  remark.  The 
LXX.  translates  each  of  the  three  by  ^vaaos. 
Cf,  notes  on  Ex.  ix.  31,  xxxix.  28.  The  esti- 
mation in  which  fine  linen  was  held  in  differ- 


V.  5,  6-] 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


359 


5 And  rams’  skins  dyed  red,  and  6 Oil  for  the  light,  spices  for  an- 
badgers’  skins,  and  shittirn  wood,  ointing  oil,  and  for  sweet  incense, 


ent  ages,  before  silk  was  generally  known, 
may  be  seen  i Chron.  xv.  ay;  Prov.  xxxi.  aa; 
Ezek.  xvi.  lo,  13;  Luke  xvi.  19;  Rev.  xix.  8, 
i^.  If  silk  is  anywhere  spoken  of  in  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  it  is  only  in  Ezek.  xvi.  10, 
where  the  word  is  not  sbesh  but  meshi^  which 
Fuerst  thinks  may  be  of  Chinese  derivation. — ■ 
It  would  seem  that,  for  the  use  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, the  flax  was  spun  by  the  women,  like 
the  coloured  wools,  and  was  delivered  in  the 
state  of  thread  to  be  woven  by  Aholiab  and 
his  assistants  (Ex.  xxxv.  25,  35).  The  fine 
linen  appears  to  have  been  used  as  the  ground- 
work of  the  figured  curtains  of  the  Taber- 
nacle as  well  as  of  the  embroidered  hangings 
of  the  Tent  and  the  Court.  See  on  xxxv.  35. 

goats’’  hair\  The  hair  of  the  goat  has  furnish- 
ed the  material  for  tents  to  the  Roman  armies 
(Virg.  ‘Georg.’  iii.  313)  and  to  the  Arabs  and 
Eastern  Nomads  of  all  ages,  as  it  did  to  the 
Israelites  in  the  wilderness.  The  tent  which 
was  to  be  the  chosen  dwelling-place  of  Je- 
hovah was  to  be  formed  of  the  same  material 
as  the  tents  of  His  people.  See  Introd.  Note. 

5.  rams’’  skins  dyed  m/]  These  skins  may 
have  been  tanned  and  coloured  like  the  leather 
now  known  as  red  morocco,  which  is  said  to 
have  been  manufactured  in  Libya  from  the 
remotest  antiquity.  On  the  manufaefure  of 
leather  by  the  Egyptians,  see  Wilkinson,  ‘ Pop. 
Account,’  II.  pp.  102 — 106. 

badgers'  sk’ms'\  The  skins  here  spoken  of 
were  certainly  not  those  of  the  badger,  as  was 
supposed  by  Luther  and  Gesenius.  That 
animal  is  often  found  in  the  Holy  Land,  but 
it  is  very  rare  in  the  wilderness,  if  it  exists 
there  at  all  (Tristram,  ‘N.  H.’  p.  44).  The 
Hebrew  name  here  used,  tachash^  occurs  in 
the  Old  Testament  only  in  connection  with 
these  skins,  which  were  employed  for  the 
outer  covering  of  the  Tent  of  the  Tabernacle 
(Ex.  xxvi.  14),  and  in  wrapping  up  the  holy 
things  when  they  were  moved  (Num.  iv.  8,  10, 
&:c.),  and  which  are  mentioned  as  the  material 
of  the  shoes  of  the  prophetic  impersonation  of 
Jerusalem  by  Ezekiel  (xvi.  10).  The  word 
bears  a near  resemblance  to  the  Arabic  tuchash^ 
which  appears  to  be  the  general  name  given  to 
the  seals,  dugongs  and  dolphins  found  in  the 
Red  Sea  (Tristram),  and,  according  to  some 
authorities,  to  the  sharks  and  dog-fish  (Fiirst). 
The  substance  spoken  of  w'ould  thus  appear 
to  have  been  leather  formed  from  the  skins  of 
marine  animals,  which  was  well  adapted  as  a 
protection  against  the  weather.  Pliny  speaks 
of  tents  made  of  seal  skins  as  proof  against  the 
stroke  of  lightning  (‘  H.  N.’  ii.  56) , and  one  of 
these  is  said  to  have  been  used  by  Augustus 
whenever  he  travelled  (Sueton.  ‘Octav.’  90). 
The  skins  of  the  dolphin  and  dugong  are  cut 


into  sandals  by  the  modern  Arabs,  and  this 
may  explain  Ezek.  xvi.  10.  The  question 
seems  thus  to  be  determined  on  pretty  certain 
grounds.  But  it  is  remarkable  that  the  LXX., 
with  Josephus,  the  Vulgate,  the  Targums,  and 
most  of  the  ancient  versions,  treat  the  word 
tachash  as  the  name  of  ordinary  leather,  dis- 
tinguished only  by  a particular  colour.  But 
there  is  a difference  as  to  whether  the  colour 
was  black,  red,  violet,  or  blue.  Most  of  the 
ancient  authorities,  followed  by  Bochart  and 
Rosenmuller,  imagine  the  colour  to  have  been 
hyac’inth’ine^  the  first  of  the  three  colours  in 
the  embroidered  work  of  the  Tabernacle  [see 
Note  at  the  end  of  the  Chapter].  From 
Josephus  speaking  of  the  colour  of  these 
skins,  such  as  he  conceived  it  to  be,  as  like 
the  heavens  (‘Ant.’  iii.  6,  §4),  we  may  infer 
with  confidence  that  he  conceived  hyacinth’me 
to  be  sky-blue.  [Note,  § IL] 

sh’itt'im  ^'ooc[\  The  word  shittirn  is  the 
plural  form  of  sh’ittah.^  which  occurs  as  the 
name  of  the  growing  tree  Is.  xli.  19.  The  tree 
is  satisfactorily  identified  with  the  Acac'ia 
seyal.,  “a  gnarled  and  thorny  tree,  somewhat 
like  a solitary  hawthorn  in  its  habit  and  man- 
ner of  growth,  but  much  larger.  [See  note 
on  Ex.  xxvi.  15.]  It  flourishes  in  the  driest 
situations,  and  is  scattered  more  or  less  nume- 
rously over  the  Sinaitic  Peninsula”  (Tristram). 
It  is  rare  in  the  Holy  Land  except  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  Dead  Sea,  where  it 
appears  to  have  given  its  name  to  two  places 
in  ancient  times.  See  Num.  xxv.  i ; Joel  iii. 
18.  It  grows  in  Egypt  in  some  regions  at  a 
distance  from  the  coast.  The  timber  is  hard 
and  close-grained,  of  an  orange  colour  with  a 
darker  heart,  well  adapted  for  cabinet  work. 
The  LXX.  call  it  ^ood  that  <will  not  rot.,  ^vXa 
aarjTTTa.  It  appears  to  be  the  only  good  wood 
produced  in  the  wilderness.  No  other  kind 
of  wood  was  employed  in  the  Tabernacle  or 
its  furniture.  In  the  construction  of  the 
Temple  cedar  and  fir  took  its  place  (i  K.  v. 
8,  vi.  18;  2 Chron.  ii.  8).  A distinct  species 
of  Acacia  is  mentioned  by  Dr  Robinson, 
Dr  Royle  and  others,  as  A.  gumm’tfera.  But 
Mr  Tristram  states  that  the  gum  arabic  of 
commerce  is  obtained  from  the  A.  seyal.,  and 
forms  an  important  article  of  traffic  on  the 
shores  of  the  Red  Sea,  as  it  did  in  ancient 
times.  See  also  Bunsen,  v.  414.  As  the  plural 
form,  sb’ittim.,  is  always  applied  to  the 
wood,  never  being  used  like  the  singular 
sh'ittah  (Is.  xli.  19)  for  the  growing  tree,  the 
conjecture  will  hardly  stand  that  the  plural 
name  is  to  be  accounted  for  from  “the 
tangled  thicket  into  which  its  stem  expands.” 
(Tristram  ‘H,  N.’  p.  390;  Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’ 
p.  20;  ‘Jewish  Ch.’  i,  p.  163;  Houghton, 


36o 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


[v.  7—10. 


7 Onyx  stones,  and  stones  to  be  set 
« chap.  28.  jj^  the  -^ephod,  and  in  the  ‘^breastplate, 
f chap.  28.  8 And  let  them  make  me  a sanc- 

tuary ; that  I may  dwell  among  them. 

9 According  to  all  that  I shew  thee, 
after  the  pattern  of  the  tabernacle. 


and  the  pattern  of  all  the  instruments 
thereof,  even  so  shall  ye  make  it. 

10  ‘^And  they  shall  make  an  ark  ^ 37- 
of  shittim  wood:  two  cubits  and  a 
half  shall  be  the  length  thereof,  and 
a cubit  and  a half  the  breadth  thereof. 


‘Smith’s  Diet.’  iii.  1295;  Royle,  ‘ Kitto’s 
Cycl.’  III.  841.)  See  also  on  Ex.  iii.  2. 

6.  Oil  for  the  light']  The  oil  was  to  be 
“pure  olive  oil  beaten,”  see  on  Ex.  xxvii.  20. 

spices  for  anointing  oiF]  What  these  spices 
were  see  Ex.  xxx.  22 — 25. 

sqveet  incense]  See  Ex.  xxx.  34,  35. 

7.  On  the  materials  and  construction  of 
the  ephod  and  breastplate,  see  ch.  xxviii. 

8.  sanctuary]  Heb.  mikdash^  i.e.  a hallow- 
ed place.  This  is  the  most  comprehensive 
of  the  words  that  relate  to  the  place  dedi- 
cated to  Jehovah.  It  included  the  Tabernacle 
with  its  hirniture,  its  Tent  and  its  Court. 

that  1 may  d-well  among  them]  The  pur- 
pose of  the  Sanctuary  is  here  definitely  declared 
by  the  Lord  Himself.  It  was  to  be  the  con- 
stant witness  of  His  presence  amongst  His 
people,  xxix.  42 — 46,  xl.  34 — 38,  &c. 

9.  According  to  all  that  I she^  thee]  The 
Tabernacle  and  all  that  pertained  to  it  were 
to  be  in  strict  accordance  with  the  ideas  re- 
vealed by  the  Lord  to  Moses:  nothing  in  the  way 
of  form  or  decoration  was  to  be  left  to  the  taste 
or  judgment  of  the  artificers.  The  command 
is  emphatically  repeated  t’.  40,  xxvi.  30;  cf. 
Acts  vii.  44;  Heb.  viii.  5. — The  word  here 
translated  pattern  is  also  used  in  Chronicles 
to  denote  the  plans  for  the  Temple  which 
were  given  by  David  to  Solomon  (i  Chron. 
xxviii.  II,  12,  19);  it  is  elsewhere  rendered 
form^  likeness,  similitude.,  Deut.  iv.  16,  17; 
Ezek.  viii.  3,  10.  The  revelation  to  the  mind 
of  Moses  was,  without  doubt,  such  as  to 
suggest  the  exact  appearance  of  the  work  td 
be  produced.  Hut  there  is  no  need  to  adopt 
the  materialistic  notion  of  some  of  therabbin- 
ists,  that  a Tabernacle  in  the  heavens  was  set 
forth  before  the  bodily  eyes  of  the  Legislator. 

the  tabernacle]  I'he  Hebrew  word  ham- 
mishkdn,  signifies  the  dwelling-place.^  It  here 
denotes  the  wooden  structure,  containing  the 
holy  place  and  the  most  holy  place,  with  the 
tent  which  sheltered  it.  See  on' xxvi.  i. 

The  Ark  of  the  Co'uenant. 

XXV.  10 — 16  (cf.  xxxvii.  I — 5). 

The  Ark  is  uniformly  designated  in  Exo- 
dus the  Ark  or  tiik  Testimony  (xxv.  22, 
xxvi.  34,  xxx.  6,  26,  xxxi.  7,  xl.  3,  &c.); 
it  is  so  called  also  Num.  iv.  5,  vii.  89;  Josh, 
iv.  16:  it  is  called  simply  tiif.  Testimony 
Ex.  xvi.  34,  xxvii.  21;  Lev.  xvi.  13,  xxiv.  3; 
Num.  xvii.  10.  But  in  Num.  x.  33  it  is 


named  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  and 
this  is  its  most  frequent  name  in  Deuterono- 
my and  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 
In  some  places  it  is  named  the  Ark  of  the 
Lord  (Josh.  iii.  13,  iv.  ii,  vii.  6;  i S.  iv.  6; 
2 S.  vi.  9,  &c.),  the  Ark  of  God  (i  S.  iii. 
3,  iv.  II,  V.  I,  &c.),  THE  Ark  of  the 
strength  of  the  Lord  (2  Chron.  vi.  41; 
Ps.  cxxxii.  8),  and  the  holy  Ark  (2  Chron. 
XXXV.  3).  Cf.  note  on  -u.  16. 

The  Ark  of  the  Covenant  was  the  central 
point  of  the  Sanctuary.  It  was  designed  to 
contain  the  Testimony  (xxv.  16,  xl.  20;  Deut, 
xxxi.  26),  that  is,  the  Tables  of  the  Divine 
Law,  the  terms  of  the  Covenant  between 
Jehovah  and  His  people:  and  it  was  to  sup- 
port the  Mercy  seat  with  its  Cherubim,  from 
between  which  He  was  to  hold  communion 
with  them  (Ex.  xxv.  22).  On  this  account, 
in  these  directions  for  the  construction  of  the 
Sanctuary,  it  is  named  first  of  all  the  parts. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  in  the  narrative  of 
the  w'ork  as  it  was  actually  carried  out,  w^e 
find  that  it  w^as  not  made  till  after  the  Taber- 
nacle (Ex.  xxxvii.  I — 9).  It  was  more  suitable 
that  the  receptacle  should  be  first  provided 
to  receive  and  shelter  the  most  sacred  of  the 
contents  of  the  Sanctuary  as  soon  as  it  wMs 
completed.  The  practical  order  of  the  w'orks 
seems  to  be  given  in  Ex.  xxxi.  7 — 10,  and 
XXXV.  II — 19. — On  the  Golden  Altar,  see  on 
xxx.  I. — The  completion  of  the  Ark  is  re- 
corded xxxvii.  I — 5.  On  its  history,  see  con- 
cluding note  on  ch.  xl. 

10,  an  ark]  The  Hebrew  name  is  aron., 
w^hich  means  a box,  or  coffer  (Gen.  1.  26; 
2 K.  xii.  9,  10;  2 Chro.  xxiv.  8,  &c.).  The 
word  ark  exactly  answers  to  it ; but  our  trans- 
lators have  employed  the  same  to  render  quite 
a different  word  itebdh).,  which  is  used  now^here 
in  the  Hebrew  Bible  except  to  denote  what 
we  familiarly  call  “the  ark”  of  Noah,  and  the 
“ark  of  bulrushes”  (Gen.  vi.  14;  Ex.  ii.  3). 
In  the  first  instance,  there  is  the  same  confu- 
sion in  both  the  LXX.  and  the  Vulgate,  but 
not  in  the  latter  one.  The  word  tebdh  is 
Egyptian,  having  nearly  the  same  meaning. 
vSee  on  Ex.  ii.  3. — Taking  the  cubit  at  eighteen 
inches  (see  on  Gen.  vi.  15),  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant  w^as  a box  3 ft.  9 in.  long,  2 ft.  3 in. 
wade,  and  2 ft.  3 in,  deep. 

of  shiitim  nvood]  It  is  well  observed  that 
if  the  Ark,  w'hich  appears  to  have  been  pre- 
served till  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  (2 
Chro.  XXXV.  3;  Jer.  iii.  16),  had  originated 


T.  II — 1 6.] 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


and  a cubit  and  a half  the  height 
thereof. 

1 1 And  thou  shalt  overlay  it  with 
pure  gold,  within  and  without  shalt 
thou  overlay  it,  and  shalt  make  upon 
it  a crown  of  gold  round  about. 

12  And  thou  shalt  cast  four  rings 
of  gold  for  it,  and  put  them  in  the  four 
corners  thereof;  and  two  rings  shall' 
be  in  the  one  side  of  it,  and  two  rings 
in  the  other  side  of  it. 


13  And  thou  shalt  make  staves  of 
shittim  wood,  and  overlay  them  with 
gold. 

14  And  thou  shalt  put  the  staves 
into  the  rings  by  the  sides  of  the  ark, 
that  the  ark  may  be  borne  with  them. 

15  The  staves  shall  be  in  the  rings 
of  the  ark:  they  shall  not  be  taken 
from  it. 

16  And  thou  shalt  put  into  the  ark 
the  testimony  which  I shall  give  thee. 


in  Palestine,  it  would  not  have  been  made  of 
shittim  wood,  the  wood  of  the  Wilderness 
(see  on  v.  5),  but  either  of  oak,  the  best 
wood  of  the  Holy  Land,  or  of  cedar,  which 
took  the  place  of  shittim  wood  in  the  con- 
struction of  the  Temple  (Stanley,  ‘ Jewish 
Church,’  I.  p.  163). 

11.  on.'erlay  it  n.uith  pure  gold~\  Accord- 
ing to  the  rabbinists,  the  Ark  was  lined  and 
covered  with  plates  of  gold.  But  there  is  no- 
thing in  the  original  which  might  not  aptly 
denote  the  common  process  of  gilding.  The 
Egyptians  in  early  times  were  acquainted  with 
both  the  art  of  gilding  and  that  of  covering 
a substance  with  thin  plates  of 'gold.  (Wilkin- 
son’s ‘Pop.  Acc.’  II.  145.) 

a crown  of  gold'\  That  is,  an  edging  or 
moulding  of  gold  round  the  top  of  the  Ark, 
within  which  the  cover  or  Mercy  seat  (t>.  17) 
may  have  fitted  (cf.  Ex.  xxxvii.  2).  There 
were  golden  mouldings,  called  by  the  same 
name,  to  the  Table  of  Shewbread  {yv.  24,  xxxvii. 
II,  12)  and  to  the  Golden  Altar  (xxx.  3, 
xxxvii.  26).  The  Heb.  word  z,eer  signifies, 
according  to  its  etymology,  a band,  or  cinc- 
ture, and  is  naturally  applied  to  a crown. 
Our  Version  in  here  rendering  it  crown ^ 
follows  the  Vulgate  and  some  other  ancient 
Versions.  But  the  renderings  of  the  LXX., 
Josephus,  the  Targums,  Luther,  de  Wette, 
Zunz,  Wogue,  See.,  more  nearly  agree  with 
our  word  moulding,  i.e.  a small  cornice,  and 
this  ansvrers  to  the  radical  meaning  of  %eer 
as  well  as  crown  does.  See  Reland,  ‘ De 
Spoliis  Templi,’  c.  vil. 

12.  four  corners  thereof  Rather,  its 
four  bases,  or  feet.  The  Hebrew  sub- 
stantive is  rendered  corners  in  most  of  the 
ancient  versions.  But  the  LXX.  have  /cXiVj^ 
(which  appears  to  be  rather  vaguely  used  to 

extremities,  c^. 'vv.  12,  19),  and  there 
seems  no  doubt  that  the  original  means  feet 
(Aben-Ezra,  Abarbanel,  Gesen.,  Furst,  Kno- 
bel,  &c.).  The  word  may  possibly  denote  the 
lowest  part  of  each  corner : but  it  is  not  un- 
likely that  there  were  low  blocks,  or  plinths, 
placed  under  the  corners  to  which  the  rings 
were  attached  (see  on  n.\  26),  and  that  it  is  to 


them  the  word  is  here  applied.  The  Ark, 
when  it  was  carried,  must  thus  have  been  raised 
above  the  shoulders  of  the  bearers.  The  rings 
of  the  Golden  Altar  were  placed  immediately 
under  the  golden  moulding  (xxx.  4);  but 
those  of  the  Table  of  Shewbread  were  fasten- 
ed to  the  feet  of  the  four  legs.  It  has  been 
imagined  by  some  Jewish  and  other  authori- 
ties that  the  Ark  was  raised  on  high  when  it 
was  carried  in  order  to  display  the  most  sacred 
symbol  of  the  Sanctuary.  But  we  may  infer, 
from  there  being  a similar  arrangement  of  the 
rings  on  the  Table  of  Shewbread,  as  well  as 
from  the  distinctive  character  of  the  Ark 
itself,  that  this  could  not  have  been  the  case. 
The  Ark  of  the  Covenant  of  Jehovah  was 
never  carried  about  like  the  arks  of  the  gen- 
tile nations,  for  display.  See  Note  at  the 
end  of  chap.  xl. 

15.  they  shall  not  he  taken  from  f This 
direction  was  probably  given  in  order  that 
the  Ark  might  not  be  touched  by  the  hand 
(cf.  2 S.  vi.  6).  There  is  no  similar  direction 
regarding  the  staves  of  the  Tabernacle  of  Shew- 
bread (gj.  27),  those  of  the  Golden  Altar  (xxx. 
5),  nor  those  of  the  Altar  of  Burnt  offering 
(xxvii.  7).  These  were  of  less  sanctity  than 
the  Ark  and  might  be  touched. — The  for- 
mula in  Num.  iv.  6,  8,  ii,  14,  as  it  is  ren- 
dered in  our  version,  may  seem  to  contradict 
the  direction  here  given  in  regard  to  the  Ark. 
But  it  might  rather  be  translated  in  a,  more 
general  sense,  as,  put  the  sta-ves  in  order 
(see  note  in  loc.). 

16.  the  testimony  which  I shall  gi-ve  thee'] 
The  stone  Tables  of  the  Ten  Command- 
ments (Ex.  xxiv.  12,  xxxi.  18,  xxxiv.  i,  28) 
are  called  the  Testimony,  or,  the  Tables  of 
the  Testimony  (xxxi.  18,  xxxii.  15,  xxxiv. 
29),  as  the  Ark  which  contained  them  is 
called  the  Ark  of  the  Testimony  (see  Introd.), 
and  the  Tabernacle  in  which  the  Ark  was 
placed,  the  Tabernacle  of  the  Testimony  (Ex. 
xxxviii.  21;  Num.  i.  50,  &c.);  they  are  also 
called  the  Tables  of  the  Covenant  (Ex.  xxxiv. 
28;  Dcut.  ix.  9,  II,  15),  as  the  Ark  is  called 
the  Ark  of  the  Covenant.  The  meaning 
of  the  latter  name  admits  of  no  doubt:  the 


362 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


[v.  17 20. 


17  And  thou  shall  make  a mercy 
seat  of  pure  gold : two  cubits  and  a 
half  shall  be  the  length  thereof,  and 
a cubit  and  a half  the  breadth  there- 
of. 

18  And  thou  shall  make  two  che- 
rub i ms  of  gold,  of  beaten  v/ork  shall 
thou  make  them,  in  the  two  ends  of 
the  mercy  seat. 

19  And  make  one  cherub  on  the  one 


end,  and  the  other  cherub  on  the  other 
end:  even^  of  the  mercy  seat  shall  ye 
make  the  cherubims  on  the  tv/o  ends  of  the 

thereof. 

20  And  the  cherubims  shall  stretch 
forth  their  wings  on  high,  covering  the 
mercy  seat  with  their  wings,  and  their 
faces  shall  look  one  to  another;  to- 
ward the  mercy  seat  shall  the  faces 
of  the  cherubims  be. 


Ten  Commandments  contained  “the  word 
of  the  Covenant”  between  Jehovah  and  His 
people  (Ex.  xxxiv.  28 ; Dent,  iv.  13).  But  there 
has  been  a difference  regarding  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  former  name,  which  derives 
additional  importance  from  its  being  the 
name  used  here  and  in  ch.  xl,  20  in  imme- 
diate connection  with  the  first  placing  of  the 
Tables  within  the  Ark  and  under  the  Mercy- 
seat.  The  reasons  for  taking  the  word  Tes- 
timony, in  its  application  to  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments, as  signifying  the  direct  testi- 
mony of  Jehovah  against  sin  in  man,  and  thus 
bringing  it  into  connection  wdth  Deut.  xxxi. 
26,  27,  is  given  elsewhere.  See  Note  on  the 
Ten  Commandments,  after  ch.  xx.  21. 

The  Mercy  Seat. 

XXV.  17 — 22.  (Cf.  xxxvii.  6 — 9.) 

17.  a mercy  seat  of  pure  gold~\  In  ex- 
ternal form,  the  Mercy  seat  was  a plate  of 
gold  with  the  cherubim  standing  on  it,  the 
whole  beaten  out  of  one  solid  piece  of  metal 
(xxxvii.  7);  it  was  placed  upon  the  Ark  and  so 
took  the  place  of  a cover.  Its  Hebrew  name 
is  kapporetb,  and  on  the  true  meaning  of  this 
word  there  is  a very  important  difference  of 
opinion.  The  greater  number  of  recent  trans- 
lators and  critics,  Jewish  and  others,  with  the 
Arabic  amongst  the  ancient  versions,  render  it 
as  simply  co-ver.  Our  version,  following  the 
general  voice  of  antiquity,  with  Luther,  Cran- 
mer,  and  others  of  the  early  translators  in 
modern  languages,  gives,  as  we  believe,  the 
truer  rendering,  calling  it  the  Mercy  seat. 
[See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter.] 

18  20.  The  way  in  which  the  Cheru- 

bim of  the  Mercy  seat  are  here  mentioned, 
with  reference  to  their  faces,  wings  and 
posture,  is  in  favour  of  the  common  Jewish 
tradition  (Otho,  ‘ Rabb.  Lex.’  p.  129),  that 
they  were  human  figures,  each  having  two 
wings,  d'hcy  must  have  been  of  small  size, 
proportioned  to  the  area  of  the  Mercy  scat. 
(.)n  the  other  notices  of  Clicrubim  in  the 
Scriptures,  sec  Note  on  Gen.  iii.  24.  Com- 
paring the  different  I'eferences  to  form  in  this 
place,  in  2 Sam.  xxii,  ii  (Ps.  xviii.  10),  in 
Kzek.  ch.  i.,  x.  and  in  Rev.  ch.  iv.,  it  would 
appear  that  the  name  Cherub  was  applied  to 
various  combinations  of  animal  forms.  Similar 


combinations  were  made  by  most  ancient 
peoples  in  order  to  represent  conceivable 
combinations  of  powers,  sufh  as  are  denied 
to  man  in  his  earthly  state  of  existence.  It 
is  remarkable  that  amongst  the  Egyptians, 
the  Assyrians  and  the  Greeks,  as  well  as  the 
Hebrews,  the  creatures  by  very  far  most 
frequently  introduced  into  these  composite 
figures,  were  man,  the  ox,  the  lion,  and  the 
eagle.  These  are  evidently  types  of  the  most 
important  and  familiarly  known  classes  of 
living  material  beings.  The  rabbinists  recog- 
nized this  in  the  Cherubim  as  described  by 
Ezekiel,  which  they  regarded  as  representing 
the  whole  creation  engaged  in  the  worship 
and  service  of  God  (Schoettgen,  ‘ Hor.  Heb.' 
p.  1108).  Cf.-  Rev.  iv.  9 — II,  V.  13.  It 
would  be  in  harmony  with  this  view  to  sup- 
pose that  the  more  strictly  human  shape  of 
the  Cherubim  of  the  Mercy  seat  represented 
the  highest  form  of  created  intelligence  en- 
gaged in  the  devout  contemplation  of  the 
divine  Law  of  love  and  justice.  Cf.  i Pet. 
i.  12.  They  were  thus  symbols  of  worship 
rendered  by  the  creature  in  the  most  exalted 
condition  (See  Augustin.  ‘ Qusest.  in  Exod.’ 
cv.). — It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  golden 
Cherubim  from  between  which  Jehovah  spoke 
to  His  people  bore  witness,  by  their  place  on 
the  Mercy  seat,  to  His  redeeming  mercy ; 
while  the  Cherubim  that  took  their  stand 
with  the  flaming  sword  at  the  gate  of  Eden, 
to  keep  the  way  to  the  tree  of  life,  witnessed 
to  His  condemnation  of  sin  in  man.  The 
most  perfect  finite  intelligence  seems  thus  to 
be  yielding  assent  to  the  divine  Law  in  its 
twofold  manifestation. 

IS.  of  beaten  ’zvork']  i.  e.  elaborate!  y wrought 
with  the  hammer. 

19.  e'vcn  of  the  mercy  seat^  Rather,  out 
of  the  Mercy  seat.  The  sense  appears  to 
be  that  the  Cherubim  and  the  Mercy  seat 
were  to  be  wrought  out  of  one  mass  of  gold. 
(Cf.  xxxvii.  7.)  This  meaning  agrees  with 
Onkelos,  Saadia,  and  most  modern  interpreters. 
But  the  LXX.,  Vulg.  and  Syr,  translate  the 
words  in  question  as  if  the  second  clause  of 
the  verse  were,  in  sense,  only  a repetition  of 
the  first  clause. 

20.  See  on  v.  18. 


V.  21 26.] 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


363 


21  And  thou  shalt  put  the  mercy 
seat  above  upon  the  ark;  and  in  the 
ark  thou  shalt  put  the  testimony  that 
I shall  give  thee. 

22  And  there  I will  meet  with  thee, 
and  I will  commune  with  thee  from 

^ Numb. 7.  above  the  mercy  seat,  from  ^between 
the  two  cherubims  which  are  upon 
the  ark  of  the  testimony,  of  all  things 
which  I will  give  thee  in  command- 
ment unto  the  children  of  Israel. 

/ chap.  37.  23  ^ -^Thou  shalt  also  make  a table 

of  shittim  wood : two  cubits  shall  be 
the  length  thereof,  and  a cubit  the 


breadth  thereof,  and  a cubit  and  a half 
the  height  thereof. 

24  And  thou  shalt  overlay  it  with 
pure  gold,  and  make  thereto  a crown 
of  gold  round  about. 

25  And  thou  shalt  make  unto  it  a 
border  of  an  hand  breadth  round 
about,  and  thou  shalt  make  a golden 
crown  to  the  border  thereof  round 
about. 

26  And  thou  shalt  make  for  it  four 
rings  of  gold,  and  put  the  rings  in  the 
four  corners  that  are  on  the  four  feet 
thereof. 


21.  the  testimony']  See  on  v.  16.  Cf.  xl.  20. 

22.  I 'will  commune  with  thee]  See  Note 
on  the  Ten  Commandments,  § V. 

• The  Table  of  Shewbread. 

23 — 30.  (Gf.  xxxvii.  10 — 16.) 

23.  a table  of  shut im  wood]  This  Table 
is  one  of  the  most  prominent  objects  in  the 
triumphal  procession  sculptured  in  relief  on  the 
Arch  of  Titus.  The  most  important  of  the 
sculptures  of  the  Arch  were  carefully  copied 
under  the  direction  of  Reland  in  1710.  Since 
that  time  they  have  gone  on  to  decay,  so  that 
the  engravings  of  them  in  his  work  ‘De  Spo- 
liis  Templi,’  &c.,  are  now  of  great  interest 
and  value.  Reland  has  interpreted  the  sculp- 
tures with  his  accustomed  learning  and 
sagacity. 


The  Shewbread  Table  with  its  incense  cups  and  the 
two  Silver  Trumpets  (Num.  x.  2).  * 


The  Table  which  is  here  represented  could 
not,  of  course,  have  been  the  one  made  for 
the  Tabernacle.  The  original  Ark  of  the  Tes- 
timony was  preserved  until  it  disappeared 
when  Jerusalem  was  captured  by  the  Baby- 
lonians : it  was  never  replaced  by  an  A rk  of 
more  modern  construction.  See  concluding 
note  on  ch.  xl.  But  the  Shewbread  Table,  the 


Golden  Altar,  and  the  Golden  Candlestick, 
were  renewed  by  Solomon  for  the  Temple. 
Of  the  Candlestick,  ten  copies  were  then  made, 
(i  K.  vii.  48,  49;  2 Chro.  iv.  19).  From  the 
omission  of  them  amongst  the  spoils  carried 
home  from  Babylon  (Ezra  i.  9 — ii)  we  may 
infer  that  the  Table  and  the  Golden  Altar 
with  a single  Candlestick  were  rc-made  by 
Zerubbabel  (see  i Macc.  i.  21,  22),  and  again 
by  the  Maccabees  (i  Macc.  iv.  49).  There 
cannot  therefore  be  a doubt  that  the  Table 
and  the  Candlestick  figured  on  the  Arch  are 
those  of  the  Maccabsean  times:  and  it  must 
have  been  these  which  are  described,  and 
must  have  been  seen,  by  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’ 
III.  6.  §6,  7;  ‘B.  J.’ VII.  5.  § 5).  It  is  however 
most  likely  that  the  restorations  were  made 
as  nearly  as  possible  after  the  ancient  models. 
In  representing  the  Table  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  sculptor  has  exhibited  its  two  ends,  in 
defiance  of  perspective.  The  details  and  size 
of  the  figure,  and  the  description  of  Jose- 
phus, appear  to  agree  very  nearly  with  the 
directions  here  given  to  Moses,  and  to  illus- 
trate them  in  several  particulars.  Josephus 
says  that  the  Table  was  like  the  so-called 
]3elphic  tables,  richly  ornamented  pieces  of 
furniture  in  use  amongst  the  Romans,  which 
were  sometimes,  if  not  always,  covered  with 
gold  or  silver  (Martial,  xii.  67;  Cicero,  ‘in 
Verr.’  i v.  59 ; cf  Du  Cange,  Art.  ‘ Delphica’). 

24.  onjerlay  it]  See  on  u.  \i. 

a crown  of  gold]  Rather,  a moulding 
of  gold.  See  on  n.  ii.  The  moulding  of 
the  Table  is  still  seen  at  the  ends  of  the 
sculptured  figure. 

25.  a border]  Rather  a framing,  v.^hich 
reached  from  leg  to  leg  so  as  to  make  the 
Table  firm,  as  well  as  to  adorn  it  with  a second 
moulding  of  gold.  Two  fragments  of  such  a 
framing  are  still  seen  in  the  sculpture  attached 
to  the  legs  half-way  down. 

26.  in  the  four  corners  that  are  on  the  four 
feet  thereof  ] The  word  here  rendered  feet  is 


3^4 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


[v.  27—31. 


27  Over  against  the  border  shall 
the  rings  be  for  places  of  the  staves  to 
bear  the  table. 

28  And  thou  shalt  make  the  staves 
of  shittim  wood,  and  overlay  them  with 
gold,  that  the  table  may  be  borne  with 
them. 

29  And  thou  shalt  make  the  dishes 
thereof,  and  spoons  thereof,  and  covers 


thereof,  and  bowls  thereof,  " to  cover  “ 
withal : of  pure  gold  shalt  thou  make  wthai. 
them. 

30  And  thou  shalt  set  upon  the 
table  shewbread  before  me  alv/ay. 

31  ^ ^ And  thou  shalt  make  a can-  ^ chap.  37. 
dlestick  of  pure  gold  : of  beaten  work 

shall  the  candlestick  be  made:  his 
shaft,  and  his  branches,  his  bowls,  his 


the  common  name  for  the  feet  of  men  or 
animals.  Josephus  says  that  the  feet  of  the 
Table  were  like  those  that  the  Dorians  used 
to  put  to  their  couches,  which  appear  to  have 
been  famous  for  their  splendour  (Ailian,  ‘ Var. 
Hist.’  XII.  29;  Athenasus,  II.  47).  Comparing 
this  with  the  sculpture,  it  would  seem  that  the 
legs  terminated  in  something  like  the  foot  of 
an  animal,  such  as  in  modern  furniture  is 
called  a cla^zv.  The  like  device  often  occurs 
in  the  ancient  Egyptian  furniture  (Wilkinson, 
I-  PP-  59^  60,  62,  &c.).  The  word  here  ren- 
dered corner  is  not  the  same  as  that  so  rendered 
in  -2'.  12,  and  it  may  denote  any  extreme  part. 
We  might  thus  render  the  words,  upon  the 
four  extremities  that  are  atthe  four 
feet.  Josephus  speaks  of  the  rings  as  having 
been  in  part  attached  to  the  claws  themselves. 
But  there  is  no  trace  of  the  rings  in  the 
sculpture. 

27.  Over  against  the  border']  Rather, 
Over  against  the  framing;  that  is,  the 
rings  were  to  be  placed  not  upon  the  framing 
itself,  but  at  the  extremities  of  the  legs  an- 
swering to  each  comer  of  it. 

29.  dishes]  The  Hebrew  word  is  the 
same  as  is  employed  to  denote  the  large  silver 
vessels  which  were  filled  with  fine  flour  and 
formed  part  of  the  offerings  of  the  Princes  of 
Israel  in  Num.  vii.  13  sq.,  where  it  is  rendered 
chargers.  According  to  its  probable  etymo- 
logy, it  denoted  a deep  vessel,  and  therefore 
neither  of  the  English  words  answers  well  to 
it : perhaps  hozuls  v/ould  be  nearer  the  mark. 
Knobel  conjectures  that  these  vessels,  which 
belonged  to  the  Shewbread  'Fable,  were  used 
to  bring  the  birad  into  the  Sanctuary;  but  it 
is  hard  to  imagine  that  vessels  of  sufficient 
si/e  for  such  a purpose  (Lev.  xxiv.  5)  were 
formed  of  gold.  I'hey  may  possibly  have 
been  the  measures  for  the  meal  used  in  the 
loaves. 

spoons]  I'lie  Hebrew  word  is  that  used 
for  the  small  gold  cups  that  were  filled  with 
frankincense  in  the  ofrerings  of  the  l^rinces, 
Num.  vii.  1454.  'Fhe  LXX.  render  it  Ovlo-kcu 
= incense  cups.  See  on  Lev.  xxiv.  7.  'Fhese 
must  be  the  only  vessels  which  arc  mentioned 
by  Josephus  in  connection  with  the  I'able — 
hx)0  (puiXuL  x^pvacai  XifSavioruv  7rXr]p€Ls  (‘  Ant.’ 


III.  c.  6.  § 6.  c.  10.  § 7),  and  which  are  re- 
presented on  the  Table  in  the  sculpture. 

covers... bow/s]  According  to  the  best  au- 
thority these  were  flagons  and  chalices, 
such  as  were  used  for  Drink  offerings.  LXX. 
(TTToudua  and  Kvadoi.  See  the  next  note. 

to  cover  voithal]  More  correctly  rendered 
in  the  margin,  to  pour  out  voithal.  It  is  strange 
that  our  translators  in  the  text  should  have  left 
Luther  and  Cranmer,  backed  as  they  are  by 
the  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  the  Syriac,  theTargunis, 
and  the  most  direct  sense  of  the  original  words, 
to  follow  Saadia  and  the  Talmud.  With 
the  exception  of  some  recent  Jewish  versions, 
the  best  modern  authorities  apply  the  pas- 
sage, along  with  the  two  last  names  of  vessels, 
to  the  rite  of  the  Drink  offering,  which  ap- 
pears to  have  regularly  accompanied  every  Meat 
offering  (Lev.  xxiii.  18  ; Num.  vi.  15,  xxviii.  14, 
&c.).  'The  subject  is  important  in  its  bearing 
upon  the  meaning  of  the  Shewbread:  the  cor- 
rected rendering  of  the  words  tends  to  shew 
that  it  was  a true  Meat  offering  [see  on  Lev. 
xxiv.  9]. — The  first  part  of  the  verse  might 
thus  be  rendered; — And  thou  shalt  make 
its  howls  and  its  incense-cups  and 
its  flagons  and  its  chalices  for  pour- 
ing out  the  Drink  offerings. 

30.  The  Shewbread  Table  was  placed  in 
the  Holy  Place  on  the  north  side  (xxvi.  35). 
Directions  for  preparing  the  Shewbread  are 
given  in  Lev.  xxiv.  5 — 9.  It  consisted  of  twelve 
large  cakes  of  unleavened  bread,  which  were 
arranged  on  the  Table  in  two  piles,  with  a 
golden  cup  of  frankincense  on  each  pile  (Jos. 
‘Ant.’  III.  10.  § 7).  It  was  renewed  every 
Sabbath  day.  Tlie  stale  loaves  were  given  to 
the  priests,  and  the  frankincense  appears  to 
have  been  lighted  on  the  Altar  for  a memorial 
[see  on  Lev.  ii.  2].  We  may  presume  that  the 
l)rink  offering  was  renewed  at  the  same  time. 
The  Shewbread,  with  all  the  characteristics 
and  significance  of  a great  national  Meat  offer- 
ing, in  which  the  twelve  tribes  were  repre- 
sented by  the  twelve  cakes,  was  to  stand 
before  Jehovah  perpetually.,  in  token  that  He 
was  always  graciously  accepting  the  good 
works  of  His  people,  for  whom  Atonement 
had  been  made  by  the  victims  offered  on  the 
Altar  in  the  Court  of  the  Sanctuary  [see  notes 
on  Lev.  xxiv.  5 — 9]. 


V.  32,  33-] 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


365 


knops,  and  his  flowers,  shall  be  of  the 
same. 

32  And  six  branches  shall  come  out 
of  the  sides  of  it;  three  branches  of 
the  candlestick  out  of  the  one  side,  and 
three  branches  of  the  candlestick  out 
of  the  other  side  : 


33  Three  bowls  made  like  unto 
almonds,  with  a knop  and  a flower  in 
one  branch ; and  three  bowls  made 
like  almonds  in  the  other  branch, 
a knop  and  a flov/er:  so  in  the  six 
branches  that  come  out  of  the  candle- 
stick. 


The  Golden  Candlestick. 

31 — 39.  (Cf.  xxxvii.  17 — 24). 

31.  a candlestick  of  pure  gold  \ This  would 
more  properly  be  called 'a  lamp-stand  than  a 
candlestick.  Its  purpose  was  to  support  seven 
oil-lamps.  Like  the  Shewbread  Table,  it  is  a 
prominent  object  amongst  the  spoils  of  the 
Temple  sculptured  on  the  Arch  of  Titus. 
This  figure  is  copied  from  Reland  [see  on 

•z’.  23]- 


The  size  of  the  Candlestick  is  nowhere  men- 
tioned : but  we  may  form  an  estimate  of  it  by 
comparing  the  figure  with  that  of  the  Table. 
It  is  most  likely  that  the  two  objects  are  re- 
presented on  the  same  scale.  Its  height  ap- 
pears to  have  been  about  three  feet,  and  its 
width  two  feet.  The  details  of  the  sculpture 
usefully  illustrate  the  description  in  the  text. 
But  the  work  and  form  of  the  pedestal  here 
represented  are  not  in  accordance  with  Jewish 
taste  or  usage  at  any  period.  Reland  con- 
jectures that  the  original  foot  may  have  been 
broken  off,  and  lost  or  stolen  when  the 
Candlestick  was  taken  out  of  the  Temple, 


and  that  the  pedestal  in  the  sculpture  was 
added  by  some  Roman  artist  to  set  off 
the  trophy.  There  are  other  ancient  re- 
presentations of  the  Candlestick  on  gems, 
in  tombs,  and  on  the  walls  of  synagogues. 
Some  of  these  are  copied  in  Reland’s  work, 
and  one  has  lately  been  discovered  by  Capt. 
Wilson  in  a ruined  synagogue  in  the  valley 
of  the  Jarmuk.  In  most  of  them  the  stem 
is  supported  on  three  feet,  or  claws.  This 
arrangement  however  is  supposed  to  contra- 
dict Josephus,  who  says  that  the  stem  rose 
from  2i  pedestal:  the  word  he  uses  (^dcris)  is 
however  not  quite  free  from  ambiguity.  In 
general  form  the  other  figures  of  the  Candle- 
stick copied  by  Reland  nearly  agree  with  that 
on  the  arch  except  in  the  limbs  being  more 
slender,  in  which  particular  they  are  coun- 
tenanced by  the  description  in  Josephus  (‘B. 
J.’  VII.  5.  § 5).  It  is  likely  that  the  sculptor 
may  have  thickened  the  limbs  in  his  work  to 
give  them  better  effect  from  the  point  of  view 
from  which  spectators  would  see  them. 

cf  beaten  ^vork']  See  on  t.'.  18. 

his  shafts  and  his  branches,  his  bo^juls,  his 
knops,  and  his  forj:ers~\  This  might  rather  be 
rendered,  its  base,  its  stem,  its  flower 
cups  [see  next  verse],  its  knobs,  and  its 
lilies. 

33.  Three  boKvls  made  like  unto  almonds^ 
More  strictly,  three  cups  of  almond 
flowers.  These  appear  to  be  the  cups  in 
immediate  contact  with  the  knobs  as  shewn 
in  the  sculpture. 

a fower^  Most  of  the  old  versions  render 
the  word  as  a lily,  and  this  rendering  well 
agrees  with  the  sculpture. 

the  candlestick^^  Here,  and  in  the  two  follow- 
ing verses,  the  word  appears  to  denote  the 
stem,  as  the  essential  part  of  the  Candlestick. 
It  would  seem  from  •vv.  33 — 35  that  the  orna- 
mentation of  the  Candlestick  consisted  of  uni- 
form members,  each  comprising  a series  of  an 
almond  fiower,  a knob  and  a lily ; that  the 
stem  comprised  four  of  these  members ; that 
each  pair  of  branches  was  united  to  the  stem 
at  one  of  the  knobs;  and  that  each  branch 
comprised  three  members.  In  comparing  the 
description  in  the  text  with  the  sculptured 
figure,  allowance  may  be  made  for  some 
deviation  in  the  sculptor's  copy,  which  was 
pardonable  enough,  considering  the  purpose 
for  which  the  representation  was  made. 


366 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


[v-  34—40- 


34  And  in  the  candlestick  shall  be 
four  bowls  made  like  unto  almonds, 
with  their  knops  and  their  flowers. 

35  And  there  shall  be  a knop  under 
two  branches  of  the  same,  and  a knop 
under  two  branches  of  the  same,  and  a 
knop  under  two  branches  of  the  same, 
according  to  the  six  branches  that  pro- 
ceed out  of  the  candlestick. 

36  Their  knops  and  their  branches 
shall  be  of  the  same;  all  it  shall  be  one 
beaten  work  of  pure  gold. 


37  And  thou  shalt  make  the  seven 
lamps  thereof:  and  they  shall  "li^ht”^*’* 

11  1 r 1 1 . cause  to 

the  lamps  thereof,  that  they  may  give  ascettd. 
light  over  against  ^ it.  ^ Heb. 

38  And  the  tongs  thereof,  and  theS^'^*^^^ 
snuffdishes  thereof,  shall  be  of  pure 

gold. 


39  Of  a talent  of  pure  gold  shall  * Acts  7. 
he  make  it,  with  all  these  vessels.  Heb.  s.  5. 

40  And  ^Mook  that  thou  make  them  ^ 
after  their  pattern,  ^ which  was  shewed 
thee  in  the  mount. 


caused  to 
see. 


37.  se-ven  lamps']  These  lamps  were  proba- 
bly like  those  used  by  the  Egyptians  and  other 
nations,  shallow  covered  vessels  more  or  less  of 
an  oval  form,  with  a mouth  at  one  end  from 
which  the  wick  protruded.  This  may  help 
us  to  the  simplest  explanation  of  the  rather 
obscure  words,  “that  they  may  give  light 
over  against  it.”  The  Candlestick  was  placed 
on  the  south  side  of  the  Holy  Place  (xxvi.  35), 
with  the  line  of  lamps  parallel  with  the  wall, 
or,  according  to  Josephus,  somewhat  oblique- 
ly. If  the  wick-mouths  of  the  lamps  were 
turned  outwards,  tlv?y  would  give  light  over 
against  the  Candlestick;  that  is,  towards  the 
north  side  [see  Num.  viii.  a]. 

37.  they  shall  light]  See  marginal  render- 
ing and  note  on  Lev.  xxiv.  2. 

33.  the  tongs]  The  Hebrew  word  is  the 
same  as  in  Is.  vi.  6.  Thr*  small  tongs  for  the 
lamps  were  used  to  trim  and  adjust  the  wicks. 

the  snuff-dishes]  These  were  shallow  vessels 
used  to  receive  the  burnt  fragments  of  wick 
removed  by  the  tongs.  The  same  Hebrew 
word  is  translated,  in  accordance  with  its 
connection,  patis^  xxvii.  3,  xxxviii.  3;  and 
censers^  Num.  iv.  14,  xvi.  6,  &c.  For  the 
regulations  respecting  the  Priests’  tending  the 
lamps,  see  xxvii.  20,  ai,  xxx.  8;  Lev.  xxiv. 
2 — 4 (with  the  note);  2 Chro.  xiii.  ii. 

39.  a talent  of  pure  gold]  Amongst  the  dis- 
crepant estimates  of  the  weight  of  the  Hebrew 
talent,  the  one  that  appears  to  be  received 


most  generally  would  make  it  about  94  lbs. 
See  on  xxxviii.  27. 

‘vessels]  Rather,  utensils  [see  on  xxvii. 

191- 

Several  writers  have  treated  of  the  sym- 
bolism of  the  lights  of  the  Golden  Candlestick 
with  their  oil,  of  its  ornamentation  vrith  the 
knobs  and  flowers,  and  of  its  branched  form 
(Bahr,Hengstenberg,  Keil,&c.).  All  these  par- 
ticulars might  have  been  in  later  times  appro- 
priated by  the  prophetic  inspiration  as  figures 
illustrative  of  spiritual  truth.  See  Zech.  iv. 
I — 14;  Rev.  i.  12,  13,  20.  But  in  any  espe- 
cial connection  with  the  place  held  by  the 
Candlestick  in  the  Sanctuary,  as  its  plan  was 
revealed  to  Moses,  there  appears  to  be  only 
one  peculiar  point  of  symbolism  on  which 
stress  can  be  laid — the  fact  that  the  lamps 
were  seven  in  number.  The  general  fashion 
of  the  Candlestick  and  its  ornaments  might 
have  been  a matter  of  taste;  light  was  of 
necessity  required  in  theTabOTnacle,  and  where- 
ever  light  is  used  in  ceremonial  observance,  it 
may  of  course  be  taken  in  a general  way  as  a 
figure  of  the  Light  of  Truth;  but  in  the 
Sanctuary  of  the  covenanted  people,  it  must 
plainly  have  been  understood  as  expressly  sig- 
nificant that  the  number  of  the  lamps  agreed 
with  the  number  of  the  Covenant.  The 
Covenant  of  Jehovah  was  essentially  a Cove- 
nant of  light. 

40.  See  on  -v.  9. 


NOTE  ON  Chap.  xxv. 


On  the  Colours  of  the:  Tabernacle. 

L 

Our  version  is  most  probably  right  in  its 
rendering  of  the  names  of  the  three  colours 
iiscil  in  the  curtains  and  vails  of  the'Eabernacle. 
But  the  subject  is  a doubtful  one.  The  names 
of  coloui*s  in  all  languages  appear  to  have  been 
very  vaguely  used,  until  the  progress  of  science 
in  connection  with  the  decorative  arts  has 
rendered  greater  precision  both  possible  and 


desirable.  Our  own  word  gray^  as  applied 
not  only  to  the  mixture  of  black  and  white 
now  so  called,  but  also  to  the  brown  dress  of 
the  “gray  friars”  and  to  the  cockchafer  (the 
“ gray  fly”  of  Milton) ; and  the  purpureus 
as  applied  to  snow,  the  swan  and  the  foam 
of  the  sea,  to  the  rose,  to  a beautiful  human 
eye,  as  well  as  to  the  colour  now  known 
as  purple,  may  be  taken  as  instances.  The 
Ifiariou  7rop(f}vf)ovif  of  John  xix.  2 is  called 
fKapiida  kokkIutjv  in  Matt,  xxvii.  28.  Mr, 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


367 


Gladstone’s  essay  on  the  use  of  the  names  of 
colours  in  Homer  furnishes  other  illustrations^ 
That  the  Hebrew  names  were  used  with  not 
more  stedfastness  is  proved  by  Mr  Bevan  in 
Smith’s  ‘ Diet,  of  the  Bible’  (Art.  ‘ Colours’). 
The  Hebrew  names  in  the  text  must  however 
have  been  applied  at  the  time  with  distinct 
denotation  in  reference  to  the  use  of  the  yarn 
in  the  embroidery  of  the  curtains.  The  un- 
certainty concerns  only  our  discovering  what 
the  colours  actually  were.  The  earliest  equi- 
valents we  have  for  the  Hebrew  words  are 
those  used  by  the  LXX.,  which  have  been 
adopted  by  Philo  and  Josephus,  and  have  been 
followed  by  the  ancient  versions  in  general. 
But  we  are  unfortunately  far  from  certain  oi 
the  purport  of  the  Greek  words. 

H. 

The  most  important  of  the  three  colours 
mentioned  in  this  place  is  the  one  rendered 
blue.  The  balance  of  evidence  seems  to  be 
in  favour  of  its  being  a pure  sky  blue.  The 
Hebrew  is  tekeleth  for  which  the 

LXX.  have  vaKivOos,  and  the  Vulgate  Hya~ 
cinthiis.  As  the  name  of  a flower,  the 
Greek  word  has  been  taken  for  the  iris, 
the  gladiolus,  the  delphinium,  or  the  hya- 
cinth : as  the  name  of  a precious  stone,  it 
evidently  could  not,  as  some  have  supposed, 
belong  to  the  amethyst,  since  it  is  mentioned 
with  the  amethyst  (djut^uo-roj)  in  Rev.  xxi. 
20 ; it  most  likely  denoted^  the  sapphire^ ; 
as  the  name  of  a colour,  it  has  been  supposed 
to  denote  pure  blue,  purple,  violet,  black,  red 
or  rust  colour Of  the  different  flowers  to 
which  the  word  has  been  ascribed,  it  may  be 
remarked  that  the  greater  number  are  blue ; 
for  example,  the  common  iris,  the  larkspur, 
the  wild  hyacinth,  and  the  starch  hyacinth, 
which  is  so  abundant  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Athens.  The  Hebrew  word  has  been  very 
generally  taken  to  denote  either  blue,  or 
bluish  purple,  while  “the  purple”  associated 
with  it  has  been  supposed  to  have  had  a 
stronger  red  tinge.  Philo ■^,  Josephus -5,  and 
Saadia,  with  most  of  the  Fathers  and  the 
rabbinists,  appear  to  have  understood  it  as 
the  colour  of  the  sky.  Philo,  who  took  it  to 
symbolize  the  air,  in  the  expression  which  he 
applies  to  the  air  ((jiba-ci  yap  peXas),  has  been 
reasonably  supposed  to  allude  to  the  dark  full 

^ 'Essays  on  Homer,’  Vol.  iii.  p.  457. 

^ Professor  Maskelyne  considers  that  the  hya- 
cinth of  Pliny  (‘II.  N.’  XXXVII.  40)  and  other 
classical  writers  was  what  we  call  the  sapphire, 
while  the  stone  called  sapphire  by  the  ancients 
was  lapis  lazuli.  ‘Edinb.  Rev.’ No.  253.  See 
note  on  Ex.  xxviii.  18. 

^ See  Liddell  and  Scott’s  ‘ Lex.’ 

* ‘ Vit.  Mos.’  III.  6. 

* ‘Ant.’  III.  7.  § 7.  See  also  note  on  Ex. 

XXV.  5. 


tinge  which  distinguishes  the  skies  of  southern 
latitudes  6. 

That  the  Egyptians  in  early  times  used 
indigo  as  a blue  dye  is  certain 7,  and  it  is  by 
no  means  improbable  that  the  Israelites  did 
the  same;  If,  as  Wilkinson  and  others^  sup- 
pose, the  blue  border  of  the  Israelites’  gar- 
ments was  adopted  from  an  Egyptian  custom, 
the  facts  that  the  Egyptian  borders  werG 
certainly  dyed  with  indigo,  and  that  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  w'ords  expressing  the 
colour  of  the  Israelites’  borders  (Num.  xv. 
38)  are  tekeleth  and  vaKivBus-,  favour  the 
notion  that  these  words  express  the  colour 
obtained  from  indigo.  But  the  etymology  of 
the  Flebrew  term  is  supposed  rather  to  in- 
dicate that  the  colour  w^as  procured,  like  the 
Tpian  purple,  from  a shell-fish.  It  is  con- 
ceived that  while  a species  of  Murex  pro- 
duced the  purple,  a Buccinum  produced  the 
blue®.  Both  colours  w'ere  obtained  by  the 
Tyrians  from  “the  Isles  of  Elishah,”  that  is, 
the  Isles  of  the  Aegean  Sea,  where  it  seems 
most  probable  that  each  must  have  been  ob- 
tained from  the  sea^®.  The  art  of  preparing 
the  dye  from  the  fish  is  now  lost,  and  this, 
of  course,  increases  the  uncertainty  of  the 
question  at  issue. 

It  is  however  likely  that  tekeleth  was  the 
name  of  the  well-known  colour  obtained 
from  more  than  one  kind  of  dye.  The 
inquiry  regarding  the  colour  itself  has  peculiar 
interest  from  its  having  been  the  predominating 
colour  in  the  decoration  of  the  Sanctuary. 
Besides  taking  its  place  with  the  other  two 
colours  in  the  curtains  and  vails  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, it  is  found  by  itself  in  the  loops  of  the 
curtains  (Ex.  xxvi.  4),  in  the  lace  of  the 
breastplate  of  the  High  Priest  (xxviii.  28),  in 
the  robe  of  the  ephod  (xxviii.  31),  and  the 
lace  of  the  mitre  (xxviii.  37).  In  wrapping 
up  the  sacred  utensils  when  the  host  was  on 
the  march,  blue  cloths,  purple  cloths,  and 
scarlet  cloths  were  used  for  the  various 
articles  according  to  specific  directions  (Num. 
iv.).  The  national  significance  of  blue  ap- 
pears to  be  shewn  in  the  blue  fringes  that 
have  been  mentioned  (Nuni.  xv.  38 ; cf.  Matt, 
xxiii.  5). 

Several  Jewish  commentators,  followed  by 
Luther  and  Cranmer,  have  taken  the  word 
tekeleth  to  denote  yellow  silk.  It  is  hardly 

® Other  grounds  for  rendering  the  Hebrew 
word  sky  blue,  rather  than  violet  or  bluish  piirple^ 
as  Gesenius  and  others  have  preferred,  may  be 
found  in  Bochart,  ‘Op.’  Vol.  ill.  p.  728,  and 
Biihr,  ‘Symbolik,’  Vol.  1.  p.  303. 

7 Wilkinson,  ‘ Pop.  Acc.’  Vol.  ii.  p.  78. 

® Henstenberg,  ‘Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
Moses,’  Smith,  ‘The  Pentateuch,’  p.  302. 

® Bochart,  ‘Op.’  p.  III.  727.  Gesenius,  s.  v. 
Fiirst,  s.  v.  Wilkinson,  Note  on  Herodot.  III. 
20.  Tristram,  ‘ Nat.  Hist,  of  the  Bi’ole,’  p.  297. 

Ezek.  xxvii.  7 ; Jer.  x.  9.  Cf.  Plin.  ‘H.N.’ 
IX.  60,  sq. 


EXODUS.  XXV. 


368 

necessary  to  state  that  the  material  could  not 
have  been  silk  [see  note  on  Ex.  xxv.  4].  The 
notion  that  the  colour  was  yellow  seems  to 
stand  upon  a mere  hollow  conjecture  sug- 
gested by  the  natural  colour  of  silk. 

III. 

Purple  is  in  Heb.  argaman  in  the 

LXX.  TTop4>vpa.  The  derivation  of  the  He- 
brew word  is  doubtful,  but  all  authorities 
seem  to  be  in  favour  of  its  signifying  the 
purple  obtained  from  more  than  one  species 
of  shell- fish  in  the  Mediterranean,  which  be- 
came commonly  known  as  the  T yrian  purple 
(Ezek.  xxvii.  7,  16).  The  colour  seems  to 
have  had  a strong  red  tinge,  and  to  have 
approached  what  we  call  crimson.  The  fish 
that  produced  it  has  been  supposed  to  be  a 
muscle,  but  it  is  hardly  to  be  doubted  that  it 
was  in  fact  a Murex,  two  species  of  which 
{M.  brandarh  and  M.  trunculus)  might  have 
furnished  it  (Tristram).  Hence  the  dye  was 
called  murex  by  the  Latin  writers.  The  colour 
is  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  Sanctuary 
only  in  combination  with  blue  and  scarlet  in 
the  curtains  and  vails  and  in  some  of  the 
cloths  for  wrapping  (Nurn.  iv.  13).  The 
estimation  in  which  the  dye  was  held  may  be 
inferred  from  Judg.  viii.  26  ; Esth.  i.  6 ; Prov. 
xxxi.  22. 

IV. 

Scarlet  is  in  Hebrew  tolalath  shdni 
'^^),  in  LXX.  K'jKKtros  (^tTrXofs,  and  in 
Vulg.  “coccus  bistinctush”  But  the  literal 
translation  of  the  two  Hebrew  words  is 
scarlet  <wQrni^  while  in  Lev.  xiv.  4,  6,  49, 51,  52, 
the  words  are  transposed  (HJlVin  'Jy’),  so  as 
to  signify  <2t.'or;«  scarlet.  '\  he  word  shdni., 
by  itself,  demrles  scarlet  in  Gen.  xxxviii.  28, 
30;  Josh.  ii.  18;  Prov.  xxxi.  21,  &c.  Ancient 
and  modern  authorities  agree  as  to  the  colour, 


which  is  uniformly  called  scarlet  in  our  ver- 
sion except  in  Jer.  iv.  30.  where  it  is  rendered 
crimson.  The  dye  used  to  produce  the  colour 
in  the  vail  of  the  Temple  is  called  karmil 
(P'pi?),  2 Chron.  ii.  7,  14,  iii.  14,  where 
it  is  rendered  crimson.,  though  there  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  colour  was  the  same 
as  the  scarlet  of  the  Tabernacle.  It  appears 
to  have  been  obtained  from  the  coccus 
ilicis.,  the  cochineal  insect  of  the  holm  oak, 
which  was  used  in  the  East  before  the  coccus 
cacti.,  the  well-known  cochineal  of  the  prickly 
pear,  was  introduced  from  Mexico.  The 
Arabic  name  for  it  is  kerme%,  which  is  evi- 
dently related  to  the  Hebrew  word  karmil. 
The  root  harm  exists  in  our  crimson  and 
carmine.  In  the  use  of  the  Sanctuary,  it  is 
found  only  in  the  figured  curtains  and  em- 
broidery associated  with  blue  and  purple,  and 
in  the  wrapping  cloths  (Num.  iv.  8).  It 
appears  to  have  had  a special  connection  with 
the  rites  of  purification  in  association  with 
hyssop  and  cedar  (Lev.  xiv.  4,  6,  49,  51,  52  ; 
Num.  xix.  6 ; Heb.  ix.  19). 

V. 

On  the  whole,  there  does  not  seem  to  be 
much  ground  to  doubt  that  our  version,  in 
rendering  the  names  of  the  colours  of  the 
woven  and  embroidered  work  of  the  Sanctuary, 
expresses  the  most  probable  conclusions. 

The  three  colours,  blue,  scarlet  and  purple, 
have  been  recognized  all  but  universally  as 
royal  colours,  such  as  were  best  suited  for  the 
decoration  of  a palace^.  This  fact  appears  to 
furnish  sufficient  ground  for  their  having  been 
appointed  as  the  colours  for  the  embroidery 
which  was  to  adorn  the  dwelling-place  of 
Jehovah.  Many  have,  however,  imagined 
that  there  was  some  other  symbolical  signifi- 
cance in  them.  See  Biihr,  ‘ Symbolik,’  V0I.  i. 
p.  324;  Dr  W.  L.  Alexander  in  Kitto’s 
‘ Cyclo.’  Vol.  I.  p.  541,  &c. 


NOTE  ON  Chap.  xxv.  17. 


On  the  Mercy  Seat. 

The  word /(’«A^orc//j  (ri7)2I!)  is  never  applied 
to  anything  except  the  golden  cover  of  the 
Ark.  The  root  from  which  it  comes,  kdphar 
without  doubt  signifies  to  conjcr,  and 
bears  an  obvious  resemblance  to  our  word 
cDojer.  In  one  j^assage  of  the  Old  Testament, 
but  in  one  only,  the  Hebrew  word,  in  its  Kal 
or  ]nimitive  form,  is  used  in  this  sense  in 
rc*fercncc  to  covering  the  Ark  of  Noah  with 
pitch  (Gen.  vi.  14).  In  the  Piel  form  (^Kipper., 
“1S2)  the  root  is  used- nearly  seventy  times, 
and  always  in  the  sense  of forgi-jing  or  recon- 

*  The  Greek  and  Latin  renderings  appear  to 
be  ,based  on  a mistake  in  regard  to  the  word 
which,  with  other  vowel  jjoints,  would 
mean  tunce. 


ciling.,  that  is  of  covering  up  offences.  Now 
a large  number  of  recent  authorities,  Jewish 
and  others^,  have  preferred  to  take  kapporetb 
in  the  simple  sense  of  a concer.  Josephus  and 
Saadia  give  countenance  to  this  rendering. 
The  question  thus  brought  before  us  is,  was 
the  kapporeth  originally  regarded  as  a mere 
part  of  the  Ark,  or  as  something  having  a 
distinct  significance,  and  a recognized  desig- 
nation, of  its  own  ? The  inquiry  is  of  great 
imj)ortance,  from  its  bearing  on  the  character 

^ See  Esth.  i.  6,  viii.  15  ; 2 S.  i.  24;  Cant, 
iii.  10;  Jer.  x.  9;  Ezek.  xxiii.  6;  Dan.  v.  7; 
Luke  xvi.  19;  Rev.  xviii.  12,  &c. 

^ Kimchi,  Mendelsohn,  de  Wette,  Gesenius, 
Schott,  Etirst,  Zunz,  Knobel,  llerxheimer, 
Lecser,  Benisch,  Sharpe,  &c.  But  amongst  the 
Jewish  commentators,  Woguc  and  Kalisch  are 
exceptions. 


EXODUS.  XXVI. 


V.  I.] 

of  the  Mosaic  ritual.  The  latter  view  appears 
to  deserve  the  preference  on  these'grounds;— 

1.  In  the  order  of  the  sacred  text,  the 
Mercy  seat  is  described  by  itself,  and  is  di- 
rected to  be  placed  “above  upon  the  Ark” 
(Ex.  XXV.  17—22,  xxvi.  34):  it  is  never 
called  the  conier  (or  kapporetb)  of^  the  Ark^ 
but  is  always  mentioned  as  a distinct  thing 
(Ex.  XXX.  6,  xxxi.  7,  XXXV.  12,  xxxvii.  6 — 
9,  xxxix.  35;  Lev.  xvi.  13;  Num.  vii.  89, 
&c.). 

2.  The  floly  of  Holies  is  called  in  the 
first  Book  of  Chronicles  (xxviii.  ii)  the  house 
of  the  kapporeth  (HlbSH  D'S);  and  in  Levi- 
ticus (xvi.  2)  it  is  called  the  place  <ivithhi  the 
•vail  before-  the  kapporeth^  'which  is  upon  the 
Ark.  Such  expressions  as  these  seem  clearly 
to  indicate  that  the  kapporeth  could  not  have 
been  regarded  as  a mere  subordinate  part  of 
the  Ark. 

3.  An  argument  scarcely  less  strong  may 

be  drawn  from  the  relationship  of  the  word 
kapporetb  to  kippurim  = atonements., 

in  connection  with  the  rites  of  the  Day  of 
Atonement,  or  (as  it  is  literally)  thb  Day  of 
Atonements.  No  part  of  the  Sanctuary  is  so 
intimately  connected  with  the  kippurim  made 
on  that  day  by  the  High  Priest  as  the  kap- 
poreth (Lev.  xvi.  2,  13,  14,  15).  The  phrase- 
ology of  these  passages  is  certainly  not  such 
as  could  be  well  accounted  for  by  the  mere 
position  of  the  kapporeth  as  the  cover  of  the 
Ark. 

4.  The  general  current  of  the  most  ancient 


369 

Jewish  tradition  evidently  favours  the  deriva- 
tion of  kapporeth  from  kipper  (IS?),  the  Piel 
form  of  the  verb,  which,  as  it  has  been  already 
observed,  nowhere  bears  any  other  meaning 
than  to  atone.,  or  to  shew  mercy.  The  oldest 
authority  is  the  Septuagint,  in  which  the  word 
is  rendered  IXacrr^pLov  cTtlQrjfia}.  Philo  speaks 
of  the  cover  of  the  Ark  beii^.  called  in  the 
Scripture  IXaa-rijptou,  as  a symbol  rijs  tXea>  rod 
Oeov  dvmpecosb  Rabbinical  tradition  fur- 
nishes evidence  to  the  same  effect.  The 
vowel  points  in  the  word  kapporeth  (n^b?) 
are  such  as  to  connect  it  with  the  Piel  form 
kipper.,  rather  than  with  the  Kal  form  kaphar. 
Another  argument  may  be  added  from  the 
use  in  the  Targums  of  the  same  expression  as 
is  found  I Chron.  xxviii.  ii,  the  house  of  the 
kapporeth  [see  § 2],  to  answer  to  “the  oracle” 
(Tn’H)  in  I K.  vi.  5. 

5.  We  might  at  once  settle  the  question 
as  to  the  Mercy  seat  having  a meaning  of  its 
own  by  referring  to  the  passages  in  the  New 
Testament  in  which  the  word  iXaa-rrjpiov 
occurs  (Heb.  ix.  5;  Rom.  iii.  25).  But  it 
is  satisfactory  to  have  such  clear  evidence  as 
exists  that  the  New  Testament  use  of  the 
word  is  not  a late  or  artificial  adaptation  of 
it,  but  a clear  and  simple  application  of  its 
original  meaning. 

^ Fiirst,  following  certain  Jewish  authorities, 
conceives  that  iXacrTppiou  is  a gloss  of  later  date. 

But  this  is  evidently  a mere  conjecture  of  pre- 
judice. 

2 ‘Vit.  Mos.’  III.  8. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

I The  ten  curtains  of  the  tabernacle.  7 The 
eleven  curtains  of  goats'  hair.  14  The  co- 
vering of  rams'  skins.  15  'The  hoards  of  the 
tabernacle.,  'ivith  their  sockets  and  bars.  31 
The  vail  for  the  ark.  36  The  hanging  for 
the  door. 


Moreover  thou  shalt  make 
the  tabernacle  with  ten  cur- 
tains of  fine  twined  linen,  and  blue,  f j^eb. 
and  purple,  and  scarlet : with  cheru-  the  work  f 
bims  of  Tunning  work  shalt  thou  make  workman, 

1 or,  em- 

tnem.  broideren 


The  Tabernacle. 
xxvi.  I — 37.  (xxxvi.  8 — 38.) 

Chap.  XXVI.  The  Tabernacle  was  to 
comprise  three  main  parts,  the  Tabernacle, 
more  strictly  so-called,  its  Tent,  and  its 
Covering  (Ex.  xxxv.  ii,  xxxix.  33,  34, 
xl.  19,  34  ; Num.  iii.  25,  &c.).  These  parts 
are  very  clearly  distinguished  in  the  Hebrew, 
but  they  are  confounded  in  many  places  of 
the  English  Version  [see  on  wv.  7,  9,  &c.], 
and  in  still  more  places  of  the  LXX.,  the  Vul- 
gate, and  other  versions,  ancient  and  modern. 
The  Tabernacle  itself  was  to  consist  of  cur- 
tains of  fine  linen  woven  with  coloured  figures 
of  Cherubim,  and  a structure  of  boards  which 
was  to  contain  the  Holy  Place  and  the  Most 
VOL.  I. 


Holy  Place ; the  Tent  was  to  be  a true  tent 
of  goats’  hair  cloth  to  contain  and  shelter  the 
Tabernacle:  the  Covering  was  to  be  of  red 
rams’  skins  and  tachash  skins  [see  on  xxv.  5], 
and  was  spread  over  the  goats’  hair  tent  as  an 
additional  protection  against  the  weather. 
On  the  external  form  of  the  Tabernacle  and 
the  arrangement  of  its  parts,  see  Note  at  the 
end  of  the  chap.  The  account  of  its  comple- 
tion is  given  ch.  xxxvi.  8 — 38. 

The  Tabernacle. 
xxvi.  I — 6.  (Cf.  xxxvi.  8 — 13.) 

1.  tabernacle']  The  Hebrew  is  mishkdn.,  i.e. 
dwelling-place  (Job  xviii.  21,  xxi.  28  ; Ps. 
xlix.  II  , Is.  xxii.  16,  See.  &c.).  When  it  de- 
notes the  Dwelling-place  of  Jehovah,  it  is 

A A 


370 


EXODUS.  XXVL 


[v.  2—6. 


2 The  length  of  one  curtain  shall 
be  eight  and  twenty  cubits,  and  the 
breadth  of  one  curtain  four  cubits : and 
every  one  of  the  curtains  shall  have  one 
measure. 

3 The  five  curtains  shall  be  coupled 
together  one  to  another;  and  other 
five  curtains  shall  he  coupled  one  to 
another. 

4 And  thou  shalt  make  loops  of  blue 
upon  the  edge  of  the  one  curtain  from 


the  selvedge  in  the  coupling ; and  like- 
wise shalt  thou  make  in  the  uttermost 
edge  of  another  curtain,  in  the  coupling 
of  the  second. 

5 Fifty  loops  shalt  thou  make  in 
the  one  curtain,  and  fifty  loops  shalt 
thou  make  in  the  edge  of  the  curtain 
that  is  in  the  coupling  of  the  second ; 
that  the  loops  may  take  hold  one  of 
another. 

6 And  thou  shalt  make  fifty  taches 


regularly  accompanied  by  the  definite  article 
{hammishkan).  The  word  tabernacle  (which 
our  translators  took  from  the  Vulgate)  might 
fitly  designate  the  structure  of  boards  which 
formed  the  walls  of  the  Holy  Places,  but  its 
meaning  does  not  etymologically  answer  to 
mlshkan.  The  Hebrew  word  is  however 
uniformly  rendered  tabernacle  in  our  Bible: 
the  confusion  to  which  reference  has  been 
made  in  the  preceding  note  occurs  in  render- 
ing the  names  of  the  Tent  and  the  Covering. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  in  this  place  ham- 
mishkan  is  not  used  in  its  full  sense  as  denot- 
ing the  dwelling-place  of  Jehovah:  it  denotes 
only  the  tabernacle  cloth.  It  was  the  textile 
work  which  was  regarded  as  the  essential  part 
of  the  Tabernacle,  and  this  is  apparent  in 
our  version  of  a’.  6.  The  tent-cloth  in  like 
manner  and  for  the  like  reason  is  called 
simply  the  Tent  (v.  ii).  The  wooden  parts 
of  both  the  Tabernacle  and  the  Tent  are  evi- 
dently mentioned  as  if  they  were  subordinate 
to  the  textile  parts. — The  word  mishkan  is 
employed  with  three  distinct  ranges  of  mean- 
ing, (i)  in  its  strict  sense,  comprising  the 
cloth  of  the  Tabernacle  with  its  'woodwork 
(Exod.  XXV.  9,  xxvi.  ‘30,  xxxvi.  13,'  xl.  t8, 
&c.);  (2)  in  a narrower  sense,  for  the  taber- 
nacle-cloth only  (Exod.  xxvi.  i,  6,  xxxv.  ii, 
xxxix.  33,  34,  &c.) ; (3)  in  a wider  sense, 
for  the  Mishkan  with  its  Tent  and  Covering 
(Exod.  xxvii.  19,  xxxv.  18,  &c.). 

<VL>ith  ten  curtains']  Rather,  of  ten 
breadths.  The  Hebrew  word  (yerPah)  is 
everywhere  in  our  version  rendered  a curtain. 
Some  corresponding  word  is  used  in  the  An- 
cient Versions  (LXX.  avXala,  Vulg.  cortina) 
and  in  some  modern  ones.  In  such  places  as 
Ps.  civ.  2,  Is.  liv.  2,  Jer.  iv.  20,  the  Hebrew 
word  is  evidently  applied  to  an  entire  tent- 
curtain.  But  in  connection  with  the  Sanctu- 
ary it  always  denotes  what  in  English  would 
more  strictly  be  called  a breadth.  Five  of 
these  breadths  were  united  so  as  to  form 
what,  in  common  usage,  we  should  call  a large 
curtain.  (See  on  v.  3.)  The  word  curtain 
will  be  used  in  this,  its  ordinary  sense,  in 
these  notes.  I'he  two  curtains  thus  formed 
were  coupled  together  by  the  loops  and  taches 


to  make  the  entire  tabernacle-cloth,  which  is 
what  is  here  called  “the  tabernacle.”  See 
preceding  note. 

fine  t<wined  linen]  i.e.  the  most  carefully 
spun  thread  of  flax,  each  thread  consisting  of 
two  or  more  smaller  threads  twined  together 
(see  Wilkinson,  ‘Pop.  Account,’  li.  76).  On 
the  original  word  for  linen^  see  on  xxv.  4. 

Z'/wc,  and  purple and  scarlet]  See  on  xxv.  4. 

clxrubims]  See  on  xxv.  18. 

of  cunning  ^vork]  More  properly,  of  the 
work  of  the  skilled  weaver.  The 
coloured  figures  of  Cherubim  were  to  be 
worked  in  the  loom,  as  in  the  manufacture  of 
tapestry  and  carpets : in  the  hangings  for  the 
Tent  they  were  to  be  embroidered  with  the 
needle  [see  on  36].  On  the  different  kinds 
of  workmen  employed  on  the  textile  fabrics, 
see  on  xxxv.  35. 

3.  Each  curtain  formed  of  five  breadths 
(see  on  i),  was  42  feet  in  length  and  30 
feet  in  breadth,  taking  the  cubit  at  18  inches. 

4.  This  verse  is  obscure  as  it  stands  in 
our  version,  nor  is  it  easy  to  render  the 
original  word  for  word  so  as  to  make  the 
sense  clear.  But  the  meaning  appears  to  be, 
ylnd  thou  shalt  tnake  loops  of  blue  on  the  sel- 
vedge of  the  one  breadth  (ywhich  is)  on  the  side 
(of  the  one  curtain)  at  the  coupling ; and  the 
same  shalt  thou  do  in  the  selvedge  of  the  outside 
breadth  of  the  other  (curtain)  at  the  coupling. 
The  “coupling”  is  the  uniting  together  of 
the  two  curtains.  This  explanation  substanti- 
ally agrees  with  the  Ancient  Versions  and 
most  of  the  modern  ones. 

5.  The  words  “ in  the  edge  of  the  curtain 
that  is  in  the  coupling  of  the  second,”  mean, 
071  the  edge  of  the  breadth  that  is  at  the  coup- 
ling in  the  second  (curtain). — The  word  ren- 
dered “loops”  {lulaoth)  only  occurs  here  and 
in  xxxvi.  ii.  It  is  doubtful  whether  it  has 
connection  with  any  Semitic  root ; it  is  pro- 
bably of  Egyptian  origin.  Conjectures  on  the 
other  side  may  be  seen  in  Gesenius’  ‘Hand- 
wbrterbuch,’  and  Furst’s  ‘ Lex.’ 

6.  taches  of  gohl]  Each  clasp,  or  tache, 
was  to  unite  two  opposite  loops.  On  the 
Heb.  v'ord  for  tache^  see  p.  375,  note  7. 


V.7-I5-]  EXODUS.  XXVI. 


371 


of  gold,  and  couple  the  curtains  to- 
gether with  the  taches : and  it  shall 
be  one  tabernacle. 

7 ^ And  thou  shalt  make  curtains 
of  goats’  hair  to  be  a covering  upon 
the  tabernacle : eleven  curtains  shalt 
thou  make. 

8 The  length  of  one  curtain  shall  be 
thirty  cubirs,  and  the  breadth  of  one 
curtain  four  cubits:  and  the  eleven 
curtains  shall  be  all  of  one  measure. 

9 And  thou  shalt  couple  live  cur- 
tains by  themselves,  and  six  curtains 
by  themselves,  and  shalt  double  the 
sixth  curtain  in  the  forefront  of  the 
tabernacle. 

10  And  thou  shalt  make  fifty  loops 
on  the  edge  of  the  one  curtain  that  is 
outmost  in  the  coupling,  and  fifty  loops 
in  the  edge  of  the  curtain  which 
coupleth  the  second. 


1 1 And  thou  shalt  make  fifty  taches 
of  brass,  and  put  the  taches  into  the 
loops,  and  couple  the  “ tent  together, 
that  it  may  be  one. 

12  And  the  remnant  that  remaineth 
of  the  curtains  of  the  tent,  the  half 
curtain  that  remaineth,  shall  hang  over 
the  backside  of  the  tabernacle. 

13  And  a cubit  on  the  one  side, 
and  a cubit  on  the  other  side  ^of  that  fHeb. 
which  remaineth  in  the  length  of  the  ;LSav. 
curtains  of  the  tent,  it  shall  hang  over 

the  sides  of  the  tabernacle  on  this  side 
and  on  that  side,  to  cover  it. 

14  And  thou  shalt  make  a cover- 
ing for  the  tent  of  rams’  skins  dyed 
red,  and  a covering  above  of  badgers’ 
skins. 

15  ^ And  thou  shalt  make  boards 
for  the  tabernacle  of  shittim  wood 
standing  up.  - 


couple  the  curtains']  i.  e.  couple  the  two 
outside  breadths  mentioned  in  4. 

it  shall  be  one  tabernacle]  The  tabernacle- 
cloth  alone  is  here  meant.  See  on  *e.  i . F or 
the  mode  in  which  the  tabernacle-cloth  was 
disposed,  see  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chap., 
§ IV. 

The  Tent-cloth. 

7 — 13  (xxxvi.  14 — 18). 

7.  curtains]  See  on  ne.  i. 
of  goats'  hair]  See  on  xxv.  4. 
a covering  upon  the  tabernacle]  a tent 
over  the  Tabernacle.  The  same  Hebrew 
words  are  rightly  translated  xxxvi,  14.  The 
name  ohel.^  which  is  here  used,  is  the  regular 
one  for  a tent  of  skins  or  cloth  of  any  sort. 
See  introd.  note  to  ch.  xxv.,  and  Note  at  the 
end  of  this  chap.  § II. 

9.  The  width  of  each  breadth  of  the  tent- 
cloth  was  to  be  four  cubits,  the  same  as  that 
of  the  breadths  of  the  figured  cloth  of  the 
Tabernacle  (v.  2).  But  the  length  was  to  be 
two  cubits  more,  and  there  was  to  be  an  addi- 
tional breadth  (v.  13).  One  of  the  curtains 
(see  on  v.  i)  was  to  comprise  five  breadths 
and  the  other  six. 

shalt  double  the  sixth  curtain  in  the  fore- 
front of  the  taberriacie]  The  last  word 
should  be  Tent,  not  tabernacle.  The  passage 
might  be  rendered,  thou  shalt  equally  divide 
the  sixth  breadth  at  the  front  of  the  Tent.  In 
this  way,  half  a breadth  would  overhang  at 
the  front  and  half  at  the  back.  See  12,  and 
Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

10.  The  meaning  may  be  thus  given : — 
And  thou  shalt  make  fifty  loops  on  the  selvedge 


of  the  outside  breadth  of  the  one  {curtain)  at 
the  coupling.,  and  fifty  loops  on  the  selvedge  of 
the  outside  breadth  of  tlx  other  {curtain)  at  the 
coupling.  Cf.  note  v.  4. 

11.  In  the  Tent,  clasps  of  bronze  were 
used  to  unite  the  loops  of  the  two  curtains ; 
in  the  Tabernacle,  clasps  of  gold,  cf.  v.  6 and 
on  V.  37. 

couple  the  tent  together]  This  is  the  right 
translation.  The  “covering,”  as  the  aljier- 
native  for  tent  given  in  the  margin,  is  wrong. 
See  introd.  note  to  this  chap.  By  “ the  tent”  is 
here  meant  the  tent-cloth  alone.  See  on  -u.  i. 

12.  the  half  curtain]  See  on  v.  9,  and 
Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter,  § IV. 

13.  The  measure  of  the  entire  tabernacle- 
cloth  was  40  cubits  by  28  ; that  of  the  tent- 
cloth  was  44  cubits  by  30.  \^^hen  the  latter 
was  placed  over  the  former,  it  spread  beyond 
it  at  the  back  and  front  two  cubits  (the 
“ half-curtain”  w.  9,  12)  and  at  the  sides  one 
cubit.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

The  Covering  for  the  Tent. 

V.  14.  (Cf.  xxxvi.  19.) 

14.  rams'  skins  dyed  red]  See  on  xxv.  5. 

badgers'  skins]  The  skin,  not  of  the 

badger,  but  of  a marine  animal  called  tachash., 
perhaps  the  dugong  or  the  seal.  See  on 
xxv.  5. 

The  Boards  and  Bars  of  the  Tabernacle. 

15—30  (xxxvi.  20—34). 

15.  boards]  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
that  these  were  simple  boards  or  planks  ( Vulg. 

A A 2 


372 


EXODUS.  XXVL 


[v.  1 6 — 24. 


16  Ten  cubits  shall  he  the  length 
of  a board,  and  a cubit  and  a half  shall 
be  the  breadth  of  one  board. 

: Heb.  ly  Two  ^ tenons  shall  there  be  in 

hands.  ' , , *1 

one  board,  set  in  order  one  against 
another : thus  shalt  thou  make  for  all 
the  boards  of  the  tabernacle. 

18  And  thou  shalt  make  the  boards 
for  the  tabernacle,  twenty  boards  on 
the  south  side  southward. 

19  And  thou  shalt  make  forty 
sockets  of  silver  under  the  twenty 
boards ; two  sockets  under  one  board 
for  his  two  tenons,  and  two  sockets 
under  another  board  for  his  two  tenons. 


20  And  for  the  second  side  of  the 
tabernacle  on  the  north  side  there  shall 
be  twenty  boards ; 

21  And  their  forty  sockets  of  silver ; 
two  sockets  under  one  board,  and  two 
sockets  under  another  board. 

22  And  for  the  sides  of  the  taber- 
nacle westward  thou  shalt  make  six 
boards. 

23  And  two  boards  shalt  thou  make 
for  the  corners  of  the  tabernacle  in  the 
two  sides. 

24  And  they  shall  be  ^coupled  to- 
gethcr  beneath,  and  they  shall  be 
coupled  together  above  the  head  of  it 


tabulce).,  of  sufficient  thickness  for  the  stability 
of  the  structure.  They  are  called  pillars  in 
Greek  (LXX.  arvXoi,  Philo  and  Josephus, 
Kioves)-  Bithr  adopts  the  rabbinical  notion 
that  they  were  a cubit  in  thickness;  Josephus, 
with  greater  probability,  says  that  they  were 
four  fingers. 

of  shlttim  <vjood'\  The  shittah  tree  (^Acacia 
seyah  see  on  xxv.  5)  has  been  said  to  be  too 
small  to  produce  boards  of  the  size  here 
described.  It  has  been  conjectured  that  each 
board  was  jointed  up  of  several  pieces.  But 
Mr  Tristram  regards  this  conjecture  as  need- 
less, and  states  that  there  are  acacia-trees  near 
Engedi  which  would  produce  boards  four 
feet  in  width  (‘  Nat.  Hist,  of  the  Bible,’  p.  392). 

there  are  no  trees  so  large  in  the  Peninsula 
{#3inai  at  this  time,  liberal  allowance  may  be 
made  for  the  diminished  capabilities  of  the 
region  for  the  production  of  timber. 

17.  tenons']  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the 
chapter. 

18.  The  dimensions  of  the  wooden  part 
of  the  Tabernacle  are  not  directly  stated  ; but 
they  are  easi'y  made  out  from  the  measure- 
ment, number  and  arrangement  of  the  boards, 
if  we  estimate  each  of  the  corner  boards  {'v. 
23)  as  adding  half  a cubit  to  the  width.  The 
entire  length  of  the  structure  was  thirty 
cubits  in  the  clear,  and  its  width  ten  cubits. 
With  this  agree  Philo  (‘  Vit.  Mos.’  ill.  7),  Jo- 
sephus (‘  Ant.’  in.  6.  § 3),  and  all  tradition. 

the  south  side  south~euard]  The  Hebrew 
phrase,  which  also  occurs  xxvii.  9,  xxxvi.  23, 
xxxviii.  9,  is  relieved  from  pleonasm  if  it  is 
rendered,  the  south  side  on  the  right. 
(Geneva  Fr.,  Zunz,  Leeser;  cf.  Gesen.  p.  600.) 
As  the  entrance  of  the  Tabernacle  was  at  its 
cast  end,  the  south  side,  to  a person  entering 
it,  would  be  on  the  left  hand : but  we  learn 
from  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  viii.  3.  § 6)  that  it  was 
•usual  in  speaking  of  the  Temple  to  identify 


the  south  with  the  right  hand  and  the  north 
with  the  left  hand,  the  entrance  being  re- 
garded as  the  face  of  the  structure  and  the 
west  end  as  its  back. 

19.  sockets]  More  literally,  bases.  The 
same  word  is  rightly  rendered  “ foundations” 
in  Job  xxxviii.  6 : most  versions  in  this  place 
translate  it  by  some  word  equivalent  to  bases. 
Each  base  weighed  a talent,  that  is,  about 
94  lbs.  (see  xxxviii,  27),  and  must  have  been  a 
massive  block.  Nothing  is  said  of  the  form, 
but  as  the  tenons  of  the  boards  were  “set  in 
order  one  against  another”  {y.  17),  the  bases 
may  have  fitted  together  so  as  to  make 
a continuous  foundation  for  the  walls  of 
boards,  presenting  a succession  of  sockets,  or 
mortices  (each  base  having  a single  socket), 
into  which  the  tenons  were  to  fit.  This  seems 
to  have  been  the  notion  of  Philo  and  Josephus 
[see  Note  at  the  end  of  chapter,  § I.].  The 
bases  served  not  only  for  ornament  but 
also  for  a protection  of  the  lower  ends  of 
the  boards  from  the  decay  which  would 
have  resulted  from  contact  with  the  ground. 
4' he  word  socket  seems  to  have  been  adopted 
from  Josephus.  The  word  he  uses  is  orpo- 
cjiiy^y  which  does  not  answer  to  the  Hebrew 
etymologically,  as  the  /Satru  of  the  LXX.  and 
Philo  does;  but  there  is  an  obvious  resem- 
blance which  seems  to  have  struck  him  be- 
tween what  is  here  spoken  of  and  the  socket 
(a-Tpofiy^)  in  which  the  tenon  of  a door  turns 
to  sene  as  a hinge,  according  to  common 
Eastern  custom. 

22.  the  sides  of  the  tabernacle  qvest^ard] 
Ratl'icr,  the  back  of  the  Tabernacle 
towards  the  west.  See  on -z;,  18. 

23.  in  the  t~M0  sides]  Rather,  at  the 
back.  So  I. XX.,  Vulg.,  Luther,  de  Wette, 
Zunz,  Herxh.,  (Sec. 

24.  I'he  corner  boards  appear  to  have 
been  of  such  v/idth,  and  so  placed,  as  to  add 


V.  25—33-] 


EXODUS.  XXVI. 


373 


unto  one  ring:  thus  shall  it  be  for 
them  both ; they  shall  be  for  the  two 
corners. 

25  And  they  shall  be  eight  boards, 
and  their  sockets  of  silver,  sixteen 
sockets ; two  sockets  under  one  board, 
and  two  sockets  under  another  board. 

26  ^1  And  thou  shalt  make  bars  of 
shittim  wood;  five  for  the  boards  of 
the  one  side  of  the  tabernacle, 

27  And  five  bars  for  the  boards  of 
the  other  side  of  the  tabernacle,  and 
five  bars  for  the  boards  of  the  side  of 
the  tabernacle,  for  the  two  sides  west- 
ward. 

28  And  the  middle  bar  in  the  midst 
of  the  boards  shall  reach  from  end  to 
end. 


29  And  thou  shalt  overlay  the  boards 
with  gold,  and  make  their  rings  of  gold 
for  places  for  the  bars : and  thou  shalt 
overlay  the  bars  with  gold. 

30  And  thou  shalt  rear  up  the  ta- 
bernacle '^according  to  the  fashion  ^hap.  2 r 
thereof  which  was  shewed  thee  in  the  Acts  7.  44 
mount. 

31  ^ And  thou  shalt  make  avail  of 
blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine 
twined  linen  of  cunning  work;  with 
cherubims  shall  it  be  made : 

32  And  thou  shalt  hang  it  upon 
four  pillars  of  shittim  woori  overlaid 
with  gold  : their  hooks  shall  be  of  gold, 
upon  the  four  sockets  of  silver. 

33  ^ And  thou  shalt  hang  up  the 
vail  under  the  taches,  that  thou  mayest 


a cubit  to  the  width  of  the  structure,  making 
up  with  the  six  boards  of  full  width  (y.  22) 
ten  cubits  in  the  clear  (see  on  ‘v.  18).  There 
is  no  occasion  to  imagine,  as  some  have  done, 
that  each  of  them  consisted  of  two  strips 
mitered  together  longitudinally  so  as  to  form 
a corner  by  itself.  They  may  have  been 
simple  boards  v'ith  the  width  of  half  a cubit 
added  to  the  thickness  of  the  boards  of  the 
sides.  The  boards  at  the  corners  were  to  be 
coupled  together  at  the  top  “unto  one  ring,” 
and  at  the  bottom  “ unto  one  ring,”  and  each 
ring  was  to  be  so  formed  as  to  receive  two 
bars  meeting  at  a right  angle. 

26,  27.  See  on  -v.  a8,  and  Note  at  the 
end  of  the  chapter,  § I. 

27.  /or  the  two  sides  westward~\  for  the 
back  towards  the  west.  Cf.  *11.  22. 

23.  in  the  midst  of  the  boards'^  The  middle 
bar  was  distinguished  from  the  other  bars  by 
its  reaching  from  end  to  end.  The  Hebrew 
might  mean  either  that’  the  midst  throughout 
which  it  ran  was  the  middle  between  the  top 
and  the  bottom  of  the  boards,  or  that  it  was 
a passage  for  it  bored  through  the  substance 
of  the  wood  out  of  sight.  The  latter  would 
seem  to  have  been  the  notion  of  our  trans- 
lators, See  xxxvi.  33.  But  if  we  suppose  the 
boards  to  have  been  of  ordinary  thickness 
[see  on  v.  16],  by  far  the  more  likely  sup- 
position is  that  the  bar  was  visible  and  passed 
through  an  entire  row  of  rings.  In  either 
case,  it  served  to  hold  the  whole  wall  to- 
gether. On  the  probable  relation  of  this 
middle  bar  to  the  others,  see  Note  and  wood- 
cut,  p.  377. 

29.  o'verlay . . . with  gol(d]  See  on  xxv.  1 1. 

their  rings']  See  on  -z;.  a 8. 

30.  Cf.  xxv.  9,  40. 


The  Vail  and  the  Holy  Places. 

31—35.  (Cf.  xxxvi.  35,  36.) 

31.  •vail]  The  Hebrew  w'ord  literally 
means  separation  [see  on  xxxv.  12]. 

blue^  and  purple^  and  scarlet]  See  on  xxv.  4. 

twined  linen]  See  on  21.  i. 

of  cunning  work,  &c.]  of  work  of  the 
skilled  weaver  [see  on  v.  i,  and  on 
xxxv.  35]  shall  it  be  made,  with 
Cherubim. 

cherubims]  The  vail  of  the  first  Temple 
was  in  like  manner  adorned  with  Cherubim 
(2  Chron.  iii.  14).  It  is  remarkable  that  Jo- 
sephus describes  the  vail  of  the  Tabernacle*  as 
woven  with  flowers  and  all  sorts  of  orna- 
mental forms,  except  the  figures  of  living  crea- 
tures (‘Ant.’  III.  6.  §4).  He  himself  calls  the 
Cherubim  living  creatures  (‘Ant.’  III.  6.  §5), 
and  he  must  have  known  that  Ezekiel  does  so 
(x.  20).  He  is  thus  plainly  at  variance  with 
the  statement  in  Exodus.  But  can  it  be  that 
he  describes  the  vail  according  to  the  one 
which  existed  in  the  Temple  in  his  time  ? If 
so,  we  obtain  a striking  instance  of  the 
operation  of  the  superstition  with  which  the 
Jews  in  later  times,  including  Josephus  him- 
self, interpreted  the  second  commandment 
(see  ‘ Ant.’  viii.  7.  §5,  and  note  on  Ex.  xx. 
4).  It  may  suggest  a thought,  if  we  may 
conceive  that  the  vail  of  the  Temple  which 
was  rent  at  the  Crucifixion  had  been  deprived 
of  its  characteristic  symbol  by  the  dark  pre- 
judices of  the  chosen  people. 

32.  pillars  of  shittim  wood,  &c.]  Rather, 
pillars  of  shittim  wood  overlaid  with  gold, 
their  hooks  also  of  gold,  upon  four 
bases  of  silver.  Cf.  xxxvi.  36. 

33.  under  the  taches]  These  taches  are 
not,  as  some  suppose,  the  same  as  the  hooks 
of  the  preceding  verse.  The  Hebrew  words 


EXODUS.  XXVI.  [v.  34-37 


bring  in  thither  within  the  vail  the  ark 
of  the  testimony : and  the  vail  shall 
divide  unto  you  between  the  holy  place 
and  the  most  holy. 

34  And  thou  shalt  put  the  mercy 
seat  upon  the  ark  of  the  testimony  in 
the  most  holy  place. 

35  And  thou  shalt  set  the  table 
without  the  vail,  and  the  candlestick 
over  against  the  table  on  the  side  of 
the  tabernacle  toward  the  south  : and 


thou  shalt  put  the  table  on  the  north 
side. 

36  And  thou  shalt  make  an  hang- 
ing for  the  door  of  the  tent,  of  blue, 
and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine  twined 
linen,  wrought  with  needlework. 

37  And  thou  shalt  make  for  the 
hanging  five  pillars  of  shittim  wood.^  and 
overlay  them  with  gold,  and  their  hooks 
shall  be  of  gold : and  thou  shalt  cast 
five  sockets  of  brass  for  them. 


are  quite  different.  These  are  the  taches  of 
the  tabernacle-cloth  (see  nj.  6).  On  the  diffi- 
culty of  the  statement,  see  Note  at  the  end  of 
the  chapter,  § I. 

34.  mercy  seat  upon  the  ark  of  the  testi~ 
mony']  See  on  xxv.  10 — 16.  The  Samaritan 
text  here  inserts  the  passage  regarding  the 
Altar  of  Incense  from  ch.  xxx.  i — 10.  The 
omission  of  all  mention  of  this  altar  in  this 
place  is  strange,  but  the  reading  of  the  Sama- 
ritan bears  marks  of  an  intended  emendation, 
and  cannot  represent  the  original  text. 

35.  candlestick']  See  on  xxv.  31. 

table']  See  on  xxv.  23. 

The  Front  of  the  Tent. 

36,  37.  (Cf.  xxxvi.  37,  38.) 

36.  hanging]  Rather,  curtain  [see  on 

xxvii.  16].  ^ 

the  door  of  the  tent]  the  entrance  to 
the  Tent.  The  word  is  pethach^  that  is  the 
opening  which  it  is  the  office  of  the  door 
(deleth)^  or  as  in  this  place,  of  the  curtain 
{mdsdkf  to  close.  The  distinction  between 


door  and  entrance  is  generally  overlooked  in 
our  version.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  3. 

nvrought  'vsith  needlework]  the  work  of 
the  embroiderer.  The  breadths  of  the 
cloth  and  the  vail  of  the  Tabernacle  were  to 
be  of  the  work  of  the  skilled  weaver; 
the  entrance  curtain  of  the  Tent  and  that  of 
the  Court  (xxvii.  16)  were  to  be  of  the  same 
materials,  but  embroidered  with  the  needle, 
not  wrought  in  figures  in  the  loom.  [See  on 
v.  I,  and  on  xxxv.  35.] 

37.  hanging]  curtain  as  in  *i7.  36. 
fi’ve  pillars]  These,  it  should  be  ob- 
served, belonged  to  the  entrance  of  the  Tent, 
not,  in  their  architectural  relation,  to  the 
entrance  of  the  Tabernacle  [see  Note,  § III.]. 
overlay  them  with  goldf]  See  on  xxv.  ii. 
their  hooks]  See  on  ns.  33.  These  pillars 
had  chapiters  (capitals),  and  fillets  (connect- 
ing rods,  see  on  xxvii.  10),  overlaid  with 
gold  (xxxvi.  38).  Their  bases  fsee  on  ns.  19) 
were  of  bron/e  (like  the  taches  of  the  tent- 
cloth),  not  of  silver,  to  mark  the  inferiority 
of  the  Tent  to  the  Tabernacle. 


NOTE  ON  Chap.  xxvi.  i — 37. 


On  the  Construction  of  the 
Tabernacle. 

I.  The  A/lshkdn,  its  Tent  and  its  Covering. 

II.  Comnion  vietu  of  the  arrangement  of 

the  parts.  III.  Mr  p'ergnsson's  theory. 

IV.  7'he  place  of  the  tabernacle  cloth. 

V.  Symmetry  of  the  proposed  arrangement. 

VI.  7 he  Court. 

The  chief  portions  of  the  structure  are 
described  with  remarkable  clearness  in  Exodus 
xxvi.  and  a second  time  in  ch.  xxxvi.  It 
would  however  seem  that  those  parts  only  are 
distinctly  mentioned  which  formed  visible 
features  in  the  completed  fabric.  Merc  details 
of  construction  were  most  probably  carried 
out  according  to  the  mechanical  usage  of  the 
time. 

If  we  take  this  for  granted,  the  sacred  text 
appears  to  furnish  sufficient  information  to 
enable  us  to  realize  with  confidence  the  form 


and  the  general  arrangements  of  the  Tabernacle 
as  well  as  of  its  Court.  But  the  subject  has 
been  encumbered  ever  since  the  time  of  Philo' 
with  certain  traditional  notions  which  are  op- 
posed not  only  to  the  words  of  Exodus,  but 
to  the  plainest  principles  of  constructive  art. 

I. 

It  has  been  already  stated 2 that  three  princi- 
pal parts  of  the  Sanctuary  are  clearly  distin- 
guished in  the  Hebrew,  though  they  are  con- 
founded in  most  versions.  These  parts  are — 

1.  The  Dwellinu  Place,  or  the  Ta- 

bernacle, strictly  so  called ; in  Hebrew, 
hammishkdn  [note  on  xxvi.  i]. 

2.  The  Tent,  in  Heb.  ohel  (bnb<). 

3.  The  Covering,  in  Heb.  (Hppp) 

' ‘ Vit.  Mos.’  III.  4 sq. 

2 Introd.  Note  to  chap.  xxvi. 


EXODUS.  XXVL 


I.  The  materials  for  the  Misiikan  were 
a great  cloth  of  woven  work  figured  with 
Cherubim  measuring  forty  cubits  by  twenty- 
eight  cubits,  and  a quadrangular  enclosure  of 
wood,  open  at  one  end,  ten  cubits  in  height, 
ten  cubits  in  width  and  thirty  cubits  in  length. 

The  size  of  the  Tabernacle  cloth  is  indicated 
beyond  the  reach  of  doubt  by  the  number  and 
dimensions  of  the  ten  breadths  (or  “curtains”) 
of  which  it  consisted^.  The  size  of  the 
wooden  enclosure  is  made  out  almost  as  cer- 
tainly from  the  number  and  measurements  *of 
the  boards  ^ 

The  boards  were  set  upright,  each  of  them 
being  furnished  at  its  lower  extremity  with  two 
tenons  which  fitted  into  mortices  in  two  heavy 
bases  of  silver.  The  whole  of  these  bases 
placed  side  by  side  probably  formed  a con- 
tinuous wall-plinth  ^ The  boards  were  fur- 
nished with  rings  or  loops  of  gold  so  fixed  as 
to  form  row's,  when  the  boards  were  set  up, 
and  through  these  rings  bars  w'ere  thrust. 
There  were  five  bars  for  each  side  of  the 
structure  and  five  for  the  back^.  The  middle 
bar  of  each  wall  “was  to  reach  from  end  to 
end,”  and  this  plainly  distinguished  it  from  the 
other  four  bars.  It  is  inferred  wfith  great  pro- 
bability that  this  middle  bar  w'as  tw'ice  as 
long  as  the  others,  that  there  were  three  rows 
of  rings,  and  that  the  half  of  each  wall  was 
fastened  together  by  two  of  the  shorter  bars, 
one  near  the  top,  the  other  near  the  bottom, 
while  the  tw'O  halves  w'ere  united  into  a whole 
by  the  middle  bar  reaching  from  end  to  end®. 
Thus  each  w'all  must  have  been  furnished 
with  four  short  bars  and  one  long  one. 
Each  of  the  rings  near  the  top  and  the  bottom 
of  the  two  corner  boards  was  shaped  in  some 
way  so  as  to  receive  the  ends  of  two  bars, 
one  belonging  to  the  back,  the  other  to  the 
side,  meeting  at  a right  angle.  In  this  way 
the  walls  were  “coupled  together”  at  the 
comers®. 

There  is  nothing  said  from  w'hich  we  can 
decide  whether  the  rings  and  bars  were  on  the 
outside  or  the  inside  of  the  wooden  structure. 
From  the  rich  materials  of  w'hich  they  were 
made,  it  seems  not  unlikely  that  they  con- 
stituted an  ornamental  feature  on  the  inside. 
It  may  be  added,  that  on  the  inside  they 
would  tend  to  make  the  structure  firm  more 
than  on  the  outside. 

So  far  it  is  not  diflRcult  to  see  nearly  what 
THE  Mishkan  must  have  been.  But  it  is 
not  so  easy  to  determine  the  way  in  which  the 
great  figured  cloth  that  belonged  to  it  was 
arranged.  The  question  must  be  considered 
in  connection  with  the  description  of  the  parts 
of  the  Text. 

1 Ex.  xxvi,  1—6;  xxxvi.  8 — 13. 

2 See  on  Ex.  xxvi.  18. 

^ See  on  xxvi.  19. 

^ Ex.  xxvi.  26 — 28;  xxxvi.  31 — 33. 

. ® See  on  Ex.  xxvi.  28,  and  woodcut,  p.  377. 

® Ex.  xxvi.  24;  xxxvi.  29. 


There  is  another  difficulty,  by  far  less  easy 
of  solution,  which  may  be  stated  here.  It 
affects  the  internal  arrangement.  The  vail 
which  separated  the  Most  Holy  Place  from 
the  Holy  Place  was  suspended  from  golden 
hooks  attached  to  four  pillars  overlaid  with 
gold,  standing  upon  silver  bases.  But  the 
position  of  these  pillars  is  not  mentioned  in 
Exodus.  It  is  indeed  said  that  the  vail  was 
hung  “under  the  taches^.”  Now  the  taches 
of  the  tabernacle  cloth  must  have  been  fifteen 
cubits  from  the  back  of  the  Mishkan,  that  is, 
half  way  between  its  back  and  front.  But 
according  to  Philo,  Josephus,  and  all  tradi- 
tion, supported  by  every  consideration  of 
probability,  the  vail  was  ten  cubits,  not 
fifteen,  from  the  back,  and  the  Holy  of 
Holies  was  a cubical  chamber  of  correspond- 
ing measurement.  The  statement  that  the 
vail  was  hung  “ under  the  taches”  remains 
unexplained.  But  this  difficulty  is  by  no 
means  such  as  to  be  set  in  opposition  to  any 
view  that  may  meet  all  other  conditions  ex- 
pressed or  involved  in  the  narrative. 

2.  The  Tent  is  described  as  consisting  of 
a great  tent-cloth  of  goats’  hair,  which,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  and  dimensions  of  its 
breadths,  was  forty-four  cubits  by  thirty 
and  five  pillars  overlaid  with  gold  standing 
on  bases  of  bronze,  and  furnished  with  golden 
hooks  from  which  was  suspended  the  curtain 
that  served  to  close  the  entrance  of  the  Tent®. 

3.  Of  the  Covering  of  rams’  skins  and 
tachash  skins,  nothing  whatever  is  said  except 
as  regards  the  materials  of  which  it  was  com- 
posed 

II. 

It  has  been  usual  to  represent  the  Tabernacle 
as  consisting  of  the  w'ooden  structure  which 
has  been  described,  with  the  masses  of  drapery 
and  skins  thrown  over  it  “as  a pall  is  thrown 
over  a coffin.”  There  was  first  the  figured 

7 Ex.  xxvi.  33.  This  is  not  mentioned  in  ch. 
xxxvi.,  where  the  manufacture  of  the  parts,  and 
not  their  arrangement,  is  spoken  of.  It  has  been 
imagined  that  the  taches  were  the  same  as  the 
hooks  from  which  the  vail  was  actually  hung 
(Ex.  xxvi.  32).  But  the  words  are  quite  dis- 
tinct. The  word  rendered  tache  is  keres  (D'i?.), 
which  is  supposed  to  be  derived  from  a root 
which  signifies  to  bind  ; that  rendered  hook, 
is  vav  (11),  which  is  the  name  of  the  Hebrew 
letter  shaped  like  a hock  suited  for  hanging 
anything  on  (1) ; its  origin  is  unknown.  Keres 
is  used  only  in  reference  to  the  taches  of  the 
tabernacle-cloth  and  of  the  tent-cloth  of  the 
Sanctuary  (Ex.  xxvi.  6,  33,  &c.),  and  vdv  only 
in  reference  to  the  hooks  of  the  vail  and  of  the 
tent-curtain. 

® Ex.  xxvi.  7 — 13;  xxxvi.  14 — 18. 

® Ex.  xxvi.  36,  37  ; xxxvi.  37,  38. 

Ex.  xxvi.  14;  xxxvi.  19.  See  on  xxv.  5. 


EXODUS.  XXVI. 


376 


cloth  recognized  as  part  of  the  Mishkan, 
then  the  goats’  hair  cloth  of  the  Tent,  and 
then  the  twofold  Covering  of  skins. 

A modification  of  this  arrangement  was  sug- 
gested by  Vater  and  adopted  by  Bilhrb  which 
has  the  advantage  of  displaying  the  figured 
cloth  and  of  connecting  it  more  strictly  with 
the  Mishkan,  though  in  no  very  graceful  or 
convenient  manner.  It  was  supposed  that 
this  cloth  was  strained  over  the  top  of  the 
structure  like  a ceiling  and  fastened  to  the  top 
of  the  boards  in  some  way,  so  as  to  hang 
down  and  cover  the  walls  on  the  inside  as  a 
tapestry,  leaving  a cubit  at  the  bases  of  the 
boards  bare,  to  show  as  a sort  of  skirting. 

With  the  exception  of  certain  expressions 
in  Josephus^,  the  whole  current  of  opinion 
seems  to  have  been  in  favour  of  this  general 
arrangement  of  the  parts  of  the  Tabernacle. 
But  it  should  be  kept  in  view  that  the  subject 
is  one  in  which  tradition  cannot  be  of  much 
value.  We  may  allow  that  it  is  just  possible, 
though  by  no  means  probable,  that  some 
points  of  detail  besides  what  are  actually 
recorded,  or  some  special  knowledge  of  the 
meaning  of  technical  terms,  may  have  been 
handed  down  from  the  time  of  Moses.  But 
in  a case  of  this  kind  we  certainly  need  not 
hesitate  to  set  tradition  aside,  whenever  it  is 
in  conflict  either  with  the  letter  of  Scripture, 
or  with  reasonable  probability. 

The  objections  to  the  common  theory  are 
these:  — 

I.  The  arrangement  proposed  makes  out 
the  £ibric  to  have  been  unsightly  in  its  form 


and  to  have  had  a great  part  of  the  beauty  of 
its  materials  entirely  concealed. 

2.  It  would  be  quite  impossible  to  strain 
drapery  over  a space  of  fifteen  feet,  so  as  to 
prevent  it  from  heavily  sagging;  and  no  flat 
roof  of  such  materials  could  by  any  means  be 
rendered  proof  against  the  weather. 

3.  It  is  hard  to  assign  any  use  to  the 
pins  and  cords  of  the  Tabernacle'*  (which 
would  be  essential  in  the  construction  of  a 
tent'^)  if  the  curtains  and  skins  were  merely 
thrown  over  the  woodwork  and  allowed  to 
hang  down  on  each  side. 

4.  The  shelter  of  the  Mishkan  is  always 
called  in  Hebrew  by  a name  which,  in  its 
strict  use,  can  denote  nothing  but  a tent,  pro- 
perly so  called,  of  cloth  or  skins. 

5.  An  essential  part  of  the  Tent  was 
the  row  of  five  pillars  at  its  entrance^:  if  we 
suppose  these  five  pillars  to  have  stood  just 
in  front  of  the  Mishkan,  they  must  have  been 
strangely  out  of  symmetry  with  the  four 
pillars  of  the  vail,  and  the  middle  pillar  must 
have  stood  needlessly  and  inconveniently  in  the 
way  of  the  entrance. 


We  are  indebted  to  Mr  FergussonT’  for 
what  may  be  regarded  as  a satisfactory  recon- 
struction of  the  Sanctuary  in  all  its  main  par- 
ticulars. He  holds  that  what  sheltered  the 
Mishkan  was  * actually  a Tent  of  ordinary 
form,  such  as  common  sense  and  practical 
experience  would  suggest  as  best  suited  for 
the  purpose. 


According  to  this  view  the  five  pillars  at 
the  entrance  of  the  tent“  were  graduated 
as  they  would  naturally  be  at  the  entrance  of 
any  large  tent  of  the  best  form,  the  tallest  one 
being  in  the  middle  to  support  one  end  of  a 
ridge-pole.  It  has  been  already  observed 

^ ‘Symbolik,’  l.  p.  63. 

* See  p.  379. 

® Ex.  xxvi.  37. 


that  the  descriptions  in  Exodus  appear  to  pass 
over  all  particulars  of  the  construction  except 

4 Sec  Ex.  xxvii.  19;  xxxv.  18.  The  word 
“tabernacle”  {viishkan),  in  these  places,  evi- 
dently includes  the  Tent  as  well  as  the  Mishkan 
itself.  Sec  note  on  Ex.  xxvi.  i. 

® Cf.  Jer.  X.  20.  Ex.  xxvi.  37  ; xxxvi.  38. 

7 Smith’s  ‘Diet,  of  the  Bible,’  Art.  Temple. — 
“ The  Holy  Sepulchre  and  the  Temple,”  1865. 


EXODUS.  XXVI. 


377 


those  which  foi*med  visible  features  in  the 
fabric.  On  this  ground  we  may  be  allowed 
to  suppose  that  there  was  not  only  a ridge- 
pole, but  a series  of  pillars  at  the  back  of  the 
Tent  corresponding  in  height  with  those  at 
the  front.  Such  a ridge-pole,  which  must 
have  been  sixty  feet  in  lengthy  would  have 
required  support,  and  this  might  have  been 
afforded  by  light  rafters  resting  on  the  top 
of  the  boards,  or,  as  is  more  in  accordance 
with  the  usage  of  tent  architecture,  by  a 
plain  pole  in  the  middle  of  the  structure. 
Over  this  framing  of  wood-work  the  tent- 
cloth  of  goats’  hair  was  strained  with  its  cord3 
and  tent-pins  in  the  usual  way.  There  must 
also  have  been  a back-cloth  suspended  from 
the  pillars  at  the  back.  The  heads  of  the 
pillars  appear  to  have  been  united  by  con-’ 
necting  rods  (in  our  version,  “ fillets”)  over- 
laid with  gold.  [See  xxxvi.  38.] 


In  this  cut  the  woodwork  of  the  Tent  and 
Tabernacle  which  is  described  in  the  text  is 
represented,  the  assumed  positions  of  the  por- 
tions that  are  not  described  being  shown  by 
dotted  lines. 

Above  the  tent-cloth  of  goats’  hair  was 
spread  the  covering  of  red  rams’  skins.  Mr 
Fergusson  conceives  that  the  covering  of 
tachash  skins 2 above  this  did  not  cover  the 
whole  roof,  but  served  only  as  “ a coping  or 
ridge-piece”  to  protect  the  crest  of  the  roof. 

^ Mr  Fergusson  considers  that  “the  middle 
bar  in  the  midst  of  the  boards”  (Ex.  xxvi.  28; 
xxxvi.  33)  was  the  ridge-pole,  and  he  would 
render  the  verse,  “And  the  middle  bar  which 
is  between  the  boards  shall  reach  from  end  to 
end.”  But  even  if  this  rendering  is  allowable, 
we  venture  to  think  that  the  expression  “from 
end  to  end”  cannot,  according  to  the  context, 
refer  to  the  Tent,  but  only  to  the  wooden 
part  of  the  Mishkan  (see  Plan,  p.  378).  More- 
over, the  methodical  arrangement  of  the  descrip- 
tions would  be  disturbed  by  the  mention  of  the 
ridge-pole  in  Ex.  xxvi.  28  and  in  x.xxvi.  33.  It 
could  only  be  introduced  in  proper  order  in 
connection  either  with  the  cloth  of  the  Tent 
(after  xxvi.  13  and  xxxvi.  18),  or  with  its  five 
pillars  (after  xxvi.  37  and  xxxvi.  36).  As  how- 
ever, according  to  the  view  here  given,  there 
must  have  been  a ridge-pole  of  some  sort,  the 
question  involves  no  essential  particular  of  the 
construction  of  the  fabric.  See  on  xxvi.  28. 

2 Ex.  xxvi.  14;  xxxvi.  19.  See  note  on  xxv.  5. 


IV. 

The  next  inquiry  relates  to  the  position  of 
the  Tabemacle-cloth  of  fine  linen  and  coloured 
yarns. 

It  is  evident  that  the  relation  in  which  the 
measurement  of  the  tabemacle-cloth  stood  to 
that  of  the  tent-cloth  had  an  important  bear- 
ing on  the  place  of  each  of  them  in  the  struc- 
ture. The  tent-cloth  is  said  to  have  extended 
a cubit  on  each  side  beyond  the  tabernacle- 
cloth  3,  and  it  appears  to  have  extended  two 
cubits  at  the  back  and  fronts.  It  would 
appear  then  that  the  tent-cloth  was  laid  over 
the  tabernacle-cloth  so  as  to  allow  the  excess 
of  the  dimensions  of  the  former  to  be  equally 
divided  between  the  two  sides  and  between 
the  back  and  front.  We  may  from  these 
particulars  infer  that  the  tabernacle-cloth 
served  as  a lining  to  the  other,  and  that  they 
were  both  extended  over  the  ridge-pole.  In 
this  way,  the  effect  would  have  been  produced 
of  an  ornamented  open  roof  extending  the 
length  of  the  Tent. 

V. 

Mr  Fergusson  has  pointed  out  the  very  re- 
markable consistency  of  the  measurements  of 
the  different  parts,  if  we  accept  this  mode  of 
putting  them  together.  Fie  assumes  the  angle 
formed  by  the  roof  to  have  been  a right  angle, 
as  a reasonable  and  usual  angle  for  such  a 
roof,  and  this  brings  the  only  measurements 
which  appear  at  first  sight  to  be  abnormal, 
into  harmony.  Every  measurement  given  in 
the  text  is  a multiple  of  five  cubits,  except 
the  width  of  the  tabernacle-cloth,  vvliich  is 
twenty-eight  cubits,  and  the  length  of  the  tent- 
cloth,  which  is  forty-four  cubits.  With  a 
right  angle  at  the  ridge,  each  side  of  the  slope 
as  shewn  in  this  section  would  be  within  a 


fraction  of  fourteen  cubits  (14.08),  half  the 
width  of  the  tabernacle-cloth.  The  slope  is 
here  carried  just  five  cubits  beyond  the  wooden 
walls  and  to  within  just  five  cubits  of  the 
ground.  The  tent-cloth  would  hang  down  in 
a valance  on  each  side,  one  cubit  in  depth 

^ Ex.  xxvi.  13. 

* Ex.  xxxvi.  9,  13. 

f Ex.  xxvi.  13. 


378 


EXODUS.  XXVI. 


If  we  allow  the  tabemacle-cloth,  according 
to  this  arrangement,  to  determine  the  length  of 
the  Tent  as  well  as  its  width,  we  obtain  an  area 
for  the  structure  of  forty  cubits  by  twenty. 
The  tent-cloth  would  of  course  overhang  this 
at  the  back  and  front  by  two  cubits,  that  is, 
half  a breadth  b The  wooden  structure  being 
placed  within  the  Tent,  there  would  be  a space 
all  round  it  of  five  cubits  in  width.  This  is 
shown  in  this  Plan,  in  which  one  half  repre- 
sents the  ground-plan  and  the  other  half  the 
extended  tent-cloth. 


The  five  pillars,  to  reach  across  the  front  of 
the  Tent,  must  have  stood  five  cubits  apart. 
Their  beads  were  united  by  connecting  rods 
(“fillets’’)  overlaid  with  gold  (Exod.  xxxvi. 
38).  The  space  immediately  within  them, 
according  to  Mr  Fergusson,  formed  a porch 
ot  five  cubits  in  depth-.  The  spaces  at  the 
sides  and  back  may  have  been  wholly  or  in 
part  covered  in  for  the  use  of  the  officiating 
priests,  like  the  small  apartments  which  in 
after  times  slcirted  three  sides  of  the  Temple. 
It  was  probably  here  that  those  portions  of 
the  sacrifices  were  eaten  which  were  not  to 
be  cairicd  out  of  the  sacred  precinct  b 
^ The  exact  symmetrical  relation  which  the 
dimensions  ot  the  Temple  bore  to  those  of  the 
Tabernacle  is  not  only  striking  in  itself,  but  it 
bears  a strong  testimony  to  the  correctness  of 
Mr  hergusson’s  theory  as  regards  those  mea- 

^ Ex.  xxvi.  9,  12. 

2 .See  cut,  p.  3 76. 

3 Lev.  vi.  16,  26,  &c.  We  may  infer  that 
priests  also  lodged  in  tliem  from  Lev.  viii.  33; 
1 S.  iii.  2,  3. 


surements  which  are  not  directly  stated  in  the 
text,  but  are  made  out  by  inference  from 
the  theory.  Each  chief  measurement  of  the 
Temple  was  just  twice  that  of  the  Tabernacle. 
The  Most  Holy  Place,  a square  of  ten  cubits 
in  the  Tabernacle'*,  was  one  of  twenty  cubits 
in  the  Temple:  the  Holy  Place,  in  each  case, 
was  a corresponding  double  square.  The 
Porch,  which  was  five  cubits  deep  in  the 
Tabernacle,  was  ten  cubits  in  the  Temple; 
the  side  spaces,  taking  account  of  the  thick- 
ness of  the  walls  of  the  Temple,  were  re- 


5 30V  20  30  40  .50  Cubitt. 

I — V-*-! f ! rH 

10  SO  30  40  30  60  70  75  fict, 

spectively  five  cubits  and  ten  cubits  in  width ; 
the  height  of  the  ridge-pole  of  the  Tabernacle 
was  fifteen  cubits,  that  of  the  roof  of  the 
Holy  Place  in  the  Temple  thirty  cubits s. 

^ It  has  already  been  observed  that  the  length 
of  the  Most  Holy  Place  is  not  given  in  Exodus; 
but  ten  cubits  is  universally  accepted  on  the 
ground  of  inference.  .See  § I. 

3 I K.  vi.  2.  The  analogy  here  pointed 
out  seems  to  shew  the  fitness  of  the  word  tent 
(Ileb.  ohcl,  wrongly  rendered  “ tabernacle”)  as 
ajiplied  to  the  Temple  in  the  vision  of  Ezekiel 
xli.  i). 


EXODUS.  XXVII. 


379 


V.  1—4] 

Whether  we  believe  the  statements  of  Jose- 
phus to  contain  any  elements  of  genuine 
tradition  or  not,  it  is  worth  noticing  that  in 
certain  particulars  he  strikingly  countenances 
the  views  of  Mr  Fergusson.  He  speaks  of 
the  Tabernacle  as  consisting  of  three  parts. 
The  third  part  v/as  the  Most  Holy  Place,  the 
second  part  the  Holy  Place ; and  he  seems  to 
intimate  that  the  remaining,  or  first  part,  was 
the  entrance  with  its  five  pillars.  He  also 
says  that  the  tent-curtain  was  so  arranged  in 
the  front  as  to  be  like  a gable  and  a porch 
(^aercofiaTL  Trapa7T\r]Giov  Ka\  TraornSi)^. 

it  may  perhaps  be  doubted  whether  there 
is,  within  the  entire  range  of  ancient  literature 
(unless  we  should  except  the  works  of  strictly 
technical  writers),  a description  of  any  struc- 
ture more  clear  and  practical  than  that  of 
the  Tabernacle  contained  in  the  xxvith  and 

1 ‘ Ant’  III.  6.  § 4. 


xxxvith  chapters  of  Exodus.  Mr  Fergusson's 
testimony  on  this  head  deserves  to  be  quoted; 
“ it  seems  to  me  clear  that  it  must  have  been 
written  by  some  one  who  had  seen  the  Taber- 
nacle standing.  No  one  could  have  worked 
it  out  in  such  detail  without  ocular  demon- 
stration of  the  way  in  which  the  parts  would 
fit  together.” 

VI. 

The  second  Plan  in  the  preceding  page  ex- 
hibits the  Tabernacle  in  its  Court,  with  the 
cords  and  tent-pins  in  their  proper  places^ 
as  determined  by  Mr  Fergusson  in  accord- 
ance with  the  practice  of  tent-architecture. 
It  will  be  seen  that  the  width  of  the  Tent 
is  the  same  as  that  of  the  enti*ance  to  the 
Court,  which  is  a coincidence  connected  with 
the  harmony  of  the  arrangement  that  well 
deserves  to  be  noticed. 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

I The  altar  of  burnt  offering,  with  the  vessels 
thereof  9 The  court  of  the  tabernacle  in- 
closed with  hangings  and  pillars.  18  The 
measure  of  the  court.  20  The  oil  for  the 
lamp. 

AND  thou  shalt  make  an  altar  of 
shittim  wood,  five  cubits  long, 
and  five  cubits  broad  \ the  altar  shall 
be  foursquare : and  the  height  thereof 
shall  be  three  cubits. 


Chap.  XXVII. 

The  Altar  of  Burnt-offering. 

I — 8.  (Cf.  xxxviii.  i — 7.) 

The  great  Altar  which  stood  in  the  Court 
immediately  in  front  of  the  Tabernacle  was 
commonly  called  the  Altar  of  Burnt-of- 
fering, because  on  it  were  burnt  the  whole 
Bumt-offerings,  and  all  those  parts  of  the 
other  animal  sacrifices  which  were  offered  to 
the  Lord.  It  was  also  called  the  Brazen 
Altar,  because  it  was  covered  with  bronze, 
in  distinction  from  the  Golden  Altar,  or  Altar 
of  Incense  (Exod.  xxxix.  38,  39,  xl.  5,  6). 

1.  an  altar]  See  Note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xl. 

§1. 

2.  his  horns  shall  be  of  the  same]  These 
horns  were  projections  pointing  upwards  in 
the  form  either  of  a small  obelisk,  or  of  the 
horn  of  an  ox.  They  were  to  be  actually 
parts  of  the  Altar,  not  merely  superadded  to 
it.  On  them  the  blood  of  the  Sin-offering 
was  smeared  (Exod.  xxix.  12;  Lev.  iv.  7, 
viii.  15,  ix.  9,  xvi,  18).  To  take  hold  of 
them  appears  to  have  been  regarded  as  an 
emphatic  mode  of  laying  claim  to  the  right 
of  Sanctuary  (Exod.  xxi.  14;  i K.  i.  50). 


2 And  thou  shalt  make  the  horns 
of  it  upon  the  four  corners  thereof : 
his  horns  shall  be  of  the  same:  and 
thou  shalt  overlay  it  with  brass. 

3 And  thou  shalt  make  his  pans  to 
receive  his  ashes,  and  his  shovels,  and 
his  basons,  and  his  fleshhooks,  and  his 
firepans:  all  the  vessels  thereof  thou 
shalt  make  brass. 

4 And  thou  shalt  make  for  it  a 


3.  pans  to  receive  his  ashes]  Rather  pots 
as  in  xxxviii.  3;  i K.  vii.  45.  On  the  use  to 
which  these  pots  were  put  in  disposing  of  the 
ashes  of  the  Altar,  see  Lev.  i.  j6.— The  Heb. 
word  here  rendered  to  receive  his  ashes,  is  re- 
markable. In  its  derivation  it  is  connected 
with  fat,  and  it  is  never  used  in  reference  to 
any  ashes  except  those  of  the  Altar.  It  occurs 
Num.  iv.  13,  and  Ps.  xx.  3 ; where  see  margin. 
But  all  authorities  are  agreed  as  to  what  it 
denotes  in  these  places. 

his  basons]  According  to  the  etymology  of 
the  name  (from  zdrak,  to  scatter)  it  is  in- 
ferred that  these  vessels  were  used  for  receiv- 
ing the  blood  of  the  victims  and  casting  it 
upon  the  Altar  [see  xxiv.  6,  Lev.  i.  5,  &c.]. 

his  fleshhooks]  These  were  for  adjusting 
the  pieces  of  the  victim  upon  the  Altar  [cf. 
I S.  ii.  13]. 

his  firepans]  The  same  word  is  rendered 
snuffdlshes,  xxv.  38,  xxxvii.  23  ; censers. 
Lev.  X.  I,  xvi.  12,  Num.  iv.  14,  xvi.  6,  &c. 
These  utensils  appear  to  have  been  shallow 
metal  vessels  which  served  either  to  catch  the 
snuff  of  the  lamps  when  they  were  trimmed, 
or  to  burn  small  quantities  of  incense.  No- 


SSo 


EXODUS.  XXVII. 


[v.  5— II. 


grate  of  network  of  brass ; and  upon 
the  net  shalt  thou  make  four  brasen 
rings  in  the  four  corners  thereof. 

5 And  thou  shalt  put  it  under  the 
compass  of  the  altar  beneath,  that  the 
net  may  be  even  to  the  midst  of  the 
altar. 

6 And  thou  shalt  make  staves  for 
the  altar,  staves  of  shittim  wood,  and 
overlay  them  with  brass. 

7 And  the  staves  shall  be  put  into 
the  rings,  and  the  staves  shall  be  upon 
the  two  sides  of  the  altar,  to  bear  it. 


8 Hollow  with  boards  shalt  thou 

make  it : as  ■ it  was  shewed  thee  in  the  ^ 
mount,  so  shall  they  make  it,  he  shewed. 

9 ^ And  thou  shalt  make  the  court 
of  the  tabernacle : for  the  south  side 
southward  there  shall  be  hangings  for 
the  court  of  fine  twined  linen  of  an 
hundred  cubits  long  for  one  side : 

10  And  the  twenty  pillars  thereof 
and  their  twenty- sockets  shall  be  of 
brass;  the  hooks  of  the  pillars  and 
their  fillets  shall  be  of  silver. 

11  And  likewise  for,  the  north  side 


thing  however  is  said  of  the  burning  of  in- 
cense in  immediate  connection  with  the 
Brazen  Altar,  and  it  has  been  supposed  that 
the  firepans  were  employed  merely  to  carry 
burning  embers  from  the  Brazen  Altar  to  the 
Altar  of  Incense,  and  that  this  use  furnishes 
their  only  claim  to  the  name  of  censers.  See 
on  Num.  xvi.  6. 

5.  the  compass  of  the  altar]  This  appears 
to  have  been  a shelf,  or  projecting  ledge,  of 
convenient  width,  carried  round  the  Altar 
half  way  between  the  top  and  the  base,  on 
which  the  priests  probably  stood  when  they 
tended  the  fire  or  arranged  the  parts  of  the 
victims.  It  was  supported  all  round  its 
outer  edge  by  a vertical  net-like  grating  of 
bronze  that  rested  on  the  ground.  The  name 
is  a peculiar  one,  occurring  only  in  this 
application  and  only  in  one  other  place, 
xxxviii.  4.  But  there  appears  to  be  scarcely 
a doubt  as  to  its  meaning. 

8.  Holloa  ^ivith  boards]  Slabs,  or  planks, 
rather  than  boards.  I'he  word  is  that  which 
is  used  for  the  stone  tables  of  the  Law  (xxiv. 
12,  xxxi.  i8),  not  that  applied  to  the  boards 
of  the  Tabernacle  (xxvi,  15), 

There  has  been  considerable  difference  of 
opinion  regarding  some  points  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  Brazen  Altar,  but  the  most  pro- 
bable account  of  it  seems  to  be  this.  It  was  a 
hollow  casing,  formed  of  stout  acacia  planks 
covered  with  plates  of  bronze,  seven  feet  six 
in  length  and  width  and  four  feet  six  in 
height.  Jewish  as  well  as  Christian  authori- 
ties have  supposed  that,  when  it  was  fixed  for 
use,  it  was  filled  up  with  earth  or  rough 
stones.  If  we  connect  this  suggestion  with 
the  old  rule  regarding  the  Altar  of  earth  and 
the  Altar  of  stone  given  in  chap.  xx.  24,  25, 
the  woodwork  might  in  fact  be  regarded 
merely  as  the  case  of  the  Altar  on  which  the 
victims  were  actually  burned.  The  shelf 
round  the  sides  (-u.  5)  \\as  reejuired  as  a 
stage  for  the  priests  to  enable  them  to  carry 
on  their  work  conveniently  on  the  top  of  the 
Altar.  Hence  it  is  said  of  Aaron  that  he 


came  doivn  from  the  Altar  (Lev.  ix.  22). 
According  to  rabbinical  tradition,  there  was 
a slope  of  earth  banked  up  for  the  priest  to 
ascend  to  the  stage  (cf.  Ex.  xx.  26).  Such 
a slope  could  only  have  been  at  the  south 
side,  as  the  place  of  ashes  was  on  the  east 
(Lev.  i.  16),  the  west  side  was  opposite  the 
Tabernacle,  and  on  the  north  the  victims 
appear  to  have  been  slain  close  to  the  Altar 
[see  on  Lev.  i,  iij.  The  rings  for  the  staves 
for  carrying  the  Altar  were  attached  to  the 
corners  of  the  grating  {v.  4),  which  must 
have  been  proportionally  strong. 

The  Altar  of  Solomon's  Temple  is  de- 
scribed 2 Chro.  iv.  I,  It  was  twenty  cubits 
in  length  and  breadth  and  ten  cubits  in 
height;  so  that  it  was  unlike  the  Altar  of  the 
Tabernacle,  not  only  in  its  magnitude  but  in 
its  proportions.  The  Altar  erected  by  Herod 
is  said  by  Josephus  to  have  been  fifty  cubits 
square  and  fifteen  cubits  high  (‘Bell.  Jud.’  v. 

5.  § 6> 

as  it  nxsas  sheaved  thee  in  the  mount]  See 
on  XXV.  40. 

The  Court  of  the  Tabernacle. 

9 — 19.  (Cf.  xxxviii.  9 — 20.) 

9.  the  south  side  south-xvaref]  the  south 
side  on  the  right.  See  on  xxvi.  18. 

fine  tavined  linen]  See  on  xxvi.  i. 

10.  sockets]  bases.  See  on  xxvi.  19. 

filets]  Rather,  connecting  rods.  So  the 

Targums.  The  Hebrew  woi^i  is  peculiar, 
and  may  mean  any  sort  of  bonds  or  fastenings. 
\V  hat  are  spoken  of  in  this  place  appear  to 
have  been  curtain-rods  of  silver  connecting 
the  heads  of  the  pillars.  The  hangings  were 
attached  to  the  pillars  by  the  silver  hooks; 
but  the  length  of  the  space  between  the  pillars 
would  render  it  most  prob.able  that  they  were 
also  in  some  way  fastened  to  these  rods.  The 
capitals  of  the  pillars  were  overlaid  with 
silver,  as  we  learn  from  chap,  xxxviii.  17.. 

11.  sockets]  bases. 

filets]  connecting  rods. 


V.  12 19-] 


EXODUS.  XXVIi. 


in  length  there  shall  be  hangings  of  an 
hundred  cubits  long,  and  his  twenty- 
pillars  and  their  twenty  sockets  of 
brass;  the  hooks  of  the  pillars  and 
their  fillets  of  silver. 

12  ^ And  for  the  breadth  of  the 
court  on  the  west  side  shall  be  hang- 
ings of  fifty  cubits : their  pillars  ten, 
and  their  sockets  ten. 

13  And  the  breadth  of  the  court  on 
the  east  side  eastward  shall  be  fifty  cubits. 

14  The  hangings  of  one  side  of  the 
gate  shall  be  fifteen  cubits  : their  pillars 
three,  and  their  sockets  three. 

15  And  on  the  other  side  shall  be 
hangings  fifteen  cubits:  their  pillars 
three,  and  their  sockets  three. 


16  ^ And  for  the  gate  of  the  court 
shall  be  an  hanging  of  twenty  cubits, 
of  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and 
fine  twined  linen,  wrought  with  needle- 
work : and  their  pillars  shall  be  four, 
and  their  sockets  four. 

17  All  the  pillars  round  about  the 
court  shall  be  filleted  with  silver;  their 
hooks  shall  be  of  silver,  and  their 
sockets  brass. 

18  *tf  The  length  of  the  court  shall 
be  an  hundred  cubits,  and  the  breadth 

^ fifty  every  where,  and  the  height  five  i Hcb. 
cubits  of  fine  twined  linen,  and 
sockets  brass. 

19  All  the  vessels  of  the  tabernacle 
in  all  the  service  thereof,  and  all  the  • 


13.  the  east  side  eastq.vard\  on  the  front 
side  easfward.  The  front  [see  on  xxvi. 
18,  cf.  9]. 

14,  15,  16.  See  on  -v.  18,  note  (f). 

16.  att  hanging']  The  Hebrew  word  is 
not  the  same  as  that  rendered  hanging  in  'v'u. 
II,  12,  14,  15,  and  it  would  be  better  repre- 
sented by  curtain.  It  strictly  denotes  an 
entrance  curtain,  which,  unlike  the  hangings 
at  the  sides  and  back  of  the  Court,  could  be 
drawn  up,  or  aside,  at  pleasure.  The  words 
are  rightly  distinguished  in  our  Bible  in  Num. 
in.  26. 

<iu nought  ^ith  needle-work]  the  worlc  of 
the  embroiderer.  See  on  xxvi.  36,  xxxv. 
35.  On  the  materials,  see  xxv.  4. 

sockets]  bases. 

1 7 . Jilleted  with  siher]  connectedwith 
silver  rods.  See  on  i'.  10. 

18.  {a)  The  size  and  general  construc- 
tion of  the  Court  of  the  Tabernacle  are  de- 
scribed in  such  a way  as  to  leave  no  im- 
portant doubt.  Its  area  was  one  hundred 
and  fifty  feet  (taking  the  cubit  at  eighteen 
inches)  in  length,  and  seventy-five  feet  in 
width.  It  was  enclosed  by  hangings  of  fine 
linen  suspended  from  pillars  seven  feet  six 
inches  in  height,  and  standing  seven  feet  six 
inches  apart.  These  pillars  were  connected 
at  their  heads  by  silver  rods  [see  on  'v.  10] ; 
they  had  silver  hooks  for  the  attachment  of 
the  hangings,  and  their  capitals  were  overlaid 
with  silver;  they  stood  on  bases  of  bronze. 
At  the  east  end  of  the  enclosure  the  linen 
hangings  on  each  side  were  continued  for 
twenty-two  feet  six  inches,  and  the  inter- 
mediate space  of  thirty  feet  was  the  entrance, 
which  was  closed  by  an  embroidered  curtain 
(girv.  14,  15,  16).  7'he  pillars  were  kept  firm 
by  cords  and  tent-pins  of  bronze  [see  -v.  19, 
cf.  Num.  iii.  26]. 


{b]  The  position  of  the  Taberaacle  in  the 
Court  could  hardly  have  been  in  the  middle, 
as  Josephus  imagined  (‘  Ant.’  ill.  6.  § 3).  It  is 
most  probable  that  its  place  was,  as  Philo 
conceived  (‘Vit.  Mos.’  11 1.  7),  equidistant  from 
the  west,  the  north  and  the  south  walls  of 
the  Court,  so  as  to  leave  between  it  and  the 
entrance  of  the  Court  a suitable  space  for 
the  Brazen  Altar  and  the  Laver.  See  Note 
at  the  end  of  ch.  xxvi.  with  the  plan  of 
the  Court,  according  to  Fergusson,  in  which 
the  feasibility  of  this  arrangement  is  strikingly 
apparent.  * 

(f)  There  has  been  a difficulty  raised  re- 
garding the  number  and  distribution  of  the 
pillars  of  the  Court.  Knobel,  taking  up  the 
notion  of  Philo  and  some  other  interpreters, 
supposes  that  the  number  was  fifty-six,  each 
corner  pillar  being  reckoned  both  as  one  for 
the  side  and  as  one  for  the  end.  Keil,  who 
contends  for  sixty  as  the  number,  has  not 
made  the  matter  much  clearer  by  his  mode 
of  explanation.  The  mode  of  stating  the 
numbers  involved  in  the  arrangement  in  'v'v. 
10,  II,  12,  14,  13,  16  is  perhaps  a technical 
one.  Taking  it  for  granted  that  the  number 
sixty,  as  given  in  those  verses,  is  the  true  one, 
and  that  the  Court  measured  precisely  one 
hundred  cubits  by  fifty,  the  pillars  must  have 
stood  five  cubits  apart,  which  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  general  symmetry  of  the  Sanc- 
tuary [see  Note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xxvi.  § V.]. 
If  we  may  suppose  the  numbers,  referring  to 
each  side  of  the  enclosure,  to  have  belonged 
to  the  spaces  between  the  pillars  rather  than 
to  the  pillars  themselves,  the  statements  be- 
come clear,  in  reference  both  to  the  sides 
with  their  continuous  hangings,  and  to  the 
front  where  there  was  the  entrance.  See  Mr 
Fergusson’s  plan,  p.  378. 

19.  All  the  ^jesscls^  &c.]  Our  version  here 
follows  the  Vulgate,  and  is  obviously  wrong. 


382 


EXODUS.  XXVII.  XXVIII. 


[v.  2 0 — r. 


pins  thereof,  and  all  the  pins  of  the 
court,  shall  be  of  brass. 

20  And  thou  shalt  command  the 
children  of  Israel,  that  they  bring  thee 
pure  oil  oliv^e  beaten  for  the  light,  to 
tHeb.  cause  the  lamp  ^to  burn  always. 
to  ascend  tabemaclc  of  the  congre- 

gation without  the  vail,  which  is  before 
the  testimony,  Aaron  and  his  sons 
shall  order  it  from  evenino;  to  mornino- 
before  the  Lord  : it  shall  be  a statute 
for  ever  unto  their  generations  on  the 
behalf  of  the  children  of  Israel. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 


I Aaron  and  his  sorts  are  set  apart  for  the 
priest's  office.  2 Holy  garments  are  appointed. 
6 The  ephod.  1 5 The  breastplate  with  twelve 
precious  stones.  30  The  Urim  and  Ihuin- 
mim.  31  The  robe  of  the  ephod^  %vith  pome- 
gt'anates  and  bells.  36  The  plate  of  the  mitre. 
39  The  embroidered  coat.  40  The  garments 
for  Aaron's  sons. 


And  take  thou  unto  thee  Aaron 
k.  thy  brother, 'and  his  sons  with 
him,  from  among  the  children  of  Israel, 
that  he  may  minister  unto  me  in  the 
priest’s  office,  even  Aaron,  Nadab  and 


We  know  that  the  vessels  of  the  Tabernacle 
were  of  gold,  xxv.  29,  39.  The  Hebrew 
word  rendered  vessels  means  in  the  broadest 
sense  utensils:  it  is  in  different  places  rendered 
furniture.^  stuff.,  sacks.,  jewels.,  weapons.,  See. 
In  the  same  connection  as  in  this  place,  it  is 
not  incoiTectly  represented  by  instruments., 
Niim.  iii.  8.  The  verse  might  be  thus  trans- 
lated; All  the  tools  of  the  Tabernacle 
used  in  all  its  -workmanship,  and  all 
its  tent-pins,  and  all  the  tent-pins 
of  the  court,  shall  be  of  bronze. — The 
working  tools  of  the  Sanctuary  were  most 
probably  such  things  as  axes,  knives,  ham- 
mers, Stc.  that  were  employed  in  making, 
repairing,  setting  up  and  taking  down  the 
structure.  Cf.  Num.  iii.  36. 

the  tabernacle'\  Heb.  hammishkdn.  The 
word  is  here  to  be  taken  as  including  both 
the  Mishkan  and  the  Tent,  as  in  Num.  i.  51, 
53,  &c.  [see  on  xxvi.  i]. 

the  pins  thereof.,... the  pins  of  the  court\  The 
Hebrew  word  is  the  regular  name  for  tent-pins. 

The  Lamps  of  the  Sanctuary, 
w.  20,  21. 

It  is  not  quite  easy  to  see  the  reason  of 
the  insertion  of  these  verses  in  this  place. 
The  passage,  with  unimportant  verbal  altera- 
tions, is  repeated  Lev.  xxiv.  2,  3,  where  it  is 
connected  in  a natural  manner  with  the  rules 
for  the  supplying  and  ordering  of  the  Shew- 
bread.  Cl:  Exod.  xxv.  6,  37;  xxxv.  14,  xl.  4, 
24,  25- 

20.  pure  oil  olive  beaten^  The  oil  was  to 
be  of  the  best  kind.  It  is  called  beaten.,  be- 
cause it  was  ol'jtained  by  merely  bruising  the 
olives  in  a mortar  or  mill,  without  the  appli- 
cation of  heat.  The  finest  oil  is  now  thus 
obtained  from  young  fruit  freshly  gathered, 
and  hence  it  is  sometimes  distinguished  as 
“cold  drawn.”  The  inferior  kind  is  expressed 
from  unselected  fruit,  under  stronger  pres- 
sure, with  the  application  of  heat. 

the  lamp'\  i.e.  the  lamps  of  the  Golden 
Candlestick.  [See  xxv.  37.] 


to  buni]  The  word  is  literally  rendered  in 
the  margin  to  ascend  up.  It  should  be  ob- 
served that  it  does  not  properly  mean  to  burn 
in  the  sense  of  to  consume,  and  that  it  is  the 
word  regularly  used  to  express  the  action  of 
fire  upon  what  was  offered  to  Jehovah  [see 
on  Lev.  i.  9]. 

always'],  i.e.  every  night  “from  evening  till 
morning.”  Cf.  xxx.  8. 

21.  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation]  More 
literally,  the  Tent  of  meeting  [see  Note 
at  the  end  of  ch.  xl.  § 11.].  This  is  the  first 
occurrence  of  this  designation  of  the  Taber- 
nacle. 

without  the  vail.,  which  is  before  the  testi- 
mony] i.e.  the  Holy  Place  [see  on  xxv.  16]. 

Chap.  XXVIII. 

The  Investiture  of  Aaron  and  iiis 
Sons. 

1—43  (Cf.  xxxix.  I— 31). 

Moses  is  now  commanded  to  commit  all  that 
pertains  to  the  Offerings  made  to  the  Lord  in 
the  Sanctuary  to  the  exclusive  charge  of  the 
members  of  a single  family,  who  were  to  hold 
their  office  from  generation  to  generation.  In 
the  patriarchal  times,  the  external  rites  of  wor- 
ship had  generally  been  conducted  by  the  head 
of  the  tribe  or  family,  in  accordance  with 
the  principle  involved  in  the  dedication  of 
the  firstborn  (Ex.  xiii.  2;  Num.  iii.  12,  13). 
Moses,  as  the  divinely  appointed  and  ac- 
knowledged leader  of  the  nation,  had,  on  a 
special  occasion,  appointed  those  who  were  to 
offer  sacrifice,  and  had  himself  sprinkled  the 
consecrating  blood  of  the  victims  on  the  people 
(xxiv.  5,  6,  8).  On  the  completion  of  the 
I'afiernacle,  after  Aaron  and  his  sons  had  been 
called  to  the  priesthood,  he  took  chief  part  in 
the  daily  service  of  the  Sanctuary  (xl.  23 — 29, 
31,  32)  until  the  consecration  of  the  family  of 
Aaron,  on  which  occasion  he  appears  to  have 
exercised  the  priest’s  office  for  the  last  time 
(Lev.  viii.  14 — 29;  cf.  Ex.  xxix.  10 — 26). 
The  setting  apart  of  the  whole  tribe  of  Levi 
for  the  entire  cycle  of  religious  services  is  men- 
tioned Num.  iii.  5 — 13,  viii.  5 — 26,  xviii.  i — 3*. 


V.  2—5-] 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


Abihu,  Eleazar  and  Ithamar,  Aaron’s 
sons. 

2 And  thou  shalt  make  holy  gar- 
ments for  Aaron  thy  brother  for  glory 
and  for  beauty. 

3 And  thou  shalt  speak  unto  all 
that  are  wise  hearted,  whom  I have 
filled  with  the  spirit  of  wisdom,  that 
they  may  make  Aaron’s  garments  to 
consecrate  him,  that  he  may  minister 
unto  me  in  the  priest’s  office. 


4 And'thcse  are  the  garments  which 
they  shall  make  ; a breastplate,  and  an 
ephod,  and  a robe,  and  a broidered 
coat,  a mitre,  and  a girdle:  and  they 
shall  make  holy  garments  for  Aaron 
thy  brother,  and  his  sons,  that  he 
may  minister  unto  me  in  the  priest’s 
office. 

5 And  they  shall  take  gold,  and 
blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine 
linen. 


1.  Nadab  and  Abihu,  the  two  elder  sons  of 
Aaron,  had  accompanied  their  father  and  the 
seventy  Elders  when  they  went  a ' part  of  the 
way  with  Moses  up  the  mountain  (xxiv.  i,  9). 
Soon  after  their  consecration  they  were  de- 
stroyed for  “offering  strange  fire  before  the 
Lord”  (Lev,  x.  i,  2),  Eleazar  and  Ithamar 
are  here  mentioned  for  the  first  time,  except 
in  the  genealogy,  vi.  23.  Eleazar  succeeded  his 
father  in  the  High- priesthood,  and  was  him- 
self succeeded  by  his  son  Phinehas  (Judg.  xx. 
28).  But  Eli,  the  next  High-priest  named  in 
the  history,  was  of  the  line  of  Ithamar.  The 
representatives  of  both  families  held  office  at 
once  in  the  time  of  David.  See  i Chro.  xxiv. 
1—3;  2 S.  viii.  17. 

3.  'Vjise  hearted^  The  heart  was  fre- 
quently spoken  of  as  the  seat  of  wisdom  (Ex. 
xxxi.  6,  XXXV.  10,  25,  xxxvi.  i;  Job  ix.  4; 
Prov.  xi.  29,  xvi.  21,  23,  &c.).  The  same 
notion  is  traced  in  the  Latin  phrase  homo  cor- 
datus;  also  in  the  language  of  Homer,  ‘II.’ 
XV.  52;  ‘ Od.’  VII.  82,  XVIII.  344.  The 
bowels,  as  distinguished  from  the  heart,  were 
commonly  recognized  as  the  seat  of  the  affec- 
tions (Gen.  xliii.  30;  i K.  iii.  26 ; Is.  Ixiii.  15  ; 
and,  in  the  Hebrew  text,  Deut.  xiii.  6 ; 2 S. 
xxiv.  14,  &c.  See  also  Luke  i.  78;  2 Cor. 
vi.  12,  vii.  15  ; Phil.  i.  8,  ii.  i ; Philemon, 
•v.  7,  &c.). 

the  spirit  of  ^visdotn\  See  on  xxxi.  3.  What 
may  be  especially  noticed  in  this  place  is,  that 
the  spirit  of  wisdom  given  by  the  Lord  is 
spoken  of  as  conferring  practical  skill  in  the 
most  general  sense : those  who  possess  it  are 
called  because  they  possess  it;  they  are  not 
first  called  and  then  endowed  with  it. 

garments  to  consecrate  hirn\  There  is  here 
a solemn  recognition  of  the  significance  of 
an  appointed  official  dress.  It  expresses  that 
the  office  is  not  created  or  defined  by  the  man 
himself  (Heb.  v.  4),  but  that  he  is  in'vested 
with  it  according  to  prescribed  institution. 
The  rite  of  anointing  was  essentially  connected 
with  investiture  in  the  holy  garments  (xxix. 
29,  30;  xl.  12 — 15). — The  history  of  all  na- 
tions shews  the  importance  of  these  forms.  As 
time  goes  on,  their  “ ancient  and  well-noted 
face”  becomes  more  and  more  valuable  as  a 


witness  against  restless  longing  for  change. 
The  following  points  in  this  divinely  ordained 
investiture  of  the  Priests  of  Jehovah  seem  to 
be  worthy  of  special  notice  in  our  own  day: — 
(i)  there  was  nothing  left  to  individual  taste 
or  fancy,  every  point  was  authoritatively  laid 
down  in  minute  detail:  (2)  the  High-priest, 
when  performing  his  highest  and  holiest  func- 
tions, was  attired  in  a plain  white  dress  (Lev. 
xvi.  4):  (3)  the  only  garments  worn  by  the 
other  priests  “for  glory  and  for  beauty” 
(gv.  40),  when  they  were  engaged  in  the  ser- 
vice of  both  the  Golden  Altar  and  the  Brazen 
Altar  (see  Lev.  vi.  10),  were  also  white,  with 
the  exception  of  the  Girdle  (pv.  40) : (4)  there 
were  no  changes  in  the  dresses  of  the  priests 
at  the  three  Great  Festivals,  nor  any  periodi- 
cal change  whatever,  except  when  the  High- 
priest,  on  the  Day  of  Atonement,  put  off  his 
robes  of  office  for  the  dress  of  white  linen. 

4.  There  are  here  mentioned  six  articles 
belonging  to  the  official  dress  of  the  High- 
priest,  which  are  described  in  the  verses  that 
follow;  but  the  description  does  not  follow 
the  order  of  this  enumeration,  and  it  com- 
prises, in  addition,  the  gold  plate  of  the  mitre 
(v.  36)  and  the  garments  which  were  com- 
mon to  all  the  priests. 

and  his  sons']  These,  it  is  evident,  were  the 
representatives  of  the  family  who,  in  the  ages 
that  followed,  inherited  the  High-priesthood 
in  succession.  But  the  sons  who  were  con- 
secrated at  this  time  with  Aaron  as  common 
priests,  are  designated  in  the  same  way  in 
<u.  AO  and  elsewhere. 

5.  gold,  and  blue,  &c.]  the  gold  and 
the  blue  and  the  scarlet  and  the  fine 
linen.  The  definite  article  is  prefixed  to 
each  substantive  to  denote  specially  the  quan- 
tity and  the  quality  of  the  material  required 
for  the  dresses.  With  the  exception  of  the 
gold,  the  materials  were  the  same  as  those  of 
the  tabernacle-cloth,  the  vail  of  the  Taber- 
nacle and  the  entrance-curtain  of  the  Tent 
(xxvi.  j,  31,  36.  See  on  xxv.  4).  The  gold 
was  wrought  into  thin  fiat  wires  which  could 
either  be  woven  with  the  woollen  and  linen 
threads,  or  worked  with  the  needle  (see 


384 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


[v.  6 — II. 


6 And  they  shall  make  the  ephod 
of  gold,  (?/'blue,  and  of  purple,  of  scarlet, 
and  fine  twined  linen,  with  cunning 
work. 

7 It  shall  have  the  two  shoulder- 
pieces  thereof  joined  at  the  two  edges 
thereof ; and  so  it  shall  be  joined  to- 
gether. 

!Or,  8 And  the  "curious  girdle  of  the 

broidered.  wliich  IS  upoii  it,  shall  be  of 

the  same,  according  to  the  work  there- 
of ; even  of  gold,  of  blue,  and  purple, 
and  scarlet,  and  fine  twined  linen. 


9 And  thou  shalt  take  two  onyx 
stones,  and  grave  on  them  the  names 
of  the  children  of  Israel : 

10  Six  of  their  names  on  one  stone, 
and  the  other  six  names  of  the  rest  on 
the  other  stone,  according  to  their 
birth. 

1 1 ''With  the  work  of  an  engraver '^wnd.iS. 
in  stone,  like  the  engravings  of  a signet, 

shalt  thou  engrave  the  two  stones  with 
the  names  of  the  children  of  Israel : 
thou  shalt  make  them  to  be  set  in 
ouches  of  gold. 


xxxix.  3 and  on  xxxv.  35).  In  rej^ard  to  the 
mixture  of  linen  and  woollen  threads  in  the 
Ephod  and  other  parts  of  the  High-priest’s 
dress,  a difficulty  seems  to  present  itself  in 
connection  with  the  law  which  forbad  gar- 
ments of  linen  and  woollen  mixed  to  be  worn 
by  the  Israelites  (Lev.  xix.  19;  Dent.  xxii.  ii). 
It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  coloured 
threads  here  mentioned  were  not  woollen  but 
dyed  linen  (Knobel).  But  see  on  Lev.  xix.  19. 

The  Ephod. 

6— T2  (xxxix.  % — 7). 

6.  the  ephod']  The  Hebrew  word  is  here 
retained,  which,  according  to  its  etymology, 
has  the  same  breadth  of  meaning  as  (iur  word 
"jestment.  The  garment  being  worn  over  the 
shoulders,  the  word  is  rendered  by  the  LXX. 
€7Ta)[xis  (which  occurs  also  Ecclus.  xlv.  8),  and 
by  the  Vulgate  super hm7ier ale.  It  consisted  of 
blue,  purple  and  scarlet  yarn  and  “hue  twined 
linen”  (on  xxvi.  i)  wrought  together  in  work 
of  the  skilled  weaver  (on  xxvi.  i and 
xxxv.  35).  It  was  the  distinctive  vestment  of 
the  fligh-priest,  to  which  “the  breastplate  of 
judgment”  was  attached  {pvnj.  25 — 28). 

7.  From  this  verse,  and  from  xxxix.  4, 
it  would  seem  that  the  Ephod  consisted  of  two 
principal  pieces  of  cloth,  one  for  the  back  and 
the  other  for  the  front,  joined  together  by 
shoulder  straps  (see  on  t.-.  27).  Below  the 
arms,  probably  just  above  the  hips,  the  two 
j)ieccs  were  kept  in  place  by  a band  attached 
to  one  of  the  pieces,  which  is  described  in  the 
next  verse.  Most  Jewish  authorities  have 
thus  understood  the  description.  But  Jose- 
phus describes  the  Isphod  as  a tunic  {^irdv) 
having  sleeves  (‘Ant.’  ill.  7.  § 5).  It  is 
just  possible  that  the  fashion  of  it  may  have 
changed  before  the  time  of  the  historian.  On 
the  respect  in  which  this  Isphcd  of  the  High- 
priest  was  held,  see  i S.  ii.  28,  xiv.  3,  xxi.  9, 
xxiii.  6,  9,  XXX,  7.  lint  an  Isphod  made  of 
linen  appears  to  have  Ix-en  a recognized  gar- 
ment not  only  for  the  common  priests  (i  S. 
xxii.  1 8)  but  also  for  those  who  were  even 


temporarily  engaged  in  the  senice  of  the 
Sanctuary  (i  S.  ii.  18;  2 S.  vi.  14;  i Chro. 
XV.  27). 

8.  the  curious  girdle  of  the  ephod.,  'which  is 
upon  it,  shall  be  of  the  same]  The  meaning 
might  rather  be  expressed: — the  band  for 
fastening  it,  which  is  upon  it,  shall  be  of  the 
same  work,  of  one  piece  with  it.  So  de  AVette, 
Knobel,  Zunz,  Herx.,  &;c.  This  band  being 
woven  on  to  one  of  the  pieces  of  the  Ephod 
was  passed  round  the  body,  and  fastened  by 
buttons,  or  strings,  or  some  other  suitable 
contrivance. 

9.  two  onyx  stones]  The  Hebrew  name  of 

the  stone  here  spoken  of  is  shoham.  It  is  uni- 
formly rendered  oyiyx  in  our  Bible  and  in  the 
Vulgate;  Josephus  calls  it  the  The 

LXX.  and  Philo,  on  the  other  hand,  call  it 
the  beryl.  But  the  Greek  translators  are  in- 
consistent in  translating  the  w6rd  in  different 
places,  so  that,  as  regards  this  question,  no 
conhdence  can  be  placed  in  them.  The  stone 
was  most  likely  one  well  adapted  for  engrav- 
ing ; in  this  respect  the  onyx  is  preferable  to 
the  beryl  See  on  2;.  17. 

11.  an  engraver  in  stone]  an  artificer 
in  stone.  See  on  xxxv.  35. 

like  the  engravings  of  a signet]  Cf.  vv.  21, 
36.  These  words  probably  refer  to  a peculiar 
way  of  shaping  the  letters,  adapted  for  en- 
graving on  a hard  substance. — Seal  engraving 
on  precious  stones  was  practised  in  Egypt 
from  very  remote  times,  and  in  Mesopotamia, 
probably,  from  2000  A.  c. 

ouches  of  gold]  I'he  gold  settings  of  the 
engraved  stones  are  here  plainly  denoted;  but, 
according  to  the  derivation  of  the  Hebrew 
word,  they  seem  to  have  been  formed  not  of 
solid  pieces  of  metal,  but  of  woven  wire, 
wreathed  round  the  stones  in  what  is  called  * 
cloisonnee  work’  a sort  of  filigree,  often  found 
in  Egyptian  ornaments.  Mr  King  conjectures 
that  these  stones,  as  well  as  those  on  the 
breastplate,  were  “ in  the  form  of  ovals,  or 
rather  ellipse^,  like  the  cartouches,  containing 
proper  names,  in  hieroglyphic  inscriptions.” 


V.  12 17-] 


•EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


385 


12  And  thou  shalt  put  the  tW(^ 
stones  upon  the  shoulders  of  the  e[>hod 
for  stones  of  memorial  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel : and  Aaron  shall  bear 
their  names  before  the  Lord  upon  his 
two  shoulders  for  a memorial. 

13  *^1  And  thou  shalt  make  ouches 
<?/gold; 

14  And  two  chains  of  pure  gold  at 
the  ends ; of  wreathen  work  shalt  thou 
make  them,  and  fasten  the  wreathen 
chains  to  the  ouches. 

15  ^ And  thou  shalt  make  the 
breastplate  of  judgment  with  cunning 


work;  after  the  work  of  the  ephod 
thou  shalt  make  it ; f gold,  of  blue, 
and  of  purple,  and  of  scarlet,  and 
of  fine  twined  linen,  shalt  thou 
make  it. 

16  Foursquare  it  shall  be  being 
doubled;  a span  shall  be  the  length 
thereof,  and  a span  shall  be  the  breadth 
thereof. 

1 7 And  thou  shalt  ^ set  in  it  set-  ^ 
tings  or  stones,  even  tour  rows  of  jftUingx  of 
stones  : the  first  row  shall  be  a >1  sar- 

dius,  a topaz,  and  a carbuncle : this 
shall  be  the  first  row. 


‘ Ancient  Gems,’  p.  136.  The  same  word  is 
used  in  w.  13,  14,  25,  where  it  seems  to  ex- 
press an  ornamental  gold  button,  without 
a stone.  The  word  ouches  is  used  by  Shak- 
speare,  Spenser,  and  some  of  their  contempo- 
raries in  the  general  sense  of  jewels.  See 
Nares’  ‘Glossary.’ 

12.  upon  the  shoulders  of  the  ephodl]  i.e. 
upon  the  shoulder-pieces  of  the  ephod. 
See  u}.  7. 

upon  his  tnjoo  shoulders']  Cf.  Isa.  ix.  6,  xxii. 
22.  The  High-priest  had  to  represent  the 
Twelve  Tribes  in  the  presence  of  Jehovah ; and 
the  burden  of  his  office  could  not  be  so  aptly 
symbolized  anywhere  as  on  his  shoulders,  the 
parts  of  the  body  fittest  for  carrying  burdens. 
The  figure  is  familiar  enough  in  all  languages. 
Gf.  on  uj.  29. 

The  Breastplate. 

13 — 30-  (Cf  xxxix.  8 — 21.) 

13.  ouches]  See  on  v.  ii.  These  were 
two  in  number,  to  suit  the  chains  mentioned 
in  the  next  verse.  Cf.  uj.  25  and  xxxix.  18. 

14.  t^o  chains  of  pure  gold  at  the  ends  ; of 
(wreathen  (work  shalt  thou  make  them]  Rather, 
two  chains  of  pure  gold  shalt  thou  make 
of  wreathen  work,  twisted  like  cords. 
— They  were  more  like  cords  of  twisted  gold 
wire  than  chains  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the 
word.  Such  chains  have  been  found  in  Egyp- 
tian tombs,  and  some  of  these  were  exhibited 
in  the  Paris  Exhibition  of  1867. 

15.  the  breastplate  of  judg7nent]  The 
meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  {choshen')  ren- 
dered breastplate^  appears  to  be  simply  orna- 
nierJ.  The  names  given  to  it  in  nearly  all 
versions  must  therefore  be  regarded  as  glosses. 
The  LXX.,  Philo,  Josephus  and  the  son  of 
Sirach  (Ecclus.  xlv.  10)  call  it  Xoy  (ioVf  or 
Xoy lov,  and  the  Vulgate  rationale,  in  reference 
to  its  use  as  an  oracle  in  making  known  the 
judgments  of  the  Lord.  It  was  from  this  use 
that  it  was  designated  the  Choshen  of  Judg- 
ment. Symmachus  renders  the  word  as  a rc- 

VOL.  I. 


ceptacle,  or  bag  {hoxiov),  from  what  appears 
to  have  been  its  form.  The  names  given  to  it 
by  most  modern  translators  (like  our  own 
breastplate)  relate  merely  to  its  place  in  the 
dress.  It  was  to  be  made  of  a piece  of  cun- 
ning (Work  (tke  work  of  the  skilled 
weaver,  see  xxxv.  35),  the  same  in  texture 
and  materials  as  the  Ephod.  This  piece  was 
a cubit  (two  spans)  in  length  and  half  a cubit 
(a  span)  in  width,  and  it  was  to  be  folded  to- 
gether so  as  to  form  a square  of  half  a cubit. 
Whether  it  was  doubled  with  no  other  pur- 
pose than  to  giv§  it  stability  (Rosenmiiller, 
Knobel,  Kalisch),  or  in  order  to  form  what 
was  used  as  a bag  (Gesenius,  Blihr,  Fiirst), 
has  been  questioned:  but  the  latter  appears 
to  be  by  far  the  more  likely  alternative.  On 
the  mode  in  which  it  was  attached  to  the 
Ephod,  see  2;.  22  sq.,  and  on  its  probable  use 
as  a bag,  see  Note  at  the  end  of  the  Chapter, 

17.  settings]  The  same  Hebrew  word  is 
less  aptly  rendered  “inclosings”  in  <v.  20. 
From  xxxix.  13  it  appears  that  they  were 
ouches  of  cloisonnee  work,  like  those  mentioned 
in  'v.  II  as  the  settings  of  the  gems  on  the 
shoulder-pieces  of  the  ephod. 

four  ro(ws  of  stones]  No  very  near  approach 
to  certainty  can  be  obtained  in  the  identifica- 
tion of  these  precious  stones.  In  several  in- 
stances the  Hebrew  names  themselves  afford 
some  light  on  the  subject.  The  oldest  ex- 
ternal authority  to  help  us  is  the  LXX.,  and 
next  to  it  come  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  ill.  7.  § 5 ; 

‘ Bel.  Jud.’v,  5.  § 7)  and  the  other  old  versions, 
especially  the  Vulgate.  It  must  however  be 
observed  that  the  Greek  and  Latin  names  are 
not  always  consistently  applied  to  the  same 
Hebrew  word  in  different  places  (see  on  v.  9). 
One  point  of  interest  in  the  inquiry  appears  to 
be  the  etymological  identity  of  several  of  the 
names  of  stones  in  Hebrew,  Greek,  Latin  and 
the  modern  languages  of  Europe.  These 
names  were  probably  transmitted  to  the  Greeks 
and  Romans  by  the  Phoenician  merchants, 
whose  traffic  in  most  of  the  precious  stones 

B B 


386 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


[v.  1 8,  19. 


18  And  the  second  row  shall  be  an 
emerald,  a sapphire,  and  a diamond. 


19  And  the  third  row  a ligure,  an 
agate,  and  an  amethyst. 


here  mentioned  is  alluded  to  by  Ezekiel  (xxviii. 
13).  But,  unfortunately,  the  identity  of  the 
stone  denoted  by  no  means  follows  from  the 
identity  of  the  name.  A name  was  often  given 
in  ancient  times  to  a substance  on  account  of 
some  single  characteristic,  such  as  its  colour  or 
its  hardness.  Hence  adamant  was  applied  to 
the  diamond,  to  steel,  and  to  other  hard  bo- 
dies: sapphire  was  certainly  applied  to  the 
lapis-lazuli,  and,  though  not  till  a much  later 
age,  to  what  we  call  the  sapphire.  Hence 
it  is  plain  that  our  conclusions  on  the  sub- 
ject can  rarely  be  quite  certain.  The  field  of 
conjecture  in  the  present  inquiry  may  however 
be  somewhat  narrowed  from  the  results  of  the 
study  of  the  antique  gems  of  Assyria,  Egypt 
and  Ancient  Greece.  We  need  not  hesitate  to 
exclude  those  stones  which  appear  to  have  been 
unknown  to  the  ancients,  and  those  which 
are  so  hard  that  the  ancients  did  not  know 
how  to  engrave  them.  On  such  grounds, 
according  to  Prof.  Maskelyne,  we  must  at 
once  reject  the  diamond,  the  ruby,  the  sap- 
phire, the  emerald,  the  topaz,  and  the  chry- 
soberyl. — The  best  information  on  the  subject 
may  be  found  in  two  articles  in  the  ‘ Edinb. 
Rev.’  Nos.  253,  254,  by  Prof.  Maskelyne,  to 
whom  these  notes  on  the  breastplate  are 
greatly  indebted. 

a sardius'\  Heb.  odem^  i.e.  the  red  stone; 
LXX.  adpdiov'i  Vulg.  sardius’^  Jds.  crapbovv^ 
in  one  place  (‘  Ant.’  iii.  7.  § 5),  but  adpdtov 
in  another  (‘  Bel.  Jud.’  v.  5.  § 7).  The  Sar- 
dian stone,  or  sard,  was  much  used  by  the 
ancients  for  seals;  and  it  is  perhaps  the  stone 
of  all  others  the  best  for  engraving  (see  Theo- 
phrastus, ‘de  Lapid.’  8;  Pliny,  ‘H.N.’xxxvii. 
23,  31).  It  is  mentioned  Ezek.  xxviii.  13. 

topaz~\  Heb.  pitddh\  LXX.  and  Jos.  to- 
Tvd^Lov\  topazhis.  The  word ap- 

pears to  have  been  formed  by  metathesis  from 
(Gesenius,  Knobel,  Fiirst).  ThQ pitddh 
is  mentioned  by  Ezekiel  (xxviii.  13);  and  it 
is  spoken  of  in  Job  (xxviii.  19)  as  a product  of 
Ethiopia,  which  tends  to  confirm  its  identity 
with  the  topaz  which  is  said  by  Strabo  (xvi. 
p.  770),  Diodorus  (ill.  39),  andldiny  (xxxvii. 
32),  to  have  been  obtained  from  Ethiopia.  It 
was  not  however  the  stone  now  called  the 
topaz : it  may  have  been  the  peridot,  or 
chrysolite,  a stone  of  a greenish  hue. 

a carbuncle~\  Heb.  bdrekeih\  LXX.  and 
Jos.  rrpdpaybo^^Wd'g.  smaragdus.  It  was  cer- 
tainly not  tne  carbuncle;  it  is  not  improbable 
that  it  was  the  beryl,  which  is  a kind  of 
•emerald  (Plin.  xxxvii.  16,  Solinus  xv.  23). 
The  Grt^-k  name  sometimes  appears  as  pdpay- 
6of,  supposed  to  be  identical  with  the  Sanskrit 
name  of  the  Iveryl,  marakata  (FUrst),  which 
plainly  appears  to  be  allied  to  the  Heb.  bdreketh^ 


and  probably  to  our  own  emerald.  Gesenius 
and  Liddell  and  Scott  severally  ascribe  the 
Hebrew  name  and  the  Greek  to  roots  signify- 
ing to  glitter.,  or  sparkle:  but  the  character- 
istic quality  thus  suggested  is  not  one  that 
particularly  distinguishes  the  beryl  amongst 
precious  stones.  The  bareketh  is  mentioned 
Ezek.  xxviii.  13. 

18.  anemeraldl  Wq'o.  nophek/\.c.  the  glow- 
ing  stone  (Knobel,  Fiirst);  LXX.  and  Jos. 
u.v6pa^\  carbtmculus.  There  seems  no 

reason  to  doubt  that  the  garnet,  which  when 
cut  with  a convex  face  is  termed  the  car- 
buncle, is  meant.  (See  Theoph,  ‘ de  Lapid.’ 
18).  The  same  stone  is  mentioned  Ezek. 
xxvii.  16,  xxviii.  13. 

a sapphire~\  Heb.  sapp'ir;  LXX.  o-a7r(/)fi- 
po?;  Vulg,  sapphirus.  Josephus  appears  to 
have  transposed  this  name  and  the  next,  and 
may  fairly  be  regarded  as  agreeing  with  the 
LXX.  as  to  its  meaning.  It  is  conceived 
to  have  been  the  sapphire  of  the  Greeks,  not 
only  from  the  identity  of  the  name,  but  from 
the  evident  references  to  the  colour  in  Exod. 
xxiv.  10;  Ezek.  i.  26,  x.  i.  The  name  also 
occurs  Job  xxviii.  6,  16;  Cant.  v.  14;  Isa. 
liv.  II ; Lam.  iv.  7;  Ezek.  xxviii.  13.  Mi- 
chaelis  and  others  objected  to  what  is  now 
called  the  sapphire  on  account  of  its  hard- 
ness, and  supposed  that  the  lapis-lazuli  is 
most  probably  meant.  The  best  recent  autho- 
rities justify  this  conjecture,  in  reference  not 
only  to  the  sappir  of  the  Old  Testament,  but 
to  the  sapphire  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans 
(see  the  first  note  on  this  verse).  According 
to  a Jewish  fancy  in  the  Talmud,  the  Tables 
of  the  Law  were  formed  of  sappir. 

a diamond]  Heb.  yahalom.  The  etymology 
of  the  word  is  supposed  to  be  similar  to  that 
ascribed  to  the  Greek  dSapay,  so  as  to  give  it 
the  meaning  of  the  unconquerable.  Hence 
some  of  the  ancient  versions,  with  Aben-Ezra, 
Abarbanel,  and  Luther  (ivhom  our  translators 
followed),  have  taken  the  diamond  as  the 
stone  denoted.  But  there  is  no  trace  of  evi- 
dence that  the  ancients  ever  acquired  the  skill 
to  engrave  on  the  diamond,  or  even  that  they 
were  acquainted  with  the  stone.  The  LXX. 

yahalom  by  iaann,  and  the  Vulg.  by 
jnspis;  but  these  words  answer  more  satis- 
factorily to  the  jasper  (see  on  i',  20).  Some 
imagine  it  to  be  the  onyx,  which  is  more 
likely  the  shoham  (v.  9)  : but  it  may  pos- 
sibly be  some  other  variety  of  chalcedony,  or 
(perhaps)  rock  crystal.  In  the  uncertainty 
which  exists,  the  original  name  yalialom 
might  be  retained  in  the  version.  The  word 
is  found  in  ICzek.  xxviii.  13:  but  it  is  another 
word  {shamir')  which  is  rendered  diamond  or 
adamant  m]QV.yi\n.i\  Ezek.  iii.  9;  Zech.vii.12. 


t Heb.  ' 
fUlbigs. 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


V.  20 27.] 

20  And  the  fourth  row  a beryl,  and 
an  onyx,  and  a jasper:  they  shall  be 
set  in  gold  in  their  ^ inclosings. 

21  And  the  stones  shall  be  with 
the  names  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
twelve,  according  to  their  names,  like 
the  engravings  of  a signet ; every  one 
with  his  name  shall  they  be  according 
to  the  twelve  tribes. 

22  ^ And  thou  shalt  make  upon 
the  breastplate  chains  at  the  ends-<5/' 
wreathen  work  of  pure  gold. 

23  And  thou  shalt  make  upon  the 
breastplate  two  rings  of  gold,  and 
shalt  put  the  two  rings  on  the  two 
ends  of  the  breastplate. 

24  And  thou  shalt  put  the  two 
wreathen  chains  of  gold  in  the  two 


rings  which  are  on  the  ends  of  the 
breastplate. 

25  And  the  other  two  ends  of  the 
two  wreathen  chains  thou  shalt  fasten 
in  the  two  ouches,  and  put  them  on  the 
shoulderpieces  of  the  ephod  before  it. 

26  ^ And  thou  shalt  make  two 
rings  of  gold,  and  thou  shalt  put  them 
upon  the  two  ends  of  the  breastplate 
in  the  border  thereof,  which  is  in  the 
side  of  the  ephod  inward. 

27  And  two  other  rings  of  gold 
thou  shalt  make,  and  shalt  put  them 
on  the  two  sides  of  the  ephod  under- 
neath, toward  the  forepart  thereof, 
over  against  the  other  coupling  there- 
of, above  the  curious  girdle  of  the 
ephod. 


19.  n ligure']  Heb.  leshem.  LXX.  and  Jos. 
'kiyvpiov,  Vulg.  ligurius.  According  to  Theo- 
phrastus (‘de  Lapid.’  29)  and  Pliny  (‘H.  N.’ 
xxxvii,  ii),  amber  came  from  Liguria,  and 
this  would  exactly  account  for  the  names  used 
by  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  if,  as  is  not  in  any 
respect  improbable,  amber  is  here  meant.  On 
the  name  XvyKovpiov^  see  Liddell  and  Scott. 
The  lesheyn  is  not  mentioned  elsewhere  in  the 
Old  Testament  except  in  xxxix.  12. 

an  agate\  Heb.  she^oo^  LXX.  d^arTj^f 
Vulg.  achates.  Josephus  appears  to  have 
transposed  dxdrrjs  with  the  next  name:  he 
makes  several  other  changes  in  the  order  of 
the  stones  in  the  list  given,  ‘Bel.  Jud.’  v.  5. 
§7.  No  question  has  been  raised  that  the 
agate  is  here  meant.  The  word  she^oc  occurs 
only  here -and  xxxix.  12;  but  another  word 
{kadkod)  is  rendered  agate  in  our  version,  Isa. 
liv.  12;  Ezek.  xxvii.  16. 

an  atnethyst\  Heb.  achldmdh.,  l.XX.  and 
Josephus  dixidvoTTos,  Vulg.  amethystus.  Men- 
tioned only  here  and  xxxix.  12. 

20.  a beryl]  Heb.  tarshish,  LXX.  and 
Jos.  ;^puo-oXidos,  Vulg.  chrysolitkus.  This 
could  hardly  have  been  the  beryl  (see  on  v.  17) 
or  the  turkois,  as  Luther  and  Granmer  im- 
agined. The  Hebrew  name  is  reasonably  sup- 
posed to  have  been  given  to  the  stone  because 
It  came  from  Tarshish.  A kind  of  carbuncle, 
or  garnet,  is  spoken  of  by  Pliny,  called  carcbe- 
doniiis,  in  connection  with  Carthage  (‘  H.  N.’ 
XXXVII.  25),  and  this  is  supposed  by  some 
to  be  the  tarshish  (Knobel,  Fiirst).  Others 
suppose  that  it  was  what  Pliny  calls  the  chry- 
solite, a brilliant  yellow  stone  (see  Plin. 
XXXVII.  42),  which  they  identify,  with  what 
is  now  known  as  the  Spanish  topaz  (Gese- 
nius,  8cc.').  It  would  seem  to  be  best,  in 
such  uncertainty,  to  retain  the  name  tarsbisli 


in  translating.  The  stone  is  mentioned  Cant, 
v.  14;  Ezek.  i.  16,  x.  9,  xxviii.  13;  Dan. 

X.  6. 

an  onyx]  Heb.  sboham.  Josephus  and  the 
Vulgate  take  it  for  the  onyx  (see  on  ns.  9) ; but 
the  LXX.,  apparently  by  a copyist’s  transpo- 
sition, have  lirjpvWiov  here,  and  duvxiov  for 
the  next  stone.  The  shoham  is  mentioned 
Gen.  ii.  12;  Ex.  xxv.  7;  i Chro.  xxix.  a;  Job 
xxviii.  16;  Ezek.  xxviii.  13. 

a jasper]  Heb.  yashpeh.  The  similarity  of 
the  Hebrew  name  to  our  word  jasper.,  to  the 
Greek  ca(r7r69,  the  Latin  jaspis.,  and  the  Arabic 
jasb.,  is  obvious.  Josephus  and  the  Vulgate 
render  it  as  beryl and  the  LXX.  as  onyx  (but 
see  preceding  note).  The  best  authorities 
take  it  for  jasper  (Gesen.,  Bahr,  Knobel, 
Furst):  it  was  probably  the  green  jasper.  It 
is  mentioned  nowhere  else  except  Ex.  xxxix. 
13;  Ezek.  xxviii.  13. 

their  inclosings]  their  settings  (see  on 
ns.  17). 

22.  chains  at  the  ends  of  n.v  re  at  hen  nvork] 
chains  of  wreathen  work,  twisted  like 
cords  (see  on  ns.  14). 

23.  on  the  t<iuo  ends  of  the  breastplate] 
The  extremities  spoken  of  here,  and  in  the 
next  verse,  must  have  been  the  upper  corners 
of  the  square.  The  chains  attached  to  them 
{y.  25)  suspended  the  Breastplate  from  the 
ouch^  of  the  shoulder-pieces  (pun).  9,  ii,  12). 

26.  tnvQ  These  two  rings  appear 

to  have  been  fastened  to  the  Breastplate,  near 
its  lower  corners  upon  the  inner  side,  so  as 
to  have  been  out  of  sight.  See  on  the  follow- 
ing two  verses. 

27.  “And  two  rings  of  gold  shalt  thou 
make  and  put  them  on  the  two  shoulder- 
pieces  of  the  Ephod,  low  down  in  the 

B B 2 


88 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


[v.  28—33. 


28  And  they  shall  bind  the  breast- 
plate by  the  rings  thereof  unto  the 
rings  of  the  ephod  with  a lace  ot 
blue,  that  it  may  be  above  the  curious 
girdle  of  the  ephod,  and  that  the 
breastplate  be  not  loosed  from  the 
ephod. 

29  And  Aaron  shall  bear  the 
names  of  the  children  of  Israel  in  the 
breastplate  of  judgment  upon  his  heart, 
v/hen  he  goeth  in  unto  the  holy  place^ 
for  a memorial  before  the  Lord  con- 
tinually. 

30  ^ And  thou  shalt  put  in  the 
breastplate  of  judgment  the  Urim  and 
the  Thummim ; and  they  shall  be 


upon  Aaron’s  heart,  when  he  goeth 
in  before  the  Lord  : and  Aaron  shall 
bear  the  judgment  of  the  children  of 
Israel  upon  his  heart  before  the  Lord 
continually. 

31  ^ And  thou  shalt  make  the 
robe  of  the  ephod  all  of  blue. 

32  And  there  shall  be  an  hole  in 
the  top  of  it,  in  the  midst  thereof: 
it  shall  have  a binding  of  woven  work 
round  about  the  hole  of  it,  as  it  were 
the  hole  of  an  habergeon,  that  it  be 
not  rent. 

33  ^ And  beneath  upon  the  hem 
of  it  thou  shalt  make  pomegranates 
of  blue,  and  of  purple,  and  of  scarlet, 


front  of  it,  near  the  joining,  above 
the  band  for  fastening  it.”  It  would 
seem  that  the  shoulder-pieces  were  continued 
down  the  front  of  the  Ephod  as  far  as  the 
band  (see  on  'v.  8);  the  joining  appears  to 
have  been  the  meeting  of  the  extremities  of 
the  shoulder-pieces  with  the  band.  These 
rings  were  attached  to  the  shoulder-pieces 
just  above  this  joining. 

28.  the  curious  girdle  of  the  ephof  the 
band  for  fastening  it  (see  on  'v.  8).  The 
two  lower  rings  of  the  Breastplate  were  to  be 
tied  to  the  rings  near  the  ends  of  the  shoulder- 
pieces,  opposite  to  which  they  seem  to  have 
been  placed,  by  laces  of  blue,  so  as  to  keep  the 
Breastplate  firmly  in  its  place  just  above  the 
band. 

29.  The  names  of  the  Tribes  on  the  two 
onyx  stones  were  worn  on  the  shoulders  of 
the  High-priest  to  indicate  the  burden  of 
the  office  which  he  bore  (see  on  nj.  12);  the 
same  names  engraved  on  the  stones  of  the 
Breastplate  were  worn  over  his  heart,  the  seat 
of  the  affections,  as  well  as  of  the  intellect 
(see  on  n).  3),  to  symboli'/e  the  relation  of 
love  and  of  personal  interest  which  the  Lord 
recjuires  to  exist  between  the  Priest  and  the 
People. 

30.  put  in  the  breastplate  of  judgment  the 
Urim  and  the  'Thummim~\  It  is  not  questioned 
that  this  rendering  (which  agrees  with  the 
Vulgate,  Saadia,  Luther,  and  most  modern 
versions)  fairly  represents  the  original  words; 
and  it  most  naturally  follows  that  the  Urim 
and  the  Thummim  (whatever  they  were) 
were  put  into  the  bag  that  was  formed  by  the 
doubling  of  the  Choshen  (see  on  v.  15),  as  the 
I'ables  of  the  Law  were' put  into  the  Ark,  the 
same  verb  and  preposition  being  used  in  each 
case  (xxv.  16).  IVlost  critics  are  in  favour  of 
this  view.  But  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the 
words  may  also  mean,  upon  the  Breastplate. 


So  the  LXX.,  the  Syriac,  de  Wette,  Knobel. 
See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  Chapter. 

the  Urim  and  the  Thummim~\  These  were 
probably  some  well-known  means  for  casting 
lots  which,  from  this  time  forward,  were  kept 
in  the  bag  of  the  Choshen.  See  Note. 

l^he  Kobe  of  the  Ephod. 

31 — 35.  (xxxix.  22 — 26.) 

31.  the  robe  of  the  ephod']  The  Robe  of 
the  Ephod  was  a frock  or  robe  of  the  simplest 
form,  woven  without  seam,  wholly  of  blue 
(see  Note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xxv.  § IL).  It 
was  put  on  by  being  drawn  over  the  head. 
It  appears  to  have  had  no  sleeves.  It  pro- 
bably reached  a little  below  the  knees.  It  must 
have  been  visible  above  and  below  the  Ephod, 
the  variegated  texture  of  which  it  must  have 
set  off  as  a plain  blue  groundwork. 

32.  Jlnd  there  shall 'be  an  hole  in  the  top  of  it  ^ 
in  the  midst  thereof]  And  its  opening  for 
the  head  shall  he  in  the  middle  of  it. 
So  de  Wette,  Knobel,  Kalisch,  Herx.,  &c. 
The  meaning  appears  to  be  that  the  opening 
through  which  the  head  was  to  be  put  should 
be  a mere  round  hole,  not  connected  with  any 
longitudinal  slit  before  or  behind. 

of  (wo-ven  r^vork]  of  the  work  of  the 
weaver  (see  on  xxvi.  i,  xxxv.  35).  This 
was  probably  a stout  binding  of  woven  thread, 
sewn  over  the  edge  of  the  hole  for  the  head, 
to  strengthen  it  and  preserve  it  from  fraying. 

an  habergeon]  The  original  word,  tachardh., 
is  found  in  Egyptian  papyri  of  the  19th  dy- 
nasty (Brugsch,  ‘ D.  H.,’  p.  1579),  though  its 
root  appears  to  be  Semitic  (Gesen.  ‘Thes.’ 
p,  518).  Corselets  of  linen,  such  as  appear  to 
be  here  referred  to,  were  well  known  amongst 
the  Egyptians  (Herodot.  ii.  182,  ill.  47;  Uhn. 
XIX.  2.  Cf.  Horn.  ‘ II.’  II.  529). 

33.  34.  The  skirt  was  to  be  adorned  with 
a border  of  pomegranates  in  colours,  and  a 


V.  34—39-] 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


389 


roundabout  the  hem  thereof ; and  bells 
of  gold  between  them  round  about : 

34  A golden  bell  and  a pome- 
granate, a golden  bell  and  a pome- 
granate, upon  the  hem  of  the  robe 
round  about. 

35  ^ And  it  shall  be  upon  Aaron  to 
minister : and  his  sound  shall  be  heard 
when  he  goeth  in  unto  the  holy  place 
before  the  Lord,  and  when  he  com- 
eth  out,  that  he  die  not. 

36  ^ And  thou  shalt  make  a plate 
of  pure  gold,  and  grave  upon  it,  like 
the  engravings  of  a signet,  HOLI- 
NESS TO  THE  LORD. 


37  And  thou  shalt  put  it  on  a 
blue  lace,  that  it  may  be  upon  the 
mitre ; upon  the  forefront  of  the  mitre 
it  shall  be. 

38  And  it  shall  be  upon  Aaron’s 
forehead,  that  Aaron  may  bear  the 
iniquity  of  the  holy  things,  which 
the  children  of  Israel  shall  hallow  in 
all  their  holy  gifts;  and  it  shall  be 
always  upon  his  forehead,  that  they 
may  be  accepted  before  the  Lord. 

39  ^ And  thou  shalt  embroider 
the  coat  of  fine  linen,  and  thou  shalt 
make  the  mitre  of  fine  linen,  and  thou 
shalt  make  the  girdle  of  needlework. 


small  golden  bell  was  to  be  attached  to  the 
hem  between  each  two  of  the  pomegranates. 

35.  his  sound]  its  sound,  i.e.  the  sound 
of  the  R.obe.  Some  conceive  that  the  bells 
furnished  a musical  offering  of  praise  to  the 
Lord  (Knobel,  &c.).  But  it  seems  more 
likely  that  their  purpose  was  that  the  people, 
who  stood  without,  when  they  heard  the 
sound  of  them  within  the  Tabernacle,  might* 
have  a sensible  proof  that  the  High-priest  was 
performing  the  sacred  rite  in  their  behalf, 
though  he  was  out  of  their  sight.  The  bells 
thus  became  an  incentive  to  devotional  feel- 
ings. This  accords  with  very  early  tradition. 
See  Ecclus.  xlv.  9. 

that  he  die  not]  The  bells  also  bore  witness 
that  the  High-priest  was,  at  the  time  of  his 
ministration,  duly  attired  in  the  dress  of  his 
office,  and  so  was  not  incurring  the  sentence 
of  death  which  is  referred  to  again  in  ‘v.  43  in 
connection  with  the  linen  drawers  that  were 
worn  by  the  whole  body  of  the  priests.  An 
infraction  of  the  laws  for  the  service  of  the 
Sanctuary  was  not  merely  an  act  of  disobe- 
dience; it  was  a direct  insult  to  the  presence 
of  Jehovah  from  His  ordained  minister,  and 
justly  incurred  a sentence  of  capital  punish- 
ment Gf.  Ex.  XXX.  2T ; Lev.  viii.  35,  x.  7. 

The  Mitre  and  the  Garments  of  Fine  Linen. 

36—43.  (xxxix.  27—31.) 

36.  In  the  narrative  of  the  making  of  the 
holy  things  (xxxix.  28,  30)  the  Mitre  of  fine 
linen  is  n|^ntioned  before  the  Golden  Plate,  as 
having  been  first  completed,  and  as  that  to 
which  the  plate  itself  was  to  be  attached. 
But  in  these  directions  the  plate  is  first  de- 
scribed, as  being  the  most  significant  part  of 
the  head-dress.  For  a similar  transposition, 
shewing  the  strictly  practical  character  of  the 
narrative,  see  on  xxxv.  ii. 

engra'vings  of  a signet]  See  on  -z;.  ii. 


HOLINESS  TO  THE  LORD]  This 
inscription  testified  in  express  words  the  holi- 
ness with  which  the  High-priest  was  invested 
in  virtue  of  his  sacred  calling. 

37.  a blue  lace]  The  plate  was  fastened 
upon  a blue  band  or  fillet,  so  tied  round  the 
mitre  as  to  shew  the  plate  in  front. 

the  mitre]  According  to  the  derivation  of 
the  Hebrew  word,  and  fi'om  the  statement  in 
2;.  39,  this  was  a twisted  band  of  linen  coiled 
into  a cap,  to  which  the  name  mitre^  in  its 
original  sense,  closely  answers,  but  which,  in 
modern  usage,  would  rather  be  called  a turban. 

38.  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  holy  things] 
The  Hebrew  expression  “to  bear  iniquity” 
is  applied  either  to  one  who  suffers  the 
penalty  of  sin  {y.  43;  Lev.  v.  i,  17,  xvii.  16, 
xxvi.  41,  &:c.),  or  to  one  who  takes  away  the 
sin  of  others  (Gen.  1.  17;  Lev.  x.  17,  xvi.  22; 
Num.  XXX,  15;  I S.  XV.  25,  &c.  See  on  Gen, 
iv.  13).  In  several  of  these  passages  the  verb 
is  rightly  rendered  to  forginee. — The  iniquity 
which  is  spoken  of  in  this  place  does  not 
mean  particular  sins  actually  committed,  but 
that  condition  of  alienation  from  God  in 
every  earthly  thing  which  makes  reconcilia- 
tion and  consecration  needful,  Cf.  Num. 
xviii.  I.  It  belonged  to  the  High-priest,  as 
the  chief  atoning  mediator  between  Jehovah 
and  His  people  (see  on  36),  to  atone  for 
the  holy  things  that  they  might  be  “ accepted 
before  the  Lord”  (cf.  Lev.  viii.  15,  xvi.  20, 
33,  with  the  notes):  but  the  common  priests 
also,  in  their  proper  functions,  had  to  take 
their  part  in  making  atonement  (Lev.  iv.  20, 
V.  10,  X.  17,  xxii.  16;  Num.  xviii.  23,  &c.). 

39.  embroider  the  coat  of  fne  linen]  This 
garment  appears  to  have  been  a long- tunic,  or 
cassock.  Josephus  says  that  it  was  worn 
next  the  skin,  that  it  reached  to  the  feet,  and 
that  it  had  closely  fitting  sleeves  (‘Ant,’  ill.  7. 
§ 2).  The  verb  translated  embroider  {shdbatz^ 
a word  of  very  rare  occurrence)  appears  ra- 


390 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


[v.  40—43- 


40  And  for  Aaron’s  sons  thou 
shalt  make  coats,  and  thou  shalt  make 
for  them  girdles,  and  bonnets  shalt 
thou  make  for  them,  for  glory  and  for 
beauty. 

41  And  thou  shalt  put  them  upon 
Aaron  thy  brother,  and  his  sons  with 
him ; and  shalt  anoint  them,  and 

f Heb.  ^ consecrate  them,  and  sanctify  them, 
that  they  may  minister  unto  me  in 
the  priest’s  office. 

42  And  thou  shalt  make  them 


linen  breeches  to  cover  Uheir  naked- 
ness ; from  the  loins  even  unto  the  their 
thighs  they  shall  ^ reach  : 

43  And  they  shall  be  upon  Aaron, 
and  upon  his  sons,  when  they  come 
in  unto  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, or  when  they  come  near  ' 
unto  the  altar  to  minister  in  the 
holy  place;  that  they  bear  not  ini- 
quity, and  die : it  shall  be  a statute 
for  ever  unto  him  and  his  seed  after 
him. 


ther  to  mean  weave  in  diaper  work.  The 
tissue  consisted  of  threads  of  one  and  the  same 
colour  diapered  in  checkers,  or  in  some  small 
figure.  According  to  xxxix.  27  such  tissue 
was  woven  by  the  ordinary  weaver,  not  by 
the  skilled  weaver.  (See  on  xxxv.  35 ; Ge- 
sen.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1356;  Fiirst,  ‘ Lex.’ s.  v.  Cf. 
Wilkinson,  ‘Pop.  Account,’  Vol.  ii.  p.  86.) 
It  has  been  inferred  from  'vv.  40,  41,  and  from 
xxxix.  27,  that  this  and  the  other  linen  gar- 
ments of  the  High-priest,  with  the  exception 
of  the  mitre,  did  not  differ  from  the  dress  of 
the  common  priests  mentioned  in  the  next 
verse.  See  Lev.  vi.  10;  Ezek.  xliv.  17. 

the  mitre  of  fine  linen']  See  on  v.  37. 

the  girdle  of  needle<work]  tlie  girdle  of 
the  work  of  the  embroiderer  (xxvi.  i, 
xxxv.  35).  The  word  translated  girdle  is  a 
different  one  from  that  so  rendered  in  ‘v.  8 
(see  note).  The  name  here  used  {ahnet)  has 
been  supposed  to  be  a Persian  word  (Gesenius), 
but  it  is  more  likely  to  be  an  Egyptian  one 
(Furst,  Brugsch,  Birch).  It  was  embroider- 
ed in  three  colours  (xxxix.  29).  Josephus 
says  that  its  texture  was  very  loose,  so  that  it 
resembled  the  slough  of  a snake,  that  it  was 
wound  several  times  round  the  body,  and  that 
its  ends  ordinarily  hung  down  to  the  feet,  but 
were  thrown  over  the  shoulder  when  the 
priest  was  engaged  in  his  work. 

40.  Aarons  sons]  The  common  priests 
are  here  meant.  See  on  v.  4.  The  girdle 
worn  by  them  is  here  c.alled  by  the  same 
name  as  that  of  the  High-priest  {abnet),  and 
was  probably  of  the  same  make.  Cf.  xxxix. 
29.  Instead  of  the  mitre  consisting  of  a coil 
of  twisted  linen,  the  common  priests  wore 
caps  of  a simple  construction  which,  accord- 
ing to  a probable  explanation  of  the  name. 


seem  to  have  been  cup-shaped.  They  were 
however  of  fine  texture  and  workmanship 
(xxxix.  28).  The  word  bonnet  is,  in  our 
present  English,  less  suitable  than  cap.  The 
description  of  the  head-dress  of  the  priests 
given  by  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  ill.  3.  § 6)  perhaps 
indicates  a change  of  foiTn  in  his  day.  Cf. 
on  "v.  7. 

for  glory  a7id  for  beauty]  See  v.  2 and  the 
following  note. 

41 — 43.  The  dress  of  white  linen  was  the 
strictly  sacerdotal  dress  common  to  the  whole 
body  of  priests  (Ezek.  xliv.  17,  18).  These 
were  “for  glory  and  for  beauty”  not  less  than 
the  golden  garments  (as  they  were  called  by 
the  jews)  which  formed  the  High-priest’s  dress 
of  state  (t.’.  2).  The  linen  suit  which  the 
High-priest  put  on  when  he  went  into  the 
Most  Holy  place  on  the  Day  of  Atonement, 
appears  to  have  been  regarded  with  peculiar 
respect  (Lev.  xvi.  4,  23;  cf.  Exod.  xxxi.  10), 
though  it  is  nowhere  stated  that  it  was  dis- 
tinguished in  its  make  or  texture,  except  in 
having  a girdle  (abnet)  wholly  of  white  linen, 
instead  of  a variegated  one. — It  may  here  be 
observed  that  the  statement  in  Josephus,  that 
the  High-priest  wore  his  golden  garments  only 
when  he  went  into  the  Most  Holy  place 
(‘Bel.  Jud.’  v.  5.  § 7)  is  an  obvious  mistake: 
the  reading  is  probably  corrupt  (see  Hudson’s 
note). — The  ancient  Egyptian  priests,  like  the 
Hebrew  priests,  wore  nothing  but  white  linen 
garments  in  the  performance  of  their  duties 
(Herod,  ii.  37,  with  Wilkinson’s  note;  Hengst. 
‘Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses,’  p.  145). 

43.  in  unto  the  tabernacle]  into  the 
Tent.  See  on  xxvi.  i. 

that  they  bear  not  iniquity^  and  die]  See 
on  'v'v.  35,  38. 


NOTE  on  Chap,  xxviii.  30. 


On  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim. 

I.  Their  names.  II.  They 'luei'e previo7isly  knenvn, 
and  distinct  front  the  Jircastplate.  III. 
Their  purpose  and  history.  IV.  Their 
origin.  V.  Theories. 


1. 

The  expression  the  Urhn  and  the  Thummim 
(D'^nTn^l  nn-INriTl^)  appears  to  mean 
the  Light  and  the  Truth.  The  primary  meaning 
of  the  latter  term  is  perfection.  The  form 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


391 


of  the  words  is  plural;  but,  according  to  the 
Hebrew  idiom,  this  does  not  necessarily  imply 
a plural  sense.  The  rendering  of  the  LXX. 
is,  7;  d^Xcoais  Kol  7;  dXijdeia]  that  of  Symma- 
chus,  (pooTicrfiol  Kal  TeXeioTrjTes’i  that  of  the 
Vulgate,  Doctrina  et  Veritas.  The  other 
ancient  versions  substantially  agree  with  one 
or  other  of  these.  In  most  modern  versions, 
except  Luther’s  {Licht  und  Recbt)  and  de 
Wette’s  (das  Licht  und  die  Wahrbeit)^  the 
words  are  untranslated. 

II. 

From  the  way  in  which  they  are  spoken  of 
in  Ex.  xxviii.  30  and  in  Lev.  viii.  8,  compared 
with  Ex.  xxviii.  15 — 21,  it  would  appear,  tak- 
ing a simple  view  of  the  words,  that  the  Urim 
and  the  Thummim  were  some  material  things, 
and  that  they  were  separate  from  the  Breast- 
plate itself,  as  well  as  from  the  gems  that 
were  set  upon  it.  It  would  seem  most  pro- 
bable that  they  were  kept  in  the  bag  of  the 
Breastplate  (Ex.  xxviii.  16).  And  from  the 
definite  article  being  prefixed  to  each  of  the 
names,  from  their  not  being  described  in  any 
way,  and  from  their  not  being  mentioned  in 
the  record  of  the  construction  of  the  Breast- 
plate (xxxix.  21),  it  seems  most  likely  that 
they  Vv^ere  something  previously  existing  and 
familiarly  known.  It  is  true  that  the  Samari- 
tan text  says  that  Moses  was  to  make  them: 
but  even  if  we  accept  this  very  weak  authority, 
when  the  statement  is  compared  with  the  fact 
that  there  is  no  direction  given  as  to  form  or 
material,  it  leaves  us  to  infer  that  they  were 
no  novelty  as  regards  their  use. 

III. 

The  purpose  of  the  Urim  and  the  Thum- 
mim is  clearly  enough  indicated  in  Num. 
xxvii.  21;  I S.  xxviii.  6;  and  also  (as  they 
were  evidently  regarded  as  belonging  to  the 
Ephod)  in  I S.  xxlii.  9 — 12,  xxx.  7,  8,  cf. 
xxii.  14,  15.  We  are  warranted  in  conclud- 
ing that  they  were  visible  things  of  some  sort 
by  which  the  will  of  Jehovah,  especially  in 
what  related  to  the  wars  in  which  His  people 
were  engaged,  was  made  known,  and  that 
from  this  time  they  were  preserved  in  the  bag 
of  the  Breastplate  of  the  High-priest,  to  be 
borne  “upon  his  heart  before  the  Lord  con- 
tinually” (Ex.  xxviii.  30).  They  were  form- 
ally delivered  by  Moses  to  Aaron  (Lev.  viii.  8), 
and  subsequently  passed  on  to  Eleazar  (Num. 
XX.  28,  xxvii.  21).  They  were  esteemed  as  the 
crowning  glory  of  the  Tribe  of  Levi  (Deut. 
xxxiii.  8).  There  is  no  instance  on  record  of 
their  being  consulted  after  the  time  of  David. 
They  were  certainly  not  in  use  after  the  Cap- 
tivity ; and  it  seems  to  have  become  a proverb 
in  reference  to  a question  of  inextricable  diffi- 
culty, that  it  should  not  be  solved  “till  there 
stood  up  a priest  with  Urim  and  Thummim” 
(Ezra  ii.  63  ; Neh.  vii.  65;  cf.  Hos.  iii.  4)- — 
Such  seem  to  be  all  the  particulars  that  can  be 


gathered  immediately,  or  by  easy  inference, 
from  Holy  Scripture,  regarding  the  nature, 
purpose,  and  history  of  the  Urim  and  the 
Thummim. 

IV, 

Since  the  time  of  Spencer,  the  opinion  has 
prevailed  to  a great  extent  that  the  U rim  and 
the  Thummim  were  wholly,  or  in  part,  of 
Egyptian  origin.  With  this  opinion  is  con- 
nected the  notion  that  they  were  Wo  small 
images  of  precious  stone,  which  appears  to 
have  taken  its  rise  from  a passage  in  Philo; 
TO  8e  Xoyeiov  rcrpaycovou  dtTrXovv  narccTK^vd- 
^ero,  d>cravc:\  j3d(TLS,  lua  dvo  dperds  dyaXparo- 
(jioprj,  di^Xosaiv  re  Ka\  dX-qdeiav  (‘Vlt.  Mos.’ 
III.  ii).  But  may  not  the  symbol  of  the  two 
virtues  in  the  fancy  of  Philo  have  been  rather 
the  two  sides  of  the  Choshen  than  two  actual 
images?  Philo’s  use  of  the  verb  dyaXparofpo- 
pelv  in  other  connections  may  tend  to  confirm 
this  view.  See  ‘de  Confus.  Ling.’  c.  13;  ‘de 
Mundi  Opif.’  c.  23;  but  still  more  to  the 
point  is  a passage  in  which  he  says  that  the 
two  webs  of  the  Choshen  were  called  Revela- 
tion and  Truth. — ’Etti  de  rov  Xoyeiov  dirra 
vejido-paTa  KaTaTroiKlXXei,  TTpocrayapevcov  to  pev 
drjX(o(riv  to  de  dX-^deiav  (‘  de  Monarch.’  II.  5. 
See  also  ‘ Legis  Alleg.’  iii.  40,  where  he  sub- 
stitutes cra(f)^ueia  for  dijXcocTLs).  But  it  is  al- 
leged that  a close  analogy  is  furnished  by  the 
image  of  sapphire  (/aj)is  lazuli,  see  on  Ex. 
xxviii.  18)  called  Truth,  that  was  suspended 
by  a gold  chain  on  the  breasts  of  the  Egyptian 
Judges,  with  which  they  touched  the  lips  of 
acquitted  persons  (Diod.  Sic.  i.  48,  75 ; Ailian, 

‘ Var.  Hist.’  xiv.  34).  That  such  a custom  as 
this  was  of  old  standing  in  Egypt,  is  rendered 
very  probable  by  certain  pictures  of  great  an- 
tiquity in  which  the  image  is  represented  as  a 
double  one,  bearing  the  symbols  of  Truth  and 
Justice.  The  deity  endowed  with  this  dual 
character  was  called  Thmei,  and  with  this  name 
some  have  connected  the  word  Thummim, 
(Wilkinson,  ii.  p.  205).  But  this  etymology 
is  entirely  rejected  by  Egyptian  scholars. — The 
Egyptian  origin  of  the  Urim  and  the  Thum- 
mim has  been  advocated  by  Spencer,  Gesenius, 
Knobel,  Furst,  Hengstenberg,  Plumptre  (in 
Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’  s.  v.)  and  others. 

But  an  argument  on  the  other  side  seems  to 
be  furnished  by  the  connection  of  the  Tera- 
phim  with  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim, 
which  may  be  traced  in  the  Old  Testament. 
It  has  been  suggested  on  very  probable  ground 
that  the  Teraphim  may  have  been  employed 
as  an  unauthorized  substitute  for  the  Urim 
and  the  Thummim  b Now  we  know  that 
the  Teraphim  belonged  to  patriarchal  times, 

^ See  Judg.  xvii.  5,  xvlii.  14,  17,  20;  Hos. 
iii.  4 ; and,  as  rightly  rendered  in  the  margin, 
2 K.  xxiii.  24;  Ezek.  xxi.  21;  Zech.  x.  2:  to 
these  may  be  added,  as  it  stands  in  the  Hebrew, 

I S.  XV.  23. 


392 


EXODUS.  XXVIII. 


to  the  Semitic  race,  and  to  regions  remote 
from  Egypt  (see  Gen,  xxxi.  19,  &c,).  Is  not 
the  supposition  as  easy  that  the  Urim  and  the 
Thummim  took  the  place  of  what  must  have 
been  familiarly  known  to  the  Patriarchs,  and 
which  appear,  in  a renewal  of  the  old  degraded 
form,  to  have  been  in  later  times  confounded 
with  them,  as  that  they  were  adopted  from 
the  Egyptians? 

V. 

As  to  the  form  and  material  of  the  Urim 
and  the  Thummim,  and  as  to  the  mode  in 
which  they  were  consulted  by  the  High- 
priest,  there  have  been  many  conjectures, 
some  of  them  very  wild  and  startling.  It 
would  be  out  of  place  here  to  go  at  length 
into  a subject  in  which  there  is  so  little  to 
limit  or  to  regulate  the  field  of  conjecture, 
that  anything  like  certainty  is  beyond  the 
reach  of  hope;  but  the  inquiry  must  not  be 
entirely  passed  over.  We  may  first  observe 
that  the  different  views  which  have  been  taken 
are  based  on  three  distinct  theories : — 

I.  That  the  Divine  Will  was  manifested 
through  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim  by  some 
physical  effect  addressed  to  the  eye  or  the  ear. 

a.  That  they  were  some  ordained  symbol 
which,  when  the  High-priest  concentrated  his 
sight  and  attention  on  it,  became  a means  of 
calling  forth  the  prophetic  gift. 

3.  That  they  were  some  contrivance  for 
casting  lots. 

I.  Josephus,  who  identified  the  stones  of 
the  Breastplate  with  the  Urim  and  the  Thum- 
mim, says  that  they  signified  a favourable 
answer  to  fhe  (juestion  proposed  by  shining 
forth  with  unusual  brilliancy.  He  adds  that 
they  had  not  been  known  to  exhibit  this  power 
for  200  years  before  his  time  (‘Ant.’  III.  8.  §9). 
As  regards  the  mode  of  the  answer,  several 
Jewish,  and  many  Christian,  writers,  have 
followed  him.  The  rabbinists  adopted  the 
notion,  and  shewed  their  usual  tendency  by 
exaggerating  it.  They  said  tlfat  the  answer 
was  communicated  in  detail  by  particular 
letters  in  the  inscriptions  on  the  stones  shining 
out  in  succession,  so  as  to  spell  the  words  k 
— Spencer,  supposing  that  the  Urim  and  the 
Thummim  were  two  images,  or  Tcraphim, 
imagined  that  an  angel  was  commissioned  to 
spc'ak  through  the  lips  of  one  of  them  with 
an  audible  voice  (‘  de  Leg.  Hebr.’  lib.  iir.  c.  v. 
§ 3).  Prideaux  and  others  have  supposed  that 
an  audible  voice  addressed  itself  from  the 
Mercy-scat  as  the  High-priest  stood  bt'fore  it 
wearing  the  Breastplate  on  his  breast  (‘  Con- 
ucction,’  See.,  book  i.). 

^ Sec  .Sheringh.'im’s  note  on  Yoma,  in  Suren- 
husius,  Vol.  II.  p.  251,  and  llie  notes  of  Drusius 
and  Cartwright  on  Ex.  xxviii.  30  in  the  ‘Crit. 
Bac.’ 


2.  Some  of  those  who  have  held  the  second 
theory  have  conceived  that  the  High-priest 
used  to  fix  his  eyes  on  the  gems  of  the  Breast- 
plate until  the  spirit  of  Prophecy  came  upon 
him  and  gave  him  utterance.  Others  have  con- 
jectured that  the  object  of  his  contemplation 
was  not  the  gems  themselves,  but  some  dis- 
tinct object  with  sacred  associations,  such  as 
a gold  plate  or  gem  of  some  kind  inscribed 
with  the  name  Jehovah,  attached  to  the 
outside  of  the  Breastplate.  This  theory, 
in  some  form,  is  adopted  by  the  Targum  of 
Palestine,  Theodoret,  Lightfoot,  Kalisch  and 
many  others ; but  it  is  most  fully  reasoned 
out  by  Plumptre  in  Smith’s  ‘Dictionary.’ 

3.  Michaelis,  Jahn  and  others,  have  sup- 
posed that  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim  might 
have  been  three  slips,  one  with  yes  upon  it, 
one  with  no,  and  tlie  third  plain,  and  that  the 
slip  taken  out  of  the  pocket  of  the  Breast- 
plate at  hap-hazard  by  the  High-priest  was 
regarded  as  giving  the  answer  to  the  question 
proposed. — Gesenius  and  Fiirst  have  adopted 
Spencer’s  notion,  that  they  were  two  images, 
but  supposed  that  they  were  used  in  some 
mode  of  casting  lots. — Winer,  following  Ziil- 
lig,  imagined  that  the  Urim  were  diamonds  cut 
in  the  form  of  dice,  and  that  the  Thummim 
were  rough  diamonds  (according  to  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word,  entire)  with  some  sort  of 
marks  engraved  on  them,  which  the  High- 
priest,  when  he  sought  tor  an  answer,  took 
out  of  the  bag  and  threw  down  on  a table 
in  the  Sanctuary,  drawing  a meaning  from 
the  mode  in  which  they  fell. 

But  the  theory  itself  is  not  necessarily  in- 
volved in  these  hollow  and  vain  conjectures  as 
to  the  material  instruments  which  may  have 
been  employed.  No  attempted  explanation 
seems  to  be  more  in  accordance  with  such 
analogy  as  the  history  of  the  Israelites  affords, 
or  more  free  from  objection,  than  that  the 
Urim  and  the  Thummim  were  some  means 
of  casting  lots.  That  the  Lord  should  have 
made  His  will  known  to  His  people  by  such 
means  may  indeed  run  counter  to  our  own 
habits  of  thought.  But  we  know  that  appeals 
to  lots  were  made  under  divine  authority  by 
the  chosen  people  on  the  most  solemn  occa- 
sions‘k  The  divine  will  was  manifested  by 
circumstances  in  themselves  of  as  little  note, 
or  of  as  little  external  connection  with  the 
question  at  issue,  as  the  dampness  or  the  dry- 
ness of  a fleece  laid  on  the  ground  (Judg. 
vi.  36 — 40).  It  must  have  been  a truth 
commonly  recognized  by  the  people  that 
though  “ the  lot  was  cast  into  the  lap,  the 
whole  disposing  thereof  was  of  the  Lord” 
(Prov.  xvi.  33). — The  practice  of  casting  lots 
was  not  wholly  discontinued  till  it  was  exer- 

2 Lev.  xvi.  8;  Num.  xxvi.  55;  Josh.  vii. 
14 — 18,  xiii.  6,  xviii.  8;  1 8,  xiv.  41,  42;  Acts 
i.  26. 


V.  I— 13-] 


EXODUS.  XXIX. 


393 


Lev.  S 

&5.  2. 


cised  in  completing  the  number  of  the  twelve 
Apostles  (Acts  i.  a6).  It  seems  v/orthy  of 
remark,  that  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim  ap- 
pear to  have  fallen  into  disuse  as  the  prophetic 
office  became  more  distinct  and  important  in 
and  after  the  reign  of  David ; and  that  we 
hear  nothing  of  the  casting  of  lots  in  the 
Apostolic  History  after  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
when  the  Holy  Ghost  was  given  to  lead  be- 
lievers into  all  truth.  In  each  case,  the  lower 


mode  of  revelation  appears  to  give  way  to 
the  higher  b 

^ It  has  been  objected  that  there  is  nothing 
in  the  etymology  of  the  names  of  the  Urim  and 
the  Thummim  to  justify  the  conjecture  that  they 
were  connected  with  casting  lots.  But  the  words 
in  their  proper  meaning  probably  referred  to  the 
result  obtained  (/.  e.  the  knowledge  of  the  divine 
will)  rather  than  to  the  mere  material  instruments 
employed. 


CH.APTER  XXIX. 

I The  sacrifice  and  cei'emonies  of  consecrating 
the  priests.  38  The  continual  burnt  offering. 
^ 5 God's  promise  to  dwell  amojig  the  children 
of  Israel. 

And  this  is  the  thing  that  thou 
shalt  do  unto  them  to  • hallow 
them,  to  minister  unto  me  in  the 
!.  2.  priest’s  office  : "Take  one  young  bul- 
lock, and  two  rams  without  blemish, 

2  And  unleavened  bread,  and  cakes 
unleavened  tempered  with  oil,  and 
wafers  unleavened  anointed  with  oil : 
of  Wheaten  flour  shalt  thou  make 
them. 

3  And  thou  shalt  put  them  into 
one  basket,  and  bring  them  in  the 
basket,  with  the  bullock  and  the  two 
rams. 

4  And  Aaron  and  his  sons  thou 
shalt  bring  unto  the  door  of  the  ta- 
bernacle of  the  congregation,  and  shalt 
wash  them  with  water. 

5  And  thou  shalt  take  the  gar- 
ments, and  put  upon  Aaron  the  coat, 
and  the  robe  of  the  ephod,  and  the 
ephod,  and  the  breastplate,  and  gird 
him  with  the  curious  girdle  of  the 
ephod ; 

6  And  thou  shalt  put  the  mitre 


upon  his  head,  and  put  the  holy 
crown  upon  the  mitre. 

7 Then  shalt  thou  take  the  anoint- 
ing ^oil,  and  pour  it  upon  his  head,  * chap.  30. 
and  anoint  him. 

8 And  thou  shalt  bring  his  sons, 
and  put  coats  upon  them. 

9 And  thou  shalt  gird  them  with 
girdles,  Aaron  and  his  sons,  and  ^ put  ^Heb. 
the  bonnets  on  them : and  the  priest’s 
office  shall  be  theirs  for  a perpetual 
statute  : and  thou  shalt  ^ consecrate 

A 11*  f'-^^ 

Aaron  and  his  sons.  hand  of. 

10  And  thou  shalt  cause  a bullock 
to  be  brought  before  the  tabernacle  of 

the  congregation:  and  Aaron  and Lev.  1.4. 
his  sons  shall  put  their  hands  upon 
the  head  of  the  bullock. 

1 1 And  thou  shalt  kill  the  bullock 
before  the  Lord,  by  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

12  And  thou  shalt  take  of  the 
blood  of  the  bullock,  and  put  it  upon 
the  horns  of  the  altar  with  thy  finger,  ^ 

and  pour  all  the  blood  beside  the  bot-  11  it  seem-’ 
tom  of  the  altar.  fnaZmy, 

13  And  ^thou  shalt  take  all  the  fat 

that  covereth  the  inwards,  and  “ the  doctors,  to 
caul  that  is  above  the  liver,  and  the 


Chap.  XXIX. 

The  Consecration  of  the  Priests. 

1-37* 

The  account  of  the  consecration  of  Aaron 
and  his  sons,  in  accordance  with  the  direc- 
tions contained  in  this  chapter,  is  given  in 
Lev.  viii.,  ix.  The  details  of  the  ceremonies 
involve  many  important  references  to  the  Law 
of  the  Offerings  contained  in  Lev.  i. — vii. 
Most  of  the  notes  on  these  details  are  there- 
fore given  under  the  narrative  of  the  conse- 
cration in  Leviticus. 

1,  2,  3.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  a,  a6. 

2.  cakes  unlea'vened  tempered  with  o/V] 


These  are  called  cakes  of  oiled  bread  in  Lev. 
viii.  26.  See  on  Lev.  ii.  4. 

4.  door  of  the  tabernacle'\  entrance  of 
the  tent.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  3. 

wash  thern\  See  on  Lev.  viii.  6. 

5.  6.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  7,  8,  9;  Exod. 
xxviii.  7,  8,  31 — 39,  xxxix.  30. 

6.  the  holy  crown\  See  on  xxxix.  30. 

7.  the  anointing  oi/]  See  Lev.  viii.  ic — 12; 
Exod.  XXX.  22 — 25. 

8.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  13:  cf.  Exod.  xxxix. 
41. 

10 — 14.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  14—17;  cf.  Lev. 
iv.  3. 


394 


EXODUS.  XXIX. 


[v.  14—30- 


two  kidneys,  and  the  fat  that  is  upon 
them,  and  burn  them  upon  the  altar. 

14  But  the  flesh  of  the  bullock, 
and  his  skin,  and  his  dung,  shalt  thou 
burn  with  fire  without  the  camp:  it 
is  a sin  offering. 

15  ^ Thou  shalt  also  take  one 
ram;  and  Aaron  and  his  sons  shall 
put  their  hands  upon  the  head  of 
the  ram. 

16  And  thou  shalt  slay  the  ram, 
and  thou  shalt  take  his  blood,  and 
sprinkle  it  round  about  upon  the  altar. 

17  And  thou  shalt  cut  the  ram  in 
pieces,  and  wash  the  inwards  of  him, 
and  his  legs,  and  put  them  unto  his 

, njwfi.  pieces,  and  “ unto  his  head. 

18  And  thou  shalt  burn  the  whole 
ram  upon  the  altar:  it  is  a burnt  of- 
fering unto  the  Lord  : it  is  a sweet 
savour,  an  offering  made  by  fire  unto 
the  Lord. 

19  ^ And  thou  shalt  take  the 
other  ram;  and  Aaron  and  his  sons 
shall  put  their  hands  upon  the  head 
of  the  ram. 

20  Then  shalt  thou  kill  the  ram, 
and  take  of  his  blood,  and  put  it  upon 
the  tip  of  the  right  ear  of  Aaron,  and 
upon  the  tip  of  the  right  ear  of  his 
sons,  and  upon  the  thumb  of  their 
right  hand,  and  upon  the  great  toe  of 
their  right  foot,  and  sprinkle  the  blood 
upon  the  altar  round  about. 

21  And  thou  shalt  take  of  the  blood 
that  is  upon  the  altar,  and  of  the 
anointing  oil,  and  sprinkle  it  upon 
Aaron,  and  upon  his  garments,  and 
upon  his  sons,  and  upon  the  garments 
of  his  sons  v/ith  him : and  he  shall 
be  hallowed,  and  his  garments,  and 
his  sons,  and  his  sons’  garments  with 
him. 

22  Also  thou  shalt  take  of  the  ram 


the  fat  and  the  rump,  and  the  fat  that 
covereth  the  inwards,  and  the  caul 
above  the  liver,  and  the  two  kidneys, 
and  the  fat  that  is  upon  them,  and 
the  right  shoulder;  for  it  is  a ram  of 
consecration : 

23  And  one  loaf  of  bread,  and  one 
cake  of  oiled  bread,  and  one  wafer 
out  of  the  basket  of  the  unleavened 
bread  that  is  before  the  Lord  : 

24  And  thou  shalt  put  all  in  the 

hands  of  Aaron,  and  in  the  hands  of 
his  sons ; and  shalt  " wave  them  for  a n Or, 
wave  offering  before  the  Lord.  ^and/rt 


25  And  thou  shalt  receive  them  of 
their  hands,  and  burn  them  upon  the 
altar  for  a burnt  offering,  for  a sweet 
savour  before  the  Lord  : it  is  an  of- 
fering made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

26  And  thou  shalt  take  the  breast 
of  the  ram  of  Aaron’s  consecration, 
and  wave  it  for  a wave  offering  before 
the  Lord  : and  it  shall  be  thy  part. 

27  And  thou  shalt  sanctify  the 
breast  of  the  wave  offering,  and  the 
shoulder  of  the  heave  offering,  which 
is  waved,  and  which  is  heaved  up,  of 
the  ram  of  the  consecration,  even  of 
that  which  is  for  Aaron,  and  of  that 
which  is  for  his  sons : 

28  And  it  shall  be  Aaron’s  and  his 
sons’  by  a statute  for  ever  from  the 
children  of  Israel : for  it  is  an  heave 
offering:  and  it  shall  be  an  heave 
offering  from  the  children  of  Israel  of 
the  sacrifice  of  their  peace  offerings, 
even  their  heave  offering  unto  the 
Lord. 

29  ^ And  the  holy  .garments  of 
Aaron  shall  be  his  sons’  after  him,  to 
be  anointed  therein,  and  to  be  conse- 
crated in  them.  , 

30  Jnd  ^ that  son  that  is  priest  in  t Heb. 
his  stead  shall  put  them  on  seven  days, 


15 — 18.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  18 — 21. 

19 — 28.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  22 — 29. 

27.  On  Waving  and  Heaving,  first  men- 
tioned in  their  connection  with  the  ceremonies 
of  the  Altar  in  this  chapter,  see  preface  to 
Leviticus.  It  should  be  noticed  that  the  right 
shoulder  (rather  perhaps  the  right  leg^  see  Lev. 
vii.  32)  was  to  be  formally  presented  to  the 


priests  {y'v.  22,  24),  in  order  to  make  a re- 
cognition of  the  Law  of  the  Heave-offering, 
though,  on  this  special  occasion,  it  was  not  to 
be  eaten  like  an  ordinary  heave-offering,  but 
to  be  made  part  of  the  burnt-offering,  {y.  25.) 

28.  This  law  is  repeated  Lev.  vii.  34.  Cf. 
Lev.  X.  14,  15;  Num.  vi.  2c. 

29,  30.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  30,  33. 


V.  31—41-] 


EXODUS.  XXIX. 


395 


when  he  cometh  into  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation  to  minister  in  the 
holy  place. 

31  ^1  And  thou  shalt  take  the  ram 
of  the  consecration,  and  seethe  his 
flesh  in  the  holy  place. 

32  And  Aaron  and  his  sons  shall 
eat  the  flesh  of  the  ram,  and  the 

/Lev.  8.  /bread  that  is  in  the  basket,  by  the 
Matt.  12.  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation. 

33  And  they  shall  eat  those  things 
wherewith  the  atonement  was  made, 
to  consecrate  and  to  sanctify  them: 
but  a stranger  shall  not  eat  thei'eof.^ 
because  they  are  holy. 

34  And  if  ought  of  the  flesh  of  the 
consecrations,  or  of  the  bread,  remain 
unto  the  morning,  then  thou  shalt 
burn  the  remainder  with  fire : it  shall 
not  be  eaten,  because  it  is  holy. 

35  And  thus  shalt  thou  do  unto 
Aaron,  and  to  his  sons,  according  to 
all  things  which  I have  commanded 
thee : seven  days  shalt  thou  consecrate 
them. 

36  And  thou  shalt  offer  every  day 
a bullock  for  a sin  offering  for  atone- 


ment : and  thou  shalt  cleanse  the  altar, 
when  thou  hast  made  an  atonement 
for  it,  and  thou  shalt  anoint  it,  to 
sanctify  it. 

37  Seven  days  thou  shalt  make  an 
atonement  for  the  altar,  and  sanctify 
it ; and  it  shall  be  an  altar  most  holy : 
whatsoever  toucheth  the  altar  shall  be 
holy. 

38  ^ Now  this  is  that  which  thou 
shalt  offer  upon  the  altar  j ^ two  ^ Numb, 
lambs  of  the  first  year  day  by  day 
continually. 

39  The  one  lamb  thou  shalt  offer 
in  the  morning;  and  the  other  lamb 
thou  shalt  offer  at  even : 

40  And  with  the  one  lamb  a tenth 
deal  of  flour  mingled  with  the  fourth 
part  of  an  hin  of  beaten  oil ; and  the 
fourth  part  of  an  hin  of  wine  for  a 
drink  offering. 

41  And  the  other  lamb  thou  shalt 
offer  at  even,  and  shalt  do  thereto  ac- 
cording to  the  meat  offering  of  the 
morning,  and  according  to  the  drink 
oflTering  thereof,  for  a sweet  savour, 
an  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the 
Lord. 


31 — 34,  See  on  Lev.  viii.  31,  32. 

33.  a stranger]  one  of  another  family, 
i.e.  in  this  case,  one  not  of  the  family  of 
Aaron.  The  Hebrew  word  (gzar)  is  the  same 
as  is  used  xxx.  33,  Deut.  xxv.  5. 

35,  36.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  33,  35. 

37.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  ii. 

The  Continual  Burnt-offering. 

38—46. 

I 38.  this  is  that  mshich  thou  shalt  offer]  The 

primary  purpose  of  the  national  Altar  is  here 
set  forth.  On  it  was  to  be  offered  “the  con- 
tinual Burnt-offering”  (gv.  42),  consisting  of 
: a yearling  lamb  with  its  meat-offering  and  its 

1 drink-offering,  and  this  was  to  figure  the  daily 

i renewal  of  the  consecration  of  the  nation. 

[ The  victim  slain  every  morning  and  every 

1 evening  was  an  acknowledgment  that  the  life 

• of  the  people  belonged  to  Jehovah,  and  the 

s offering  of  meal  was  an  acknowledgment  that 

all  their  right  works  were  His  due  (see  on 
Lev.  ii.) ; while  the  incense  symbolized  their 
n daily  prayers.  (See  on  xxx.  6 — 8.) 

' 39.  at  e'ven]  Literally,  between  the  tn.vo 

^ ensenings.  See  on  xii.  6. 

40.  a tenth  deaf]  z.  the  tenth  part  of  an 
Ephah;  it  is  sometimes  called  an  Oiner  (Exod. 


xvi.  36;  Num.  xxviii.  5.  See  on  Lev.  xxiii.  13). 
The  Ephah  seems  to  have  been  rather  less  than 
four  gallons  and  a half  (see  on  Lev.  xix.  36); 
and  the  tenth  deal  of  flour  may  have  weighed 
about  3 lbs,  2 oz. 

an  hin]  The  word  ///;,  which  here  first 
occurs,  appears  to  be  Egyptian.  The  measure 
was  one-sixth  of  an  ephah.  The  quarter  of  a 
hin  was  therefore  about  a pint  and  a half.  See 
on  Lev.  xix.  36. 

beaten  0//]  i.e.  oil  of  the  best  quality.  See 
on  xxvii.  20. 

(ujine  for  a drink-offering]  The  earliest  men- 
tion of  the  Drink-offering  is  found  in  connec- 
tion with  Jacob’s  setting  up  the  stone  at  Bethel 
(Gen.  XXXV.  14).  But  it  is  here  first  associated 
with  the  rites  of  the  Altar.  The  Law  of  the 
Drink-offering  is  stated  Num.xv.  5 sq.  Nothing 
whatever  is  expressly  said  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment regarding  the  mode  in  which  the  wine 
was  treated : but  it  would  seem  probable,  from 
the  prohibition  that  it  should  not  be  poured 
upon  the  Altar  of  Incense  (Exod.  xxx.  9), 
that  it  used  to  be  poured  on  the  Altar  of 
Burnt-offering.  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  ill.  9.  § 4) 
says  that  it  was  poured  round  the  Altar  (^fpl 
Tov  jScofio!^) : it  may  have  been  cast  upon  it 
in  the  same  way  as  the  blood  of  the  Burnt- 


Ii 

It 


396 


EXODUS.  XXIX.  XXX. 


[v.  42—4. 


42  Tins  shall  be  a continual  burnt 
offering  throughout  your  generations 
at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  before  the  Lord  : where 
I will  meet  you,  to  speak  there  unto 
thee. 

43  And  there  I will  meet  with  the 
Is^Iei  children  of  Israel,  and  ” the  tabernacle 

shall  be  sanctified  by  my  glory. 

44  And  I will  sanctify  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation,  and  the 
altar : I will  sanctify  also  both  Aaron 
and  his  sons,  to  minister  to  me  in  the 
priest’s  office. 

^^Lev.  26.  4^  ^ And  I will  dwell  among  the 

2  Cor.  6.  children  of  Israel,  and  will  be  their 
God. 

46  And  they  shall  know  that  I am 
the  Lord  their  God,  that  brought 
them  forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
that  I may  dwell  among  them : I am 
the  Lord  their  God. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

r The  altar  of  incense,  ii  The  raitsoni  of 
souls.  17  The  brasen  laver.  22  The  holy 
anointing  oil.  34  The  composition  of  the 
perfume. 

And  thou  shalt  make  an  altar  to 
^ burn  incense  upon : of  shittim 
wood  shalt  thou  make  it. 

2 A cubit  shall  be  the  length  there- 
of, and  a cubit  the  breadth  thereof; 
foursquare  shall  it  be : and  two  cubits 
shall  be  the  height  thereof : the  horns 
thereof  shall  be  of  the  same. 

3  And  thou  shalt  overlay  it  v/ith 
pure  gold,  the  Hop  thereof,  and  thefHeb. 
Hides  thereof  round  about,  and  the  2//^ 
horns  thereof ; and  thou  shalt  make 
unto  it  a crown  of  gold  round  about,  ‘watts'. 

4  And  two  golden  rings  shalt  thou 
make  to  it  under  the  crown  of  it,  by 
the  two  Horners  thereof,  upon  the 
two  sides  of  it  shalt  thou  make  it;  and  ^ 


offering  and  the  Peace-offering  (see  on  Lev.  i.), 
or  at  its  foot  (e?  defieXia),  Ecclus.  i.  15. 
This  appears  to  agree  with  the  patriarchal 
usage  mentioned  Gen.  xxxv.  14. 

42.  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle']  at  the 
entrance  of  the  Tent. 

43.  the  {tabernacle')  shall  be  sanctified] 
The  word  tabernacle  is  certainly  not  the  right 
one  to  be  here  supplied.  From  the  context 
it  may  be  inferred  that  what  is  meant  is  the 
spot  in  which  Jehovah  promises  to  meet  with 
the  assembly  of  His  people,  who  were  not  ad- 
mitted into  the  Mishkdn  itself,  as  the  priests 
were  (see  xxv,  22);  that  is,  the  Holy  Pre- 
cinct between  the  Tabernacle  and  the  Altar. 
See  Lev.  x.  17,  18. — This  verse  should  be 
rendered.  And  in  that  place  will  I meet 
with  the  children  of  Israel,  and  it 
shall  be  sanctified  with  my  glory. 

44.  45.  The  purpose  of  the  formal  con- 
secration of  the  Sanctuary  and  of  the  priests 
who  served  in  it  was,  that  the  whole  nation 
which  Jehovah  had  set  free  from  its  bondage 
in  Egypt  might  be  consecrated  in  its  daily 
life,  and  dwell  continually  in  His  presence  as 
“a  kingdom  of  priests  and  an  holy  nation.” 

46.  Cf.  Gen.  xvii.  7. 

CUAW  XXX. 

The  Altar  of  Incense. 

I — 10.  (xxxvii.  25 — 28,  xl.  26,  27.) 

This  pas-sage  would  seem  naturally  to  be- 
long to  ch.  xxv,,  where  directions  are  given 
for  the  whole  of  the  furniture  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, except  the  Altar  of  Incense.  No  satis- 


factory reason  appears  for  its  occurrence  in 
this  place.  In  the  lists  of  the  articles  (xxxi.  8, 
xxxv.  15),  and  in  the  record  of  their  con- 
struction (xxxvii.  25 — ^28),  and  of  their  ar- 
rangement in  the  Sanctuary  (xl,  26,  27),  the 
Altar  of  Incense  is  mentioned  in  due  order. 
It  should  however  be  observed,  that  the  in- 
structions here  given  respecting  it  are  distin- 
guished from  those  relating  to  the  other  arti- 
cles in  ch.  xxv.  in  as  far  as  they  comprise 
directions  for  the  mode  in  which  it  was  to  be 
used  {‘v'v.  7 — 10). 

The  Altar  was  to  be  a casing  of  boards  of 
shittim  wood  (see  on  xxv.  5),  18  inches  square 
and  three  feet  in  height  (taking  the  cubit  as 
18  inches),  entirely  covered  with  plates  of 
gold.  Four  “horns”  were  to  project  upwards 
at  the  corners  like  those  of  the  Altar  of 
Burnt-offering  (xxvii.  2).  A moulding  of 
gold  was  to  run  round  the  top.  On  each  of 
two  opposite  sides  there  was  to  be  a gold 
ring  through  which  the  staves  were  to  be  put 
when  it  was  moved  from  place  to  place. 

3.  a crorjun  of  gold]  a moulding  of 
gold.  See  on  xxv.  II. 

4.  by  the  two  corners  thereof]  The  Fle- 
brew  w'ord  does  not  mean  corners.  See  mar- 
gin. The  sense  of  the  first  part  of  the  verse 
appears  to  be : And  two  gold  rings  shalt  thou 
make  for  it  under  its  7noulding ; on  its  two 
sides  shalt  thou  make  them  {i.e.  one  ring  on 
each  side).  So  de  Wette,  Knobel,  Schott, 
Wogue.  The  Ark  and  the  Shewbread  Table 
had  each  four  rings,  two  for  the  pole  on  each 
side;  but  the  Incense  Altar,  being  shorter, 


V.  5— I 2-] 


EXODUS.  XXX. 


397 


they  shall  be  for  places  for  the  staves 
to  bear  it  withal. 

5 And  thou  shalt  make  the  staves 
of  shittim  wood,  and'  overlay  them 
with  gold. 

6 And  thou  shalt  put  it  before  the 
vail  that  Is  by  the  ark  of  the  testimony, 
before  the  mercy  seat  that  is  over  the 
testimony,  where  I will  meet  with 
thee. 

7 And  Aaron  shall  burn  thereon 
^ sweet  incense  every  morning:  v/hen 

sM^s.  he  dresseth  the  lamps,  he  shall  burn 
incense  upon  it. 

up.  8 And  when  Aaron  “ lighteth  the 
^causethio  l^mps  ^ at  even,  he  shall  burn  incense 
niZ^'  ^ perpetual  incense  before  the 

/>rfwe>n  LoRD  throughout  youi'  generations. 

9  Ye  shall  offer  no  strange  incense 


thereon,  nor  burnt  sacrifice,  nor  meat 
ofiering;  neither  shall  ye  pour  drink 
offering  thereon. 

10  And  Aaron  shall  make  an  atone- 
ment upon  the  horns  of  it  once  in  a 
year  with  the  blood  of  the  sin  offering 
of  atonements : once  in  the  year  shall 
he  make  atonement  upon  it  through- 
out your  generations : it  is  most  holy 
unto  the  Lord. 

11  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

12  ^When  thou  takest  the  sum 

the  children  of  Israel  after  ^ their  num-  t Heb.’ 
ber,  then  shall  they  give  every  man  a 
ransom  for  his  soul  unto  the  Lord, 
when  thou  numberest  them ; that 
there  be  no  plague  among  them,  when 
thou  numberest  them. 


was  sufficiently  supported  by  a single  ring  on 
each  side,  without  risk  of  its  being  thrown  off 
its  balance. 

6,  The  place  for  the  Altar  of  Incense  was 
outside  the  vail,  opposite  to  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant  and  between  the  Candlestick  on  the 
south  side  and  the  Shewbread  Table  on  the 
north  (xl.  22 — 24).  It  appears  to  have  been 
regarded  as  having  a more  intimate  connection 
with  the  fioly  of  Holies  than  the  other  things 
in  the  Holy  Place  (see  i K.  vi.  22 ; Rev.  viii. 
3 ; also  Heb.  ix.  4,  if  we  are  to  identify  it 
with  the  Ov^iaT^piov  there  m.entioned,  see 
on  Lev.  xvi.  1 2)  ; and  the  mention  of  the 
Mercy-seat  in  this  verse,  if  we  associate  with 
it  the  significance  of  incense  as  figuring  the 
prayers  of  the  Lord’s  people  (Ps,  cxli.  2 ; Rev. 
V.  8,  viii.  3,  4),  seems  to  furnish  additional 
ground  for  an  inference  that  the  Incense 
Altar  took  precedence  of  the  Table  of  Show- 
bread  and  the  Candlestick. 

7.  the  lamps]  See  on  xxvii.  21. 

burn  incense]  The  word  here  and  elsewhere 
applied  to  the  burning  of  incense  is  the  same 
as  that  used  xxv.  37.  See  note. 

7,  8.  The  offering  of  the  Incense  accom- 
panied that  of  the  morning  and  evening  sacri- 
fice. The  two  forms  of  offering  symbolized 
the  spirit  of  man  reaching  after  communion 
with  Jehovah,  both  in  act  and  utterance,  ac- 
cording to  the  words  of  the  Psalmist,  ‘ ‘ Let 
my  prayer  be  set  forth  before  thee  as  incense ; 
and  the  lifting  up  of  my  hands  as  the  evening 
sacrifice.”  Ps.  cxli.  2. 

9.  By  this  regulation,  the  symbolism  of 
the  Altar  of  Incense  was  kept  free  from  ambi- 
guity. Atonement  was  made  by  means  of  the 
victim  on  the  Brazen  altar  in  the  court  out- 


side ; the  prayers  of  the  reconciled  worshippers 
had  their  type  within  the  Tabernacle. 

10.  See  on  Lev.  xvi.  18,  19. 

shall  he  make  atonement]  rather,  shall 
atonement  be  made. 

The  Ransom  of  Souls. 

II — 16.  (xxxviii.  25 — 28.) 

11.  12.  The  materials  for  the  textile  work, 
the  wood,  the  gold,  and  the  bronze,  were 
to  be  the  free-will  offerings  of  those  who 
could  contribute  them  (xxv.  2,  xxxv.  21  sq.). 
But  the  silver  was  to  be  obtained  by  an  en- 
forced capitation  on  every  adult  male  Israelite, 
the  poor  and  the  rich  having  to  pay  the  same 
{"v.  15).  Hence,  in  the  estimate  of  the  metals 
collected  for  the  work  (xxxviii.  24—31)  the 
gold  and  the  bronze  are  termed  offerings 
(strictly,  wave- offerings,  see  preface  to 
Leviticus),  while  the  silver  is  spoken  of  as 
“the  silver  of  them  that  were  numbered.” 
But  this  payment  is  brought  into  its  highest 
relation  in  being  here  accounted  a spiritual 
obligation  laid  on  each  individual,  a tribute 
expressly  exacted  by  Jehovah.  Every  man  of 
Israel  who  would  escape  a curse  (-t’.  12)  had 
in  this  way  to  make  a practical  acknowledg- 
ment that  he  had  a share  in  the  Sanctuary, 
on  the  occasion  of  his  being  recognised  as  one 
of  the  covenanted  people  (-i;.  16).— Silver  was 
the  metal  commonly  used  for  current  coin. 
See  Gen.  xxiii.  16. 

12.  When  thou  takest  the  sum  of  the  children 
of  Israel]  The  silver  must  have  been  contri- 
buted at  this  time,  along  with  the  other 
materials,  since  it  was  used  in  the  Tabernacle, 
which  was  completed  on  the  first  day  of  the 
first  month  of  the  second  year  after  coming 


EXODUS.  XXX. 


[v.  13—19. 


398 


13  This  they  shall  give,  every  one 
that  passeth  among  them  that  are  num- 
bered, half  a shekel  after  the  shekel  of 
* Lev.  27.  the  sanctuary:  [^2.  shekel  is  twenty 
Numb.  3.  gerahs:)  an  half  shekel  shall  be  the 
Ezek  oftering  of  the  Lord. 

12.  ‘ ’ 14  Every  one  that  passeth  among 

them  that  are  numbered,  from  twenty 
years  old  and  above,  shall  give  an 
offering  unto  the  Lord. 

\M^uipiy  ^5  ^give  more, 

tHeb.  and  the  poor  shall  not  ^give  less 
dimmish,  ^ shekel,  when  they  give  an 

offering  unto  the  Lord,  to  make  an 
atonement  for  your  souls. 

16  And  thou  shalt  take  the  atone- 


ment money  of  t«he  children  of  Israel, 
and  shalt  appoint  it  for  the  service  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation ; 
that  it  may  be  a memorial  unto  the 
children  of  Israel  before  the  Lord,  to 
make  an  atonement  for  your  souls. 

17  *[I  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

18  Thou  shalt  also  make  a laver  of 
brass,  and  his  foot  also  of  brass,  to 
wash  withal:  and  thou  shalt  put  it 
between  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation and  the  altar,  and  thou  shalt 
put  water  therein. 

1 9 P'or  Aaron  and  his  sons  shall  wash 
their  hands  and  their  feet  thereat : 


out  of  Egypt  (xl.  17).  But  the  command  to 
take  the  complete  census  of  the  nation  appears 
not  to  have  been  given  until  the  first  day  of 
the  second  month  of  that  year  (Num.  i.  i). 
On  comparing  the  words  of  Exod.  xxx.  12 
with  those  of  Num.  i.  i — 3,  we  may  perhaps 
infer  that  the  first  passage  relates  to  a mere 
counting  of  the  adult  Israelites  at  the  time 
when  the  money  was  taken  from  each,  and 
that  what  the  latter  passage  enjoins  was  a 
formal  enrolment  of  them  according  to  their 
genealogies  and  their  order  of  military  service. 

a ransom  for  his  soul~\  What  the  sincere 
worshipper  tlms  paid  was  at  once  the  fruit 
and  the  sign  of  his  faith  in  the  goodness  of 
Jehovah,  who  had  redeemed  hun  and  brought 
him  into  the  Covenant.  (See  Introd.  note  to 
ch.  XXV.)  Hence  the  payment  is  rightly  called 
a rafisom  in  as  much  as  it  involved  a personal 
appropi’iation  of  the  fact  of  his  redemption. 
On  the  word  sold.,  see  on  Lev.  xvii.  ii. 

that  there  he  no  plague']  i.  e.  that  they  might 
not  incur  punis.hment  for  the  neglect  and  con- 
tempt of  spiritual  privileges.  Cf.  i Cor.  xi. 
27 — 30;  and  the  Exhortation  in  our  Com- 
munion Service. 

13.  ha/fa  shekel]  The  probable  weight  of 
silver  in  the  half-shekel  would  now  be  worth 
about  ij.  3L/.  (See  on  Exod.  xxxviii.  25.) 
Cerah  is,  literally,  a bean.,  probably  the  bean 
of  the  carob  or  locust-tree  (A ben- Ezra).  It 
was  used  as  the  name  of  a small  weight,  as  our 
word  grain  came  into  use  from  a grain  of 
wheat.  'I'he  purpose  of  the  definition  of  the 
shekel  here  given  is  not  quite  certain.  It 
might  seem  to  countenance  the  rabbinical 
notion  that  there  were  two  kinds  of  shekel, 
the  shekel  of  the  Sanctuary  consisting  of  twenty 
gerahs,  and  the  common  shekel.  (See  on 
xxxviii.  24.)  But  it  is  more  likely  that  the 
weight  is  defined  rather  for  the  sake  of  em- 
phasis, to  intimate  that  the  just  value  should 
be  given  precisely.  The  words  in  question 


might  rather  be  rendered:  “half  a shekel  after 
the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary,  twenty  gerahs 
to  the  shekel;  the  half  shekel  shall 
he  the  offering  (Hob.  terumah.,  as  in  •vn.\ 
14,  15  ; see  xxv.  2)  to  Jehovah.” 

15.  Every  Israelite  stood  in  one  and  the 
same  relation  to  Jehovah.  See  on  'w.  ii,  12. 

16.  tabernacle  of  the  congregation]  Tent 
of  meeting. 

a memorial  unto  the  children  of  Is mel]  The 
silver  used  in  the  Tabernacle  was  a memorial 
to  remind  each  man  of  his  position  before  the 
Lord,  as  one  of  the  covenanted  people. 

The  Lamer  of  Brass. 

17 — 21.  (xxxviii.  8.) 

18.  a lamer  of  brass]  The  bronze  for  the 
Laver  and  its  foot  w^s  supplied  from  the 
bronze  mirrors  of  the  women  “ who  assembled 
at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle.”  The  women 
seem  to  have  voluntarily  given  up  these  articles 
of  luxury  (see  on  xxxviii.  8).  Bronze  mirrors 
were  much  used  by  the  ancient  Egyptians. 
Wilkinson,  Vol.  11.  p.  345.  No  hint  is  given 
as  to  the  form  of  the  Laver.  It  may  have 
been  made  with  an  immediate  view  to  use 
of  the  simplest  and  most  convenient  form. 
The  Brazen  Sea  and  the  ten  Lavers  that  served 
the  same  purpose  in  the  Temple  of  Solomon, 
were  elaborately  wrought  in  artistic  designs 
and  are  minutely  described  (i  K.  vii.  23 — 29). 

tabernacle  of  the  congregation]  Tent  of 
meeting. 

19.  c.oash  their  hands  and  their  feet] 
Whenever  a priest  had  to  enter  the  Taber- 
nacle, or  to  offer  a victim  on  the  Altar,  he 
was  required  to  wash  his  hands  and  his  feet ; 
but  on  certain  solemn  occasions  he  was  re- 
quired to  bathe  his  whole  person  (xxix.  4 ; 
Lev.  xvi.  4).  The  leaver  must  also  have  fur- 
nished the  water  for  washing  those  parts  of 
the  victims  that  needed  cleansing  (Lev.  i.  9). 


V.  20 24-] 


EXODUS.  XXX. 


399 


20  When  they  go  into  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation,  they  shall 
wash  with  water,  that  they  die  not; 
or  when  they  come  near  to  the  altar 
to  minister,  to  burn  offering  made  by 
hre  unto  the  Lord  : 

21  So  they  shall  wash  their  hands 
and  their  feet,  that  they  die  not : and 
it  shall  be  a statute  for  ever  to  them, 
even  to  him  and  to  his  seed  through- 
out their  generations. 


22  ^ Moreover  the  Lord  spake 
unto  Moses,  saying, 

23  Take  thou  also  unto  thee  prin- 
cipal spices,  of  pure  myrrh  five  hun- 
dred shekels^  and  of  sweet  cinnamon 
half  so  much,  even  two  hundred  and 
fifty  shekels^  and  of  sweet  calamus  two 
hundred  and  fifty  shekels^ 

24  And  of  cassia  five  hundred  she- 
kels^ after  the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary, 
and  of  oil  olive  an  ‘'hin  ; 


c chap.  29. 
40. 


20.  tabernacle  of  the  congregation\  Tent 
of  meeting. 

that  they  die  not\  See  on  xxviii.  35. 
to  burn  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord\ 
Literally,  to  send  up  in  fire  an  offering  to 
Jeho-vah.  The  verb  is  the  same  as  in  ui.  7 
and  XXV  37. 

The  Holy  Anointing  Oil. 

22—33*  (xxxvii.  29.) 

23.  principal  spices']  the  best  spices. 
pure  myrrh]  There  cannot  be  much  doubt 
as  to  the  identity  of  this  substance  from  its 
name  in  different  languages  (Hebrew,  mor; 
Arabic,  murr;  Greek,  afxvpva'^  Latin,  myrrha'). 
It  is  a gum  which  comes  from,  the  stem  of  a 
low,  thorny,  ragged  tree,  that  grows  in  Arabia 
Felix  and  Eastern  Africa,  called  by  botanists 
Balsamodendron  myrrha.  The  word  here 
rendered  pure.^  is  literally,  freely  fio^ving^  an 
epithet  which  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  the 
best  myrrh  is  said  to  exude  spontaneously 
from  the  bark  (Plin.  ‘H.  N.’  xii.  35;  Theo- 
phrast.  ‘de  Odorib.’  29),  while  that  of  inferior 
quality  oozes  out  in  greater  quantity  from 
incisions  made  in  the  bark.  On  the  estimation 
in  which  myrrh  was  held,  see  Cant.  i.  13 ; 
Matt.  ii.  II ; on  its  use  as  a perfume,  Ps.  xlv. 
8;  Prov.  vii.  17;  Cant.  v.  3;  and  on  its  use 
in  embalming,  John  xix.  39.  This  is  the  first 
mention  of  it  in  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Old 
Testament,  but  in  our  version  it  is  named  by 
mistake  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  xliii.  ii. 

fi<ve  hundred  shekels]  Probably  rather  more 
than  15  J-  lbs.  See  on  xxxviii.  24. 

srjjeet  cinnamon]  This  substance  is  satis- 
factorily identified,  like  the  preceding  one,  on 
account  of  its  name  (Heb.  Kinnamon;  Gr.  klv- 
vdjjLoipov]  Lat.  cinnamomurn).  It  is  obtained 
from  a tree  allied  to  the  laurel  that  grows  in 
Ceylon  .and  other  islands  of  the  Indian  Ocean, 
known  in  Botany  as  the  Cinnamomun  zeyla^ 
nicum.  It  is  the  inner  rind  of  the  tree  dried 
in  the  sun.  The  origin  of  the  name  appears  to 
be  found  in  the  Malay  language  (Ritter,  Kno- 
bel),  Herodotus  says  that  the  word  is  Phoe- 
nician, but  this  means  no  more  than  that  the 
Greeks  learned  it  from  the  Phoenicians.  It 
is  probable  that  Cinnamon  v/as  imported  from 


India  in  very  early  times  by  the  people  of 
Ophir,  and  that  it  was  brought  with  other 
spices  fi-om  the  south  part  of  Arabia  by  the 
trading  caravans  that  visited  Egypt  and  Syria. 
Hence,  even  in  later  times.  Cinnamon  and 
other  Indian  spices  were  spoken  of  as  produc- 
tions of  the  land  of  the  Sabacans  (Strabo,  xvi. 
pp.  769,  774,  778).  If  weaccept  thisexplana- 
tion,  the  mention  of  these  spices  in  Exodus 
may  be  taken  as  the  earliest  notice  we  have  con- 
nected with  commerce  with  the  remote  East. 
Cinnamon  is  elsewhere  mentioned  in  the  Scrip- 
tures only,  Prov.  vii.  17;  Cant.  iv.  14;  Rev. 
xviii.  13. 

t^o  hundred  and  fifty  shekels]  Probably 
about  7 lbs.  14  oz.  See  on  xxxviii.  24. 

s^veet  calamus]  The  word  rendered  calamus 
{lianelS)  is  the  common  Hebrew  name  for  a 
stalky  reed,  or  cane  (Gen.  xli.  5 ; i K.  xiv.  15 ; 
Ezek.  xli.  8).  The  fragrant  cane  (or  rusld) 
here  spoken  of  is  mentioned  in  Isa.  xliii.  24,  in 
Jer.  vi,  20  (where  it  is  called  in  the  Hebrew 
“the  good  cane  from  a far  country”),  and  in 
Cant.  iv.  14;  Ezek.  xxvii.  19,  where  it  is  call- 
ed simply  cane.  It  was  probably  what  is  now 
known  in  India  as-  the  Lemon  Grass  {An- 
dropogon  schoenanthus').  Aromatic  reeds  were 
known  to  the  ancients  as  the  produce  of  India 
and  the  region  of  the  Euphrates  (Xenophon, 

‘ Anab.’  i.  5,  § i;  Diosc.  ‘ Mat.  Med.’  i.  16). 
The  statements  that  such  reeds  were  produced 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Libanus  (Theophr. 

‘ H.  P.’  IX.  7 ; ‘ C.  P.’  VI.  18 ; Polybius,  V.  45), 
near  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  (Strabo,  xvi. 
p.  755)  and  in  the  Land  of  the  Sabieans 
(Strabo,  xvi.  p.  778  ; cf.  Diod.  ii.  49),  may 
be  regarded  as  some  of  the  many  mistakes 
which  have  arisen  from  confounding  the 
country  from  which  a commodity  is  obtained 
with  that  of  its  original  production. 

24.  cassia]  The  Hebrew  name  (kidddh) 
is  found  elsewhere  only  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  19, 
where  it  is  associated,  as  it  is  here,  with  sweet 
cane.  The  word  rendered  cassia  in  Ps.  xlv.  8 
is  a diflerent  one,  but  it  is  probable  that  the 
same  substance  is  denoted  by  it.  Most  of  the 
ancient  versions,  and  all  modern  authorities, 
seem  to  be  in  favour  of  cassia  being  the  true 
rendering  of  kidddh.  Cassia  is  the  inner  bark 


400 


EXODUS.  XXX.  [v.  25-34. 


25  And  thou  shalt  make  it  an  oil 
of  holy  ointment,  an  ointment  com- 

*0r,  pound  after  the  art  of  the  “ apothe- 
pe7jumer.  ^ anointing  oil. 

26  And  thou  shalt  anoint  the  ta- 
bernacle of  the  congregation  there- 
with, and  the  ark  of  the  testimony, 

27  And  the  table  and  all  his  ves- 
sels, and  the  candlestick  and  his  ves- 
sels, and  the  altar  of  incense, 

28  And  the  altar  of  burnt  offering 
with  all  his  vessels,  and  the  laver  and 
his  foot. 

29  And  thou  shalt  sanctify  them, 
that  they  may  be  most  holy:  what- 
soever toucheth  them  shall  be  holy. 

30  And  thou  shalt  anoint  Aaron 
and  his  sons,  and  consecrate  them, 


that  they  may  minister  unto  me  in 
the  priest’s  office. 

31  And  thou  shalt  speak  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  saying,  This  shall 
be  an  holy  anointing  oil  unto  me 
throughout  your  generations. 

32  Upon  man’s  flesh  shall  it  not 
be  poured,  neither  shall  ye  make  any 
other  like  it,  after  the  composition  of 
it:  it  is  holy,  and  it  shall  be  holy 
unto  you. 

33  Whosoever  compoundeth  any 
like  it,  or  whosoever  putteth  any  of 
it  upon  a stranger,  shall  even  be  cut 
off  from  his  people. 

34  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto 
Moses,  Take  unto  thee  sweet  spices, 
stacte,  and  onycha,  and  galbanum; 


of  an  Indian  tree  (Cinnamonum  cassia)^  which 
differs  from  that  which  produces  cinnamon  in 
the  shape  of  its  leaves  and  some  other  particu- 
lars. It  bears  a strong  resemblance  to  cinna- 
mon, but  it  is  more  pungent,  and  of  coarser 
texture.  It  was  probably  in  ancient  times,  as 
it  is  at  present,  by  far  less  costly  than  cinna- 
mon, and  it  may  have  been  on  this  account 
that  it  was  used  in  double  quantity. 

an  hhi]  Probably  about  six  pints.  See  on 
Lev.  xix.  36. 

25. ]  a)i  oil  of  holy  ohitment\  rather,  a 
holy  anointing  oil. 

after  the  art  of  the  apothecary~\  According 
to  Jewish  tradition,  the  essences  of  the  spices 
were  first  extracted,  and  then  mixed  with  the 
oil  (Otho,  ‘Lex,  Rabb.’  p.  486).  That  some 
such  process  was  employed  is  probable  from 
the  great  proportion  of  solid  matter  compared 
with  the  oil.  The  preparation  of  the  Anoint- 
ing Oil,  as  well  as  of  the  Incense,  was  en- 
trusted to  Be/aleel  (xxxvii.  29),  and  the  care 
of  preserving  it  to  Lleazar  the  son  of  Aaron 
(Num.  iv.  16).  In  a later  age,  it  was  prepared 
by  the  sons  of  the  priests  (i  Chro.  ix.  30). 

26 — 31.]  Cf.  xl.  9 — 15.  See  on  Lev. 

viii,  10 — 12. 

26.  tabernacle  of  the  congregation']  Tent 
of  meeting. 

*29.]  See  on  xxix.  37. 

32.  upon  viayis  flesh]  i.e.  on  the  persons 
of  those  that  were  not  priests  who  might 
employ  it  for  such  anointing  as  was  usual 
on  festive  occasions  (Ps.  civ.  15  ; Prov.  xxvii.  9 ; 
Matt.  vi.  17,  &c.). 

33.  a stranger]  one  of  another 
family.  See  on  xxix.  33.  The  Holy 
Anointing  Oil  was  not  even  to  be  used  for 
the  anointing  of  a king.  See  on  i K.  i.  39. 


cut  off  from  his  people.]  See  on  Gen.  xvii. 
14,  Exod.  xxxi.  14,  and  Lev.  vii.  20. 

The  Holy  Incense. 

34—38.  .(xxxvii.  29.) 

34.]  The  Incense,  like  the  Anointing  Oil, 
consisted  of  four  aromatic  ingredients. 

stacte]  The  Hebrew  word  is  nataph  {i.e.  a 
drop').,  which  occurs  in  its  simple  sense  in  Job 
xxxvi.  27.  Our  version  and  the  Vulgate  have 
adopted  the  word  used  by  the  LXX.  (o-raKrJ), 
which,  like  the  Hebrew,  may  denote  anything 
that  drops,  and  was  applied  to  the  purest  kind 
of  myrrh  that  drops  spontaneously  from  the 
tree  (see  on  2;.  23).  But  the  substance  here 
meant,  Which  is  nowhere  else  mentioned  in 
the  Old  Testament,  is  generally  supposed  to 
be  the  gum  of  the  Storax-tree  {Styrax  offici- 
nalis) found  in  Syria  and  the  neighbouring 
countries.  The  gum  was  burned  as  a per- 
fume in  the  time  of  Pliny  (‘H.  N.’  xii.  40). 
But  it  seems  by  no  means  unlikely  that  the 
stacte  here  mentioned  was  the  gum  known  as 
Benzoin,  or  Gum  Benjamin,  which  is  an  im- 
portant ingredient  in  the  incense  now  used  in 
churches  and  mosks,  and  is  the  produce  of 
another  storax-tree  {Styrax  henjoin)  that  grows 
in  Java  and  Sumatra.  See  on  2;.  23.  It  may 
be  observed  that  the  liquid  storax  of  com- 
merce is  obtained  from  quite  a different  tree 
known  to  botanists  as  Liquldainhar  syraciflua. 

onycha]  Heb.  shecheleth  (which  appears  to 
mean  a shell.,  or  scale).,  LXX.  Vulg. 

onycha.  The  word  does  not  occur  in  any 
other  place  in  the  Old  Testament.  The 
Greek  word  was  not  only  applied  to  the  well- 
known  precious  stone,  the  onyx,  from  its  re- 
semblance to  the  human  nail,  but  to  the 
horny  operculum,  or  cap,  of  a shell.  The  oper- 
culum of  the  strombus,  or  wing-shell,  which 


V-  35— 37-] 


EXODUS.  XXX. 


401 


IHeb. 

salted. 


these  -sweet  spices  with  pure  frank- 
incense : of  each  shall  there  be  a like 
weight: 

35  And  thou  shalt  make  it  a per- 
fume, a confection  after  the  art  of 
the  apothecary,  ^ tempered  together, 
pure  and  holy : 

36  And  thou  shalt  beat  some  of  it 
very  small,  and  put  of  it  before  the 


testimony  in  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  where  I will  meet  with 
thee : it  shall  be  unto  you  most 
holy. 

37  And  as  for  the  perfume  which 
thou  shalt  make,  ye  shall  not  make 
to  yourselves  according  to  the  compo- 
sition thereof:  it  shall  be  unto  thee 
holy  for  the  Lord. 


abounds  in  the  Red  Sea,  is  said  to  be  employ- 
ed at  this  day  in  the  composition  of  perfume, 
and  to  have  been  used  as  a medicine  in  the 
Middle  Ages  under  the  name  of  Blatta  Byzati- 
tina.  Pliny,  most  likely  referring  to  the  same 
substance  with  imperfect  knowledge,  speaks 
of  a shell  called  onyx  that  was  used  both  as  a 
perfume  and  a medicine  (‘H.  N.’  xxxir.  46; 
cf.  Dioscorides,  ‘Mat.  Med.’  ii.  ii).  Its  iden- 
tification with  the  shecheleth  of  the  text  seems 
probable.  Saadia  uses  the  word  ladanum.^  the 
name  of  the  gum  of  the  Lada  tree  (see  Plin. 
‘H.  N.’  XII.  37).  Bochart,  on  weak  ground, 
imagined  that  bdellium  (Gen.  ii.  12)  was 
meant.  See  Bochart,  ‘Op.’  Vol.  iii.  p.  803; 
Gesen.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1388. 

galbanum]  Heb.  chelbenah;  LXX.  ^aX^avt]', 
Vulg.  galbanum.  It  is  not  mentioned  else- 
where in  the  Old  Testament.  No  doubt 
has  been  raised  as  to  its  identity.  Galbanum 
is  now  well  known  in  medicine  as  a gum 
of  a yellowish  brown  colour,  in  the  form 
of  either  grains  or  masses.  It  burns  with  a 
pungent  smell  which  is  agreeable  when  it  is 
combined  with  other  smells,  but  not  else.  It 
is  imported  from  India,  Persia,  and  Africa; 
yet,  strange  to  say,  the  plant  from  w'^hich  it 
comes  is  not  yet  certainly  known.  (See 
‘ English  Cyclo.’  s.  v.) 

pure  frankincense']  Heb,  lebonah;  LXX.  Xi- 
^avos'i  Vulg.  t/jus.  This  was  the  most  impor- 
tant of  the  aromatic  gums.  Like  myrrh,  it 
was  regarded  by  itself  as  a precious  perfume 
(Cant.  iii.  6;  Matt.  ii.  ii),  and  it  was  used 
unmixed  with  other  substances  in  some  of  the 
rites  of  the  Law  (Lev.  ii.  i.  15,  v.  ii,  vi.  15, 
&c.).  The  Hebrew  name  is  improperly  ren- 
dered incense  in  our  Version  in  Isa.  xliii.  23,  Ix. 
6,  Ixvi.  3;  Jer.  vi.  20,  xvii,  26,  xli.  5.  It  is 
certain  that  the  supplies  of  it,  as  well  as  of 
the  other  spices,  were  obtained  from  Southern 
Arabia  (Isa.  lx.  6,  Jer.  vi,  20.  Cf.  i K.  x.  i,  2, 10, 
15 ; 2 Chro.  ix.  9.  14).  The  Greek  and  Latin 
writers  in  general  speak  of  its  being  produced 
in  that  region.  But  they  evidently  knew  but 
little  of  the  subject,  as  their  descriptions  of 
the  plant  producing  it  differ  greatly  from  each 
other.  (Plin.  ‘H.  N,’  vi.  32,  xii.  31;  Diod. 
Sic.  II.  49,  V.  41;  Theophrast.  ‘de  Plant.’ 
IX.  i;  Arrian,  ‘Perip.’  with  Stuck’s  note, 
p.  49 ; Dioscor.  i.  82  ; Strabo,  xvi.  p.  774.  Cf. 
p.  782.)  The  tree  from  which  it  is  obtained 
VoL.  I. 


is  not  found  in  Arabia,  and  it  was  most 
likely  imported  from  India  by  the  Sabie- 
ans,  like  Cinnamon,  Cassia,  and  Calamus 
(see  on  ns.  23).  The  tree  is  now  known  as  the 
Bos^vjellia  serrata.,  or  B.  tburifera.,  and  grows 
abundantly  in  the  highlands  of  India,  where  its 
native  name  is  Salat.  The  native  name  of  the 
gum  is  oUbanum.^  and  its  Arabic  name,  looban : 
the  Hebrew  and  Greek  names  seem  to  have 
been  taken  directly  from  the  Arabic.  The 
frankincense  of  commerce  is  a different  sub- 
stance, the  resin  of  the  spruce  and  of  some 
other  kinds  of  fir. 

35.  after  the  art  of  the  apothecary]  The 
four  substances  were  perhaps  pounded  and 
thoroughly  mixed  together,  and  then  fused 
into  a mass. 

tempered  together]  With  this  rendering, 
most  Versions,  modem  as  well  as  ancient, 
and  many  of  the  best  critics,  agree.  But, 
according  to  its  etymology,  the  Hebrew  might 
mean  seasoned  nvith  salt.,  or  (as  it  stands  in 
the  margin)  salted.  It  is  thus  explained  in 
the  Talmud,  which  has  been  followed  by 
Maimonides,  de  Wette,  Gesenius,  Herxheimer, 
Kalisch,  and  Keil.  It  is  urged  that  this  accords 
with  the  law  that  every  offering  should  be 
accompanied  by  salt  (Lev.  ii.  13).  But  this 
law  appears  to  refer  only  to  the  offerings  of 
what  was  used  as  food  (see  note  in  loc.,  and  on 
Lev.  xxiv,  7),  and  Knobel  has  well  observed 
that  the  use  of  salt  in  incense  is  contrary  to 
all  known  analogy,  since  no  such  combination 
is  known  to  have  been  made  in  the  incense  of 
any  people. — Josephus  speaks  of  the  incense 
of  the  Temple  as  consisting  of  thirteen  ingre- 
dients, but  he  does  not  state  what  they  were 
(‘B.  J.’  v.  5.  § 5).  A list  of  them  is  however 
given  by  Maimonides.  A change  may  have 
been  made  in  the  composition  in  later  times. 

36.  A portion  of  the  mass  was  to  be 
broken  into  small  pieces  and  put  “before  the 
testimony;”  that  is  opposite  to  the  Ark  of 
the  Covenant,  on  the  outside  of  the  vail,  con- 
veniently near  the  Golden  Altar  on  which  it 
was  to  be  lighted.  (See  on  27.  6,  and  on  xl. 
20.)  It  may  be  observed  that  the  incense 
thus  brought  into  relation  with  the  Ark  was 
styled  “most  holy,”  while  the  Oil  is  no  more 
than  “holy,”  ns.  32. 

37.  38.  Cf.  2727.  32,  33.  The  Holy  In- 
cense, like  the  Holy  Anointing  Oil,  was  to  be 

c c 


402 


EXODUS.  XXX.  XXXI. 


[v.  38—6. 


38  Whosoever  shall  make  like  un- 
to that,  to  smell  thereto,  shall  even  be 
cut  off  from  his  people. 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 


I BezaUel  a7td  Aholiab  are  called  and  made 
meet  for  the  work  of  the  taber}tacle.  1 2 TJie 
observation  of  the  sabbath  is  agam  cojnmand- 
ed,  1 8 Moses  receiveth  the  two  tables. 


K 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2  See,  I have  called  by  name  Be- 
chron.  zaleel  the  "son  of  Uri,  the  son  of 
Hur,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  : 


3 And  I have  filled  him  with  the 
spirit  of  God,  in  wisdom,  and  in  un- 
derstanding, and  in  knowledge,  and  in 
^11  manner  of  workmanship, 

4 To  devise  cunning  works,  to  work 
in  gold,  and  in  silver,  and  in  brass, 

5 And  in  cutting  of  stones,  to  set 
them.,  and  in  carving  of  timber,  to 
work  in  all  manner  of  workmanship. 

6 And  I,  behold,  I have  given  with 
him  Aholiab,  the  son  of  Ahisamach, 
of  the  tribe  of  Dan : and  in  the  hearts 
of  all  that  are  wise  hearted  I have  put 


kept  in  the  Sanctuary,  exclusively  for  the 
service  of  Jehovah. 

Chap.  XXXI. 

The  CaK  sf  Bezaleel  and  Aholiab. 

I— II.  (xxxv.  30—35.) 

2 — 6.  This  solemn  call  of  Bezaleel  and 
Aholiab  is  full  of  instruction.  Their  work  was 
* to  be  only  that  of  handicraftsmen.  Every 
thing  that  they  had  to  do  was  prescribed  in 
strict  and  precise  detail.  There  was  to  be  no 
exercise  for  their  original  powers  of  invention, 
nor  for  their  taste.  Still  it  was  Jehovah  Him- 
self who  called  them  by  name  to  their  tasks, 
and  the  powers  which  they  were  now  called 
upon  to  exercise  in  their  respective  crafts, 
were  declared  to  have  been  given  them  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  (See  on  xxviii.  3.)  Thus  is 
every  effort  of  skill,  every  sort  of  well-ordered 
labour,  when  directed  to  a right  end,  brought 
into  the  very  highest  sphere  of  association. 

3.  the  spirit  of  Cod'],  Literally,  a spirit  of 
Elohim.  Mr  Quarry  (‘Genesis,’  &c.  pp.  271 
— 275)  endeavours  to  prove  that  this  expres- 
sion has  a lower  meaning  than  the  spirit  of 
Jehovah  (which  stands  in  our  Bible,  “ the  spirit 
of  the  Lord”),  and  he  would  rather  translate 
it,  “a  divine  spirit.”  The  definite  article  is 
wanting  in  the  Hebrew  in  both  cases.  Mr 
Quarry  however  conceives  that  the  distinction 
lies  in  the  fact  that  Jehovah  is  a proper  name, 
while  Elohim  is  an  appellative.  But  there  is 
certainly  no  fair  ground  to  infer  any  differ- 
ence of  meaning  from  the  general  use  of  the 
two  phrases  in  the  sacred  text.  It  is  the  spirit 
of  Elohim  who  inspires  Balaam  (Num.  xxiv. 
2),  Azariah,  the  son  of  Oded  (2  Chro.  xv.  i), 
and  Zechariah,  the  son  of  Jehoiada  (2  Chro. 
xxiv.  20),  in  their  prophetic  utterances;  while 
it  is  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  who  inspires  the 
Judges  for  their  work  as  leaders  of  the  people. 
(Judg.  iii.  10,  vi.  34,  xi.  29,)  The  Spirit  of 
Jehovah  who  inspired  Saul  (i  S.  x.  6)  is  the 
same  as  is  more  frequently  called  the  Spirit 
of  Elohim  (i  S.  x.  10,  xi.  6,  &c.).  The  terms 
would  thus  seem  to  be  strictly  equivalent. 
nvisdotn']  The  Hebrew  word  is  derived  from 


a root  of  which  the  meaning  is  to  judge  or 
decide.  It  is  used  to  denote  the  proper  endow- 
ment of  the  ruler  (2  S.  xiv.  20;  Is.  xix.  ii), 
and  that  of  the  prophet  (Ezek.  xxviii.  3,  4; 
Dan.  V.  1 1) ; the  highest  exercise  of  the  mind  in 
a general  sense  (Job  ix.  4,  xi.  6,  xii.  12,  xv.  8), 
and,  as  in  this  place,  the  prime  qualification  of 
the  workman  in  any  manner  of  work.  (Exod. 
xxviii.  3,  xxxi.  6,  xxxv.  10,  25,  26,  31,  35, 
xxxvi.  I,  2,  &;c.)  It  is,  in  fact,  that  “right 
judgment  in  all  things”  for  which  we  specially 
pray  on  Whitsun-day.  LXX.  aocjiia’,  Vulg. 
sapie7ttia. 

under standmg'\  The  Hebrew  word  is  from 
a root  that  signifies  to  discern,  or  discriminate ; 
it  denotes  the  perceptive  faculty.  LXX.  o-w- 
veaLs’i  Vulg.  intelligentia. 

knovuledge']  i.e.  experience,  a practical  ac- 
quaintance with  facts.  LXX. 

Vulg.  scientia. 

in  all  7nanner  of  workmans  hip"^  i.e.  not.  only 
in  the  intellectual  gifts  of  wisdom,  under- 
standing and  knowledge,  but  in  dexterity  of 
hand. 

4.  to  devise  cunning  works']  Rather,  to  de- 
vise works  of  skill.  The  Hebrew  phrase  is 
not  the  same  as  that  rendered  “cunning  work” 
in  respect  to  textile  fabrics  in  xxvi.  i. 

4 — 6.  There  appears  to  be  sufficient  reason 
to  identify  Hur,  the  grandfather  of  Bezaleel, 
with  the  Hur  who  assisted  Aaron  in  support- 
ing the  hands  of  Moses  during  the  battle  with 
Amalek  at  Rephidim  (Ex.  xvii.  10),  and  who 
was  associated  with  Aaron  in  the  charge  of 
the  people  while  Moses  was  on  the  mountain 
(Ex.  xxiv.  14).  Josephus  says  that  he  was 
the  husband  of  Miriam  (‘Ant.’  iii.  2.  §4  ; vi. 
§ i).  It  is  thus  probable  that  Bezaleel  was 
related  to  Moses.  He  was  the  chief  artificer 
in  metal,  stone  and  wood;  he  had  also  to  per- 
form the  apothecary’s  work  in  the  composi- 
tion of  the  Anointing  Oil  and  the  Incense 
(xxxvii.  29).  He  had  precedence  of  all  the 
artificers,  but  Aholiab  appears  to  have  had 
the  entire  charge  of  the  textile  work  (xxxv. 
35,  xxxviii.  23). 


V.  7— 15-] 


EXODUS.  XXXI. 


403 


t Heb. 

Vd'SSf/s. 


wisdom,  that  they  may  make  all  that 
I have  commanded  thee ; 

7 The  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, and  the  ark  of  the  testimony, 
and  the  mercy  seat  that  /s  thereupon, 
and  all  the  Turniture  of  the  tabernacle, 

8 And  the  table  and  his  furniture, 
and  the  pure  candlestick  with  all  his 
furniture,  and  the  altar  of  incense, 

9 And  the  altar  of  burnt  offering 
with  all  his  furniture,  and  the  laver 
and  his  foot, 

10  And  the  cloths  of  service,  and 
the  holy  garments  for  Aaron  the 
priest,  and  the  garments  of  his  sons, 
to  minister  in  the  priest’s  office, 

1 1 And  the  anointing  oil,  and 
sweet  incense  for  the  holy  : ac- 


cording to  all  that  I have  commanded 
thee  shall  tliey  do. 

12  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

13  Speak  thou  also  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  saying,  Verily  my 
sabbaths  ye  shall  keep:  for  it  A a 
sign  between  me  and  you  through- 
out your  generations;  that  may 
know  that  I am  the  Lord  that  doth 
sanctify  you. 

14  “^Ye  shall  keep  the  sabbath  ^ 
therefore ; for  it  Is  holy  unto  you : beut.  5. 
every  one  that  defileth  it  shall  surely  Ezck.  20. 
be  put  to  death : for  whosoever  doeth 

any  work  therein,  that  soul  shall  be 
cut  off  from  among  his  people. 

15  Six  days  may  work  be  done; 


6.  a//  that  are  ^aiise  hearted^  See  on 
xxviii.  3. 

7.  tabernacle^  Tent,  in  both  places. 

of  the  congregation~\  of  meeting. 

8.  the  table  and  his  furniture']  xxv.  23 — 30. 

the  purs  candlestick]  That  is,  the  candle- 
stick of  pure  gold;  xxv.  31 — 40. 

the  altar  of  incense]  xxx.  i— 10. 

9.  the  altar  of  burnt  offering]  xxvii.  i — 8. 

the  lanjer]  xxx.  17 — 21. 

10.  And  the  cloths  of  sernjice]  Rather, 

And  the  garments  of  office;  that  is,  the 
distinguishing  official  garments  of  the  High- 
driest.  LXX.  aroXal  XeirovpyiKac.  With 
this  agree,  more  or  less  clearly,  the  Syriac, 
Vulg.,  Targums,  Saadia,  Luther,  Cranmer, 
both  the  Geneva  Versions,  de  Wette,  Zunz, 
Knobel,  Kalisch,  See.  The  three  kinds  of 
dress  mentioned  in  this  verse  appear  to  be 
the  only  ones  which  were  peculiar  to  the 
Sanctuary.  They  were:  (i)  The.  richly 
adorned  state  robes  of  the  High-priest  (see 
xxviii.  6 — 38,  xxxix.  i sq.).  (2)  The  “holy 

garments”  of  white  linen  for  the  High-priest, 
worn  on  the  most  solemn  occasion  in  the  year 
(see  Lev.  xvi.  4 ; Ex.  xxviii.  39).  (3)  The  gar- 
ments of  white  linen  for  all  the  priests,  worn 
in  their  regular  ministrations  (see  xxviii. 
40,  41).  — From  the  connection  in  which 
the  expression  rendered  “cloths  of  service” 
here  occurs,  and  a comparison  of  this  verse 
with  xxxix.  I,  it  seems  strange  that  any  doubt 
should  have  arisen  as  to  its  meaning.  But 
some  Jewish  writers  have  supposed  that  the 
wrapping  cloths  are  denoted  which  are  men- 
tioned Num.  iv.  6,  7.  II,  See.,  and  our  trans- 
lators appear  to  have  held  some  similar  notion. 
Gesenius  imagined  that  the  inner  curtains  of 
the  Tabernacle  are  meant.  But  neither  of 


these  interpretations  appears  to  be  supported 
by  a single  ancient  authority,  nor  can  either 
of  them  be  well  reconciled  with  the  expres- 
sion, “to  do  service  in  the  holy  place”  (xxxv. 
19,  xxxix.  I,  41).  Cf.  xxviii.  35. 

The  Penal  La^uj  of  the  Sabbath. 

12—17.  (xxxv.  2,  3.) 

In  the  Fourth  Commandment  the  injunc- 
tion to  observe  the  Seventh  Day  is  addressed 
to  the  conscience  of  the  people  (see  on  xx.  8) : 
in  this  place,  the  object  is  to  declare  an  infrac- 
tion of  the  Commandment  to  be  a capital 
offence.  The  two  passages  stand  in  a rela- 
tion to  each  other  similar  to  that  between 
Lev.  xviii.  xix.  and  Lev.  xx.  See  note  on 
Lev.  xviii.  24.^ — Considering  the  weighty 
bearing  of  the  Sabbath  upon  the  Covenant 
between  Jehovah  and  His  people,  a solemn 
sanction  of  its  observance  might  well  form  the 
conclusion  of  the  string  of  messages  which 
Moses  was  to  deliver  on  this  occasion.  But 
from  the  repetition  of  the  substance  of  these 
verses  in  the  beginning  of  ch.  xxxv.  it  seems 
likely  (as  many  commentators  have  observed) 
that  the  penal  edict  was  specially  introduced 
as  a caution  in  reference  to  the  construction 
of  the  Tabernacle,  lest  the  people,  in  their 
zeal  to  carry  on  the  work,  should  be  tempted 
to  break  the  divine  Law  for  the  observance  of 
the  Day.  In  this  chapter,  the  edict  imme- 
diately follows  the  series  of  directions  given 
to  Moses  on  Sinai  for  the  work;  in  ch.  xxxv. 
Moses  utters  it  before  he  repeats  any  of  the 
directions  to  the  people. 

13.  a sign  bet^ueen  me  and  you,  &c.]  Cf. 
2;.  17:  Ezek.  XX.  12,  20.  See  on  Exod.  xx.  8. 

14.  put  to  death]  This  Law  was  very 
soon  put  into  operation  in  the  case  of  the 
man  who  gathered  sticks  upon  the  Sabbath- 

CC  2 


404 


EXODUS.  XXXI.  XXXII. 


[v.  i6 — I. 


t Heb. 
holiness. 


''  Gen.  I. 
& 2. 


but  in  the  seventh  h the  sabbath  of 
rest,  ^ holy  to  the  Lord  : whosoever 
doeth  any  work  in  the  sabbath  day, 
he  shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

1 6 Wherefore  the  children  of  Israel 
shall  keep  the  sabbath,  to  observe  the 
sabbath  throughout  their  generations, 
for  a perpetual  covenant. 

17  It  h a sign  between  me  and 
the  children  of  Israel  for  ever;  for  ^in 
six  days  the  Lord  made  heaven  and 
earth,  and  on  the  seventh  day  he 
rested,  and  was  refreshed. 

18  H And  he  gave  unto  Moses, 
when  he  had  made  an  end  of  com- 
muning with  him  upon  mount  Sinai, 


‘^two  tables  of  testimony,  tables 
stone,  written  with  the  finger  of  God. 

CHAPTER  XXXII. 

I The  people.,  in  the  absence  of  Moses,  catise 
Aaron  to  make  a calf.  7 God  is  ajigered 
thereby.  11  At  the  intreaty  of  Moses  he  is 
appeased.  15  Moses  cometh  down  with  the 
tables.  19  Pie  breaketh  them.  -20  Pie  de- 
stroyeth  the  calf.  22  Aaron's  excuse  for 
himself.  25  Moses  causeth  the  idolaters  to  be 
slain.  30  Pie  prayeth  for  the  people. 

AND  when  the  people  saw  that 
\ Moses  delayed  to  come  down 
out  of  the  mount,  the  people  gathered 
themselves  together  unto  Aaron,  and 
said  unto  him,  "'Up,  make  us  gods,  « Acts 7. 
which  shall  go  before  us ; for  as  for 


day.  Death  was  inflicted  by  stoning.  Num. 

XV.  35. 

cut  off  from  among  his  people^  This  is  dis- 
tinctly assigned  as  a reason  why  the  offender 
should,  or  might,  be  put  to  death.  The  pas- 
sage seems  to  indicate  the  distinction  between 
the  meaning  of  the  two  expressions,  to  be  cut 
off  from  the  people,  and  to  be  put  to  death.  He 
who  was  cut  oif  from  the  people  had,  by  his 
offence,  put  himself  out  of  the  terms  of  the 
Covenant,  and  was  an  outlaw.  (See  on  Lev. 
xviii.  29.)  On  such,  and  on  such  alone,  when 
the  offence  was  one  which  affected  the  well- 
being of  the  nation,  as  it  was  in  this  case, 
death  could  be  inflicted  by  the  public  authority. 

17.  eivas  refreshed^  Literally,  he  took 
breath.  Cf.  xxiii.  12;  a S.  xvi.  14.  The  ap- 
plication of  the  word  to  the  Creator,  which 
occurs  nowhere  else,  is  remarkable. 

18.  The  directions  for  the  construction  of 
the  Sanctuary  and  its  furniture  being  ended, 
the  Tables  of  Stone  which  represented  the 
Covenant  between  Jehovah. and  His  people, 
and  which,  when  covered  with  the  Mercy- 
seat  were  to  give  the  Sanctuary  its  significance, 
are  now  delivered  to  Moses  in  accordance 
with  the  promise  xxiv.  12 ; cf.  xxxii.  15,  16. 

The  history  of  what  relates  to  the  con- 
struction of  the  Sanctuary  is  here  interrupted, 
and  is  taken  up  again  chap.  xxxv.  i. 

Chap.  XXXII.— XXXI V. 

The  Golden  Calf.  The  Covenant 

AND  THE  Tables  broken  and  re- 
newed. 

The  exact  coherence  of  the  narrative  of  all 
that  immediately  relates  to  the  construction 
of  the  Sanctuary,  if  we  pass  on  immediately 
from  ch.  xxxi.  to  ch.  xxxv.,  might  suggest 
the  probability  that  these  three  chapters  ori- 
ginally formed  a distinct  composition.  This 
suggestion  is  in  some  degree  strengthened,  if 
we  take  account  of  some  part  of  the  subject 


matter  of  ch.  xxxiv.  (see  on  xxxiv.  12 — 27). 
But  this  need  not  involve  the  question  of  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  the  three  chapters.  The 
main  incidents  recorded  in  them  follow  in 
due  order  of  time,  and  are  therefore  in  their 
proper  place  as  regards  historical  sequence. 

The  Golden  Calf  xxxii.  i — 6. 

The  people  had,  to  a great  extent,  lost  the 
patriarchal  faith,  and  were  but  imperfectly  in- 
structed in  the  reality  of  a personal  unseen 
God.  Being  disappointed  at  the  long  absence 
of  Moses,  they  seem  to  have  imagined  that  he 
had  deluded  them  and  had  probably  been  de- 
stroyed amidst  the  thunders  of  the  mountain 
(xxiv.  15 — 18).  They  accordingly  gave  way 
to  their  superstitious  fears  and  fell  back  upon 
that  form  of  idolatry  that  was  most  familiar 
to  them  (see  on  ao.  4).  The  narrative  of  the 
circumstances  is  more  briefly  given  by  Moses 
at  a later  period  in  one  of  his  addresses 
to  the  people  (Dent.  ix.  8 — 21,  25—29,  x. 
I — 8 — ii).  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that 
Josephus,  in  his  very  characteristic  chapter  on 
the  giving  of  the  Law  (‘Ant.’  111.  5),  says 
nothing  whatever  of  this  act  of  apostasy, 
though  he  relates  that  Moses  twice  ascended 
the  mountain,  and  renews  his  own  profession 
that  he  is  faithfully  following  the  authority 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Philo  speaks  of  the 
calf  as  an  imitation  of  the  idolatry  of  Egypt, 
but  he  takes  no  notice  of  Aaron’s  share  in  the 
sin  (‘Vit.  Mos.’  ill.  19.  37). 

1.  mito  Aaron']  The  chief  authority  dur- 
ing the  absence  of  Moses  was  committed  to 
Aaron  and  Hur  (xxiv.  14). 

7nake  us  gods]  The  substantive  (elohlm) 
is  plural  in  form  and  may  denote  gods.  But 
according  to  the  Hebrew  idiom,  the  meaning 
need  not  be  plural,  and  hence  the  word  is 
used  as  the  common  designation  of  the  true 
God  (Gen.  i.  i,  (See.  See  on  xxi.  6).  It  here 
denotes  a god,  and  should  be  so  rendered 


V.  2—7.] 


EXODUS.  XXXII. 


405 


this  Moses,  the  man  that  brought  us 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  we  wot 
not  what  is  become  of  him. 

2 And  Aaron  said  unto  them.  Break 
off  the  golden  earrings,  which  are  in 
the  ears  of  your  wives,  of  your  sons, 
and  of  your  daughters,  and  bring  them 
unto  me. 

3 And  all  the  people  brake  off  the 
golden  earrings  which  were  in  their 
ears,  and  brought  them  unto  Aaron. 

*Psai.  106.  ^ -^And  he  received  them  at  their 

likings  hand,  and  fashioned  it  with  a graving 
tool,  after  he  had  made  it  a molten 


calf:  and  they  said.  These  he  thy 
gods,  O Israel,  which  brought  thee 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt. 

5 And  when  Aaron  saw  ;V,  he  built 
an  altar  before  it;  and  Aaron  made 
proclamation,  and  said.  To  morrow 
is  a feast  to  the  Lord. 

6 And  they  rose  up  early  on  the 
morrow,  and  offered  burnt  offerings, 
and  brought  peace  offerings ; and  the 

people  sat  down  to  eat  and  to  drink,  i Cor.  10. 
and  rose  up  to  play. 

7 ^1  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, ^ Go,  get  thee  down  ; for  thy  ^ 


(Saadia  and  most  modern  interpreters).  It  is 
evident  that  what  the  Israelites  asked  for  was 
a visible  god.  Our  version  follows  the  LXX., 
Viilg.,  &c. 

2.  Break  off  the  golden  earrings']  It  has 
been  very  generally  held  from  early  times, 
that  Aaron  did  not  willingly  lend  himself  to 
the  mad  design  of  the  multitude;  but  that, 
when  ovei'come  by  their  importunity,  he  ask- 
ed them  to  give  up  such  possessions  as  he 
knew  they  would  not  willingly  part  with,  in 
the  hope  of  putting  a check  on  them  (Augus- 
tin. ‘(^oest.’  14 1 ; Theodoret.  ‘ QusEst.’  66). 
Assuming  this  to  have  been  his  purpose,  he 
took  a wrong  measure  of  their  fanaticism,  for 
all  the  people  made  the  sacrifice  at  once  {v. 
3).  His  weakness,  in  any  case,  was  un- 
pardonable and  called  for  the  intercession  of 
Moses  (Deut.  ix.  20).  According  to  a Jewish 
tradition  found  in  the  later  Targums,  Aaron 
was  terrified  by  seeing  Hur,  his  colleague  in 
authority  (xxiv.  14),  slain  by  the  people  be- 
cause he  had  ventured  to  oppose  them. 

4.  And  he  recei‘ved...a  molten  calf]  The 
Hebrew  is  somewhat  difficult.  The  follow- 
ing rendering  represents  the  sense  approved 
by  most  modern  critics ; — and  he  received  the 
gold  at  their  hand  and  collected  it  in  a bag  and 
made  it  a molten  calf  (Bochart,  Gesenius, 
Rosenmilller,  Fiirst,  Knobel,  Kurtz,  &c.  with 
the  later  Targums).  Our  version  is  supported 
by  the  LXX.,  Onkelos,  Luther,  de  Wette, 
Keil,  &c.  Other  interpreters  conceive  the  latter 
part  of  the  passage  to  mean  that  Aaron  shaped 
the  gold  in  a mould  (or,  after  a pattern)  and 
made  it  a molten  calf  Syriac,  Vulgate, 

Aben-Ezra,  Michaelis,  Zunz,  Herx.,  &c.). 

a molten  calf]  The  word  calf  may  mean 
a yearling  ox.  The  Israelites  must  have 
been  familiar  with  the  ox-worship  of  the 
Egyptians;  perhaps  many  of  them  had  wit- 
nessed the  rites  of  Mnevis  at  Heliopolis, 
almost  on  the  borders  of  the  Land  of  Goshen, 
and  they  could  not  have  been  unacquainted 
with  the  more  famous  rites  of  Apis  at  Mem- 
phis. It  is  expressly  said  that  they  yielded 


to  the  idolatry  of  Egypt  while  they  were  in 
bondage  (Josh.  xxiv.  14;  Ezek.  xx.  8,  xxiii. 
3,  8).  The  earliest  Jewish  tradition  derives 
the  golden  calf  from  an  Egyptian  origin  (Philo, 
‘ Vit.  Mo.s.’  III.  19).  It  seems  most  likely 
that  the  idolatrous  tendency  of  the  people  had 
been  contracted  from  the  Egyptians,  but  that 
it  was  qualified  by  what  they  still  retained 
of  the  truths  revealed  to  their  forefathers.  In 
the  next  verse,  Aaron  appears  to  speak  of  the 
calf  as  if  it  was  a representative  of  Jehovah — 
“To-morrow  is  a feast  to  the  LordP  They 
did  not,  it  should  be  noted,  worship  a living 
Mnevis,  or  Apis,  having  a proper  name,  but 
only  the  golden  type  of  the  animal.  The 
mystical  notions  connected  with  the  ox  by 
the  Egyptian  priests  may  have  possessed  their 
minds,  and,  when  expressed  in  this  modified 
and  less  gross  manner,  may  have  been  applied 
to  the  Lord,  who  had  really  delivered  them 
out  of  the  hand  of  the  Egyptians.  Their 
sin  then  lay,  not  in  their  adopting  ano- 
ther god,  but  in  their  pretending  to  worship 
a visible  symbol  of  Him  whom  no  symbol 
could  represent.  The  close  connection  be- 
tween the  calves  of  Jeroboam  and  this  calf  is 
shewn  by  the  repetition  of  the  formula, 

‘ ‘ which  brought  thee  up  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt”  (i  Kings  xii.  28). 

These  be  thy  gods]  This  is  thy  god.  See 
on  I. 

5.  a feast  to  the  Lord]  See  on  'v.  4. 

6.  See  I Cor.  x.  7).  Hengstenberg,  Kurtz 
and  others  have  laid  a stress  upon  the  simi- 
larity of  what  is  briefly  described  in  the  words, 
“the  people  sat  down  to  eat  and  drink,  and 
rose  up  to  play,”, to  certain  rites  of  the  Egyp- 
tians spoken  of  by  Herodotus  (11.  60.  ill.  27). 
But  such  orgies  were  too  common  amongst 
ancient  idolaters  for  the  remark  to  be  of 
much  worth. 

The  trial  of  Moses  as  a Mediator. 

7—35. 

The  faithfulness  of  Moses  in  the  office  that 
had  been  entrusted  to  him  was  now  to  be  put 


4o6 


EXODUS.  XXXII. 


[v.  8—14. 


people,  which  thou  broughtest  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt,  have  corrupted 
themselves : 

Deut.  9.  8 ^ They  have  turned  aside  quickly 

^ out  of  the  way  which  I commanded 

them:  they  have  made  them  a mol- 
ten calf,  and  have  worshipped  it,  and 
have  sacrificed  thereunto,  and  said. 
These  be  thy  gods,  O Israel,  which 
have  brought  thee  up  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt. 

9 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
/chap.  33. /J  have  seen  this  people,  and,  behold, 
Deut.  q.  it  is  a stiffnecked  people : 

10  Now  therefore  let  me  alone,  that 
my  wrath  may  wax  hot  against  them, 
and  that  I may  consume  them : and  I 
will  make  of  thee  a great  nation. 

e-Psai.  106.  1 1 ^ And  Moses  besought  ^ the 

fHeb.  Lord  his  God,  and  said.  Lord,  why 
^the^LoRD.  thy  wrath  wax  hot  against  thy 


people,  which  thou  hast  brought  forth 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  with  great 
power,  and  with  a mighty  hand? 

12  ^ Wherefore  should  the  Egyp-  * Numb, 
tians  speak,  and  say,  Eor  mischief 

did  he  bring  them  out,  to  slay  them 
in  the  mountains,  and  to  consume 
them  from  the  face  of  the  earth? 

Turn  from  thy  fierce  wrath,  and  re- 
pent of  this  evil  against  thy  people. 

13  Remember  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Israel,  thy  servants,  to  whom  thou 
swarest  by  thine  own  self,  and  saidst 

unto  them,  ^I  will  multiply  your  seed  ‘Gen.  12. 
as  the  stars  of  heaven,  and  all  this  & 48.76.^’ 
land  that  I have  spoken  of  will  I give 
unto  your  seed,  and  they  shall  inherit 
it  for  ever. 

14  And  the  Lord  repented  of  the 
evil  which  he  thought  to  do  unto  his 
people. 


to  the  test.  It  was  to  be  made  manifest  whe- 
ther he  loved  his  own  glory  better  than  he  loved 
the  brethren  who  were  under  his  charge; 
whether  he  would  prefer  that  he  should  him- 
self become  the  founder  of  a “ great  nation,” 
or  that  the  Lord’s  promise  should  be  fulfil- 
led in  the  whole  people  of  Israel.  As  in  the 
trial  of  Abraham,  the  object  to  be  attained  was 
not  that  He  who  knows  the  hearts  of  all  men 
might  be  assured  that  the  servant  whom  He 
had  chosen  was  true  and  stedfast,  but  that 
the  faith  of  the  servant  might  be  strengthened 
and  instructed,  by  its  being  made  known  to 
him  what  power  had  been  given  to  him  to 
resist  temptation.  This  may  have  been  espe- 
cially needful  for  Moses,  in  cousequence  of 
his  natural  disposition.  See  Num.  xii.  3 ; cf. 
Ex.  iii.  II.  With  this  trial  of  Moses  may 
be  compared  the  third  temptation  which  the 
evil  one  was  permitted  to  set  before  our  Sa- 
viour. Matt.  iv.  8 — 10. 

Moses  was  tried  in  a twofold  manner.  The 
trial  was  at  first  base{l  on  the  divine  commu- 
nication made  to  him  in  the  mount  respecting 
the  apostasy  of  the  people:  on  this  occasion, 
he  rejects  the  offer  of  glory  for  himself  and 
intercedes  for  the  nation;  the  exercise  was 
a purely  spiritual  one,  apart  from  visible 
fact,  and  no  answer  is  given  to  his  interces- 
sion (see  on  -u.  14).  But  in  the  second  case, 
stirred  up  as  he  was  by  the  facts  actually  be- 
fore his  eyes,  after  he  had  unflinchingly  car- 
ried out  the  judgment  of  God  upon  the  per- 
sons of  the  r/ostinate  idolaters,  he  not  only 
again  intercedes  for  the  nation,  but  declares 
himself  ready  to  sacrifice  his  own  salvation 
for  them  (x’.  32).  It  is  thus  that  the  hearts 


of  God’s  saints  in  all  ages  are  strengthened 
beforehand,  by  inward  struggles  that  are  wit- 
nessed by  no  human  eye,  to  fight  the  battle 
when  outward  trials  come  upon  them. — If 
the  wonderful  narrative  in  this  passage  should 
appear  to  any  thoughtful  reader  incoherent 
or  obscure,  let  him  read  it  again  and  again 
and  apply  to  it  the  key  of  his  own  spiritual 
experience. 

On  another  occasion  in  the  history,  when 
the  people  had  rebelled  on  account  of  the  re- 
port of  the  ten  spies,  the  trial  of  Moses’ 
faithfulness  was  repeated  in  a very  similar 
manner  (Num.  xiv.  ii — 23). 

8.  These  be  thy  gods . . . have  brought]  This 
is  thy  god,  0 Israel,  who  has  brought — 

10.  let  me  alone]  But  Moses  did  not  let 
the  Lord  alone ; he  wrestled,  as  Jacob  had 
done,  until,  like  Jacob,  he  obtained  the  bless- 
ing (Gen.  xxxii.  24). 

12.  repent  of  this  evil]  See  on  v.  14. 

13.  See  Gen.  xv.  5,  18,  xxii.  17,  xxxii.  12. 

14.  This  states  the  fact  that  was  not  re- 
vealed to  Moses  till  after  his  second  interces- 
sion when  he  had  come  down  from  the 
mountain  and  witnessed  the  sin  of  the  people 
iyv.  30 — 34).  He  was  then  assured  that  the 
l.ord’s  love  to  His  ancient  people  would  pre- 
vail. God  is  said,  in  the  language  of  Scrip- 
ture, to  repent,  when  his  forgiving  love  is 
seen  by  man  to  blot  out  the  letter  of  His 
judgments  against  sin  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  16;  Joel 
ii-  13;  Jonah  iii.  10,  &c.);  or  when  the  sin 
of  man  seems  to  human  sight  to  have  disap- 
pointed the  purposes  of  grace  (Gen.  vi.  6; 
I Sam.  XV.  35,  &c.).  As  they  exist  in  the 


V.  15—26.] 


EXODUS.  XXXII. 


407 


15  H And  Moses  turned,  and  went 
down  from  the  mount,  and  the  two 
tables  of  the  testimony  were  in  his 
hand : the  tables  were  written  on  both 
their  sides;  on  the  one  side  and  on 
the  other  were  they  written. 

^’^chap.  31.  j 5 the  ^ tables  were  the  work 
of  God,  and  the  writing  was  the  writ- 
ing of  God,  graven  upon  the  tables. 

17  And  when  Joshua  heard  the 
noise  of  the  people  as  they  shouted, 
he  said  unto  Moses,  There  is  a noise 
of  war  in  the  camp. 

18  And  he  said.  It  is  not  the  voice 
of  them  that  shout  for  mastery,  neither 
is  it  the  voice  of  them  that  cry  for 

t Heb.  ^ being  overcome : but  the  noise  of  them 

weakness . ,1  . • 1 t 1 

that  sing  do  1 hear. 

19  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  as  soon 
as  he  came  nigh  unto  the  camp,  that 
he  saw  the  calf,  and  the  dancing : and 
Moses’  anger  waxed  hot,  and  he  cast 
the  tables  out  of  his  hands,  and  brake 
them  beneath  the  mount. 

^Deut.  9.  20  ^And  he  took  the  calf  which  they 

had  made,  and  burnt  it  in  the  fire,  and 


ground  it  to  powder,  and  strawed  it 
upon  the  water,  and  made  the  children 
of  Israel  drink  of  it. 

21  And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron,' 

What  did  this  people  unto  thee,  that 
thou  hast  brought  so  great  a sin  upon 
them  ? 

22  And  Aaron  said.  Let  not  the 
anger  of  my  lord  wax  hot : thou 
knowest  the  people,  that  they  are  set 
on  mischief. 

23  For  they  said  unto  me.  Make 
us  gods,  which  shall  go  before  us : for 
as  for  this  Moses,  the  man  that  brought 
us  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  we 
wot  not  v/hat  is  become  of  him. 

24  And  I said  unto  them,  Whoso- 
ever hath  any  gold,  let  them  break  it 
off.  So  they  gave  it  me : then  I cast 
it  into  the  fire,  and  there  came  out 
this  calf. 

25  *11  And  when  Moses  saw  that 
the  people  were  naked;  (for  Aaron 

had  made  them  naked  unto  their  ^ 

, j 1 • • \ t/wse  that 

shame  among  ^ their  enemies  :}  rose  up 

26  Then  Moses  stood  in  the  gateS”^'^ 


Eternal  Father,  wrath  and  love  are  essentially 
ONE,  however  they  may  appear  to  thwart 
each  other  to  carnal  eyes.  The  awakened 
conscience  is  said  to  repent^  when,  having  felt 
its  sin,  it  feels  also  the  divine  forgiveness : it 
is  at  this  crisis  that  God,  according  to  the 
language  of  Scripture,  repents,  towards  the 
sinner.  Thus  the  repentance  of  God  made 
known  in  and  through  the  One  true  Media- 
tor reciprocates  the  repentance  of  the  return- 
ing sinner,  and  reveals  to  him  Atonement. 

17,  18.  Moses  does  not  tell  Joshua  of  the 
divine  communication  that  had  been  made  to 
him  respecting  the  apostasy  of  the  people,  but 
only  corrects  his  impression  by  calling  his 
attention  to  the  kind  of  noise  which  they  are 
making. 

19.  Though  Moses  had  been  prepared 
by  the  revelation  on  the  Mount,  his  righteous 
indignation  was  stirred  up  beyond  control 
when  the  abomination  was  before  his  eyes. 

20.  We  need  not  suppose  that  each  in- 
cident is  here  placed  in  strict  order  of  time. 
What  is  related  in  this  verse  must  have  occu- 
pied some  time  and  may  have  followed  the 
rebuke  of  Aaron.  Moses  appears  to  have 
thrown  the  calf  into  the  fire  to  destroy  its 
form  and  then  to  have  pounded,  or  filed,  the 
metal  to  powder,  which  he  cast  into  the 
brook  (Deut.  ix.  ai).  He  then  made  the 
Israelites  drink  of  the  water  of  the  brook. 


The  act  was  of  course  a symbolical  one.  The 
idol  was  brought  to  nothing  and  the  people 
were  made  to  swallow  their  own  sin  (cf. 
Mic.  vii.  13,  14).  It  seems  idle  to  speculate, 
as  many  interpreters  have  done  (Rosen- 
miiller,  Davidson,  Kurtz,  &c.),  on  the  means 
by  which  the  comminution  of  the  gold  was 
efected. 

21.  Moses,  in  grave  irony,  asks  Aaron 
whether  the  people  had  olfended  him  in  any 
way  to  induce  him  to  inflict  such  an  injury 
on  them  as  to  yield  to  their  request. 

22.  my  lor  1]  The  deference  here  shown 
to  Moses  by  Aaron  should  be  noticed.  His 
reference  to  the  character  of  the  people,  and 
his  manner  of  stating  what  he  had  done 
(yv.  24),  are  very  characteristic  of  the  depre- 
cating language  of  a weak  mind. 

23.  Make  us  god3\  Make  us  a god. 

25.  naked\  Rather,  unruly,  or  licentious. 

So  the  LXX.,  Onk.,  Syriac,  and  nearly  all 
critical  authorities. 

shame  among  tloeir  enemies'\  Cf.  Ps.  xliv.  13  ; 
Deut.  xxviii.  37;  Ps.  Ixxix.  4. 

26 — 29.]  The  Tribe  of  Levi,  Mdses’  own 
Tribe,  now  distinguished  itself  by  immediately 
returning  to  its  allegiance  and  obeying  the 
call  to  fight  on  the  side  of  Jehovah.  We 
need  not  doubt  that  the  3000  who  were  slain 
were  those  who  persisted  in  resisting  Moses : 
we  may  perhaps  conjecture  that  they  were 


4o8 


EXODUS.  XXXII. 


H Or,  And 
Moses 
said,  Con- 
secrate 
yourselves 
to  day  to 
the  LORD, 
because 
every  man 
hath  been 
against 
his  son, 
and 
against 
his  bro- 
ther, &*c. 

1 Heb. 
Fill  your 
hands. 


of  the  camp,  and  said,  Who  is  on  the 
Lord’s  side?  let  him  come  unto  me. 
,And  all  the  sons  of  Levi  gathered 
themselves  together  unto  him. 

27  And  he  said  unto  them.  Thus 
saith  the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  Put 
every  man  his  sword  by  his  side,  and 
go  in  and  out  from  gate  to  gate 
throughout  the  camp,  and  slay  every 
man  his  brother,  and  every  man  his 
companion,  and  every  man  his  neigh- 
bour. 

28  And  the  children  of  Levi  did 
according  to  the  word  of  Moses : and 
there  fell  of  the  people  that  day  about 
three  thousand  men. 

29  “For  Moses  had  said,  ^Conse- 
crate yourselves  to  day  to  the  Lord, 
even  every  man  upon  his  son,  and 
upon  his  brother ; that  he  may  be- 
stow upon  you  a blessing  this  day. 

30  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 


[v.  27—34. 

morrow,  that  Moses  said  unto  the 
people.  Ye  have  sinned  a great  sin: 
and  now  I will  go  up  unto  the  Lord  j 
peradventure  I shall  make  an  atone- 
ment for  your  sin. 

31  And  Moses  returned  unto  the 
Lord,  and  said.  Oh,  this  people  have 
sinned  a great  sin,  and  have  made 
them  gods  of  gold. 

32  Yet  now,  if  thou  wilt  forgive 
their  sin — ; and  if  not,  blot  me,  I 
pray  thee,  out  of  thy  book  which  thou 
hast  written. 

33  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Whosoever  hath  sinned  against  me, 
him  will  I blot  out  of  my  book. 

34  Therefore  now  go,  lead  the 
people  unto  the  place  of  which  I have 
spoken  unto  thee : behold,  mine  Angel 
shall  go  before  thee : nevertheless  in 
the  day  when  I visit  I will  visit  their 
sin  upon  them. 


such  as  contumaciously  refused  to  drink  of 
the  water  of  tlie  brook  {y.  26).  The  spirit  of 
the  narrative  forbids  us  to  conceive  that  the 
act  of  the  Levites  was  anything  like  an  indis- 
criminate massacre.  An  amnesty  had  first 
been  offered  to  all  in  the  words,  “ Who  is  on 
the  Lord’s  side  ?”  Those  who  were  forward 
to  draw  the  sword  were  directed  not  to  spare 
their  closest  relations  or  friends;  but  this 
must  plainly  have  been  with  an  understood 
qualification  as  regards  the  conduct  of  those 
who  were  to  be  slain.  Had  it  not  been  so, 
they  who  were  on  the  Lord’s  side  would 
have  had  to  destroy  each  other.  ATe  need 
not  stumble  at  the  bold,  simple  way  in  which 
the  statement  is  made.  The  Bible  does  not 
deign  to  apologise  for  itself;  and  hence  at 
times  it  afibrds  occasion  to  gainsayers,  who 
shut  their  eyes  to  the  spirit  while  they  are 
captiously  looking  at  dissevered  fragments  of 
tlie  letter. 

29.  Consecrate  yoursel-ves  to  day  to  the 
Lori)]  The  margin  contains  the  literal  ren- 
dering. Our  version  gives  the  most  probable 
meaning  of  the  Hebrew  (see  Lev,  viii.  a 2,  27), 
and  is  supported  by  the  best  authority.  The 
Levites  were  to  prove  themselves  in  a special 
way  the. servants  of  Jehovah,  in  anticipation 
of  their  formal  consecration  as  ministers  of 
the  Sanctuary,  by  manifesting  a self-sacrificing 
zeal  in  carrying  out  the  divine  command, 
even  upon  their  nearest  relatives  (cf.  Deut. 
X.  8).  Kurtz,  adopting  the  rendering  of  the 
Targums,  supposes  that  what  the  Levites 
were  commanded  to  do  was  to  offer  sacri- 


fices upon  the  Altar  to  expiate  the  blood 
which  they  were  directed  to  shed.  But  this 
interpretation  cannot  be  well  reconciled  with 
the  Hebrew,  and  it  is  hard  to  imagine  that 
expiation  could  be  required  for  what  was 
done  in  direct  obedience  to  the  command  of 
the  Lord.  It  may  be  added  that  the  Sin- 
offering,  the  only  kind  of  sacrifice  that  would 
be  suitable  on  such  a hypothesis,  had  not  yet 
been  instituted. 

31.  returned  unto  the  Lord"]  i.e.  he  again 
ascended  the  Mount. 

gods  of  gold~\  a god  of  gold. 

32.  For  a similar  form  of  expression,  in 
which  the  conclusion  is  left  to  be  supplied  by 
the  mind  of  the  reader,  see  Dan.  iii.  17 ; Luke 
xiii.  9,  xix,  42  ; John  vi.  62;  Rom.  ix.  22. — 
For  the  same  thought,  see  Rom.  ix.  3.  It  is 
for  such  as  Moses  and  St  Paul  to  realize,  and 
to  dare  to  utter,  their  readiness  to  be  wholly 
sacrificed  for  the  sake  of  those  whom  God  has 
entrusted  to  their  love.  This  expresses  the 
perfected  idea  of  the  whole  Burnt-offering. 

thy  book']  The  figure  is  taken  from  the 
enrolment  of  the  names  of  citizens.  This  is 
its  first  occurrence  in  the  Scriptures.  See 
Ps.  Ixix.  28;  Isa.  iv.  3 ; Dan.  xii.  i ; Luke  x. 
20;  Phil.  iv.  3;  Rev.  iii.  5,  &c. 

33,  34.  Each  offender  was  to  suffer  for 
his  own  sin.  On  xx.  5 cf.  Ezek.  xviii.  4,  2.0. 
Moses  was  not  to  be  taken  at  his  word.  He 
was  to  fulfil  his  appointed  mission  of  leading 
on  the  people  towards  the  Land  of  Promise. 

34.  mine  Jlngel  shall  go  before  thee]  See 
on  xxlii.  20,  and  xxxiii.  3. 


V-  35—3-] 


EXODUS.  XXXII.  XXXIII. 


409 


35  And  the  Lord  plagued  the 
people,  because  they  made  the  calf, 
which  Aaron  made. 

CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

I The  Lord  refiiseth  io  go  as  he  had  promised 
with  the  people.  4 The  people  7ntir7niir  there- 
at. 7 The  tabemtaele  is  re^noved  oat  of  the 
cafJip.  9 The  Lord  talketh  familiarly  with 
Moses,  1 2 ALoses  desireth  to  see  the  glory  of 
God. 


AND  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Depart,  and  go  up  hence,  thou 
and  the  people  which  thou  hast  brought 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  unto  the 


land  which  I sware  unto  Abraham,  to 
Isaac,  and  to  Jacob,  saying,  Unto  " Gen.  13. 
thy  seed  will  I give  it: 

2 '^And  I will  send  an  angel  before  » Dent.  7. 
thee ; and  I will  drive  out  the  Ca-  josh.  24. 
naanite,  the  Amorite,  and  the  Hittite,  ”• 
and  the  Perizzite,  the  Hivite,  and  the 
Jebusite : 

3 Unto  a land  flowing  with  milk 
and  honey:  for  I will  not  go  up  in 

the  midst  of  thee ; for  thou  art  a “^stift-  <^chap.  32. 
necked  people : lest  I consume  thee  Deut.  9. 
in  the  way. 


in  the  day  nuhen  I 'visit.,  cSr^r.]  This  has  been 
supposed  to  refer  to  the  sentence  that  was 
pronounced  on  the  generation  of  Israelites 
then  living,  when  they  murmured  on  account 
of  the  report  of  the  ten  spies,  that  they  should 
not  enter  the  land  (Num.  xiv.).  On  that  oc- 
casion they  were  charged  with  having  tempt- 
ed God  “these  ten  times”  (pv.  22).  But 
though  the  Lord  visited  the  sin  upon  those 
who  rebelled,  yet  He  “repented  of  the  evil 
which  He  thought  to  do  unto  His  people.” 
He  chastised  the  individuals,  but  did  not  take 
His  blessing  from  the  nation. 

35.  and  the  Lord']  Thus  Jehovah. 

Chap.  XXXIII. 

The  Conference  between  Jehovah  and  His 
mediator  is  continued  in  this  Chapter.  It 
had  been  conceded  to  Moses  that  the  nation 
should  not  be  destroyed  (see  xxxii.  10  sq  ),  and 
that  he  should  lead  them  on  towards  the  place 
of  which  the  Lord  had  spoken  (see  xxxii.  34). 
But  the  favour  was  not  to  be  awarded  accord- 
ing to  the  terms  of  the  original  promise  (xxiii. 
20 — 23).  The  Covenant  on  which  the  pro- 
mise was  based  had  been  broken  by  the  people. 
Jehovah  now  therefore  declared  that  though 
His  Angel  should  go  before  Moses  (xxxii.  34) 
and  should  drive  out  the  heathen  from  the 
land,  He  would  withhold  His  own  favouring 
presence,  lest  he  should  consume  than  in  the 
'way  (xxxiii.  2,  3).  Thus  were  the  people 
forcibly  warned  that  His  presence  could  prove 
a blessing  to  them  only  on  condition  of  their 
keeping  their  part  of  the  covenant  (see  on  'v.  3). 
If  they  failed  in  this.  His  presence  would  be  to 
them  “a  consuming  fire”  (Deut.  iv.  24).  The 
people,  when  they  heard  the  Divine  message, 
mourned  and  humbled  themselves,  stripping 
off  their  accustomed  ornaments  in  accordance 
with  the  command  (pw.  4- — 6).  Moses  now 
appointed  a religious  service  of  a peculiar 
kind,  dedicating  a Tent  pitched  at  some  dis- 
tance from  the  camp,  as  a meeting-place  for 
Jehovah  and  himself  ('u-i;.  7 — n).  Here  he 
again  intercedes  with  persevering  fervour  until 


he  obtains  the  answer,  “My  presence  shall  go 
with  thee,  and  I will  give  thee  rest”  {pv.  14; 
see  note).  He  then  dares  to  reason  on  this 
answer  and  to  prove  its  necessity,  as  one  man 
might  discuss  terms  with  another  (pv.  ii). 
The  answer  is  at  last  given  in  a still  clearer 
and  more  gracious  form;  “I  will  do  this 
thing  also  that  thou  hast  spoken:  for  thou 
hast  found  grace  in  my  sight,  and  I know 
thee  by  name”  (rv.  17).  Having  proved  him- 
self worthy  of  his  calling  as  a mediator,  both 
in  vindicating  the  honour  of  Jehovah  and  in 
his  self-sacrificing  intercession  with  Jehovah 
for  the  nation,  he  is  rewarded  by  a special 
vision  of  the  Divine  nature : Jehovah  reveals 
Himself  to  him  in  His  essential  character  to 
the  utmost  point  that  such  revelation  is  pos- 
sible to  a finite  being  (-ut’.  18 — 23). 

2.  See  on  iii.  8. 

3.  fni/h  and  honey]  See  on  iii.  8. 

for  I will  not  go  up  in  the  midst  of  thee] 
This  is  the  awful  qualification  with  which  the 
possession  of  the  promised  Land  might  have 
been  granted:  Jehovah  Himself  was  not  to  go 
before  the  people.  A ccording  to  the  T argums, 
it  was  the  shekinah  that  was  to  be  withheld 
(see  on  xiv.  19,  20).  Hengstenberg  supposes 
that  the  Angel  promised  in  xxiii.  2c — 23  was 
“the  Angel  of  Jehovah,”  Kaf  i^oxrjv,  the 
Second  Person  of  the  Trinity,  in  whom  Jeho- 
vah was  essentially  present,  the  same  whom 
Isaiah  called  “the  Angel  of  His  presence” 
(Ixiii.  9)  and  Maiachi,  “the  Angel  of  the 
Covenant”  (iii.  i);  but  that  the  Angel  here 
mentioned  was  an  ordinary  Angel,  one  com- 
missioned for  this  service  out  of  the  heavenly 
host  (Christology,  Vol.  i.  p.  107).  It  should 
however  be  noted  that  this  Angel  is  expressly 
spoken  of  as  the  jdngel  of  Jehouah  in  xxxii.  34. 
But  in  whatever  way  we  understand  the 
mention  of  the  A ngel  in  this  passage  as  com- 
pared with  xxiii.  20,  the  meaning  of  the  threat 
appears  to  be  that  the  nation  should  be  put  on 
a level  with  other  nations,  to  lose  its  cha- 
racter as  the  people  in  special  covenant  with 
Jehovah  (see  on  -v.  16). — On  the  name  Angel 


410 


EXODUS.  XXXIII. 


[''•  4—9. 


4 ^ And  when  the  people  heard 
these  evil  tidings,  they  mourned  : and 
no  man  did  put  on  him  his  orna- 
ments. 

5 For  the  Lord  had  said  unto 
Moses,  Say  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
Ye  are  a stiffnecked  people:  I will 
come  up  into  the  midst  of  thee  in  a 
moment,  and  consume  thee : therefore 
now  put  off  thy  ornaments  from  thee, 
that  I may  know  what  to  do  unto 
thee. 

6 And  the  children  of  Israel  stripped 
themselves  of  their  ornaments  by  the 
mount  Horeb. 

7 And  Moses  took  the  tabernacle. 


and  pitched  it  without  the  camp,  afar 
off  from  the  camp,  and  called  it  the 
Tabernacle  of  the  congregation.  And 
it  came  to  pass,  that  every  one  which 
sought  the  Lord  went  out  unto  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  which 
was  without  the  camp. 

8 And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Moses 
went  out  unto  the  tabernacle,  that  all 
the  people  rose  up,  and  stood  every 
man  at  his  tent  door,  and  looked  after 
Moses,  until  he  was  gone  into  the 
tabernacle. 

9 And  it  came  to  pass,  as  Moses 
entered  into  the  tabernacle,  the  cloudy 
pillar  descended,  and  stood  at  the  door 


of  Jeho'vah^  see  on  Gen.  ii.  i.  Hengstenberg’s 
arguments  have  been  elaborately  answered  by 
Kurtz,  ‘ Hist  of  O.  C.’  Vol.  i.  § 50  (a),  and 
Vol.  III.  § 14  (3). 

lest  I consume  thee  in  the  ^i.vay\  See  introd. 
note  to  this  chap.  St  Augustine-  speaks  of  the 
mystery  that  Jehovah  should  declare  Himself 
to  be  less  merciful  than  His  Angel  (Quiest. 
150).  It  would  seem  that  the  presence  of 
Jehovah  represented  the  Covenant  with  its 
penalties  as  well  as  its  privileges.  See  pre- 
ceding note. 

4 — 6.  See  introd.  note. 

5.  I will  come  up...co7isume  thee~\  By  far 
the  greater  number  of  versions  put  this  con- 
ditionally; If  I were  to  go  up  for  one 
moment  in  the  midst  of  thee,  I should 
consume  thee  (see  nj.  3).  This  rendering 
seems-  best  to  suit  the  context.  Our  trans- 
lators follow  the  earlier  English  versions, 
which  are  supported  by  the  Syriac,  Vulg. 
and  Luther. 

that  I may  knmv^  &^c.']  and  I shall 
know  by  that  what  to  do  unto  thee. 
That  is,  by  that  sign  of  their  repentance  Je- 
hovah would  decide  in  what  way  they  were 
to  be  punished. 

6.  by  the  mount  Horcb~\  from  mount 
Horeb  onwards.  The  meaning,  according  to 
all  the  best  authorities,  appears  to  be  that 
they  ceased  to  wear  their  ornaments  from  the 
time  they  were  at  xMount  Horeb. 

The  Temporary  Tent  of  Meeting. 

7— II. 

7.  the  tabernacle']  The  original  word  sig- 
nifies the  Tent.  The  only  word  in  the  Old 
Testament  which  ought  to  be  rendered  taber- 
nacle {tn  'ishkdn ) does  not  occur  once  in  this 
narrative  (see  on  xxvi.  i).  What  is  here  called 
The  'Lent  has  been  understood  in  three  dif- 
ferent ways.  It  has  been  taken  to  denote : 


I.  The  Tabernacle  constructed  according 
to  the  pattern  showed  to  Moses  in  the  Mount 
(our  version  and  the  earlier  English  ones,  se- 
veral Jewish  authorities,  Knobel,  &c.).  But 
if  we  are  in  any  degree  to  respect  the  order  of 
the  narrative,  the  Tabernacle  was  not  made 
until  after  the  events  here  recorded  (see 
xl.  a). 

2.  An  old  sanctuary,  or  sacred  tent, 
which  the  Israelites  had  previously  possessed 
(Michaelis,  Rosenmuller,  &c.).  But  it  is  in- 
credible that  such  a structure  should  not  have 
been  spoken  of  elsewhere,  had  it  existed. 

3.  A tent  appointed  for  this  temporary 
purpose  by  Moses,  very  probably  the  one  in 
which  he  was  accustomed  to  dwell.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Hebrew  idiom,  the  article  may 
stand  for  the  possessive  pronoun,  and  thus  it 
is  most  likely  that  the  right  rendering  is,  his 
tent.  This  is  by  far  the  most  satisfactory 
interpretation  (LXX.,  Syriac,  Jarchi,  Aben- 
Ezra,  Drusilis,  Grotius,  Geneva  French, 
Kurtz,  Wogue,  &c.). 

pitched  it  without  the  camp^  afar  off  from,  the 
camp]  This  tent  was  to  be  a place  for  meet- 
ing with  Jehovah,  like  the  Tabernacle  which 
was  about  to  be  constructed.  But  in  order 
that  the  people  might  feel  that  they  had  for- 
feited the  Divine  presence  (see  xxv.  8),  the 
Tent  of  meeting  (as  it  should  be  called, 
see  on  xxvii.  21,  and  Note  at  the  end  of  Chap, 
xl.)  was  placed  “afar  off  from  the  camp,”  and 
the  Mediator  and  his  faithful  servant  Joshua 
were  alone  admitted  to  it  (yv.  ii). 

8.  the  tabernacle]  tbe  Tent. 

at  his  tent  door]  at  the  entiance  of  his 
tent  (see  on  xxvi.  36).  The  people  may 
have  stood  up  either  out  of  respect  to  Moses, 
or  from  doubt  as  to  what  was  going  to  occur. 
But  as  soon  as  the  cloudy  pillar  was  seen, 
they  joined  in  worship  ('v.  10). 

9.  as  Moses  entei'ed... talked  'with  Moses] 
“As  Moses  entered  into  the  Tent,  the  cloudy 


V.  lo — 18.] 


EXODUS.  XXXIII. 


4H 


of  the  tabernacle,  and  the  Lord  talked 
with  Moses. 

10  And  all  the  people  saw  the  cloudy 
pillar  stand  at  the  tabernacle  door: 
and  all  the  people  rose  up  and  wor- 
shipped, every  man  in  his  tent  door. 

1 1 And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
face  to  face,  as  a man  speaketh  unto 
his  friend.  And  he  turned  again  into 
the  camp:  but  his  servant  Joshua,  the 
son  of  Nun,  a young  man,  departed 
not  out  of  the  tabernacle. 

12  ^ And  Moses  said  unto  the 
Lord,  See,  thou  sayest  unto  me,  Bring 
up  this  people : and  thou  hast  not  let 
me  know  whom  thou  wilt  send  with 
me.  Y et  thou  hast  said,  I know  thee 
by  name,  and  thou  hast  also  found 
grace  in  my  sight. 

13  Now  therefore,  I pray  thee,  if 
I have  found  grace  in  thy  sight,  shew 
me  now  thy  way,  that  I may  know 


thee,  that  I may  find  grace  in  thy 
sight:  and  consider  that  this  nation 
is  thy  people. 

14  And  he  said.  My  presence  shall 
go  with  thee,  and  I will  give  thee 
rest. 

15  And  he  said  unto  him.  If  thy 
presence  go  not  with  me,  carry  us  not 
up  hence. 

16  For  wherein  shall  it  be  known 
here  that  I and  thy  people  have  found 
grace  in  thy  sight?  is  it  not  in  that 
thou  goest  with  us?  so  shall  we  be 
separated,  I and  thy  people,  from  all 
the  people  that  are  upon  the  face  of  the 
earth. 

17  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
I will  do  this  thing  also  that  thou  hast 
spoken : for  thou  hast  found  grace  in 
my  sight,  and  I know  thee  by  name. 

18  And  he  said,  I beseech  thee, 
shew  me  thy  glory. 


pillar  came  down  and  stood  at  the 
entrance  of  the  Tent  and  talked  with 
Moses”  (LXX..,  Viilg.,  Onk.,  de  Wette, 
Knobel,  &c,).  The  Cloudy  pillar  is  the  proper 
nominative  to  the  verb  talked  (cf.  xiii.  21,  xix. 
9,  xxiv.  16,  xl.  35). 

10.  the  tabernacle  door~\  the  entrance 
of  the  Tent. 

rose  up  and  <ivorshipped]  or,  began  to  nvor~ 
ship.  The  people  by  this  act  gave  another 
proof  of  their  penitence. 

in  his  tent  door']  at  the  entrance  of  his 
tent. 

11.  face  to  face]  The  meaning  of  these 
words  is  limited  by  ns.  20,  see  note;  cf.  also 
Num.  xii.  8;  Deut.  iv.  12. 

Joshua]  See  on  xvii.  9. 

the  tabernacle]  the  Tent. 

The  Mediator  is  rewarded. 

12—13- 

12.  let  me  kno^u  whom  tbou  wilt  send  with 
me]  Jehovah  had  just  previously  commanded 
Moses  to  lead  on  the  people  and  had  promised 
to  send  an  Angel  before  him  {ns.  2,  xxxii.  34). 
Moses  was  now  anxious  to  know  who  the 
Angel  was  to  be.  • 

I know  thee  by  name]  The  LORD  had  called 
him  by  his  name,  iii.  4;  cf.  Isa.  xliii.  i,  xlix.  i. 

found  grace]  xxxii.  10,  &c. 

13.  thy  way]  He  desires  not  to  be  left  in 
uncertainty,  but  to  be  assured,  by  Jehovah’s 
mode  of  proceeding,  of  the  reality  of  the  pro- 
mises that  had  been  made  to  him. 

14. ].  Ewald  considers  that  this  verse  should 


be  read  interrogatively,  “ Must  my  presence 
go  with  thee,  and  shall  I give  thee  rest?” 
This  rendering  may  make  the  connection 
more  simple ; but  it  appears  to  be  supported 
by  no  other  authority.  See  on  xxxiv.  9. 

rest]  This  was  the  common  expression 
for  the  possession  of  the  promised  Land. 
Deut.  iii,  20;  Josh.  i.  13,  15,  xxii.  4,  (See.; 
cf.  Heb.  iv.  8. 

15,  16]  Moses  would  have  preferred  that 
the  people  should  forego  the  possession  of  the 
Land  and  remain  in  the  wilderness,  if  they 
were  to  be  deprived  of  the  presence  of  Jeho- 
vah, as  the  witness  for  the  Covenant,  accord- 
ing to  the  original  promise.  It  was  this  which 
alone  distinguished  (rather  than  “sepa- 
rated”) them  from  other  nations,  and  which 
alone  would  render  the  Land  of  Promise  a 
home  to  be  desired. 

17.  Cf.  'v.  13.  His  petition  for  the  na- 
tion, and  his  own  claims  as  a mediator,  are 
now  granted  to  the  full. 

18.  shew  me  thy  glory]  The  faithful  ser- 
vant of  Jehovah,  now  assured  by  the  success 
of  his  mediation,  yearns,  with  the  proper 
tendency  of  a devout  spirit,  for  a more  inti- 
mate communion  with  his  Divine  Master  than 
he  had  yet  enjoyed.  He  seeks  for  something 
surpassing  all  former  revelations.  He  had 
talked  with  the  Lord  “ face  to  face  as  a man 
speaketh  unto  his  friend”  {yv.  ii;  cf,  Deut. 
xxxiv.  10),  but  it  was  in  the  Cloudy  pillar: 
he,  and  the  people  with  him,  had  seen  ‘ ‘ the 
glory  of  the  Lord,”  but  it  was  in  the  form  of 
“devouring  fire”  (xvi.  7.  10,  xxiv.  16,  17): 


412 


EXODUS.  XXXIII.  XXXIV. 


[v.  IQ 2. 


^ Rom. 

15- 


19  And  he  said,  I will  make  all 
my  goodness  pass  before  thee,  and  I 
will  proclaim  the  name  of  the  Lord 
before  thee;  ^and  will  be  gracious  to 
whom  I will  be  gracious,  and  will  shew 
mercy  on  whom  I will  shew  mercy. 

20  And  he  said.  Thou  canst  not  see 
my  face:  for  there  shall  no  man  see 
me,  and  live. 

21  And  the  Lord  said.  Behold, 
there  is  a place  by  me,  and  thou  shalt 
stand  upon  a rock : 

22  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  while 
my  glory  passeth  by,  that  I will  put 
thee  in  a clift  of  the  rock,  and  will 
cover  thee  with  my  hand  while  I pass 
by: 


he  had  even  beheld  the  “similitude”  of  the 
Lord  in  a mystical  sense  (Num.  xii.  8).  But 
he  asks  now  to  behold  the  face  of  Jehovah 
in  all  its  essential  glory,  neither  veiled  by  a 
cloud  nor  represented  by  an  Angel. 

19,  20]  But  his  request  could  not  be 
granted  in  accordance  with  the  conditions  of 
human  existence.  The  glory  of  the  Almighty 
in  its  fulness  is  not  to  be  revealed  to  the  eye 
of  man.  A further  revelation  of  the  Divine 
goodness  was  however  possible.  Jehovah  was 
to  reveal  Himself  as  the  gracious  One,  whose 
mercy  in  forgiving  iniquity  included,  and 
brought  into  harmony,  all  the  claims  of  jus- 
tice (xxxiv.  6,7;  see  on  xxxii.  14).  The  pro- 
mise here  given  was  to  be  fulfilled  on  the 
morrow,  when  the  mediator  was  to  receive 
the  twofold  reward  of  his  spiritual  wrestling ; 
the  covenant  was  to  be  renewed  with  the  na- 
tion according  to  its  original  terms,  and  he 
himself  was  to  be  permitted  to  penetrate 
more  deeply  into  the  mysteries  of  the  Divine 
nature  than  had  ever  before  been  granted  to 
mortal  man. 

It  was  vouchsafed  to  St  Paul,  as  it  had 
been  to  Moses,  to  have  special  “visions  and 
revelations  of  the  Lord”  (2  Cor.  xii.  i — 4). 
He  was  “caught  up  into  the  third  heaven” 
and  heard  “ unspeakable  words  which  it  is 
not  possible  for  a man  to  utter.”  But  he 
had,  also  like  Moses,  to  find  the  narrow  reach 
of  the  intellect  of  man  in  the  region  of  God- 
head. It  was  long  after  he  had  heard  the 
unspeakable  words  in  Paradise  that  he  spoke 
of  the  Lord  as  dwelling  “ in  the  light  which 
no  man  can  approach  unto,  whom  no  man 
hath  seen  nor  can  see”  (i  Tim.  vi,  16).  He 
knew  of  the  Mediator  greater  than  Moses 
(Heb.  iii.  5,  6),  who  being  “ in  the  bosom  of 
the  bather”  had  declared  flim  in  a higher 
sense  than  He  had  been  declared  to  Moses, 
but  still  it  remains  true  that  “ no  man  hath 


23  And  I will  take  away  mine  hand, 
and  thou  shalt  see  my  back  p^arts : but 
my  face  shall  not  be  seen. 

CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

I The  tables  are  renewed.  5 The  name  of  the 
LORD  proclaimed.  8 Moses  intreateth  God 
to  go  with  them.  10  God  maketh  a covenant 
with  them,  repeating  certain  duties  of  the  first 
table.  2 8 Moses  after  forty  days  in  the  mount 
Cometh  down  with  the  tables.  29  His  face 
shineth,  and  he  covereth  it  with  a vail. 

And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 

L '^Hew  thee  two  tables  of  stone  " Deut.  la 
like  unto  the  first:  and  I will  write 
upon  these  tables  the  words  that  were 
in  the  first  tables,  which  thou  brakest. 

2 And  be  ready  in  the  morning, 
and  come  up  in  the  morning  unto 


seen  God  at  any  time”  (John  i.  18).  How- 
ever intimate  may  be  our  communion  with 
the  Holy  One,  we  are  still,  as  long  as  we  are 
in  the  flesh,  “ to  see  through  a glass  darkly,” 
w'aiting  for  the  time  when  we  shall  see,  with 
no  figure  of  speech,  “ face  to  face”  (i  Cor. 
xiii.  12).  Then  we  know  “that  we  shall  be 
like  him,  for  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is”  (i  John 
iii.  2).  It  was  in  a tone  of  aspiration  lower 
than  that  of  Moses  or  St  Paul,  that  St  Philip 
said,  “Lord, shew  us  the  Father”  (John  xiv.  8). 

19.  ‘2C///  be  gracious  to  <whom  I (will  be 
gracious,  and  <will  she^tv  mercy  on  <ivhom  I ^joill 
sbe<iju  mercy']  Jehovah  declares  His  own  wdll 
to  be  the  ground  of  the  grace  which  He  is 
going  to  shew  the  nation.  St  Paul  applies 
these  wmrds  to  the  election  of  Jacob  in  order 
to  overthrow  the  self-righteous  boasting  of 
the  Jews  (Rom.  ix.  15). 

20.  Cf.  xix.  21.  Such  passages  as  this 
being  clearly  in  accordance  with  what  we 
know  of  the  relation  of  spiritual  existence  to 
the  human  senses,  shew  how  we  are  to  inter- 
pret the  expressions  “face  to  face”  (y.  ii), 
“ mouth  to  mouth”  (Num.  xii.  8),  and  others 
of  the  like  kind.  See  especially  xxiv.  10,  ii ; 
Isa.  vi.  I ; and  cf.  John  xiv.  9. 

21—23.]  The  conjectures  and  traditions 
on  the  place  of  this  vision,  inconclusive  as 
they  must  be,  are  given  by  Robinson,  ‘ Bib. 
Res.’  Vol.  I.  p.  153. 

Chap.  XXXIV. 

The  Covenant  and  the  Tables  are  renenved — The 
second  revelation  of  the  Divine  Name  to 
Moses. 

I — 10. 

1.  Hevj  thee]  See  v.  4.  The  fonner  tables 
are  called  “the  work  of  God,”  xxxii.  16. 

the  vuords  that  ewere  in  the  first  tables, 
(which  thou  brakest]  These  were  “the  words 


V.  3—9-] 


EXODUS.  XXXIV. 


413 


mount  Sinai,  and  present  thyself  there 
to  me  in  the  top  of  the  mount. 

*chap.  19.  3 And  no  man  shall  ‘^come  up  with 

thee,  neither  let  any  man  be  seen 
throughout  all  the  mount ; neither  let 
the  flocks  nor  herds  feed  before  that 
mount. 

4 ^ And  he  hewed  two  tables  of 
stone  like  unto  the  first;  and  Moses 
rose  up  early  in  the  morning,  and  v/ent 
up  unto  mount  Sinai,  as  the  Lord  had 
commanded  him,  and  took  in  his  hand 
the  two  tables  of  stone. 

5 And  the  Lord  descended  in  the 
cloud,  and  stood  with  him  there,  and 
proclaimed  the  name  of  the  Lord. 


6 And  the  Lord  passed  by  before 
him,  and  proclaimed.  The  Lord,  The 
Lord  God,  merciful  and  gracious, 
longsuffiering,  and  abundant  in  good- 
ness and  truth, 

7 Keeping  mercy  for  thousands, 
forgiving  iniquity  and  transgression 
and  sin,  and  that  will  by  no  means 
clear  the  guilty i ^visiting  the  iniquity ^ chap, 
of  the  fathers  upon  the  children,  and  i)eut.  5 
upon  the  children’s  children,  unto  the  32- 
third  and  to  the  fourth  generation. 

8 And  Moses  made  haste,  and 
bowed  his  head  toward  the  earth,  and 
worshipped. 

9 And  he  said.  If  now  I have  found 


of  the  covenant,  the  ten  commandments”  {v. 
28);  see  Dent.  iv.  13,  ix.  10,  ii,  x.  i,  4,  and 
especially  Deut.  v.  6 — 22.  These  passages 
would  seem  to  leave  no  room  for  doubt  that 
what  we  recognize  as  the  Ten  Command- 
ments were  inscribed  on  the  second  as  well 
as  the  first  pair  of  Tables.  But  Gothe,  in 
one  of  his  early  works,  started  ‘the  notion 
that  what  was  written  on  these  Tables  was 
the  string  of  precepts,  which  may  be  reckoned 
as  Ten,  contained  in  this  chap.  nj'v.  12 — 26. 
Falsely  regarding  the  Mosaic  Covenant  as 
essentially  narrow  and  exclusive,  he  could 
not  see  how  an  expression  of  universal  moral- 
ity like  the  Ten  Commandments  of  Ex.  xx. 
could  possibly  have  formed  its  basis.  Hitzig 
has  taken  a similar  view.  Hengstenberg  ( ‘Pent.’ 
Vol.  II.  p.  31)  and  Kurtz  (‘Old  Cov.’  iii.  182) 
have  answered  Hitzig  at  length. — Ewald  holds 
that  the  Tables  mentioned  in  this  verse  con- 
tained the  original  Ten  Commandments,  but 
that  the  tables  spoken  of  in  2;.  2 8 were  dis- 
tinct ones,  on  which  Moses  engraved  this 
string  of  precepts.  But  this  seems  an  utterly 
gratuitous  supposition. 

3.  Lhese  are  similar  to  the  instructions 
given  on  the  first  occasion.  See  xix.  12,  13. 

6,  7.  This  was  the  second  revelation  of 
the  name  of  the  God  of  Israel  to  Moses.  The 
first  revelation  was  of  Jehovah  as  the  self- 
existent  One,  who  purposed  to  deliver  His 
people  with  a mighty  hand  (iii.  1 4) ; this  was 
of  the  same  Jehovah  as  a loving  Saviour  who 
was  now  forgiving  their  sins.  The  two  ideas 
that  mark  these  revelations  are  found  com- 
bined, apart  from  their  historical  develop- 
ment, in  the  Second  Commandment,  where 
the  Divine  unity  is  shewn  on  its  practical 
side,  in  its  relation  to  human  obligations  (cf. 
xxxiv.  14).  Both  in  the  Commandment  and 
in  this  passage,  the  Divine  Love  is  associated 
with  the  Divine  Justice;  but  in  the  former 
there  is  a transposition  to  serve  the  proper 


purpose  of  the  Commandments,  and  the 
Justice  stands  before  the  Love.  This  is 
strictly  the  legal  arrangement,  brought  out 
in  the  completed  system  of  the  ceremonial 
Law,  in  which  the  Sin-offering,  in  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  sentence  of  Justice  against 
sin,  was  offered  before  the  Burnt-offering 
and  the  Peace-offering  (see  pref.  to  Leviticus). 
But  in  this  place  the  truth  rappears  in  its 
essential  order ; the  retributive'  Justice  of 
Jehovah  is  subordinated  to,  rather  it  is  made 
a part  of.  His  forgiving  Love  (see  on  xxxii. 
14).  The  visitation  of  God,  whatever  form 
it  may  wear,  is  in  all  ages  working  out  pur- 
poses of  Love  towards  all  His  children.  The 
diverse  aspects  of  the  Divine  natui-e,  to  sepa- 
rate which  is  the  tendency  of  the  unre- 
generate mind  of  man  and  of  all  heathenism, 
are  united  in  perfect  harmony  in  the  Lord 
Jehovah,  of  whom  the  saying  is  true  in  all 
its  length  and  breadth,  “God  is  love”  (i  Joh. 
iv.  8).  It  was  the  sense  of  this  in  the  degree 
to  which  it  was  now  revealed  to  him  that 
caused  Moses  to  bow  his  head  and  worship 
{y.  8).  But  the  perfect  revelation  of  the 
harmony  was  reserved  for  the  fulness  of  time 
when  “ the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation 
of  the  world”  was  made  known  to  us  in 
the  flesh  as  both  our  Saviour  and  our  Judge. 
— Moses  quotes  the  words  here  pronounced 
to  him  in  his  supplication  after  the  rebellion 
that  arose  from  the  report  of  the  ten  spies 
(Num.  xiv.  18), 

9.  Moses  had  been  assured  of  the  pardon 
of  the  people  and  the  perfect  restoration  of  the 
Covenant  (xxxiii.  14,  17)  : he  had  just  had  re- 
vealed to  him,  in  a most  distinguished  man- 
ner, the  riches  of  the  Divine  forgiveness.  Yet 
now,  in  the  earnest  travail  of  his  spirit,  he 
supplicates  for  a repetition  of  the  promise,  add- 
ing the  emphatic  petition,  that  Jehovah  would 
take  Israel  for  his  own  inheritance  (ch.  xv, 
17).  This  yearning  struggle  after  assurance 


414 


EXODUS.  XXXIV. 


[v.  10—21. 


grace  in  thy  sight,  O Lord,  let  my 
Lord,  I pray  thee,  go  among  us ; for 
it  is  a stiffnecked  people ; and  pardon 
our  iniquity  and  our  sin,  and  take  us 
for  thine  inheritance. 
rfDeut.  5-  10  ^ And  he  said.  Behold, 

make  a covenant : before  all  thy  peo- 
ple I will  do  marvels,  such  as  have 
not  been  done  in  all  the  earth,  nor  in 
any  nation : and  all  the  people  among 
which  thou  art  shall  see  the  work  of 
the  Lord  : for  it  is  a terrible  thing 
that  I will  do  with  thee. 

1 1 Observe  thou  that  which  I 
command  thee  this  day:  behold,  I 
drive  out  before  thee  the  Amorite, 
and  the  Canaanite,  and  the  Hittite, 
and  the  Perizzite,  and  the  Hivite, 
and  the  Jebusite. 

r chap.  23.  12  ^ Take  heed  to  thyself,  lest  thou 

Dcut.  7. 2.  make  a covenant  with  the  inhabitants 
of  the  land  whither  thou  goest,  lest 
it  be  for  a snare  in  the  midst  of  thee : 

13  But  ye  shall  destroy  their  altars, 

siliuis  tbeir  ^ images,  and  cut  down 

their  groves : 

14  For  thou  shalt  worship  no  other 
god:  for  the  Lord,  whose  name  is 

/chap.  20.  Jealous,  is  a-^^jealous  God. 

. 15  Lest  thou  make  a covenant 


with  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,  and 
they  go  a whoring  after  their  gods,  and 
do  sacrifice  unto  their  gods,  and  one 
call  thee,  and  thou  eat  of  his  sacrifice ; 

16  And  thou  take  of  ^ their  daugh-'^  ^ Kings 
ters  unto  thy  sons,  and  their  daugh- 
ters go  a whoring  after  their  gods, 

and  make  thy  sons  go  a whoring  after 
their  gods. 

17  Thou  shalt  make  thee  no  mol- 
ten gods. 

18  The  feast  of  unleavened chap.  23. 
bread  shalt  thou  keep.  Seven  days 

thou  shalt  eat  unleavened  bread,  as  I 
commanded  thee,  in  the  time  of  the 
month  Abib : for  in  the  * month  Abib  * chap.  13, 
thou  earnest  out  from  Egypt. 

19  All  that  openeth  the  matrix  is  ^chap.  22. 
mine;  and  every  firstling  among  thy  Ezek.  44. 
cattle,  whether  ox  or  sheep,  that  is  male. 

20  But  the  firstling  of  an  ass  thou 

shalt  redeem  with  a Mamb:  and  if  n Or, /t/zf. 
thou  redeem  him  not,  then  shalt  thou 
break  hi^  neck.  All  the  firstborn  of 
thy  sons  thou  shalt  redeem.  And 
none  shall  appear  before  me  ^ empty. 

21  ^ "'Six  days  thou  shalt  work, chap. 23. 
but  on  the  seventh  day  thou  shalt  Deut.  5. 
rest : in  earing  time  and  in  harvest  ^3. 
thou  shalt  rest. 


is  like  the  often-repeated  utterance  of  the 
heart,  when  it  receives  a blessing  beyond  its 
hopes,  “can  this  be  real?”  These  words  of 
Moses  wonderfully  commend  themselves  to 
the  experience  of  the  prayerful  spirits  of  all 
ages, — A hint  may  perhaps  be  gathered  from 
this  verse  in  favour  of  reading  the  verbs  in 
xxxiii,  14  (see  note)  affirmatively  rather  than 
interrogatively. 

10.  mar'vels\  These  marvels  are  explained 
in  the  following  verse.  Cf.  Deut.  vii.  i,  &c. 

Conditions  of  th'j  Covenant. 

1 1 — 27. 

11.  The  names  of  the  nations  are  the  same 
as  occur  in  the  first  promise  to  Moses  in 
iii.  8. 

12 — 27.  The  precepts  contained  in  these 
verses  are,  for  the  most  part,  identical  in  sub- 
stance with  some  of  those  which  follow  the 
Ten  Commandments  and  are  recorded  in  “the 
Book  of  the  Covenant”  (xx. — xxiii. ; see 
xxiv.  7).  Such  a selection  of  precepts  in  this 
place,  conncxrted  with  the  account  of  the  re- 
stored Covenant  and  the  new  'Cables,  may 
tend  to  support  the  probability  that  chapters 


xxxii.,  xxxiii.,  xxxiv.  originally  formed  a dis- 
tinct composition.  See  introd.  note  to  xxxii. 

12.  See  on  xxiii,  32,  33. 

13.  See  on  xxiii.  24, 

cat  do^jun  thiir  grooves']  See  Note  at  the  end 
of  the  Chap. 

14.  See  on  xx.  5. 

15.  16]  An  expansion  of  -z;.  12  (cf,  Deut. 
xxxi.  16).  The  unfaithfulness  of  the  nation 
to  its  Covenant  with  Jehovah  is  here  for  the 
first  time  spoken  of  as  a breach  of  the  mar- 
riage bond.  The  metaphor  is,  in  any  'case, 
a natural  one,  but  it  seems  to  gain  point,  if  we 
suppose  it  to  convey  an  allusion  to  the  abo- 
minations connected  with  heathen  worship, 
such  as  are  spoken  of  Num.  xxv.  i — 3.  Cf 
Lev.  xvii.  7,  xx.  5,  6;  Num.  xiv.  33. 

15.  eat  of  his  sacrifice]  See  Num.  xxv.  a. 

17.  molten]  See  on  xx.  4, 

18.  See  xxiii.  15. 

19.  See  on  xiii.  2,  12  and  Lev.  xxvii.  26. 

20.  See  xiii.  13. 

shall  appear  before  me  empty]  See  xxiii.  15. 

21.  See  XX.  9,  xxiii.  12.  There  is  here 
added  to  the  Commandment  a particular  cau- 


V.  22 32-] 


EXODUS.  XXXIV. 


415 


w^chap.  23.  22  ^ ” And  thou  shalt  observe  the 

feast  of  weeks,  of  the  firstfruits  of 
wheat  harvest,  and  the  feast  of  in- 
t Heb.  gathering  at  the  ^ year’s  end. 
l/theycTr.  23  ^ ThHce  in  the  year  shall  all 
your  men  children  appear  before  the 
Deut.  16.  Lord  God,  the  God  of  Israel. 

24  For  I will  cast  out  the  nations 
before  thee,  and  enlarge  thy  bor- 
ders: neither  shall  any  man  desire 
thy  Lind,  when  thou  shalt  go  up  to 
appear  before  the  Lord  thy  God 
thrice  in  the  year. 

/chap.  23,  25  ^Thou  shalt  not  offer  the  blood 

^ ’ of  my  sacrifice  with  leaven ; neither 
shall  the  sacrifice  of  the  feast  of  the 
passover  be  left  unto  the  morning. 

26  The  first  of  the  firstfruits  of 
* thy  land  thou  shalt  bring  unto  the 
house  of  the  Lord  thy  God.  Thou 
? chap.  23.  shalt  not  seethe  a ^'kid  in  his  mo- 
Deut.i4.  then’s  milk. 

21-  27  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 

^Dcut.  4.  Write  thou  ''these  words:  for  after 
the  tenor  of  these  words  I have  made 
a covenant  with  thee  and  with  Israel. 


28  And  he  was  there  with  the 
Lord  forty  days  and  forty  nights ; Deut.  9. 9. 
he  did  neither  eat  bread,  nor  drink 
water.  And  he  wrote  upon  the  tables 

the  v/ords  of  the  covenant,  the  ten 
^ commandments. 

29  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
Moses  came  down  from  mount  Sinai 
with  the  two  tables  of  testimony  in 
Moses’  hand,  when  he  came  down 
from  the  mount,  that  Moses  wist  not 
that  the  skin  of  his  face  shone  while 
he  talked  v/ith  him. 

30  And  when  Aaron  and  all  the 
children  of  Israel  saw  Moses,  behold, 
the  skin  of  his  face  shone ; and  they 
were  afraid  to  come  nigh  him. 

31  And  Moses  called  unto  them; 
and  Aaron  and  all  the  rulers  of  the 
congregation  returned  unto  him : and 
Moses  talked  with  them. 

32  And  afterv/ard  ail  the  children  of 
Israel  came  nigh : and  he  gave  them 
in  commandment  all  that  the  Lord 
had  spoken  with  him  in  mount 
Sinai. 


tion  respecting  those  times  of  year  when  the 
land  calls  for  most  labour. — The  old  verb 
to  ear  (i.  e,  to  plough)  is  genuine  English. 
Though  it  appears  to  be  cognate  with  the 
Latin  arare^  it  is  certainly  not  derived  from 
it.  The  English,  verb  is  found  Gen.  xlv.  6, 
in  Shakespeare  (‘Rich.  II.’  iii.  a;  ‘Ant.  and 
Cleo.’  I.  4),  and  elsewhere. 

22.  See  xxiii.  16. 

23.  See  xxiii.  14,  17. 

24.  for  1 <ivill  cast  out]  See  xxiii.  23. 

enlarge  thy  borders]  See  xxiii.  31;  Deut. 

xii.  20. 

neither  shall  any  man  desire^  5cc.]  This  is 
the  only  place  in  which  the  promise  is  given 
to  encourage  such  as  might  fear  the  conse- 
quences of  obeying  the  Divine  Law  in  attend- 
ing to  their  religious  duties.  But  cf.  xxiii.  27. 

25.  26.]  See  xxiii.  18,  19. 

27.  Write  thou]  Moses  is  here  com- 
manded to  make  a record  in  his  own  writing 
of  the  preceding  precepts  (see  on  njv.  12 — 27). 
The  Book  of  the  Covenant  was  written  in 
like  manner  (xxiv.  4,  7). — On  the  words  “ he 
wrote,”  in  the  next  verse,  see  note. 

Moses  recei^ves  the  Ne^iu  Tables^  comes  down 

from  the  Mount^  and  converses  with  the 

people, 

,,,  . ^8—35- 

28.  Cf.  XXIV.  18. 


he  wrote]  According  to  Hebrew  usage, 
the  name  of  Jehovah  may  be  the  subject  of 
the  verb ; that  it  must  be  so,  is  evident  from 
V.  I.  Cf.  xxxii.  16. 

29.  the  two  tables  of  testimony]  Cf.  xxxi. 
18. 

the  skin  of  his  face  shone]  Cf.  Matt.  xvii.  2. 
The  brightness  of  the  Eternal  Glory,  though 
Moses  had  witnessed  it  only  in  a modified 
manner  (xxxiii.  22,  23),  w^as  so  reflected  in 
his  face,  that  Aaron  and  the  people  were 
stricken  wfith  aw^e  and  feared  to  approach 
him  until  he  gave  them  words  of  encourage- 
ment. The  Hebrew  verb  kciran,,  to  shine^  is 
connected  through  a simple  metaphor  with 
keren,,  a horn;  and  hence  Aquila  and  the 
Vulgate  have  rendered  the  verb  to  be  horned. 
The  latter  part  of  the  verse  in  the  Vulg.  is, 
et  ignorabat  quod  cornuta  esset  facies  sua  ex 
consortio  sermonis  Do^nini,  From  this  use  of 
the  word  cornuta  has  arisen  the  popular  repre- 
sentation of  Mpses  with  horns  on  his  fore- 
head. 

33 — 35.  St  Paul  refers  to  this  passage  as 
shewing  forth  the  glory  of  the  Law,  though 
it  was  but  a “ministration  of  condemnation,” 
and  was  to  be  done  away,  in  order  to  enhance 
the  glory  of  the  Gospel,  “the  ministration 
of  the  spirit,”  which  is  concealed  by  no  vail 
fi'om  the  eyes  of  believers,  and  is  to  last  for 
ever  (2  Cor.,  iii.  7 — 15). 


4i6 


2 Cor. 


EXODUS. 

33  And  till  Moses  had  done  speak- 
s' ing  with  them,  he  put  ^a  vail  on  his 

face. 

34  But  when  Moses  went  in  be- 
fore the  Lord  to  speak  with  him,  he 
took  the  vail  off,  until  he  came  out. 
And  he  came  out,  and  spake  unto 


XXXIV.  [v.  33-35.. 

the  children  of  Israel  that  which  he 
was  commanded. 

35  And  the  children  of  Israel  saw 
the  face  of  Moses,  that  the  skin  of 
Moses’  face  shone:  and  Moses  put 
the  vail  upon  his  face  again,  until  he 
went  in  to  speak  with  him. 


33.  ^nd  till  Moses  had  done']  Our  translators 
give  what  may  seem  to  be  the  easiest  sense  of 
the  original  by  supplying  the  word  till.  But 
the  Hebrew  rather  requires  that  -when,  not 
tilh  should  be  inserted ; and  this  agrees  better 
with  v.  (so  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  the  Tar- 
gums,  Syriac,  Saadia,  and  nearly  all  modern 
versions,  not  excepting  Luther  and  Cranmer). 
If  we  adopt  this  rendering,  Moses  did  not 
wear  the  vail  when  he  was  speaking  to  the 
people,  but  when  he  was  silent.  See  on  v.  2,s- 

34.  Moses  <ivent  in]  i.e.  to  the  Tent  of 
meeting. 

35.  Our  \&rsion  accords  with  the  Hebrew 
and  all  the  ancient  versions,  except  the  Vul- 
gate, which  has  this  remai-kable  rendering,  for 


which  it  is  difficult  to  account  unless  we  may 
suppose  it  to  represent  a different  reading  in 
the  original ; — •videbant  faciem  egredientis  Moysi 
esse  cornutam  ; sed  operiebat  ilk  rursus  faciem 
suam^  siquando  loquebatur  ad  eos.  It  has 
been  suggested  that  if  we  may  imagine  St 
Paul  to  have  had  such  a reading  in  his  mind, 
it  would  simplify  the  use  he  makes  of  the 
passage  in  z Cor.  iii.  iz — 15.  But  it  is  not 
necessary  to  resort  to  any  such  supposition, 
since  St  Paul’s  application  of  the  narrative 
may  be  well  explained  as  referring  to  the 
simple  fact  that  it  was  distinctive  of  the  old 
dispensation  that  a vail  should  conceal  the 
glory.  There  was  no  occasion  to  notice  the 
particular  that  Moses  did  not  wear  the  vail 
just  in  the  act  of  speaking. 


NOTE  ON  Chap,  xxxiv.  13. 


The  Groves. 

This  is  the  first  reference  to  what  is  com- 
monly known  as  grove-worship.  The  original 
word  for  groz.'^  in  this  connection  is 
{asherdh').^  a difierent  one  from  that  so  ren- 
dered in  Gen.  xxi.  33  eshel).  Our 

translators  have  followed  the  sense  given  in 
most  of  the  passages  in  which  the  word 
occurs  by  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  and  Saadia,  and 
which  has  been  adopted  by  most  Jewish 
authorities,  by  Luther,  and  other  modern 
translators.  It  was  supposed  that  what  the 
Law  commands  is  the  destruction  of  groves 
dedicated  to  the  worship  of  false  deities.  The 
allusions  to  such  groves  in  classical  writers 
are  familiar  enough.  The  connection  of 
sacred  groves  and  trees  with  the  worship  of 
the  powers  of  nature  may  be  traced  very 
generally  amongst  the  ancient  nations  of  Asia 
and  Europe  (see  Humboldt,  ‘Cosmos,’  Vol. 
II.  p.  95,  Sabine’s  translation).  But  there 
appear  to  be  insuperable  ciiffculties  in  the 
way  of  thus  rendering  asberdh.  Since  the 
times  of  Selden  and  Spencer  most  critics 
liave  taken  the  word  to  denote  either  a per- 
sonal goddess  or  some  symbolical  representa- 
tion of  one. 

'Lhe  following  conclusions  seem  to  be  fairly 
deduced  from  the  references  to  the  subject  in 
the  Old  Testament: 

(i)  According  to  the  most  probable  deri- 


vation of  the  name  the  asherdh  represented 
something  that  was  upright,  which  was  fixed, 
or  planted,  in  the  ground;  hence,  if  it  was 
not  a tree,  it  must  have  been  some  sort  of 
upright  pillar  or  monument. 

(2)  It  was  formed  of  wood,  and  when  it 
was  destroyed  it  was  cut -down  and  burned 
(Deut.  vii.  5;  Judg.  vi.  25,  26;  2 K.  xxiii. 
6,  15).  It  might  be  made  of  any  sort  of 
wood.  See  note  on  Deut.  xvi.  21. 

(3)  That  it  could  not  be  a grove  appears 
from  an  asherdh  having  been  set  up  “under 
every  green  tree”  in  Judah  in  the  time  of 
Rehoboam  (i  K.  xiv.  23),  and  in  Israel  in 
the  time  of  Hoshea  (2  K.  xvii.  10);  from  an 
asherdh  idol  (not  “an  idol  in  a grove,”  as  it 
stands  in  our  version)  having  been  destroyed 
and  burnt  near  the  brook  Kidron  by  Asa 
(i  K.  XV.  13;  2 Chr.  XV.  16);  and  from  a 
carved  image  of  the  asherdh  having  been  set 
up  in  the  Temple  by  Manasseh  (2  K.  xxi.  7), 
which  was  brought  out  by  Josiah  and  burnt 
and  stamped  to  powder  (2  K.  xxiii.  6). 

The  worship  of  asherdh  is  found  associated 
with  that  of  Baal  (Judg.  iii.  7 ; i K.  xviii.  19, 
z K.  xxi.  3;  xxiik  4),  like  that  of  Astarte,  or 
Ashtcreth  (n^h^’y)  (Judg.  ii.  13,  x.  6;  i S. 
vii.  4).  Hence  it  has  been  inferred  by 
de  Wette  and  others  that  Asherdh  was  ano- 
ther name  for  Astarte.  This  opinion  might 
seem  to  be  countenanced  by  the  LXX.  in 


V.  I — II.J 


EXODUS.  XXXV. 


chap.  2 

Lev.  23. 
Deut.  5;  1 
I-uke  13, 

I Heb. 
kolitiess. 


417 


% Chron.  xv.  16  (where  the  Vulgate  has 
simulacrum  Priapi)^  and  by  the  Vulgate  in 
Judg.  iii.  7.  But  it  has  been  proved  that  the 
words  have  no  etymological  connection  Avith 
each  other,  and  are  not  likely  to  have  had  the 
same  oenotation.  Movers,  resting  his  main 
argument  upon  a K.  xxiii.  13  — 15,  con- 
ceived them  to  be  the  names  of  two  distinct 
deities.  On  the  whole,  the  most  probable 
result  of  the  inquiry  seems  to  be  that  while 
Astarte  was  the  personal  name  of  the  god- 
dess, the  asherah  was  a symbol  of  her,  pro- 
bably in  some  one  of  her  characters,  wrought 
in  wood  in  some  conventional  form.  If  we 
suppose  it  to  have  symbolized  her  as  a god- 
dess of  nature,  the  conjecture  that  its  form 
resembled  that  of  the  sacred  tree  of  the  As- 
sygans,  with  which  we  have  become  familiar 
from  the  monuments  of  Nineveh^  (see  Fer- 

^ It  has  been  conjectured  from  the  sculptured 
figures  that  this  was  an  upright  stock  which  was 
adorned  at  festive  seasons  with  boughs,  flowers, 
and  ribbons.  Such  might  have  been  the  asherah. 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 

I The  sabbath.  4 The  free  gifts  for  the  taber- 
nacle. 20  The  readiness  of  the  people  to  offer. 
30  Bezaleel  and  Aholiab  are  called  to  the 
work. 

And  Moses  gathered  all  the  con- 
L gregation  of  the  children  of  Is- 
rael together,  and  said  unto  them, 
These  are  the  words  v/hich  the  Lord 
hath  commanded,  that  ye  should  do 
them. 

■ 2 " Six  days  shall  work  be  done, 
3.  but  on'  the  seventh  day  there  shall  be 
to  you  ^ an  holy  day,  a sabbath  of  rest 
to  the  Lord  : whosoever  doeth  work 
therein  shall  be  put  to  death. 

3  Ye  shall  kindle  no  fire  throughout 
your  habitations  upon  the  sabbath  day. 

4  ^ And  Moses  spake  unto  all  the 
congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
saying,  This  ts  the  thing  which ‘the 
Lord  commanded,  saying. 


gusson,  ‘Nineveh  and  Persepolis,’  p.  299), 
gains  something  in  probability. 

It  has  been  supposed,  on  what  seems  to  be 
good  ground,  that  the  image,  or  rather 
pillar  (ni-^O,  matzen^dlS),  spoken  of  here 
and  elsewhere  in  the  Kime  connection,  was  a 
stone  pillar,  set  up  in  honour  of  Baal,  as  the 
Asherah  was  a wooden  pillar,  set  up  in  honour 
of  Astarte  (i  K.  xiv.  23;  2 K.  xvii.  10,  xviii. 
4,  &c.).  But  Gesenius  rightly  observes  that 
these  monuments  may  have  lost  in  later  times 
their  original  meaning  as  regards  Baal  and 
Astarte,  as  the  herm^  of  the  Greeks  did  in 
regard  to  Hermes.  They  probably  became 
connected  with  a debased  and  superstitious 
worship  of  Jehovah,  like  the  figure  of  the  calf 
(see  on  xxxii.  4).  This  perhaps  explains  the 
need  of  the  prohibition  that  an  asherah  should 
be  placed  near  the  Altar  of  Jehovah.  See 
Deut.  xvi.  21.  (Selden,  ‘ de  Diis  Syr.’  p.  343 
sq. ; Spencer,  ‘ de  Leg.  Heb.’  lib.  ii.  c.  xxvii. 
§1;  Gesenius,  ‘Thes.’  and  ‘ Handworterbuch,’ 
s.  V. ; Furst,  ‘ Lex.’  s.  v. ; Movers,  ‘ Phbnizier,’ 
I.  p.  560;  Keil  on  i Kings  xiv.  23.) 


5 Take  ye  from  among  you  an  of- 
fering unto  the  Lord  : '^whosoever  is 
of  a willing  heart,  let  him  bring  it,  an 
offering  of  the  Lord  ; gold,  and  sil- 
ver, and  brass, 

6 And  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet, 
and  fine  linen,  and  goats’  hair., 

7 And  rams’  skins  dyed  red,  and 
badgers’  skins,  and  shittim  wood, 

8 And  oil  for  the  light,  and  spices 
for  anointing  oil,  and  for  the  sweet 
incense, 

9 And  onyx  stones,  and  stones  to 
be  set  for  the  ephod,  and  for  the 
breastplate. 

10  And  every  wise  hearted  among 
you  shall  come,  and  make  all  that  the 
Lord  hath  commanded  j 

1 1 The  tabernacle,  his  tent,  and 
his  covering,  his  tachc^  and  his  boards, 
his  bars,  his  pillars,  and  his  sockets, 


Chap.  XXXV.  The  narrative  of  what 
relates  to  the  construction  of  the  Sanctuary 
is  now  resumed  from  xxxi.  18. 

Moses  deiuvers  to  the  people  the  messages  on  the 
supply  of  materials  for  the  Sanctuary. 

I— 19. 

1.  Moses  here  addresses  the  whole  people. 
See  xxy.  i;  cf.  on  Lev.  viii.  3.  On  2;.  2 see 
on  xxxi.  12. 

VoL.  I. 


3.  This  prohibition  is  here  first  distinctly 
expressed,  but  it  is  implied  xvi.  23. 

10.  mise  hearted]  See  on  xxviii.  3. 

11.  See  on  xxvi.  i — 37.  It  has  been 
already  observed  that  in  the  instructions  for 
making  the  Sanctuary,  the  Ark  of  the  Cove- 
nant, as  the  principal  thing  belonging  to  it, 
is  mentioned  first;  but  in  the  practical  order 
of  the  work,  as  it  is.  here  ari'anged,  thC'. 

D D 


4i8 


EXODUS.  XXXV. 


V.  12 25. 


12  The  ark,  and  the  staves  thereof, 
with  the  mercy  seat,  and  the  vail  of 
the  covering, 

13  The  table,  and  his  staves,  and 
all  his  vessels,  and  the  shewbread, 

14  The  candlestick  also  for  the 
light,  and  his  furniture,  and  his  lamps, 
with  the  oil  for  the  light, 

«'chrip.  30.  13  And  the  incense  altar,  and  his 

•staves,  and  the  anointing  oil,  and  the 
sweet  incense,  and  the  hanging  for 
the  door  at  the  entering  in  of  the 
tabernacle, 

<^chap.  27.  16  ^The  altar  of  burnt  offering, 

with  his  brasen  grate,  his  staves,  and 
all  his  vessels,  the  laver  and  his  foot, 

17  The  hangings  of  the  court,  his 
pillars,  and  their  sockets,  and  the 
hanging  for  the  door  of  the  court, 

18  The  pins  of  the  tabernacle,  and 
the  pins  of  the  court,  and  their  cords, 

19  The  cloths  of  service,  to  do 
service  in  the  holy  place^  the  holy 
garments  for  Aaron  the  priest,  and 
the  garments  of  his  sons,  to  minister 
in  the  priest’s  office. 

20  ^1  And  all  the  congregation  of 


the  children  of  Israel  departed  from 
the  presence  of  Moses. 

2 1 And  they  came,  every  one  whose 
heart  stirred  him  up,  and  every  one 
whom  his  spirit  made  willing,  and 
they  brought  the  Lord’s  offering  to 
the  work  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, and  for  all  his  service,  and 
for  the  holy  garments. 

22  And  they  came,  both  men  and 
women,  as  many  as  were  willing 
hearted,  and  brought  bracelets,  and 
earrings,  and  rings,  and  tablets,  all 
jewels  of  gold:  and  every  man  that 
offered  offered  an  offering  of  gold  unto 
the  Lord. 

23  And  every  man,  with  whom 
was  found  blue,  and  purple,  and 
scarlet,  and  fine  linen,  and  goats’  hair,^ 
and  red  skins  of  rams,  and  badgers’ 
skins,  brought  them. 

24  Every  one  that  did  offer  an  of- 
fering of  silver  and  brass  brought  the 
Lord’s  offering : and  every  man,  with 
whom  was  found  shittim  wood  for  any 
work  of  the  service,  brought  it. 

25  And  all  the  women  that  were 


Tabernacle  with  its  Tent  and  covering  come 
first.  See  on  xxv.  10 — 16. 

12.  On  the  Ark  and  the  Mercy  Seat,  see 
on  xxv.  10 — 22. 

the  'vail  of  the  covering]  The  second  He- 
brew word  is  not  the  same  as  that  in  the 
preceding  verse,  which  is  rendered  covering., 
and  denotes  the  Covering  of  the  Tent  (see 
on  xxvi.  14):  but  it  is  the  one  used  for  the 
entrance  curtains  (see  on  xxvi.  36,  xxvii.  16). 
The  same  phrase  occurs  Ex.  xxxv.  12,  xl.  21 ; 
Num.  iv.  5. 

13,  14.  Sc-e  on  xxv.  23 — 38. 

15.  the  incense  altar]  Sec  on  xxx.  i 

the  anointing  oil']  See  on  xxx.  22 — 33. 

the  s~i.veet  incense]  Sec  on  xxx.  34 — 38. 

the  hanging  for  the  door]  the  entrance 

curtain.  See  on  xxvi.  36,  xxvii.  16. 

16.  the  cdtar  of  burnt,  offering]  See  on 
xxvii.  I — 8. 

the  laver]  See  on  xxx.  18 — 21. 

17.  See  on  xxvii.  9 — 18. 

18.  d'hcse  Avere  the  tent-pins  and  cords 
of  the  d'ent  of  tlic  Tabernacle  and  those  of 
the  jAillars  of  the  Court.  See  Note  at  the  end 
ot  (hi.  XXVI.  'I'lic  word  1 ahernacle  f/iishkdn) 
is  here  used  for  the  full  name,  the  Taber- 
nacle of  the  Tent  of  meeting  (sec  xl.  2, 


6,  29,  note  on  xxvi.  i,  &c.).  It  denotes  the 
entire  structure. 

19.  the  cloths  of  service  to  do  service  in 
the  holy  place]  Rather; — the  garments  of 
office  to  do  service  in  the  Sanctuary, 
&c.  See  on  xxxi.  10. 

21.  See  on  xxv.  2. 

22.  bracelets]  R.ather,  brooches. 

earrings]  The  Hebrew  word  signifies  a 

ring,  either  for  the  nose  (Prov.  xi.  22;  Isa.  iii. 
21)  or  for  .the  ear  (xxxii.  2;  Gen.  xxxv.  4; 
Judg.  viii.  24).  That  ear-rings,  not  nose- 
rings, as  some  have  imagined,  are  here  meant 
is  confirmed  by  what  we  know  of  early  He- 
brew and  Egyptian  customs.  See  Gen.  xxxv. 
4 ; Wilkinson,  ‘ Pop.  Acc.’  i.  p.  145,  ii.  p.  338. 

rings]  signet  rings. 

tablets]  It  is  not  certain  what  the  HebrcAv 
word  denotes.  Gesenius  and  others  have  taken 
it  for  gold  beads  - but  Fiirst,  with  more  pro- 
bability, for  armlets,  in  accordance  with 
the  Ancient  Versions.  It  is  most  likely  that 
all  the  articles  mentioned  in  this  verse  were  of 
gold.  'Phe  indulgence  of  private  luxury  was 
thus  given  up  for  the  honour  of  the  Lord. 
(rt'.  xxxviii.  8 

23.  24.  See  on  xxv.  3,  4,  5. 

25.  See  on  xxv.  4. 


V.  26—35-] 


EXODUS.  XXXV. 


419 


wise  hearted  did  spin  with  their  hands, 
and  brought  that  which  they  had  spun, 
both  of  blue,  and  of  purple,  and  of 
scarlet,  and  of  fine  linen. 

26  And  all  the  women  whose  heart 
stirred  them  up  in  wisdom  spun  goats’ 
hair. 

'l"j  And  the  rulers  brought  onyx 
stones,  and  stones  to  be  set,  for  the 
ephod,  and  for  the  breastplate ; 

/chap.  30.  28  And  -h spice,  and  oil  for  the  light, 

and  for  the  anointing  oil,  and  for  the 
sweet  incense. 

29  The  children  of  Israel  brought 
a willing  offering  unto  the  Lord, 
every  man  and  woman,  whose  heart 
made  them  willing  to  bring  for  all 
manner  of  work,  which  the  Lord 
had  commanded  to  be  made  by  the 
hand  of  Moses. 

30  ^ And  Moses  said  unto  the 
chap.  31.  children  of  Israel,  See,  ^the  Lord 

hath  called  by  name  Bezaleel  the  son 


of  Uri,  the  son  of  Hur,  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah ; 

31  And  he  hath  filled  him  with  the 
spirit  of  God,  in  wisdom,  in  under- 
standing, and  in  knowledge,  and  in  all 
manner  of  workmanship ; 

32  And  to  devise  curious  works,  to 
work  in  gold,  and  in  silver,  and  in  brass, 

33  And  in  the  cutting  of  stones, 
to  set  them.,  and  in  carving  of  wood, 
to  make  any  manner  of  cunning  work. 

34  And  he  hath  put  in  his  heart 
that  he  may  teach,  both  he,  and  Aho- 
liab,  the  son  of  Ahisamach,  of  the 
tribe  of  Dan. 

35  Them  hath  he  filled  with  wis- 
dom of  heart,  to  work  all  manner  of 
work,  of  the  engraver,  and  of  the 
cunning  workman,  and  of  the  em- 
broiderer, in  blue,  and  in  purple,  in 
scarlet,  and  in  fine  linen,  and  of  the  * 
WQ2iVQr.,even  of  them  that  do  any  work, 
and  of  those  that  devise  cunning  work. 


27.  See  on  xxviii.  9 — 20.  The  precious 
stones  and  spices  were  contributed  by  the 
rulers,  who  were  more  wealthy  than  the 
other  Israelites. 

28.  See  on  xxx.  22 — 38. 

29.  Cf.  2;.  21.  Observe  the  emphatic  re- 
petition. 

30.  Cf.  xxxi.  2 

31.  Cf.  xxxi.  3. 

32.  to  denj'ise  curious  nvorks~\  to  devise 
works  of  skill.  Cf.  xxxi.  4. 

33  to  make  any  manner  of  cunning  ^ork'\ 

to  work  in  all  manner  of  works  of 
skill. 

34.  “And  he  hath  put  it  into  his  heart 
to  teach,  both  into  his  heart  and 
into  Aholiab’s,”  &c. — They  were  qualified 
by  the  Lord  not  only  to  work  themselves, 
but  to  instruct  those  who  were  under  them. 

35.  of  the  engraver']  of  the  artificer. 
The  branches  of  work  committed  to  Bezaleel 
are  here  included  under  the  general  term  the 
work  of  the  artificer:  they  are  distinct- 
ly enumerated  ‘v’u.  32,  33  and  xxxi.  4,  5.  But 
what  was  under  the  charge  of  Aholiab  is  here 
for  the  first  time  clearly  distinguisheefinto  the 
work  of  the  skilled  weaver,  that  of  the 
embroiderer,  and  that  of  the  weaver. 

the  cunning  civorkman~\  the  skilled  wea- 
ver, literally,  the  reckoner.  He  might  have 
been  so  called  because  he  had  nicely  to  count 
and  calculate  the  threads  in  weaving  figures 
in  the  manner  of  tapestry  or  carpet.  His 
work  was  chiefly  used  in  the  curtains  and 


vail  of  the  Tabernacle,  in  the  Ephod  and  the 
Breastplate  (xxvi.  i,  31,  xxviii.  6,  15,  &c.). 
It  is  generally  called  “ cunning  work”  in  our 
version,  but  the  name  is  unfortunately  not 
restricted  to  it. 

the  embroiderer~\  He  worked  with  a needle, 
either  shaping  his  design  in  stitches  of  colour- 
ed thread,  or  in  pieces  of  coloured  cloth  sewn 
upon  the  groundwork.  His  work  was  em- 
ployed in  the  entrance  curtains  of  the 
Tent  and  the  court,  and  in  the  girdle  of  the 
High-priest  (xxvi.  36,  xxvii.  16,  xxviii.  39), — 
The  Hebrew  root  rdkarn  — to  work  with  a 
needle,  has  survived  in  Arabic,  but  is  not 
found  in  Syriac,  nor  in  the  Targums.  It  is 
a curious  fact  that  through  the  Arabic  have 
come  from  the  same  Semitic  root  the  Spanish 
recamare  and  the  Italian  ricamare. 

the  <vjea‘ver'\  He  appears  to  have  worked 
in  the  loom  in  the  ordinary  way  with  mate- 
rials of  only  a single  colour.  The  tissues 
made  by  him  were  used  for  the  Robe  of  the 
Ephod  and  its  binding  and  for  the  coats  of  the 
priests  (xxviii.  32,  xxxix.  22,  27).  The  dis- 
tinctions in  the  kinds  of  work  mentioned  in 
this  and  the  two  preceding  notes  are  clearly 
expressed  in  the  LXX.  and  are  in  accordance 
with  Jewish  tradition  (Bahr,  ‘Sym.b.’  i,  p. 
266;  Gesenius,  ‘Thes.’  p.  1310). 

As  the  names  of  the  three  classes  cf 
workers  are  in  the  masculine  gender,  we 
know  that  they  denote  men,  while  the 
spinners  and  dyers  were  women  (y.  25). 
f'rom  what  we  know  of  the  proficiency 

D D 2 


420 


■[v.  1 — 13. 


EXODUS.  XXXVI. 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

I The  offerings  are  delivered  to  the  wnrkmen. 

5 The  liberality  of  the  people  is  restrained. 

8 The  curtains  of  cherub wis.  14  The  cur- 
tains of  goats'  hair.  19  The  covering  of 
skins.  ■20  The  boards  -with  their  sockets. 
31  The  bars.  35  The  vail.  37  The  hanging 
for  the  door. 

Then  wrought  Bezaleel  and 
Aholiab,  and  every  wise  hearted 
man,  in  whom  the  Lord  put  wisdom 
and  understanding  to  know  how  to 
work  all  manner  of  work  for  the  ser- 
vice of  the  sanctuary,  according  to  all 
that  the  Lord  had  commanded. 

2 And  Moses  called  Bezaleel  and 
Aholiab,  and  every  wise  hearted  man, 
in  whose  heart  the  Lord  had  put 
wisdom,  even  every  one  whose  heart 
stirred  him  up  to  come  unto  the  work 
to  do  it : 

3 And  they  received  of  Moses  all 
the  offering,  which  the  children  of 
Israel  had  brought  for  the  work  of  the 
service  of  the  sanctuary,  to  make  it 
withal.  And  they  brought  yet  unto 
him  free  offerings  every  morning. 

4 And  all  the  wise  men,  that  wrought 
all  the  work  of  the  sanctuary,  came 
every  man  from  his  work  which  they 
made ; 

5 11  And  they  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying.  The  people  bring  much  more 
than  enough  for  the  service  of  the 
work,  which  the  Lord  commanded 
to  make. 

6 And  Moses  gave  commandment. 


and  they  caused  it  to  be  proclaimed 
throughout  the  camp,  saying.  Let 
neither  man  nor  woman  make  any 
more  work  for  the  offering  of  the 
sanctuary.  So  the  people  were  re- 
strained from  bringing. 

7 For  the  stuff  they  had  was  suf- 
ficient for  all  the  work  to  make  it, 
and  too  much. 

8 ^ And  every  wise  hearted  man  “ 
among  them  that  wrought  the  work 
of  the  tabernacle  made  ten  curtains 
of  fine*  twined  linen,  and  blue,  and 
purple,  and  scarlet:  with  cherubims 
of  cunning  work  made  he  them. 

9 The  length  of  one  curtain  was 
twenty  and  eight  cubits,  and  the 
breadth  of  one  curtain  four  cubits: 
the  curtains  were  all  of  one  size. 

10  And  he  coupled  the  five  curtains 
one  unto  another : and  the  other  five 
curtains  he  coupled  one  unto  another. 

1 1 And  he  made  loops  of  blue  on 
the  edge  of  one  curtain  from  the  sel- 
vedge in  the  coupling:  likewise  he 
made  in  the  uttermost  side  of  another 
curtain,  in  the  coupling  of  the  second. 

12  ^ Fifty  loops  made  he  in  one  ^^^chap.  26 
curtain,  and  fifty  loops  made  he  in  the 

edge  of  the  curtain  which  was  in  the 
coupling  of  the  second : the  loops  held 
one  curtain  to  another. 

13  And  he  made  fifty  taches  of 
gold,  and  coupled  the  curtains  one 
unto  another  with  the  taches : so  it 
became  one  tabernacle. 


of  the  textile  aits  in  Egypt  in  early  times, 
we  need  not  wonder  at  the  exact  divi- 
sion of  labour  among  the  Hebrews  which 
the  use  of  the  temas  in  this  verse  indicates. 
—It  is  remarkable  in  regard  to  the  other 
arts  of  construction,  that  the  workman 
in  each  of  them  was  called  by  the  general 
name  artificer  (in  Hebrew,  literally,  one  (who 
cuts)  added  to  the  name  of  the  material  in 
which  he  worked:  thus  the  carpenter  was 
called  an  artificer  in  wood;  the  smith, 
an  artificer  in  iron:  the  mason,  or  the 
lapidary (xxviii.  ii),  an  artificer  in  stone. 
— The  view  given  in  these  notes  of  the  three 
kinds  of  workers  in  textile  fabrics,  is  sub- 
stantially that  of  Gesenius,  Bahr,  Ftirst,  Wi- 
ner and  others.  Hut  Knolx'l  and  Keil  take 
a different  view  respecting  the  embroiderer. 


and  consider  that  he  worked  not  ^ with  a 
needle  but  with  a loom  of  some  peculiar  kind. 

Chap.  XXXVI. 

Bezaleel,  .Aholiab.  and  their  assistants  are 
set  to  work. 

1—7- 

1.  See  on  xxxi.  3. 

4.  the  wise  tneii]  i.e.  the  skilful  men.  See 
on  xxxU  3. 

3,  5 — 7.  See  on  xxv.  2. 

The  Tabernacle  is  made. 

8—38. 

8 — 13.  See  on  xxvi.  i — 6. 

8.  made  he  theni]  Rather,  were  they 
made.  A corresponding  change  should  be 
made  in  most  of  the  verses  in  this  Chapter. 
See  on  xxxvii.  i — 5. 


V.  14—38.] 


EXODUS.  XXXVI. 


421 


14  ^ And  he  made  curtains  of  goats’ 
hair  for  the  tent  over  the  tabernacle : 
eleven  curtains  he  made  them. 

15  The  length  of  one  curtain  was 
thirty  cubits,  and  four  cubits  was  the 
breadth  of  one  curtain : the  eleven 
curtains  were  of  one  size. 

16  And  he  coupled  hve  curtains 
by  themselves,  and  six  curtains  by 
themselves. 

17  And  he  made  fifty  loops  upon 
the  uttermost  edge  of  the  curtain  in 
the  coupling,  and  fifty  loops  made  he 
upon  the  edge  of  the  curtain  which 
coupleth  the  second. 

18  And  he  made  fifty  taches  of 
brass  to  couple  the  tent  together,  that 
it  might  be  one. 

19  And  he  made  a covering  for 
the  tent  of  rams’  skins  dyed  red,  and  a 
covering  (^badgers’  skins  above  that. 

20  *![  And  he  made  boards  for  the 
tabernacle  of  shittim  wood,  standing  up. 

21  The  length  of  a board  was  ten 
cubits,  and  the  breadth  of  a board 
one  cubit  and  a half. 

22  One  board  had  two  tenons, 
equally  distant  one  from  another : thus 
did  he  make  for  all  the  boards  of  the 
tabernacle. 

23  And  he  made  boards  for  the 
tabernacle ; twenty  boards  for  the 
south  side  southward : 

24  And  forty  sockets  of  silver  he 
made  under  the  twenty  boards;  two 
sockets  under  one  board  for  his  two 
tenons,  and  two  sockets  under  another 
board  for  his  two  tenons. 

25  And  for  the  other  side  of  the 
tabernacle,  which  is  toward  the  north 
corner,  he  made  twenty  boards, 

26  And  their  forty  sockets  of  silver ; 
two  sockets  under  one  board,  and  two 
sockets  under  another  board. 


27  And  for  the  sides  of  the  taber- 
nacle westward  he  made  six  boards. 

28  And  two  boards  made  he  for 
the  corners  of  the  tabernacle  in  the 
two  sides. 

29  And  they  were  ^ coupled  be- 
neath,  and  coupled  together  at  the 

' head  thereof,  to  one  ring : thus  he  did 
to  both  of  them  in  both  the  corners. 

30  And  there  were  eight  boards; 
and  their  sockets  were  sixteen  sockets 
of  silver,  ^ under  every  board  two 

, •'  ■>  two 

sockets.  sockets, 

31  ^ And  he  made  ‘^bars  of  shittim  ^fnder^one 

wood ; five  for  the  boards  of  the  one  2- 
side  of  the  tabernacle,  28. 

32  And  five  bars  for  the  boards  of 
the  other  side  of  the  tabernacle,  and 
five  bars  for  the  boards  of  the  taber- 
nacle for  the  sides  westward. 

33  And  he  made  the  middle  bar  to 
shoot  through  the  boards  from  the  one 
end  to  the  other. 

34  And  he  overlaid  the  boards  with 
gold,  and  made  their  rings  of  gold  to 
be  places  for  the  bars,  and  overlaid  the 
bars  with  gold. 

35  *11  And  he  made  a vail  of  blue, 
and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine 
twined  linen ; with  cherubims  made 
he  it  of  cunning  work. 

36  And  he  made  thereunto  four 
pillars  of  shittim  wood.,  and  overlaid 
them  with  gold : their  hooks  were  of 
gold ; and  he  cast  for  them  four  sockets 
of  silver. 

37  ^ And  he  made  an  hanging  for 
the  tabernacle  door  of  blue,  and  purple, 
and  scarlet,  and  fine  twined  linen,  ^ of ' Heix 

, , , the  work 

needlework ; of  a 

38  And  the  five  pillars  of  it  with  'Zlikf 
their  hooks : and  he  overlaid  their 
chapiters  and  their  fillets  with  gold : 

but  their  five  sockets  were  ^ brass. 


14 — 18.  See  on  xxvi.  7 — 13. 

19.  See  on  xxvi.  14. 

20 — 34.  See  on  xxvi.  15 — 29. 

22.  equally  distant  one  from  another^  set 
in  order  one  against  another.  See 
xxvi.  17. 

27.  for  the  sides']  for  the  hack.  See 
xxvi.  22. 


33.  to  shoot  through  the  hoards]  rather,  1 0 
reach  across  the  boards.  See  xxvi.  28. 

35,  36.  See  on  xxvi.  31,  32. 

37.  an  hanging  for  the  tabernacle  door] 
an  entrance  curtain  for  the  entering 
of  the  Tent.  See  on  xxvi,  36. 

38.  their  chapiters  and  their  filets]  their 
capitals  and  their  connecting  rods. 


422 


EXODUS.  XXXVII.  [v.  1-19. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 

r The  ark.  6 The  7nercy  scat  with  chcncbmis. 

JO  The  table  with  his  vessels.  1 7 The  candle- 
stick with  his  lanips  and  instrimients.  25 

The  altar  of  mcense.  29  The  anointing  oil 

and  sweet  incense. 

"chap.  25.  AND  Bezaleel  made  "the  ark  of 
shittim  wood:  two  cubits  and 
a half  was  the  length  of  it,  and  a 
cubit  and  a half  the  breadth  of  it,  and 
a cubit  and  a half  the  height  of  it : 

2 And  he  overlaid  it  with  pure 
gold  within  and  without,  and  made  a 
crown  of  gold  to  it  round  about. 

3 And  he  cast  for  it  four  rings  of 
gold,  to  he  set  by  the  four  corners  of 
it;  even  two  rings  upon  the  one  side 
of  it,  and  two  rings  upon  the  other 
side  of  it. 

4 And  he  made  staves  of  shittim 
wood,  and  overlaid  them  with  gold. 

5 And  he  put  the  staves  into  the 
rings  by  the  sides  of  the  ark,  to  bear 
the  ark. 

/’chap.  25.  6 fl  And  he  made  the  ^ mercy  seat 

of  pure  gold : two  cubits  and  a half 
was  the  length  thereof,  and  one  cubit 
and  a half  the  breadth  thereof. 

7 And  he  made  two  cherubims  of 
gold,  beaten  out  of  one  piece  made  he 
them,  on  the  two  ends  of  the  mercy 
seat ; 

I, Or.  8 One  cherub  "on  the  end  on  this 

side,  and  another  cherub  "on  the  oihet' 
Qiifj  on  that  side:  out  of  the  mercy 
seat  made  he  the  cherubims  on  the 
two  ends  thereof. 

9 And  the  cherubims  spread  out 
their  win^rs  on  high,  attd  covered  with 
their  wings  over  the  mercy  seat,  with 
their  faces  one  to  another;  even  to  the 


mercy  seatward  were  the  faces  of  the 
cherubims. 

10^  And  he  made  the  table  (y^shittim 
wood : two  cubits  was  the  length  there- 
of, and  a cubit  the  breadth  thereof, 
and  a cubit  and  a half  the  height 
thereof : 

1 1 And  he  overlaid  it  with  pure 
gold,  and  made  thereunto  a crown  of 
gold  round  about. 

12  Also  he  made  thereunto  a border 
of  an  handbreadth  round  about ; and 
made  a crown  of  gold  for  the  border 
thereof  round  about. 

13  And  he  cast  for  it  four  rings  of 
gold,  and  put  the  rings  upon  the  four 
corners  that  were  in  the  four  feet 
thereof. 

14  Over  against  the  border  were 
the  rings,  the  places  for  the  staves  to 
bear  the  table. 

1 5 And  he  made  the  staves  of  shittim 
wood,  and  overlaid  them  with  gold,  to 
bear  the  table. 

16  And  he  made  the  vessels  which 

were  upon  the  table,  his  ‘^dishes,  and  ^Cnap.  25. 
his  spoons,  and  his  bowls,  and  his 
covers  "to  cover  withal,  of  pure  gold,  nor, 

17  ^ And  he  made  the  "^candlestick 

of  pure  gold : of  beaten  work  made  ^hap.  2>. 
he  the  candlestick ; his  shaft,  and  his  31- 
branch,  his  bowls,  his  knops,  and  his 
dowers,  were  of  the  same  : 

18  And  six  branches  going  out  of 
the  sides  thereof ; three  branches  of 
the  candlestick  out  of  the  one  side 
thereof,  and  three  branches  of  the 
candlestick  out  of  the  other  side 
thereof : 

19  Three  bowls  made  after  the 


These  rods  united  the  heads  of  the  pillars, 
like  the  connecting  rods  of  the  Court  (xxvii. 
10).  Neither  these  nor  the  capitals  are  men- 
tioned in  the  instructions  in  xxvi.  37.  See 
Note  at  the  end  of  Ch.  xxvi. 

Chap.  XXXVII. 

T.he  Furniture  of  the  Tabernacle  is  made. 

1—29. 

1 — 5.  See  on  xxv.  10 — 16  and  on  xxxv.  ii. 
It  has  been  oliserved  that  the  Ark,  as  the  most 
precious  thing  made  for  the  Sanctuary,  is  ex- 
pressly spoken  of  as  the  workmanship  of  Beza- 
leel himself.  The  expression  here  is  quite  free 


from  ambiguity ; but  to  prevent  misunder- 
standing, it  may  be  well  to  observe  that  in 
chap,  xxxvi.  8,  10,  ii,  12,  13,  14,  16,  17,  18, 
19,  20,  &c.,  and  elsewhere,  there  is  no  nomi- 
native expressed  in  the  Hebrew,  and  the  verb 
is  used  indefinitely,  as  in  the  German  phrase 
with  man  and  the  French  one  with  on.  In 
translating  into  English,  it  would  be  better 
in  such  cases  to  use  the  passive  voice.  See 
on  xxxvi.  8. 

6 — 9.  See  on  xxv.  17 — 22. 

7.  beaten  out  of  one  piece'\  See  on  xxv.  18, 

10—16.  See  on  xxv.  23 — 30. 

17 — 24.  See  on  xxv.  31 — 39. 


V.  20 — 8.] 


EXODUS.  XXXVII.  XXXVIII. 


423 


fashion  of  almonds  in  one  branch,  a 
knop  and  a flower;  and  three  bowls 
made  like  almonds  in  another  branch, 
a knop  and  a flower:  so  throughout 
the  six  branches  going  out  of  the 
candlestick. 

20  And  in  the  candlestick  were  four 
bowls  made  like  almonds,  his  knops, 
and  his  flowers : 

21  And  a knop  under  two  branches 
of  the  same,  and  a knop  under  two 
branches  ’of  the  same,  and  a knop 
under  two  branches  of  the  same,  ac- 
cording to  the  six  branches  going  out 
of  it. 

22  Their  knops  and  their  branches 
were  of  the  same:  all  of  it  was  one 
beaten  work  of  pure  gold. 

23  And  he  made  his  seven  lamps, 
and  his  snufters,  and  his  snuffdishes, 
of  pure  gold. 

24  Of  a talent  of  pure  gold  made 
he  it,  and  all  the  vessels  thereof. 

^chap.  30.  25  ^ ^And  he  made  the  incense  altar 

of  shittim  wood : the  length  of  it  vjas 
a cubit,  and  the  breadth  of  it  a cubit ; 
It  was  foursquare ; and  two  cubits  was 
the  height  of  it;  the  horns  thereof 
were  of  the  same. 

26  And  he  overlaid  it  with  pure 
gold,  both  the  top  of  it,  and  the  sides 
thereof  round  about,  and  the  horns 
of  it : also  he  made  unto  it  a crown 
of  gold  round  about. 

27  And  he  made  two  rings  of  gold 
for  it  under  the  crown  thereof,  by  the 
two  corners  of  it,  upon  the  two  sides 
thereof,  to  be  places  for  the  staves  to 
bear  it  withal. 


28  And  he  made  the  staves  ly^shittim 
wood,  and  overlaid  them  with  gold. 

29  ^ And  he  made  Ahe  holy  an- 
ointing  oil,  and  the  pure  incense  of" 
sweet  spices,  according  to  the  work  of 
the  apothecary. 

CHAPTER  XXXVIII. 

I The  altar  of  burnt  offering.  8 The  laver  of 
brass,  g The  court,  'i  i The  sum  of  that  the 
people  ojfei'ed. 

AND  "he  made  the  altar  of  burnt  " 
offering  of  shittim  wood : five 
cubits  was  the  length  thereof,  and  five 
cubits  the  breadth  thereof;  It  was  four- 
square ; and  three  cubits  the  height 
thereof. 

2 And  he  made  the  horns  thereof 
on  the  four  corners  of  it ; the  horns 
thereof  were  of  the  same : and  he  over- 
laid it  with  brass. 

3 And  he  made  all  the  vessels  of 
the  altar,  the  pots,  and  the  shovels, 
and  the  basons,  and  the  fleshhooks, 
and  the  firepans : all  the  vessels  there- 
of made  he  brass. 

4 And  he  made  for  the  altar  a brasen 
grate  of  network  under  the  compass 
thereof  beneath  unto  the  midst  of  it. 

5 And  he  cast  four  rings  for  the 
four  ends  of  the  grate  of  brass,  to  be 
places  for  the  staves. 

6 And  he  made  the  staves  shittim 
wood,  and  overlaid  them  with  brass. 

7 And  he  put  the  staves  into  the 
rings  on  the  sides  of  the  altar,  to  bear 
it  withal ; he  made  the  altar  hollow 
with  boards. 

8 ^ And  he  made  the  laver  of 
brass,  and  the  foot  of  it  of  brass,  of 


25 — 28.  See  on  xxx,  i — 10. 

29,  See  on  xxx.  22 — 38. 

Chap.  XXXVIII. 

The  Braz.en  Altar.,  the  Laneer.,  and  the  Court 
are  made. 

I — 20. 

1 — 7.  See  on  xxvii,  i — 8. 

8.  the  la%'er']  See  on  xxx.  18 — 21.  It 
appears  that  the  nletal  for  this  laver  was  sup- 
plied by  women,  who  gave  up  their  bronze 
mirrors,  such  as  were  commonly  used  in 
Egypt  and  elsewhere  (Wilkinson,  ‘Pop.  Acc.’ 
II.  p.  336).  This  is  generally  approved  by 
critics  as  the  simple  meaning  of  the  Hebrew, 


and  it  agrees  with  the  ancient  versions  and 
the  Targums.  The  other  interpretations — 
one,  that  the  laver  was  furnished  with  mir- 
rors for  the  use  of  the  women  who  served  in 
the  Sanctuary  (Michaelis,  Bahr) ; and  another, 
that  its  sides  were  adorned  with  figures  in 
relief  of  vromen  ranged  in  a religious  proces- 
sion (Knobel) — only  deserve  notice  from  the 
learning  and  reputation  of  their  authors.  The 
women  who  assem.bled  at  the  entrance 
of  the  Tent  of  meeting  were  most  pro- 
bably devout  women  who  loved  the  public 
service  of  religion.  The  giving  up  their 
mirrors  for  the  use  of  the  Sanctuary  was  a fit 
sacrifice  for  such  women  to  make  (cf.  on 


424 


EXODUS.  XXXVIII. 


[v.  9—24. 


''  Or,  the  lookingglasses  of  the  women 
^iVcscs.  Assembling,  which  assembled  at  the 
tabernacle  of  the  con- 

gregation. 

9 ^ And  he  made  the  court : on  the 
south  side  southward  the  hangings  of 
the  court  were  of  fine  twined  linen,  an 
hundred  cubits : 

10  Their  pillars  were  twenty,  and 
their  brasen  sockets  twenty ; the  hooks 
of  the  pillars  and  their  fillets  were  of 
silver. 

1 1 And  for  the  north  side  the  hang- 
i7igs  were  an  hundred  cubits,  their  pil- 
lars were  twenty,  and  their  sockets  of 
brass  twenty ; the  hooks  of  the  pillars 
and  their  fillets  of  silver. 

1 2 And  for  the  west  side  were  hang- 
ings of  fifty  cubits,  their  pillars  ten, 
and  their  sockets  ten ; the  hooks  of 
the  pillars  and  their  fillets  of  silver. 

13  And  for  the  east  side  eastward 
fifty  cubits. 

14  The  hangings  of  the  one  side  of 
the  gate  were  fifteen  cubits ; their  pil- 
lars three,  and  their  sockets  three. 

15  And  for  the  other  side  of  the 
court  gate,  on  this  hand  and  that  hand, 
zvere  hangings  of  fifteen  cubits ; their 
pillars  three,  and  their  sockets  three. 

16  All  the  hangings  of  the  court 
round  about  were  of  fine  twined  linen. 

17  And  the  sockets  for  the  pillars 
were  of  brass ; the  hooks  of  the  pillars 


and  their  fillets  o/'  silver;  and  the  over- 
laying of  their  chapiters  of  silver;  and 
all  the  pillars  of  the  court  were  filleted 
with  silver. 

1 8 And  the  hanging  for  the  gate  of 
the  court  was  needlework,  of  blue,  and 
purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine  twined 
linen ; and  twenty  cubits  was  the 
length,  and  the  height  in  the  breadth 
was  five  cubits, answerable  to  the  hang- 
ings of  the  court. 

19  And  their  pillars  were  four,  and 
their  sockets  ^ brass  four;  their  hooks 
of  silver,  and  the  overlaying  of  their 
chapiters  and  their  fillets  of  silver. 

20  And  all  the  ^pins  of  the  taber-  ^^hap. 
nacle,  and  of  the  court  round  about, 
were  ^ brass. 

21  ^ This  is  the  sum  of  the  taber- 
nacle, even  of  the  tabernacle  of  testi- 
mony, as  it  was  counted,  according  to 
the  commandment  of  Moses,  for  the 
service  of  the  Levites,  by  the  hand  of 
Ithamar,  son  to  Aaron  the  priest. 

22  And  Bezaleel  the  son  of  Uri,  the 
son  of  Hur,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
made  all  that  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

23  And  with  him  was  Aholiab,  son 
of  Ahisamach,  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  an 
engraver,  and  a cunning  workman, 
and  an  embroiderer  in  blue,  and  in 
purple,  and  in  scarlet,  and  fine  linen. 

24  All  the  gold  that  was  occupied 


XXXV.  22).  ^Ve  know  from  the  instance  of 
Anna  (Laike  ii.  36)  that  pious  women,  in  later 
..ges,  used  to  spend  much  time  within  the  pre- 
cincts of  the  Temple.  But  there  seems  to  be 
but  weak  ground  for  the  notion  of  Hengsten- 
berg  and  others  that  these  women  ever  form- 
ed a regularly  constituted  order,  like  the 
widows,  or  deaconesses,  of  the  early  Church, 
and  the  Na/arites  for  life  in  the  time  of 
the  Prophets  (Lam.  iv.  7;  Amos  ii.  ii). 
Hengstenberg  conceives  that  Moses  made  no 
specilic  law  on  the  subject  because  the  in- 
stitution had  been  adopted  from  the  customs 
ot  the  Lgyptian  temples.  The  only  passages 
quoted  from  the  Old  Testament  in  support 
>f  the  existence  of  such  an  order  of  women  are 
: Sam.  ii.  22,  i.am.  ii.  21  (Hengst.  ‘Egypt,’ 
kc.  p.  184). 

9 — 20.  See  on  xxvii.  10 — 19. 

18.  the  height  in  the  breadth  <ivas  frve 
mbits']  meaning  seems  to  be  that  the 


height  of  the  curtain  answered  to  the  breadth 
of  the  stuff  of  which  it  was  formed;  i.e.  five 
cubits.  See  xxvii.  18. 

The  sum  of  the  metals  used  in  the  Sanctuary. 

21—31. 

21.  “This  is  the  reckoning  of  the  Ta- 
bernacle, the  Tabernacle  of  the  Tes- 
timony (see  on  xxv.  16)  as  it  was 
reckoned  up  according  to  the  command- 
ment oi  Moses,  by  the  service  of  the  Levites. 
by  the  hand  of  Ithamar,”  &:c.  The  weight  of 
the  metals  was  taken  by  the  Levites,  under 
the  direction  of  Ithamar. 

23.  an  engra-ver]  an  artificer. — a cun- 
ning qjjorkmaif]  a skilled  weaver.  See  on 
XXXV.  35. 

24.  of  the  holy  place]  Rather,  of  the 
Sanctuary.  The  gold  was  employed  not 
only  in  the  Holy  Place,  but  in  the  Most  Holy 


V.  25 2 8.] 


EXODUS.  XXXVIIl. 


425 


Heb. 

poll. 


for  the  work  in  all  the  work  of  the 
holy  place^  eyen  the  gold  of  the  offer- 
ing, was  twenty  and  nine  talents,  and 
seven  hundred  and  thirty  shekels,  after 
the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary. 

25  And  the  silver  of  them  that  were 
numbered  of  the  congregation  was  an 
hundred  talents,  and  a thousand  seven 
hundred  and  threescore  and  fifteen 
shekels,  after  the  shekel  of  the  sanc- 
tuary : 

26  A bekah  for  ^ every  man,  that  is. 


half  a shekel,  after  the  shekel  of  the 
sanctuary,  for  every  one  that  went  to 
be  numbered,  from  twenty  years  old 
and  upward,  for  six  hundred  thousand 
and  three  thousand  and  five  hundred 
and  fifty  ?nen. 

'l-j  And  of  the  hundred  talents  of 
silver  were  cast  the  sockets  of  the 
sanctuary,  and  the  sockets  of  the  vail ; 
an  hundred  sockets  of  the  hundred 
talents,  a talent  for  a socket. 

28  And  of  the  thousand  seven 


Place  and  in  the  entrance  to  the  Tent  (xxx\i. 
38). 

ths  gold  of  the  offering'^  the  gold  of  the 
wave  offering  (see  pref,  to  Leviticus). 

talents  ...the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary]  The 
Shekel  was  the  common  standard  of  weight 
and  value  with  the  Hebrews:  but  what  its 
weight  w^as  in  early  times,  as  compared  with 
our  standard,  is  a m.atter  on  which  there  has 
been  much  difference  of  opinion.  There  is 
however  no  particular  reason  to  suppose  that 
the  Hebrew  standard  underw^ent  much  alter- 
ation in  the  course  of  ages ; and  in  regard  to 
later  times,  we  have  three  distinct  elements 
of  calculation  which  lead  to  a tolerably  har- 
monious- result,  {a)  According  to  the  rab- 
binists,  the  shekel  weighed  320  barley  grains, 
which  are  equal  to  about  214  English  grains, 
the  weight  of  which  w^as  originally  taken  from 
a grain  of  w^heat.  (b)  There  are  several 
silver  shekels  in  existence  coined  in  the 
Maccabean  times  (see  i Macc.  xv.  6),  and, 
making  allowance  for  wear,  each  of  these  ap- 
pears to  have  weighed  220  grains,  (r)  The 
LXX,,  when  they  do  not  retain  the  origi- 
nal name  in  the  form  cri/cXo?,  render  it  by 
dldpaxisov  (Gen.  xxiii.  15;  Ex.  xxi.  32,  xxx. 
13,  15;  Lev.  xxvii.  3;  Num.  iii.  47,  &c.)  : 
they  also  render  bekah.,  the  half  shekel,  by 
(see  V.  26).  Now  the  Macedonian 
didrachmon,  wdth  which  they  must  have  been 
familiar,  weighed  218  grains.  It  hence  ap- 
pears that  we  cannot  be  far  wTong  in  esti- 
mating the  shekel  at  220  English  grains  (just 
over  half  an  ounce  avoidupois)  and  its  value 
in  silver  as  2s.  'jd. — The  statement  of  Jose- 
phus (‘  Ant.’  III.  8.  § 2),  that  the  shekel  wns 
equal  to  four  Attic  drachms  (252  grains)  is 
evidently  a rough  estimate:  and  still  further 
from  accuracy  is  his  turning  the  fifty  shekels 
of  2 K.  XV.  20  into  fifty  drachms  (‘  Ant.’ 
IX.  II.  § i) — A question  is  raised  as  to  the 
meaning  of  the  term,  “a  shekel  of  the  sanc- 
tuary.” The  rabbinists  speak  of  a common 
shekel  of  half  the  weight  of  the  shekel  of  the 
sanctuary.  But  there  is  no  sufficient  reason 
to  suppose  that  such  a distinction  existed  in 
ancient  times,  and  the  Shekel  of  the  Sanctuary 


(or,  the  Holy  Shekel')  would  seem  to  denote 
no. more  than  an  exact  Shekel,  “after  the 
king’s  weight”  (2  S,  xiv.  26),  “ current  money 
of  the  merchant”  (Gen.  xxiii.  16). 

In  the  reign  of  Joash,  a collection  similar 
to  the  one  here  mentioned,  apparently  at 
the  same  rate  of  capitation,  was  made  for 
the  repairs  of  the  Temple  (2  Chron.  xxiv.  9). 
The  tax  of  later  times,  called  didrachma 
(Matt.  xvii.  27),  w^hich  has  often  been  con- 
nected with  this  passage  of  Exodus,  and  which 
was  recognized  by  our  Lord  as  having  the 
same  solemn  meaning  as  this  payment  of  half 
a shekel,  w^as  not,  like  this  one  and  that  of 
Joash,  a collection  for  a special  occasion, 
but  a yearly  tax  for  the  support  of  the 
Temple,  of  a whole  shekel  (didpaxpov). — See 
on  xxx.  13. 

The  Talent  (Heb.  kikkdr,  LXX.  rdX  avTov) 
contained  3000  shekels,  as  may  be  gathered 
from  'vv.  25,  26.  According  to  the  com- 
putation here  adopted,  the  Hebrew  Talent 
was  94Ubs.  avoirdupois.  The  Greek  (Tgi- 
netan)  Talent,  from  w'hich  the  LXX.  and 
most  succeeding  versions  have  taken  the  name 
talent.,  was  82|-lbs.  The  original  word,  kikkdr., 
would  denote  a circular  mass,  and  nearly  the 
same  word,  kerker.,  was  in  use  amongst  the 
Egyptians  for  a mass  of  metal  cast  in  the 
form  of  a massive  ring  with  its  weight  stamp- 
ed upon  it. 

26.  A b^kah]  Literally,  a half:  the  words 
“half  a shekel,”  &c.  appear  to  be  inserted 
only  for  emphasis,  to  enforce  the  accuracy  to 
be  observed  in  the  payment.  See  on  xxx.  13, 
where  there  is  a similar  expression,  and  cf. 
xxx.  15. — Respecting  the  capitation  and  the 
numbering  of  the  people,  see  on  xxx.  12. 
There  must  have  been,  in  addition  to  the  sum 
of  the  half  shekels,  the  free-will  ofierings  of 
silver  (see  xxxv.  24),  of  which  no  reckoning  is 
here  made.  They  may  perhaps  have  been 
amongst  v/hat  was  returned  to  the  donors  as 
being  more  than  enough  (xxxvi.  7). 

27.  sockets]  bases.  See  on  xxvi.  19. 

28.  The  hooks,  chapiters  and  fillets  here 
spoken  of  belonged  to  the  pillars  of  the  Court. 
See  xxvii.  10,  17. 


426 


EXODUS.  XXXVHL  XXXIX.  U- 29-1. 


hundred  seventy  and  five  shekels  he 
made  hooks  for  the  pillars,  and  over- 
laid their  chapiters,  and  filleted  them. 

29  And  the  brass  of  the  offering 
zuas  seventy  talents,  and  two  thousand 
and  four  hundred  shekels. 

30  And  therewith  he  made  the 
sockets  to  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congreo-ation,  and  the  brasen 

o G J 

altar,  and  the  brasen  grate  for  it,  and 
all  the  vessels  of  the  altar, 

31  And  the  sockets  of  the  court 


round  about,  and  the  sockets  of  the 
court  gate,  and  all  the  pins  of  the 
tabernacle,  and  all  the  pins  of  the 
court  round  about. 

CHAPTER  XXXIX. 

I 77ie  cloths  of  service  and  holy  garments.  2 
The  ephod.  8 The  breastplate.  22  The  robe 
of  the  ephod.  2 7 The  coats,  mitre,  and  girdle 
of  fine  linen.  30  The  plate  ofi  the  holy  crown. 
32  All  is  viewed  and  approved  by  Aloses. 
And  of  the  blue,  and  purple,  and 
scarlet,  they  made  cloths  of  ser- 
vice, to  do  service  in  the  holy  place.^ 


30.  sockets  to  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation^^  bases  for  the  entjrance 
of  the  Tent  of  meeting.  See  xxvi.  37. 

the  brasen  altar']  See  xxvii.  i — 8. 

31.  the  sockets  of  the  court]  See  xxvii.  10,  17. 

the  pins  of  the  tabernacle . ..the  pins  of  the 

court]  See  on  xxvii.  19. 

According  to  the  estimate  of  the  shekel  that 
has  here  been  adopted,  the  weight  of  the 
metals  mentioned  in  this  chapter  would  be 
nearly  as  follows,  in  avoirdupois  weight : — 
Gold,  I ton  4 cwt.  2 qrs.  13  lbs. 

Silver,  4 tons  4 cwt.  2 qrs.  20  lbs. 

Bronze,  2 tons  19  cwt.  2 qrs.  ii  lbs. 

The  value  of  the  gold,  if  pure,  in  our  money 

would  be  75075.  13J.,  and  of  the  silver 
/I38034.  15J.  lod.  The  quantities  of  the 
precious  metals  come  quite  within  the  limits 
of  probability,  if  we  consider  the  condition 
of  the  Israelites  when  they  left  Egypt  (see 
introd.  note  to  Exod.  and  on  xxv.  3),  and 
the  object  for  which  the  collection  was  made. 
There  is  no  reasonable  ground  to  call  in 
question  the  substantial  accuracy  of  the  state- 
ments of  Strabo  (xvi.  p.  778)  and  Dio- 
dorus (ill.  45)  regarding  the  great  stores  of 
gold  collected  by  the  Arab  tribes  near  the 
zElanitic  Gulf,  and  they  were  probably  still 
m.ore  abundant  at  this  time  when  the  tribes 
must  have  come  into  frequent  contact  with 
the  Israelites.  There  may  be  no  trace  of  na- 
tive gold  in  those  regions  at  present ; but  the 
entire  exhaustion  of  natural  supplies  of  the 
precious  metals  is  too  familiarly  known  to 
need  more  than  a bare  notice  in  this  place  (see 
‘ Bib.  Atlas’  of  the  S.  P.  C.  K.  p.  38).  Bahr, 
Knobel  and  others  have  remarked  that  the 
(juantities  collected  for  the  Tabernacle  are  in- 
significant when  compared  with  the  hoards  of 
gold  and  silver  collected  in  the  East  in  recent, 
as  well  as  ancient,  times.  In  communities  in 
which  there  is  not  much  commercial  stir,  and 
in  consequence  not  much  use  for  a circulating 
medium,  the  precious  metals  will  be  more 
readily  accumulated  either  for  a great  national 
object,  as  in  this  case,  or  for  the  gratification 
of  a ruler.  The  enormous  wealth  of  the  sove- 
reigns, and  also  of  the  temples,  of  India,  a 


century  ago,  taking  the  most  moderate  state- 
ments, may  furnish  examples.  As  instances 
in  ancient  times,  we  may  refer  to  the  accounts 
of  gold  in  the  temple  of  Belus  (Diod.  Sic.  11. 
9;  cf.  Herodot.  i.  183);  of  the  wealth  of 
Sardanapalus  (Ctesias,  edit.  Bahr,  p.  431); 
and  of  the  spoils  taken  by  Cyrus  (Plin.  ‘H.  N.’ 
XXXIII.  15,  47)  and  by  Alexander  (Diod.  Sic. 
XVII.  66).  All  reasonable  allowance  may  be 
made  for  exaggeration  in  these  statements,  and 
the  argument,  in  its  connection  with  well  as- 
certained facts,  will  still  be  left  amply  strong 
enough  for  our  purpose.  F or  more  examples, 
see  Bahr,  ‘ Symbolik,’  i.  p.  259;  Knobel  on 
Ex.  xxv.  and  xxxviii. 

It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  silver,  in  the 
time  of  Homer,  appears  to  have  been  more 
precious  than  gold  amongst  the  Greeks  (Glad- 
stone, ‘Ju-ventus  Mundi,’  p.  531).  The 
treasures  of  Thrace  and  Laurium  were  then 
unknown.  But  it  seems  to  have  been  other- 
wise with  the  Asiatic  nations.  The  word 
silver  (according  to  Pictet)  is  Sanscrit.  This 
would  tend  to  shew  that  the  metal  was 
known  to  the  Aryan  race  before  the  Ger- 
manic nations  migrated  to  the  West.  The 
forefathers  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  pro- 
bably lost  all  knowledge  of  it,  and  when  they 
again  met  with  it,  they  gave  it  quite  a dif- 
ferent name  {apyvpiov,  argent wn).  This  same 
argument  may  be  applied  to  other  metals. 
But  what  distinguishes  silver  is,  that  it  was 
at  first  obtained  by  the  people  of  Southern 
Europe  from  sparing,  and,  perhaps,  distant 
sources.  We  know  that  the  quantity  of  silver 
at  Rome  was  very  greatly  increased  by  the 
contributions  obtained  in  the  Punic  Wars 
(Niebuhr,  ‘Hist,  of  Rome,’  Vol.  iii.  p.  613). 
By  this  time  Spain  had  begun  to  yield  its 
Siipjdy.  The  Hebrews  and  Egyptians  proba- 
bly obtained  the  metal  in  the  earliest  times 
both  from  Asia  and  Africa. 

CiiAn.  XXXIX. 

The  Priests'  Dresses  are  made. 

..  H- 

1.  See  on  xxviii.  5.  The  fine  linen  is  omit- 
ted in  this  verse,  but  is  mentioned  in  the  next. 


V.  2 — 21.] 


EXODUS.  XXXIX. 


427 


« chap.  31.  and  «niade  the  holy  garments  for 
& 35- 19-  Aaron;  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

2 And  he  made  the  ephod  of  gold, 
blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine 
twined  linen. 

3 And  they  did  beat  the  gold  into 
thin  plates,  and  cut  it  into  wires,  to 
work  it  in  the  blue,  and  in  the  purple, 
and  in  the  scarlet,  and  in  the  fine 
linen,  with  cunning  work. 

4 They  made  shoulderpicces  for  it, 
to  couple  it  together:  by  the  two 
edges  was  it  coupled  together. 

5 And  the  curious  girdle  of  his 
ephod,  that  was  upon  it,  vjas  of  the 
same,  according  to  the  work  thereof; 
of  gold,  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet, 
and  fine  twined  linen ; as  the  Lord 
commanded  Moses. 

chap.  28.  6 ^ And  they  wrought  onyx  stones 

inclosed  in  ouches  of  gold,  graven,  as 
signets  are  graven,  with  the  names  of 
the  children  of  Israel. 

7 And  he  put  them  on  the  shoulders 
of  the  ephod,  that  they  should  be  stones 

fchap.  28.  for  a ‘^memorial  to  the  children  of  Is- 
rael ; as  the  Lord  commanded  Moses. 

8 ^ And  he  made  the  breastplate 
of  cunning  work,  like  the  w'ork  of  the 
ephod;  (^'gold,  blue,  and  purple,  and 
scarlet,  and  fine  twined  linen. 

9 It  was  foursquare;  they  made 
the  breastplate  double  : a span  was  the 
length  thereof,  and  a span  the  breadth 
thereof,  being  doubled. 

10  And  they  set  in  it  four  rows  of 
II  Or,  stones  : the  first  row  was  a '^sardius, 

a topaz,  and  a carbuncle : this  was  the 
first  row. 


1 1 And  the  second  row,  an  eme- 
rald, a sapphire,  and  a diamond. 

12  And  the  third  row,  a ligure,  an 
agate,  and  an  amethyst. 

13  And  the  fourth  row,  a beryl,  an 
onyx,  and  a jasper : they  were  inclosed 
in  ouches  of  gold  in  their  inclosings. 

14  And  the  stones  were  according 
to  the  names  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
twelve,  according  to  their  names,  like 
the  engravings  of  a signet,  every  one 
with  his  name,  according  to  the  twelve 
tribes. 

15  And  they  made  upon  the  breast- 
plate chains  at  the  ends,  of  wreathen 
work  of  pure  gold. 

16  And  they  made  two  ouches  of 
gold,  and  two  gold  rings ; and  put  the 
two  rings  in  the  two  ends  of  the 
breastplate. 

17  And  they  put  the  two  wreathen 
chains  of  gold  in  the  two  rings  on  the 
ends  of  the  breastplate. 

18  And  the  two  ends  of  the  two 
wreathen  chains  they  fastened  in  the 
tv/o  ouches,  and  put  them  on  the 
shoulderpieces  of  the  ephod,  before  it. 

19  And  they  made  tw^o  rings  of 
gold,  and  put  them  on  the  two  ends 
of  the  breastplate,  upon  the  border  of 
it,  which  was  on  the  side  of  the  ephod 
inward. 

20  And  they  made  two  other  golden 
rings,  and  put  them  on  the  two  sides 
of  the  ephod  underneath,  toward  the 
forepart  of  it,  over  against  the  other 
coupling  thereof,  above  the  curious 
girdle  of  the  ephod. 

21  And  they  did  bind  the  breast- 
plate by  his  rings  unto  the  rings  of  the 


cloths  of  ser'vice]  more  properly,  the  gar- 
ments of  office.  On  these  and  the  Holy 
Garments,  see  on  xxxi.  10. 

2.  the  ephod]  See  on  xxviii.  6 sq. 

3.  the  gold]  *See  on  xxviii.  5. 

^^ith  cuyiynng  <rajork]  with  work  of  the 
skilled  weaver.  See  on  xxvi.  i,  xxxv.  35. 

5.  the  cui'ious  gh'dle]  See  on  xxviii.  8. 

6,  7.  See  on  xxviii.  9 — 12. 

8.  the  breastplate]  See  on  xxviii.  15,  16. 

10 — 13.  On  the  precious  stones,  see  on 
xxviii.  17 — 20. 

13.  in  their  inclosmgs]  Rather,  in  their 
settings.  See  on  xxviii.  ii,  17. 


15.  chains  at  the  eytds^  of  nvreathen  ^vork] 
chains  of  wreathen  work  twisted. 
See  on  xxviii.  14. 

16.  See  on  xxviii.  13,  23. 

19.  See  on  xxviii.  26,  27. 

20.  “ And  they  made  two  rings  of  gold 
and  put  them  on  the  two  shoulder- pieces 
of  the  Ephod,  low  down  in  the  front 
of  it,  near  the  joining,  above  the 
band  for  fastening  it.”  See  on  xxviii. 
27. 

21.  See  on  xxviii.  28. 


428 


EXODUS.  XXXIX. 


[v.  22—43. 


ephod  with  a lace  of  blue,  that  it  might 
be  above  the  curious  girdle  of  the 
ephod,  and  that  the  breastplate  might 
not  be  loosed  from  the  ephod ; as  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses. 

22  H And  he  made  the  robe  of  the 
ephod  0/ woven  work,  all  ofhlne. 

23  And  there  ’was  an  hole  in  the 
midst  of  the  robe,  as  the  hole  of  an 
habergeon,  with  a band  round  about 
the  hole,  that  it  should  not  rend. 

24  And  they  made  upon  the  hems 
of  the  robe  pomegranates  ofhXne^  and 
purple,  and  scarlet,  and  twined  linen. 

rfehap.  28.  25  And  they  made  "^bells  of  pure 

gUd,  and  put  the  bells  between  the 
pomegranates  upon  the  hem  of  the 
robe,  round  about  between  the  pome- 
granates ; 

26  A bell  and  a pomegranate,  a bell 
and  a pomegranate,  round  about  the 
hem  of  the  robe  to  minister /«;  as  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses. 

27  ^ And  they  made  coats  of  fine 
linen  of  woven  work  for  Aaron,  and 
for  his  sons, 

28  And  a mitre  of  fine  linen,  and 
f chap.  28.  goodly  bonnets  y'fine  linen,  and  linen 

breeches  of^ne  twined  linen, 

29  And  a girdle  of  fine  twined 
linen,  and  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet, 
of  needlework;  as  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses. 

30  ^ And  they  made  the  plate  of 
the  holy  crown  of  pure  gold,  and  wrote 
upon  it  a writing,  like  to  the  engrav- 

./^chap.  28.  ings  of  a signet,  -^HOLINESS  TO 
I'HE  LORD. 

31  And  they  tied  unto  it  a lace 
of  blue,  to  fasten  it  on  high  upon 
the  mitre;  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Adoses. 

32  ^ Thus  was  all  the  work  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  tent  of  the  congre- 

22 -2G.  See  on  xxviii.  3 1 — 35. 

27.  See  on  xxviii.  40,  41. 

28.  a )nitre~\  See  on  xxviii.  37. 

bonnets']  See  on  xxviii.  40. 

breeches]  See  on  xxviii.  42. 

29.  a girdle]  See  on  xxviii.  40. 

30.  the  holy  crovun  of  pure  gold]  Cf.  xxix. 

6.  See  on  xxviii.  36. 


gation  finished:  and  the  children  of 
Israel  did  according  to  all  that  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses,  so  did  they. 

33  ^ And  they  brought  the  taber- 
nacle unto  Moses,  the  tent,  and  all  his 
furniture,  his  taches,  his  boards,  his 
bars,  and  his  pillars,  and  his  sockets, 

34  And  the  covering  of  rams"  skins 
dyed  red,  and  the  covering  of  badgers’ 
skins,  and  the  vail  of  the  covering, 

35  The  ark  of  the  testimony,  and  , 
the  staves  thereof,  and  the  mercy  seat, 

36  The  table,  and  all  the  vessels 
thereof,  and  the  shewbread, 

37  The  pure  candlestick,  with  the 
lamps  thereof,  even  with  the  lamps  to 
be  set  in  order,  and  all  the  vessels 
thereof,  and  the  oil  for  light, 

38  And  the  golden  altar,  and  the 
anointing  oil,  and  ^ the  sweet  incense,  ^ 

, , o,  . - , , , the  incense 

and  the  hanging  tor  the  tabernacle  of  sweet 
door, 

39  The  brasen  altar,  and  his  grate 
of  brass,  his  staves,  and  all  his  vessels, 
the  laver  and  his  foot, 

40  The  hangings  of  the  court,  his 
pillars,  and  his  sockets,  and  the  hang- 
ing for  the  court  gate,  his  cords,  and 
his  pins,  and  all  the  vessels  of  the  ser- 
vice of  the  tabernacle,  for  the  tent  of 
the  congregation, 

41  The  cloths  of  service  to  do  ser- 
vice in  the  holy  place.,  and  the  holy 
garments  for  Aaron  the  priest,  and  his 
sons’  garments,  to  minister  in  the 
priest’s  office. 

42  According  to  all  that  the  Lord 
commanded  Moses,  so  the  children  of 
Israel  made  all  the  work. 

43  And  Moses  did  look  upon  all 
the  work,  and,  behold,  they  had  done 
it  as  the  Lord  had  commanded,  even 
so  had  they  done  it : and  Moses  blessed 
them. 

HOLINESS  TO  THE  LORD]  See  on 
xxviii.  36. 

The  'whole  work  of  the  Sanctuary  is  submitted 
to  Moses  and  appro'ved. 

32—4.3. 

33 — 38.  See  on  xxxv.  ii — 15,  and  on 
xxvi.  I. 

39,  40.  See  on  xxxv.  16 — 18. 

41.  See  'V'v.  1,27,  xxxi.  10. 


V.  I— IS.] 


EXODUS.  XL. 


429 


CHAPTER  XL. 

I The  tabernacle  is  conunattcied  to  he  reared^ 
9 and  anointed.  13  Aaron  and  his  sons  to 
be  sanctified.  16  Moses  performeth  all  things 
accordingly.  34  A cloud  covereth  the  taber- 
nacle. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
l\  saying, 

2 On  the  first  day  of  the  first 
month  shalt  thou  set  up  the  tabernacle 
of  the  tent  of  the  congregation. 

3 And  thou  shalt  put  therein  the 
ark  of  the  testimony,  and  cover  the 
ark  with  the  vail.  . 

« chap.  26.  ^ And  "thou  shalt  bring  in  the  ta- 

?Heb.  ble,  and  set  in  order  ^the  things  that 
are  to  be  set  in  order  upon  it;  and 
thou  shalt  bring  in  the  candlestick, 
and  light  the  lamps  thereof. 

5 And  thou  shalt  set  the  altar  of 
gold  for  the  incense  before  the  ark  of 
the  testimony,  and  put  the  hanging  of 
the  door  to  the  tabernacle. 

6 And  thou  shalt  set  the  altar  of 
the  burnt  offering  before  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  tent  of  the  con- 
gregation. 

7 And  thou  shalt  set  the  laver  be- 
tween the  tent,  of  the  congregation 
and  the  altar,  and  shalt  put  water 
therein. 


Chap.  XL. 

Moses  is  commanded  to  arrange  the  holy  things., 
and  to  anoint  them  and  the  priests. 

I — II. 

2.  On  the  first  day  of  the  first  .month']  See 
n).  17. 

4.  the  things  that  are  to  be  set  in  order'] 
The  directions  given  in  Lev.  xxiv.  5 — 9 are  here 
presupposed,  and  must  have  been  issued  be- 
fore this  chapter  was  written. 

5.  before  the  ark]  See  on  xxx.  6. 

the  hanging  of  the  door  to  the  tabernacle] 

the  curtain  at  the  entrance  of  the 
Tabernacle. 

6.  before  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
tent  of  the  congregation]  before  the  en- 
trance of  the  Tabernacle  of  the  Tent 
of  meeting. 

7.  8.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  Ch.  xxvi.  § VI. 

8.  hang  up  the  hanging]  hang  up  the 
entrance  curtain. 

9 — 11.  The  directions  to  anoint  and  con- 
secrate the  Tabernacle  and  the  Prie.sts  had 
been  previously  given  xxx.  26 — 31.  They  are 


8 And  thou  shalt  set  up  the  court 
round  about,  and  hang  up  the  hang- 
ing at  the  court  gate. 

9 And  thou  shalt  take  the  anoint- 
ing oil,  and  anoint  the  tabernacle,  and 
all  that  is  therein,  and  shalt  hallow  it, 
and  all  the  vessels  thereof;  and  it  shall 
be  holy. 

10  And  thou  shalt  anoint  the  altar 

of  the  burnt  offering,  and  all  his  ves- 
sels, and  sanctify  the  altar:  and  it 
shall  be  an  altar  ^ most  holy.  t Heb. 

1 1 And  thou  shalt  anoint  the  laver  )wihtcsseL 
and  his  foot,  and  sanctify  it. 

12  And  thou  shalt  bring  Aaron 
and  his  sons  unto  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  and 
wash  them  with  water. 

13  And  thou  shalt  put  upon  Aa- 
ron the  holy  garments,  and  anoint 
him,  and  sanctify  him;  that  he  may 
minister  unto  me  in  the  priest’s  office. 

14  And  thou  shalt  bring  his  sons, 
and  clothe  them  with  coats : 

15  And  thou  shalt  anoint  them, 
as  thou  didst  anoint  their  father,  that 
they  may  minister  unto  me  in  the 
priest’s  office  : for  their  anointing  shall 
surely  be  an  everlasting  priesthood 
throughout  their  generations. 


here  repeated  in  a summary  form.  The  anoint- 
ing is  described  Lev.  viii.  10 — 12. 

9.  -vessels]  utensils  I'he  name  includes 
the  whole  of  the  furniture  of  the  Tabernacle. 
See  on  xxvii.  19. 

10.  -vessels]  utensils. 

most  holy]  In  the  piTceding  verse  the 
Tabernacle  and  its  utensils  are  said  to  be 
rendered  holy  by  the  anointing ; the  Altar 
and  its  utensils  are  here,  and  in  xxx.  10, 
said  to  be  most  holy.  The  term  most  holy 
must  not  in  this  case  be  taken  as  express- 
ing a higher  degree  of  holiness  than  that 
which  belonged  to  the  Tabernacle;  it  is  only 
used  for  emphasis,  as  a caution  (it  has  been 
conjectured)  in  reference  to  the  position  of 
the  Altar  exposing  it  to  the  chance  of  being 
touched  by  the  people  when  they  assembled 
in  the  Court,  while  they  were  not  permitted 
to  enter  the  Tabernacle.  The  Tabernacle  it- 
self, with  all  that  belonged  to  it,  is  called 
most  holy  in  xxx.  29. 

12.  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation] the  entrance  of  the  Tent  of 
meeting.  The  directions  in  -v-v.  12 — 15  had 
been  previously  given  xxix.  4 — 9,  xxx.  30 ; 
the  ceremony  is  described  Lev.  viii.  5,  6. 


430 


EXODUS.  XL. 


[v.  1 6 — 23. 


* Numb. 
?•  I 


16  Thus  did  Moses;  according  to 
ali  that  the  Lord  commanded  him, 
so  did  he. 

17  ^ And  it  came  to  pass  in  the 
first  month  in  the  second  year,  on  the 
first  day  of  the  month,  that  the  '^ta- 
bernacle was  reared  up. 

18  And  Moses  reared  up  the  ta- 
bernacle, and  fastened  his  sockets,  and 
set  up  the  boards  thereof,  and  put 
in  the  bars  thereof,  and  reared  up  his 
pillars. 

19  And  he  spread  abroad  the  tent 
over  the  tabernacle,  and  put  the  co- 
vering of  the  tent  above  upon  it;  as 
the  Lord  commanded  Moses. 


20  ^ And  he  took  and  put  the 
testimony  into  the  ark,  and  set  the 
staves  on  the  ark,  and  put  the  mercy 
seat  above  upon  the  ark ; 

21  And  he  brought  the  ark  into 

the  tabernacle,  and  ^set  up  the  vail  of^^^^^ar- 
the  covering,  and  covered  the  ark  of 
the  testimony;  as  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses. 

22  ^ And  he  put  the  table  in  the 
tent  of  the  congregation,  upon  the 
side  of  the  tabernacle  northward,  with- 
out the  vail. 

23  And  he  set  the  bread  in  order 
upon  it  before  the  Lord  ; as  the 
Lord  had  commanded  Moses. 


Moses  puts  the  Tabernacle  in  order. 

17—33. 

17.  on  the  first  day  ofi  the  month']  That  is, 
on  the  first  of  the  month  Nisan  (xii,  2,  xiii.  4), 
one  year,  wanting  fouiteen  days,  after  the  de- 
parture of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt.  They 
had  been  nearly  three  months  in  reaching  the 
foot  of  Mount  Sinai  (xix.  i);  Moses  had  spent 
eighty  days  on  the  mountain  (xxiv.  18,  xxxiv. 
28),  and  some  time  must  be  allowed  for  what 
is  related  in  chap,  xxiv.,  as  well  as  for  the  in- 
terval between  the  two  periods  which  Moses 
spent  on  the  mountain  (xxxiii.  i — 23).  The 
construction  of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  furni- 
ture would  thus  appear  to  have  occupied 
something  less  than  half  a year.  Bleek’s  ob- 
jection to  this  period  as  too  short  for  the 
completion  of  such  a work  (‘Introd.  to  O.T.’ 
Vol.  I.  p.  247)  is  worth  nothing  if  we  duly 
consider  the  interest  which  the  whole  people 
must  have  felt  in  it,  and  the  nature  of  the 
structure,  so  unlike  one  of  solid  masonry. 

19.  The  tent  cloth  was  spread  over  the 
tabernacle  cloth,  and  the  covering  of  skins 
was  put  over  the  tent  cloth.  See  xxvi.  i,  6, 
II,  14;  and  Note  at  the  end  of  Ch.  xxvi.  § II. 

20.  the  testimony]  i.e.  the  Tables  of  stone 
with  the  Ten  Commandments  engraved  on 
them  (see  xxv.  16,  xxxi.  18).  Nothing  else  is 
said  to  have  been  put  into  the  Ark.  These 
were  found  there  by  themselves  in  the  time  of 
Solomon  (i  K.  viii.  9;  2 Chron.  v.  10).  The 
Pot  of  .Manna  was  “laid  up  before  the  testi- 
mony” (Ex.  xvi.  34);  Aaron’s  rod  was  also 
placed  “before  the  testimony”  (Num.  xvii. 
10);  and  the  Book  of  the  Law  was  put  at 
“the  side  of  the  Ark”  (Deut.  xxxi.  26). 
The  expression  “before  the  testimony”  ap- 
pears to  mean  the  space  immediately  in  front 
of  the  Ark.  Most  interpreters  hold  that 
the  Pot  of  Manna  and  Aaron’s  rod  were 
placed  between  the  Ark  and  the  Vail.  It  is 
however  said  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 


that  the  Ark  contained  “the  golden  pot  that 
had  manna,  and  Aaron’s  rod  that  budded,  and 
the  tables  of  the  covenant”  (ix.  4).  From 
this  statement,  and  from  the  mode  of  expres- 
sion in  Kings  and  Chronicles  (which  appears 
to  indicate  that  the  fact  of  the  Ark’s  contain- 
ing nothing  at  that  time  but  the  Tables  was 
unexpected),  it  would  seem  that  the  other 
articles  were  at  some  period  put  within  the 
Ark;  and  this  accords  with  some  rabbinical 
traditions.  It  has  however  been  conjectured 
that  “before  the  testimony”  may  mean  the 
space  within  the  Ark,  at  the  back  of  which  the 
Tables  are  supposed  to  have  been  placed. 
But  from  a comparison  of  Ex.  xxx.  36  with 
xl.  5,  it  appears  that  the  two  expressions 
“ before  the  testimony,”  and  “ before  the  ark 
of  the  testimony,”  are  equivalent  and  denote 
the  space  in  front  of  the  Ark,  even  extending 
to  the  outside  of  the  Vail.  Besides  this,  it 
is  plain  that  Aaron’s  Rod,  when  it  was  brought 
“ before  the  testimony,”  was  merely  restored 
to  the  place  “ before  the  Lord  in  the  taber- 
nacle of  witness,”  where  it  was  first  placed 
along  with  the  other  rods  (Num.  xvii.  ;-cf.  -v. 
7 veith  ns.  10).  These  considerations,  added 
to  the  presumption  from  Ex.  xxv.  16,  xl.  20, 
that  nothing  but  the  Tables  were  put  into  the 
Ark,  seem  to  afford  sufficient  evidence  that 
the  articles  in  cjuestion  were  not  at  first  placed 
within  it,  but  in  front  of  it.  It  is  very  pro- 
bable that  the  pot  and  the  rod  had  been  put 
into  the  Ark  before  it  was  taken  by  the  Phi- 
listines, but  that  they  were  not  sent  back  with 
the  Ark  and  the  Tables,  i Sam.  iv.  ii,  vi.  ii. 

the  mercy  seat]  See  on  xxv.  21. 

21.  the  nsail  ofi  the  covering]  See  on  xxxv. 
12. 

22 — 24.  See  on  xxv.  23 — 29,  and  Lev. 
xxiv.  5 — 9. 

23.  he  set  the  bread  in  order]  Moses  per- 
formed these  priestly  functions  (see  on  xxviii. 
i)  of  setting  the  Bread  on  the  Table,  lighting 


V.  24—38.] 


EXODUS.  XL. 


431 


24  ^ And  he  put  the  candlestick 
in  the  tent  of  the  congregation,  over 
against  the  table,  on  the  side  of  the 
tabernacle  southward. 

25  And  he  lighted  the  lamps  before 
the  Lord;  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

26  ^ And  he  put  the  golden  altar 
in  the  tent  of  the  congregation  before 
the  vail : 

27  And  he  burnt  sweet  incense 
thereon ; as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

28  ^ And  he  set  up  the  hanging 
at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle. 

29  And  he  put  the  altar  of  burnt 
offering  by  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  tent  of  the  congregation,  and 
offered  upon  it  the  burnt  offering  and 

‘^chap  30.  the  meatoffering;  as  the^LoRDcom- 
manded  Moses. 

30  And  he  set  the  laver  be- 
tween the  tent  of  the  congregation 
and  the  altar,  and  put  water  there,  to 
wash  withal. 

31  And  Moses  and  Aaron  and  his 
sons  washed  their  hands  and  their  feet 
thereat : 

32  When  they  went  into  the  tent 


of  the  congregation,  and  when  they 
came  near  unto  the  altar,  they  wash- 
ed; as  the  Lord  commanded  Moses. 

33  And  he  reared  up  the  court 
round  about  the  tabernacle  and  the 
altar,  and  set  up  the  hanging  of  the 
court  gate.  So  Moses  finished  the 
work. 

34  ^ ^Then  a cloud  covered  the Numb.  9. 
tent  of  the  congregation,  and  the  J'Kings  s. 
glory  of  the  Lord  filled  the  taber- 
nacle. 

35  And  Moses  was  not  able  to 
enter  into  the  tent  of  the  congrega- 
tion, because  the  cloud  abode  thereon, 
and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  filled  the 
tabernacle. 

36  And  when  the  cloud  was  taken 
up  from  over  the  tabernacle,  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  ^ went  oiiward  in  all  '.Heb. 

I . . Jourjteyed 

their  journeys : 

37  But  if  the  cloud  were  not  taken 
up,  then  jhey  journeyed  not  till  the 
day  that  it  was  taken  up. 

38  For  the  cloud  of  the  Lord  was 
upon  the  tabernacle  by  day,  and  fire 
was  on  it  by  night,  in  the  sight  of  all 
the  house  of  Israel,  throughout  all 
their  journeys. 


the  Lamps  (‘v.  25),  burning  Incense  (‘v.  27), 
and  offering  the  Daily  Sacrifice  (t;.  29),  before 
the  holy  things  with  which  they  were  per- 
formed were  anointed.  The  things  had  been 
made  expressly  for  the  service  of  Jehovah,  by 
His  command,  and  in  this  fact  lay  their  essen- 
tial sanctity,  of  which  the  anointing  was  only 
the  seal  and  symbol.  Aaron  and  his  sons,  on 
similar  ground,  having  had  the  divine  call, 
took  part  in  the  service  of  the  Sanctuary  as 
soon  as  the  work  was  completed  (v.  31). 
But  Moses  took  part  with  them,  and  most 
likely  took  the  lead,  until  they  were  conse- 
crated and  invested  (Lev.  viii.)  and  publicly 
set  apart  for  the  office.  See  on  Lev.  viii.  14. 

26.  before  the  n}ail~\  that  is,  opposite  to 
the  Ark,  in  the  middle  between  the  Table  of 
Shewbread  on  the  North  and  the  Candlestick 
on  the  South  (see  on  xxx.  36). 

28.  set  up  the  hangings  &c.]  put  up 
the  curtain  at  the  entrance  to  the 
Tabernacle. 

29.  by  the  dQor'\  at  the  entrance.  It 
is  here  evident  that  the  term  denoted  a broad 
space  in  front  of  the  Tabernacle.  See  Plan, 
P*  .378. 

31,32.  See  xxx.  18 — 21. 


33.  set  up  the  hanging']  put  up  the 
curtain.  See  on  xxvi.  36. 

The  glory  of  the  Lord  is  manifested  on  the 
completed  nvork. 

34—38. 

34.  35.  On  the  distinction  between  the 
Tent  as  the  outer  shelter  and  the  Tabernacle  as 
the  dqveUing-place  of  Jehovah,  which  is  very 
clear  in  these  verses,  see  on  xxvi.  i.  The  glory 
appeared  as  a light  within  and  as  a cloud  on 
the  outside. 

35.  Cf.  the  entrance  of  the  High-priest 
into  the  Holy  of  Holies  on  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment, Lev.  xvi.  2,  13.  For  special  appear- 
ances of  this  glory  in  the  Tabernacle,  see 
Num.  xiv.  10,  xvi.  19,  42;  cf.  Ex.  xvi.  10; 
I K.  viii.  10,  II. 

36 — 38.  This  is  more  fully  described 
Num.  ix.  15 — 23,  x.  II,  12,  34. 


The  Tabernacle,  after  it  had  accompanied 
the  Israelites  in  their  wanderings  in  the  wil- 
derness, was  most  probably  first  set  up  in 
the  Holy  Land  at  Gilgal  (Josh.  iv.  19,  v.  10,^ 
ix.  6,  X.  6,  43).  But  before  the  death  of 


432 


EXODUS.  XL. 


Joshua,  it  was  erected  at  Shiloh  (Josh,  xviii. 
I,  xix.  51).  Here  it  remained  as  the  national 
Sanctuary  throughout  the  time  of  the  Judges 
(Josh,  xviii.  8,  xxi.  2,  xxii.  19  ; Judg.  xviii. 
31,  xxi.  19;  I S.  i.  3,  iv.  3).  But  its  ex- 
ternal construction  was  at  this  time  some- 
what changed,  and  doors,  strictly  so  called, 
had  taken  the  place  of  the  entrance  curtain 
(i  S.  iii.  15)  : hence  it  seems  to  have  been 
sometimes  called  the  Temple  (i  S.  i.  9,  iii.  3), 
the  name  by  which  the  structure  of  Solomon 
was  afterwards  commonly  known.  After  the 
time  of  Eli  it  was  removed  to  Nob  in  the 
canton  of  Benjamin,  not  far  from  Jerusalem 
(i  S.  xxi.  I — q).  From  thence,  in  the  time 
of  David,  it  was  removed  to  Gibeon  (i  Chro. 
xvi.  39,  xxi.  29  ; 2 Chro.  i.  3 ; i K.  iii.  4,  ix. 
2).  It  was  brought  from  Gibeon  to  Jerusa- 
lem by  Solomon  (i  K.  viii.  4).  After  this, 
it  disappears  in  the  narrative  of  Scripture. 
When  the  Temple  of  Solomon  was  built,  “the 
Tabernacle  of  the  Tent”  had  entirely  performed 
its  work ; it  had  protected  the  Ark  of  the 


Covenant  during  the  miigrations  of  the  people 
until  they  were  settled  in  the  Land,  and  the 
promise  was  fulfilled,  that  the  Lord  would 
choose  out  a place  for  Himself  in  which  His 
name  should  be  preserved  and  His  service 
should  be  maintained  (Deut.  xii.  14,  21,  xiv. 
24). 

In  accordance  with  its  dignity  as  the  most 
sacred  object  in  the  Sanctuary,  the  original 
Ark  of  the  Covenant  constructed  by  Moses 
was  preserved  and  transferred  from  the  Ta- 
bernacle to  the  Temple.  The  Golden  Altar, 
the  Candlestick  and  the  Shewbread  table 
were  renewed  by  Solomon.  They  were  sub- 
sequently renewed  by  Zerubbabel,  and  lastly 
by  the  Maccabees  (see  on  xxv.  23).  But  the 
Ark  was  preserved  in  the  Temple  until  Jeru- 
salem was  taken  by  the  forces  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar (2  Chro.  XXXV.  3;  Jer.  iii.  16).  It 
was  never  replaced  in  the  Second  Temple. 
(Jos.  ‘ Bell,  Jud.’  V.  5.  § 5 ; Tacitus,  ‘ Hist.’ 
V.  9).  According  to  a rabbinical  tradition, 
its  place  was  occupied  by  a block  of  stone. 


NOTE  ON  Chap.  XL. 


On  the  Sanctuary  as  a whole. 

I.  The  Altar  and  the  Tabernacle.  * II.  Names 
■ of  the  Tabernacle.  III.  Order  of  the  Sacred 
things.  IV.  The  Ark  and  its  belongings. 
V.  Allegorical  explanations.  VI.  Origi- 
nality of  the  7 'aber7iacle. 

1. 

The  two  chief  objects  within  the  Court 
were  the  Brazen  Altar  and  the  Tabernacle.  As 
sacrificial  worship  was  no  new  thing,  there  is 
nothing  said  or  intimated  as  to  the  purpose  of 
the  Altar,  either  in  the  instructions  for  the 
Sanctuary  or  in  the  record  of  its  completion  1. 
The  intention  was  merely  to  provide  a single 
Altar  of  suitable  construction  for  the  ofter- 
ings  of  the  whole  nation  in  such  juxtaposition 
with  the  Tabernacle  as  to  suit  the  order  of 
the  inspired  ritual. 

But  the  Tabernacle  was  an  entirely  new 
matter  belonging  to  the  dispensation  of  the 
Mosaic  Covenant.  Its  purpose  was  therefore 
distinctly  set  forth  at  this  time.  It  was  to 
be  the  symbolical  dwelling-place  of  Jehovah, 
where  He  was  to  meet  with  His  people  or 
their  representatives.  His  own  words  were: 
“Let  them  make  me  a sanctuary  that  I may 
dwell  among  them.” — “I  will  meet  you,  to 
speak  there  unto  thee,  and  there  will  I meet 
with  the  Clnldren  of  Israel^.” 

11. 

The  name  most  frequently  given  to  the  Ta- 
bernacle in  our  Version  is,  “The  Tabernacle 

^ ICx.  xxvii.  I — 8,  xxxviii,  i — 7.  See  note  on 
Ex.  XX.  24. 

Ex.  xxv.  8,  xxix.  42,  43.  See  also  Ex.  xxvii. 
2i,xxviii.  12. 


(or  Tent-"*)  of  the  congregation k”  But  the 
latter  word  in  Hebrew  signifies  meeting, 

in  its  most  general  sense,  and  is  always  used 
without  the  article.  The  better  rendering  of 
the  name  is  The  Tabernacle  (or  The  Tent) 
of  meeting,  and  the  idea  connected  with  it  is 
that  of  Jehovah  meeting  with  either  Moses,  or 
the  priests,  or  (in  only  a few  cases’)  with  the 
people  gathered  into  a congregation  at  the 
entrance  of  the  Tent.  The  English  translation 
is  not  supported  by  the  old  Versions,  nor  by 
the  best  critical  authorities.  The  complete 
designation  is  given  as  “the  Tabernacle  of  the 
Tent  of  meeting,”  Ex.  xl.  i,  29,  See. 

The  Tabernacle  is  also  called.  The  Taber- 
nacle (or  The  Tent)  of  the  Testimony®. 
Now  this  designation  evidently  relates  to  the 
Tabernacle  as  the  depository  of  the  Testi- 
mony^, that  is,  the  Tables  of  the  Law.  It 
has  been  ])referred  by  the  LXX.  (9  (7x97/9 
ToO  iinpTvpLov)  and  the  Vulgate  {tabernaculum 
testhno7iii),  to  render  not  only  the  Hebrew, 
which  strictly  answers  to  it,  but  also  the, 
name  in  more  common  use,  which  means  The 
Tabernacle  of  meeting.  It  occurs  in  the 
New  Testament,  Acts  vii.  44;  Rev.  xv.  5. 

^ On  the  words  Tabernacle  and  Tent,  in  some 
cases  used  indifferently  for  the  Avhole  structure, 
see  on  xxvi.  1 . 

^ Ex.  xxvii.  21,  xxviii.  43,  xxix.  4,  ro,  ri,  30, 
XXX.  16,  18,  20,36,  xxxi.  7,  XXXV.  21,  xl.  2,  6,  7, 
12  ; Lev.  i.  1,  3,  5,  &c.  &c. 

“ Lev.  viii.  3,  4;  Num.  x.  3;  cf.  Ex.  xxxiii,  7* 

® The  Hebrew  word  (n-niil)Jn  this  connection, 
always  has  the  article.  Ex,  xxxviii.  21 ; Num.  i. 
50,  53,  ix.  15,  X.  1 I,  xvii.  7,  8,  xviii.  2. 

t See  Note  on  Ex,  xx.  i — 17,  § V. 


EXODUS.  XL. 


433 


The  second  name,  of  itself,  suggests  that 
the  Tabernacle  owed  its  character  and  sig- 
nificance to  the  Ark  with  its  sacred  contents 
and  the  Mercy-seat  that  covered  it.  Above 
the  Mercy-seat,  in  a concentrated  sense,  was 
the  spot  where  Jehovah  communed  with  His 
peopled  The  furniture  of  the  Holy  Place 
held  a subordinate  position,  and  all  its  symbol- 
ism pointed  to  the  truth  which  had  its  deepest 
and  fullest  expression  in  the  Ark.  In  the  form 
and  materials  of  the  Tabernacle  itself  there 
appears  to  have  been  nothing,  either  in  its 
wood-work  or  its  curtains,  but  what  was 
most  convenient  for  the  arrangement  and  pro- 
tection of  the  holy  things  and  most  becoming 
for  beauty.  It  was  in  fact  a regal  Tent-,  in 
which  the  Ark  symbolized  the  constant  pre- 
sence of  Jehovah,  who  now  condescended  to 
dwell  amongst  the  people  whom  He  had  re- 
deemed. 

III. 

The  order  in  which  the  chief  facts  con- 
nected with  the  construction  of  the  Sanctuary 
are  related  in  the  sacred  narrative,  closely 
corresponds  with  the  essential  relation  in  which 
the  several  parts  stand  to  each  other.  The 
Ten  Commandments  are  uttered  by  the  voice 
of  Jehovah  from  the  summit  of  Mount  Sinai, 
with  every  circumstance  that  can  show  their 
solemn  importance  a short  practical  com- 
pendium of  the  Law,  called  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant 4,  is  written  out  by  Moses  for  the 
occasion : after  the  Covenant  is  sealed  by 
sprinkling  on  the  people  the  blood  of  Burnt- 
offerings  and  Peace-offerings,  a mysterious 
manifestation  of  the  Divine  presence  is  made 
to  Moses,  Aaron  and  the  Elders ^ : Moses  is 
then  summoned  to  the  Mount  and  receives 
instructions  first  for  making  the  Ark  that  was 
to  contain  the  tables  of  the  Ten  Command- 
ments with  the  Mercy-seat  that  was  to  cover 
them®,  next  for  the  holy  things  that  were  to  be 
placed  in  the  Holy  Place,  and  not  till  then, 
for  the  Tabernacle  with  its  Tent  and  its 
Covering^:  after  this,  the  Brazen  Altar  and 
the  Court  are  described^,  and  directions  are 
given  for  the  consecration  of  those  Avho  had 
to  minister  at  the  Altar  and  the  Tabernacle*^: 
what  may  be  regarded  as  a supplementary 
section  relating  to  the  Golden  Altar and 
some  other  things,  is  followed  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  workmen  and  a repetition  of 

^ Ex.  XXV.  22. 

^ See  Note  on  chap.  xxvi. 

^ Ex.  xix,  XX. 

^ See  on  Ex.  xx.  22. 

^ Ex.  xxiv.  According  to  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  the  Book  was  sprinkled  as  well  as  the 
people;  see  Heb.  ix.  19. 

® See  on  Ex.  xxv.  10 — 16. 

7 See  Note  on  Ex.  xxvi. 

® Ex.  xxvii. 

® Ex.  xxviii,  xxix. 

See  on  Ex.  xxx.  i. 

VoL.  I. 


the  Law  for  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath- 
day  h These  practical  instructions  being  com- 
pleted, the  precious  gift  of  the  Tables  of  the 
Law  is  put  into  the  hands  of  Moses**.  This 
arrangement  of  the  particulars  is  the  more 
noticeable,  because  the  articles  are  named  in 
reversed  order  in  the  account  of  the  construc- 
tion of  the  work  3. 

IV. 

The  Ten  Commandments  conveyed  no  new 
revelation  in  the  details  of  their  subject  matter. 
Every  duty  enjoined  in  them  may  be  found 
expressed  in  no  obscure  terms  in  the  earlier 
portion  of  the  Pentateuch.  But  the  old  truths 
were  now  for  the  first  time  embodied  and 
proclaimed  to  the  people  in  connection  with 
their  lately  recovered  freedom.  Hence  they 
were  put  into  new  relations  with  other  truths, 
and  were  combined  with  them  in  expressing 
the  will  of  Jehovah.  The  tables  of  the  Testi-- 
mony  did  not  however,  by  themselves,  form  the 
central  point  of  the  Sanctuary.  It  required  the 
complete  Ark  that  contained  them,  with  the 
Mercy-seat  that  covered  them,  to  convey  the 
true  meaning  of  the  Covenant  that  was  based 
on  the  name  of  Jehovah  as  it  was  revealed  to 
Moses^ 

We  may  regard  then  the  sacred  contents 
of  the  Tabernacle  as  figuring  what  was  pecu- 
liar to  the  Covenant  of  which  Moses  was  the 
Mediator,  the  closer  union  of  God  with  Israel 
and  their  consequent  election  as  “a  kingdom 
of  priests,  an  holy  nation^:”  while  the  Brazen 
Altar  in  the  Court  not  only  bore  witness  for 
the  old  sacrificial  worship  by  which  the  Patri- 
archs had  drawn  nigh  to  God,  but  formed  an 
essential  part  of  the  Sanctuary,  signifying,  by 
its  now  more  fully  developed  system  of  Sacri- 
fices® in  connection  with  the  Tabernacle,  those 
ideas  of  Sin  and  Atonement,  which  were 
first  distinctly  brought  out  by  the  revelation 
of  the  Law  and  the  sanctification  of  the 
nation 

V. 

Keeping  strictly  to  the  conclusions  that 
appear  clearly  to  follow  from  the  sacred  narra- 
tive, there  seems  to  be  neither  occasion  nor 
place  for  those  allegorical  explanations  of  the 
Tabernacle  which  are  so  often  found  in  com- 
mentators, both  Jewish  and  Christian.  Philo®, 
Josephus®,  Theodoret*®,  Jerome**,  with  other 
Fathers,  and  some  of  the  Rabbinists,  supposed 

* Ex.  xxxi.  I — 17.  2 xxxi.  18. 

3 Ex.  xxxvi,  xxxvii. 

4 Ex,  xxxiv.  6,  7.  See  Note  on  ch.  xx.  § VI. 

3 Ex.  xix.  6. 

® See  Lev,  i. — vii. 

^ See  notes  on  Lev.  iv. 

® ‘Vit.  Mos.’  III.  6. 

9 ‘Ant.’  III.  7.  § 7.  Cf.  ‘Bel.  Jud.’  v.  5.  § 4, 
where  the  same  explanation  is  applied  to  the 
Temple. 

*®  ‘Qusest.  in  Exod.’  60. 

**  ‘Epist.’  LXiv.  § 9. 


E E 


434 


EXODUS.  XL. 


that  the  structure  was  a type  of  the  material 
universe  of  heaven  and  earth  which  the  Lord 
had  created  as  an  abode  for  Himself.  It 
appears  however  that  no  two  of  these  writers 
agree  together  in  the  application  of  this  theory 
to  the  several  parts.  Bahr\  following  in  this 
general  track,  has  elaborated  with  curious  in- 
genuity an  explanation  of  almost  every  recorded 
particular  in  the  description  of  Moses. — In 
other  lines  of  speculation,  the  Tabernacle  has 
been  taken  as  a symbol  of  human  nature 
(Luther),  and  as  a prophetic  type  of  the 
Christian  Church  (Cocceius). 

VI. 

It  has  been  usual,  especially  since  the  time 
of  Spencer,  to  seek  out  parallels  from  heathen 
antiquity  for  the  Tabernacle  itself,  but  more 
particularly  for  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant. 
The  Tabernacle  has  been  compared  with 
several  moveable  temples  of  which  there  are 
notices  in  ancient  writers,  the  most  remarkable 
of  which  seems  to  be  -‘the  Sacred  Tent”  (77 
tepn  cTK-qvrj)  of  the  Carthaginians  mentioned  by 
Diodorus 

The  Ark  of  the  Covenant  has  been  most 
generally  likened  to  the  arks,  or  moveable 
shrines,  which  are  represented  on  Egyptian 
monuments^.  The  Egyptian  arks  were  carried 
in  a similar  manner  by  poles  resting  on  men’s 
snoulders,  and  some  of  them  had  on  the  cover 
two  winged  figures  not  unlike  what  we  con- 
ceive the  golden  Cherubim  to  have  been. 
Thus  far  the  similarity  is  striking.  But 
there  were  points  of  great  dissimilarity.  Be- 
tween the  winged  figures  on  the  Egyptian 
arks  there  was  placed  the  material  symbol 
of  a deity,  and  the  arks  themselves  were 
carried  about  in  religious  processions,  so  as 
to  make  a show  in  the  eyes  of  the  people. 
\Ve  know  not  what  they  contained.  As  re- 
gards the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  the  absence 
of  any  symbol  of  God  was  one  of  its  great 
characteristics.  It  was  never  carried  in  a cere- 
monial procession:  when  it  was  moved  from 
one  place  to  another,  it  was  closely  packed  up, 
concealed  from  the  eyes  even  of  the  Levites 
who  bore  it-*.  AVhen  the  Tabernacle  was 
pitched,  the  Ark  was  never  exhibited,  but  was 

* ‘Symbolik,’  Vol.  I.  p.  75. 

^ Lib.  XX.  65 : others  are  mentioned  by  Knobel. 

^ Wilkinson,  ‘Pop.  Acc.’  Vol,  I.  p.  267. — The 
articles  in  Smith’s  and  Kitto’s  Dictionaries. — 
Smith,  ‘The  Pentateuch,’  p.  260,  &c.  &c.  — On 
the  arks  of  other  ancient  nations,  see  Biihr, 
‘.Symbolik,’  Vol.  i.  399,  and  Knobel,  p.  262. 

■*  Num.  iv.  5,  6,  19,  20. 


kept  in  solemn  darkness.  Rest,  it  is  evident, 
\vas  its  appointed  condition.  It  was  occasion- 
ally moved  out  of  its  place  in  the  Holy  of 
Holies,  but  only  as  long  as  the  nation  was 
without  a settled  capital,  and  had  something 
of  the  character  of  an  army  on  the  march. 
During  this  period  it  accompanied  the  army 
on  several  occasions*.  But  it  had  been  fore- 
told that  the  time  should  come  when  the 
Sanctuary  was  to  be  fixed^,  and  when  this 
was  fulfilled,  we  are  told  that  “the  Ark  had 
rest^.  ” It  was  never  again  moved  .till  the 
capture  of  Jerusalem  by  the  forces  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar-*. Not  less,  we  may  fairly  sup- 
pose, was  it  distinguished  from  all  other  arks 
in  the  simple  grandeur  of  its  purpose:  it  was 
constructed  to  contain  the  plain  text  of  the 
Ten  Commandments  written  on  stone  in 
words  that  were  intelligible  to  all. 

Such  resemblances  to  foreign  patterns  as 
have  been  mentioned  are  without  doubt 
interesting ; but  it  should  always  be  kept 
in  view  that  they  are  extremely  superficial. 
The  Israelites  could  hardly  have  been  in 
contact  with  the  Egyptians  for  so  long 
a period  without  learning  much  of  their  arts 
and  customiS.  It  is  most  likely  that  they  were 
in  the  habit  of  using  the  sam.e  tools  and  modes 
of  construction.  In  order  to  attain  a given 
end  they  probably  used  similar  mechanical 
contrivances.  There  are  certain  points  of 
likeness  in  the  descriptions  of  Moses  and 
what  we  know  of  Egyptian  art,  which  would 
clearly  prove  that  the  Israelites  had  dwelt  in 
Egypt -^.  But  on  the  whole,  it  seems  wonderful 
that  there  is  so  little  in  the  Sanctuary  to  remind 
us  of  any  foreign  association.  Besides  such  dis- 
tinctions as  might  naturally  be  ascribed  to  the 
difference  between  an  idol's  temple  and  a 
structure  meant  to  express  the  Covenant  be- 
tween the  unseen  Lord  and  His  people,  there 
is  in  the  Tabernacle  an  originality,  both  in  its 
general  arrangement  and  in  its  details,  which 
is  by  far  more  striking  than  any  resemblance 
that  may  be  traced  between  it  and  heathen 
models. 

* I S.  iv.  3,  xiv.  18;  2 S.  xi.  11. 

2 Dent,  xii.  ic,  11. 

3 I Chro.  vi.  31 ; cf.  xvi.  i. 

* See  concluding  note  on  Exocl.  xl. — It  is 
strange  that  Knobel  and  others  should  regard 
such  occasions  as  are  described  Josh.  vi.  8, 
2 S.  vi.  12 — 16,  as  of  the  nature  of  ceremonial 
processions. 

* Ilengstenberg  has  not  stated  the  argument 
too  confidently  in  his  ‘Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
Moses,’  but  he  has  certainly  brought  some  very 
fanciful  instances  to  its  support. 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVIL  XIX. 


435 


NOTE  ON  THE  ROUTE  OF  THE  ISRAELITES  FROM 
RAMESES  TO  SINAI.  F.  C.  C. 


(Chaps.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX.) 


The  commentary  on  the  first  nineteen 
chapters  of  Exodus  had  been  some  time  in 
print,  when  the  results  of  the  survey  of  the 
western  districts  of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula  were 
communicated  to  the  writer.  Some  conclu- 
sions to  which  he  had  been  led  by  the  re- 
searches of  travellers,  of  which  the  fullest 
account  is  given  in  Ritter’s  work  on  Sinai  and 
Palestine  (see  Band  i.  p.  517 — 638),  were  mate- 
rially affected  by  the  information  which  he 
received  from  Captain  Wilson,  of  the  Royal 
Engineers,  who  with  Captain  Palmer,  R.  E., 
conducted  the  survey,  and  from  the  Rev.  F. 
W.  Holland,  who  accompanied  the  expedition, 
and  had  previously  spent  much  time  in  ex- 
ploring the  Peninsula,  of  which  he  has  pre- 
pared a valuable  map,  published  by  the  Geo- 
graphical Society. 

The  first  part  of  the  route,  from  Rameses 
to  Elim,  is  not  affected  by  these  new  sources 
of  information,  and  the  notes  remain  un- 
touched. It  may,  however,  be  convenient  to 
touch  briefly  on  this  portion  in  order  to  pre- 
sent a clear  and  connected  view  of  the  circum- 
scances  which  may  have  determined  the  direc- 
tion of  the  march.  The  first  two  days’  march 


brought  the  Israelites  from  Rameses  to  Etham. 
Rameses  was  the  general  name  of  the  district 
in  the  time  of  Jacob;  the  principal  city  built 
by  the  Israelites  was  probably  situate  on  the 
ancient  canal  at  some  distance  from  the  fron- 
tier. Etham  was  on  the  edge  of  the  wilder- 
ness, at  the  point  where  the  road  towards 
Palestine  branched  off;  and  the  direction  of 
the  journey  was  turned  southwards,  towards 
the  encampment  by  the  sea  at  Baal-zephon. 
See  xii.  37,  xiii.  20,  xiv.  2,  3.  Etham,  which 
is  probably  identical  with  Pithom,  is  held 
by  the  writer  of  this  note  to  correspond  to 
the  ancient  Heroopolis,  the  frontier  city  of 
Egypt,  near  the  southern  extremity  of  Lake 
Timsah.  The  journey  from  this  place  to 
Suez  would  occupy  sufficient  time  for  a com- 
munication to  be  made  to  Pharaoh,  and  for 
the  rapid  march  of  his  army^.  The  Israelites 

^ The  subjoined  sketch,  prepared  by  the  Rev. 
S.  Clark,  shows  the  route  of  the  Israelites  from 
Rameses  to  'Ayun  Miisa,  and  the  probable  ex- 
tent of  the  Red  Sea  north  of  its  present  bed  in 
the  time  of  Moses.  Mr  Clark  identifies  Etham 
with  a spot  near  Serapeum. 


E E 2 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX. 


436 

must  have  had  a considerable  start  in  order  to 
reach  the  encampment  of  Suez  before  they  were 
overtaken,  but  they  could  scarcely  have  been  so 
near  to  Suez  when  at  Etham  as  the  site  fixed 
upon  by  Robinson  would  bring  them,  or  the 
passage  could  have  been  effected  without  inter- 
ruption. That  passage  took  place,  as  nearly  all 
modern  critics  admit,  near  Suez,  where  sands  of 
considerable  extent  were  pa.ssable  when  “the 
Lord  caused  the  sea  to  go  back  by  a strong  east 
wind,”  which  blew  all  the  night;  see  c.  xiv.  21. 
After  crossing  the  sea  the  Israelites  would 
naturally  make  their  first  station  at  ‘Ayun 
Mu.sa,  where  they  would  find  an  ample  sup- 
ply of  water:  passing  thence  by  Marah  they 
reached  Elim,  when  they  encamped  under  the 
palm-trees,  by  the  waters,  Elim  is  generally 
identified  with  the  Wady  Gharandel.  It  is  pro- 
bable that  the  Israelites  remained  there  several 
days  and  then  advanced  to  the  station  on  the 
Red  Sea,  near  the  headland  called  Ras-Selima, 
or,  as  in  the  map,  Ras  Abu  Zenimeh. 

The  difference  of  opinions  as  to  the  course 
pursued  by  the  Israelites  up  to  this  point  is 
limited  to  questions  of  secondary  importance  ; 
but  from  Elim  two  principal  routes  lead  to 
Sinai,  one  by  El  Markha  and  Wady  Feiran, 
the  other,  less  circuitous,  through  a succession 
of  Wadys  on  the  north-east.  Both  these 
routes  are  reported  by  Captain  Wilson,  R.E. 
to  be  practicable  even  for  a large  host  like  that 
of  the  Israelites : the  former  is  the  more  easy 
of  transit ; the  latter  has  the  advantage  of  an 
abundant  supply  of  excellent  water  at  the 
beginning  of  the  journey.  At  the  one  end 
of  the  route  it  may  be  regarded  as  settled 
that  the  station  by  Ras-Selima  was  the  start- 
ing-point, if  not  for  the  whole  host,  yet  for 
the  head-quarters  of  the  Israelites.  At  the 
other  extremity  the  reasons  which  will  be  ad- 
duced appear  to  prove  that  Ras  Sufsafeh  was 
the  summit  from  which  the  Law  was  delivered, 
and  the  Wady  er  Rahah  the  wilderness  of  Sinai 
on  which  the  people  were  assembled  to  hear  it. 

The  facts  stated  in  Exodus  and  in  the  itine- 
rary in  Numbers  xxxiii.  are  these.  The  first 
station  was  in  the  wilderness  of  Sin,  which 
lay  between  Elim  and  Sinai.  The  people  re- 
mained there  some  days : we  find  no  com- 
plaint of  want  of  water,  but  they  suffered 
fre^m  want  of  food,  and  were  supplied  firsf 
with  cpiails  and  then  with  manna.  From 
this  wilderness  they  advanced,  encamping  first 
at  Dophkah,  then  at  Alush  ; thence  they  went 
to  Rephidim,  where  they  found  no  water  until 
it  was  supplied  by  a miracle  from  the  rock  of 
Floreb^  At  Rephidim  they  were  attacked  by 
the  Amalekites.  I'heir  next  encampment  was 
in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai.  Some  fifteen  days 
elapsed  betwt'cn  the  first  encampment  in  the 
wilderness  of  Sin  and  their  arrival  at  the 
Mount  of  God:  compare  xvi.  i,  and  xix.  i. 

W'e  may  first  consider  the  claims  of  the 
more  direct  route,  advocated  with  great  ability 
by  Knobel,  whose  view  has  been  adopted  by 


Keil,  and  is  accepted  in  the  foot-notes  of  this 
commentary.  It  has  been  fully  described  by 
Burckhardt,  Robinson  and  other  travellers, 
v/hose  accounts  are  generally  con'oborated  by 
Captains  Wilson  and  Palmer  and  by  Mr 
Holland. 

From  Ras  Abu  Zenimeh  this  route  passes 
through  several  Wadys  to  a wide  undulating 
plain,  the  Debbet  er  Ramleh.  This  desert  is 
identified  by  Knobel  with  the  wilderness  of  Sin. 
It  corresponds  in  many  striking  particulars 
with  the  accounts  of  that  wilderness : bare, 
wild,  and  desolate,  it  would  offer  no  refresh- 
ment to  the  Israelites  after  their  first  long  and 
laborious  march.  It  lies,  properly  speaking, 
between  Elim  and  the  Sinaitic  group  in  which 
greenstone  and  porphyry  take  the  place  of  the 
sandstone  of  the  desert.  The  word  Debbet 
mioreover  corresponds  exactly  in  meaning  to 
Sini;  and  at  Wady  Nasb,  the  first  station  on 
this  route,  there  is  a copious  supply  of  water:  a 
circumstance  which,  combined  with  the  supply 
of  quails  and  manna,  gives  a probable  reason 
for  the  delay  of  some  days  in  this  wilderness. 
From  \^^ady  Nasb  the  road  passes  by  Sarabit 
el  Khadim.  At  this  place  the  Egyptians  work- 
ed mines  of  great  extent,  and  the  remains  of 
buildings  with  numerous  inscriptions  prove 
that  it  was  occupied  by  an  Egyptian  colony 
before  the  time  of  Moses.  The  existence  of 
this  settlement  presents  conflicting  arguments 
for  and  against  the  selection  of  this  route  by 
Moses.  On  the  one  hand  it  may  be  reasoned 
that  he  would  avoid  coming  into  contact  with 
Egyptians,  especially  since  this  must  have 
been  a military  station,  and  a conflict  would 
seem  inevitable,  since  the  sojourn  in  the  dis- 
trict extended  over  some  days.  On  the  other 
hand  it  is  admitted  that  the  Egyptians  would 
keep  the  entire  route  from  Ras  Selima  in  good 
order,  and  take  great  care  to  protect  the 
sources  of  water:  nor  considering  that  the 
whole  colony,  as  Captain  Wilson  states,  could 
not  consist  of  more  than  1000  men,  is  it  at  all 
probable  that  they  would  attempt  to  arrest 
the  advance  of  the  vast  host  of  the  Israelites; 
especially  if,  as  may  be  assumed,  they  had  re- 
ceived information  of  the  destruction  of  Pha- 
raoh’s host  in  the  Red  Sea. 

The  road  from  Sarabjt  el  Khadim  is  extreme- 
ly rough ; but,  as  military  authorities  affirm, 
not  impracticable  even  for  light  waggons,  such 
as  tlie  Israelites  probably  used.  Dophkah  is 
assumed  by  Knobel  to  be  in  the  Wady  Sih, 
both  names  having  the  same  meaning 2.  Alush, 

^ Freytag,  in  his  Arabic  lexicon,  s.  v.  explains 
the  former  to  mean  “arena  aequabilis  et  plana,” 
the  latter  .Sin,  or  Sinin,  “arena  elatior  et  longius 
])roten5a  per  regionis  superficiem,”  a most  exact 
description  of  this  district. 

^ sift,  flowing  waters,  the  same  be- 

ing the  meaning  of  J , da/aka,  from  which 
npDl  was  probably  derived. 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX 


437 


SKETCH  MAP 


OF  PART  OF  THE 


PENINSULA  OF  SINAI 


FROM  THE  ORDNANCE  SURVEY 
MADE  IN  1868,  1869, 


Capts.  WILSON  & PALMER, 

ROYAL  ENGINEERS. 

(Scale  16  Statute  miles  to  i inch.) 


d j Ahaiviiviam  -fa  run  i 


T/lNufen_f 


ER.RAHRK^ 

yiRnSSUFSAFEHl 


J.NflCUS 


J.ETHTHEBT  //;) 


Country  through  which  the  Israelites  must  have  passed  on  their  way  to  Mount  Sinai. 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX. 


43S 


according  to  the  same  critic,  may  be  the 
Wady  el  ‘Esh,  where  there  is  a spring  of  good 
water:  a journey  of  two  hours  from  this 
point  ends  in  the  Wady  es  Sheikh. 

The  correspondence  of  the  sites  and  even  of 
the  names  on  this  route,  and  of  the  circum- 
stances of  the  journey,  presents  a strong  if  not 
conclusive  argument  in  its  favour,  nor  is  the 
argument  affected  by  any  discoveries  made  in 
the  late  survey.  The  notes  On  the  text  are 
therefore  left  in  their  original  form  ; the  writer 
still  retaining,  though  with  some  diffidence  in 
face  of  the  opinions  of  the  explorers,  his  con- 
viction that  Knobel  is  right,  so  far  as  this 
part  of  the  route  is  concerned. 

We  have  now  to  consider  the  other  main 
route.  The  first  day’s  journey  from  Ras  Abu 
Zenimeh  southwards  leads  through  a narrow 
slip  of  barren  sand  to  the  open  plain  of 
El  Markha.  From  this  a Wady  at  once 
opens  on  the  east,  leading  to  the  Wady 
Feiran.  This  route  is  most  unlikely  to  have 
been  selected  by  the  Israelites : it  would  have 
brought  them  into  contact  with  Egyptians  in 
a district  occupied  by  that  people  for  cen- 
turies, nor  do  the  narrow  passes  present  any 
features  corresponding  to  the  wilderness  of 
Sin.  On  the  south,  however,  a very  even  and 
tolerably  wide  tract  of  desert  land  extends 
through  El  Markha,  and  at  its  southern  ex- 
tremity, by  a sudden  turn  eastwards,  through 
the  Wady  Feiran  just  described.  * This 
tract  is  identified  by  the  conductors  of  the 
survey  and  by  Mr  Holland  with  the  wilderness 
of  Sin.  They  consider  it  to  be  the  route 
which  Moses  would  naturally  have  followed 
having  once  reached  the  station  by  Ras  Se- 
lima.  The  chief  objection  to  this  view  is  that 
there  are  no  springs  of  water  in  the  district ; to 
which  it  is  answered  that  the  Israelites  who 
had  waggons  (see  Num.  vii.  3)  and  oxen  would 
of  course  bring  with  them  a supply,  which 
might  suffice  for  a rapid  march  until  they 
reached  the  upper  part  of  the  Wady  Feiran. 
The  march  however  was  not  rapid,  since  there 
was  a considerable  delay,  probably  a whole 
week,  in  the  wilderness  of  Sin.  The  route 
then  passes  north  east  of  Mount  Serbal,  till 
it  meets  the  Wady  Sheikh,  from  which  point 
tw'o  routes  lead  to  Er  Rahah  and  Ras-Suf- 
safeh  ; the  one  direct,  but  rough  at  the  upper 
end ; the  other  circuitous,  but  well  adapted 
for  the  march  and  encampment  of  the  Israel- 
ites. In  Wady  es  Sheikh  about  midway  this 
route  meets  the  upper  route  previously  de- 
scribed. 

The  question  on  which  the  explorers  differ 
is  one  of  great  importance.  It  touches  the 
site  of  Rephidim,  where  the  Israelites  first 
suffered  for  want  of  water,  and  where  they 
defeated  the  Amalekites.  Captains  Wilson 
and  Palmer  hold  that  the  battle  was  fought  in 
the  Wady  Feiran,  under  Mount  Serbal.  Mr. 
Holland  places  Rephidim  at  the  pass  of  A1 
Watiyeh,  at  the  eastern  end  of  Wady  es 


Sheikh,  to  the  north  of  the  point  where  it 
joins  the  Wady  ed  Deir,  which  leads  to 
Sinai. 

If  indeed  the  Israelites  passed  through 
Wady  Feiran,  it  seems  improbable  that  they 
should  not  have  come  into  collision  with 
the  natives.  From  El  Hesweh  it  is  a well- 
watered  district,  winding  for  a considerable 
distance  through  defiles  which  could  be  easily 
defended  by  a people  who  had  been  trained 
for  warfare  by  centuries  of  fierce  struggles 
with  the  Egyptians:  on  the  adjoining  high- 
lands towards  Jebel  Serbal  remains  of  curious 
buildings,  which  undoubtedly  belong  to  a 
very  ancient  period,  still  attest  the  presence  of 
a numerous  population  along  this  route  h The 
site  of  the  battle  with  the  Amalekites  is  fixed  by 
Captain  Wilson  near  the  ancient  city  of  Feiran. 
The  hill  on  which  Moses  witnessed  the  combat 
is  supposed  by  Dr  Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’  p.  41, 
to  be  the  rocky  eminence  which  commands 
the  palm-grove,  on  which  in  early  Christian 
times  stood  the  church  and  palace  of  the 
bishops  of  Paran.  Captain  Wilson  holds  it 
to  be  the  Jebel  Tahuneh,  on  the  opposite 
side  of  the  Wady.  The  whole  of  the  Wady 
Feiran  may  have  been  cleared  of  the  Ama- 
lekites by  the  decisive  victory ; after  which 
the  Israelites  halted  some  time,  with  their 
head-quarters  under  the  palm- groves,  when 
they  were  visited  by  Jethro.  This  view 
assumes  the  identification  of  the  Mount  of 
God  where  Moses  encamped  in  the  wilder- 
ness, c,  xviii.  5,  with  Mount  Serbal,  a con- 
jecture of  Ritter’s  which  seems  open  to 
grave  objection,  since  the  Mount  of  God  in 
Exodus  is  in  all  probability  the  group  of 
Sinai,  and  the  term  “wilderness”  is  scarcely  ap- 
plicable to  the  palm-groves  of  Feiran.  f'rom 
this  place  the  Israelites  might  have  proceeded 
to  the  Wady  er  Rahah,  either  by  Wady  es 
Sheikh,  the  longer  route,  but  presenting  no 
impediments ; or  by  the  W.  Solaf,  which 
though  rugged  in  part  is  not  impracticable, 
and  in  Captain  Wilson’s  opinion  would  most 
probably  have  been  pursued. 

Mr  Holland,  on  the  other  hand,  believes 
that  the  Israelites  passed  through  the  Wady 
Feiran  without  encountering  opposition,  and 
that  they  then  traversed  the  Wady  es  Sheikh ; 
Rephidim  he  places  at  the  pass,  called  El 

^ Mr  Holland  describes  them  in  a paper  read 
at  the  Church  Congress,  1869.  After  careful 
examination  he  came  to  the  conclusion  that  they 
were  probably  the  tombs  and  store-houses  of  the 
ancient  Amalekites.  They  evidently  were  the 
work  of  a large  and  powerful  people  who  inha- 
bited the  peninsula  at  a very  early  period.  There 
are  indications  that  they  were,  to  some  extent, 
an  agricultural,  as  well  as  a pastoral  people,  a 
]X)int  of  great  importance  in  its  bearings  upon 
the  probable  condition  of  the  neighbourhood  of 
.Mount  Sinai  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus.  See  In- 
troduction, p.  245.  The  Egyptian  names  of  the 
old  inhabitants  were  Anu  and  Mentu. 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX. 


439 


Wat'iyeh ; it  is  shut  in  by  perpendicular 
recks  on  either  side.  The  Amalekites  hold- 
ing this  defile  would  be  in  a position  of 
great  strength : and  their  choice  of  this 
p<.int  for  the  attack  is  well  accounted  for, 
supposing  the  Israelites  to  have  reached  it 
without  previous  molestation.  It  commands 
the  entrance  to  the  Wadys  surrounding  the 
central  group  of  Sinai,  on  and  about  which 
the  Bedouins  pasture  their  flocks  during  the 
summer.  All  the  requirements  of  the  nar- 
rative appear  to  be  satisfied  by  this  assump- 
tion. On  the  north  is  a large  plain  desti- 
tute of  water  for  the  encampment  of  the 
Israelites;  there  is  a conspicuous  hill  to  the 
north  of  the  defile  commanding  the  battle- 

^ The  engravings  which  accompany  this  note 
were  supplied  by  General  Sir  Henry  James, 
F.R.S.  ^ J ’ 

The  first  is  an  accurate  representation  of  a 
raised  model  of  that  group,  together  with  the 
adjoining  Wadys,  which  is  at  the  Topographical 
department.  The  model  is  on  the  scale  of  six 


field,  pre.senting  a bare  cliff,  such  as  we  may 
suppose  the  rock  to  have  been  which  Moses 
struck  with  his  rod.  On  the  south  of  the 
pass  is  another  plain  sufficient  for  the  en- 
campment of  the  Amalekites,  within  easy 
reach  of  an  abundant  supply  of  water.  At 
the  foot  of  the  hill  on  which  Moses  most 
probably  sat,  if  this  be  Rephidim,  the  Arabs 
point  out  a rock,  which  they  call  “the  seat 
of  the  prophet  Moses.” 

Taking  all  points  into  consideration  we  feel 
constrained  to  adopt  one  of  the  following  alter- 
natives. If,  as  the  explorers  hold,  the  Israelites 
passed  through  the  Wady  Feiran,  the  conflict 
with  the  Amalekites  must  have  taken  place 
on  the  spot  fixed  upon  by  Captains  Wilson 

inches  to  the  mile,  and  represents  the  natural 
features  in  their  true  proportions. 

The  other  is  taken  from  a photograph,  which 
represents  the  northern  end  of  the  Sinaitic 
group,  with  Ras-Sufsafeh  in  the  centre,  and 
the  extensive  plain  of  the  Wady  Rahah  in 
front. 


440 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX. 


and  Palmer.  If  however  the  battle  field  was 
at  El  Watiyeh  the  Israelites  may  have  reached 
it  by  the  upper  route,  which  meets  the  lower 
about  midway  in  the  Wady  es  Sheikh.  The 
arguments  appear  to  the  writer  to  preponderate 
in  favour  of  this  view,  which  accepts  all  the 
facts  ascertained  by  the  Expedition  of  Survey, 
and  presents  a series  of  coincidences  of  great 
weight  in  the  settlement  of  the  question. 

From  this  point  the  writer  accepts  without 
hesitation  the  conclusion  to  which  all  the 
persons  concerned  in  the  Survey  unanimously 
arrive  touching  the  encampment  of  the  Is- 
raelites in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai.  The  re- 
presentation of  the  Sinaitic  group  here  given 
will  enable  the  reader  to  judge  of  the  weight  of 
the  arguments  which  led  to  that  conclusion. 

The  opinion  which  formerly  appeared  to 
the  writer  to  be  sustained  by  the  strongest 
evidence  identified  Jebel  Musa  with  the  peak 
of  Sinai.  This  view  was  advocated  by  Ritter. 
He  supposed  that  on  the  south  of  Jebel  Musa 
there  is  a plain  of  great  extent,  the  Wady 
Sebaiyeh,  in  which  the  Israelites  could  as- 
semble in  front  of  the  mount.  The  pyra- 
midal height  of  Jebel  Musa  is  described  as 
rising  over  it  like  a monolithic  wall  of  granite, 
a sheer  precipice  of  2000  feet ; on  the  summit 
the  mosque,  the  Christian  chapel,  and  even 
the  so-called  stone  of  Moses,  are  seen  dis- 
tinctly from  the  plain  ; which  Wellsted,  Vol. 

1 1,  p.  34,  describes  in  terms  which  might  have 
seemed  conclusive. 

“ We  crossed  a large  plain  terminating 
in  a broad  and  extensive  valley.  It  has  been 
objected  to  the  identification  of  Jebel  Musa 
with  Mount  Sinai,  that  the  narrow  valleys 
and  ravines  contiguous  to  it  could  not  have 
contained  the  immense  multitude  of  Israel- 
ites. In  this  •valley  ho^vei'er  there  is  more 
than  ample  space  for  them:  while  at  the  same 
time  at  its  termination  Mount  Sinai  stands 
forth  in  naked  majesty.”  A traveller  who 
spent  some  time  in  the  neighbourhood  lately 
informed  the  writer  of  this  note  that  the 
description  is  quite  accurate,  and  that  it  is 
the  only  plain  where  the  host  could  have 
been  assembled.  Tischendorf,  who  notices 
the  extent  of  the  plain,  specially  adapted  for 
so  great  an  event,  observes  that  “ the  situation 
supplies  an  excellent  illustration  of  the  words 
in  c.  xix.  12,  ‘that  ye  go  not  up  unto  the 
mount,  nor  touch  the  border  of  it;’  for  in 
this  plain  the  mountain  can  be  touched  in  the 
literal  sense,  rising  sheer  from  the  plain,  stand- 
ing before  the  eye  from  base  to  summit  as  a 
whole;”  and  again,  “Seldom  could  one  so 
properly  be  said  to  stand  at  the  nether  part 
of  the  mount  as  in  the  plain  at  the  foot  of 
Sinai  looking  upwards  to  the  granite  summit 
2000  feet  high.” 

The  view  of  Jebel  Musa  is  admitted  to  be 
singularly  striking.  Lepsius  says,  of  the  ascent 
that  it  lies  between  vast  heights  and  rocks  of 
the  wildest  and  grandest  character,  giving  the 


impression  of  an  approach  to  a spot  of  his- 
torical interest.  The  ascent  from  the  chapel 
of  Elijah  occupies  about  three-quarters  of  an 
hour  to  the  summit,  a height  of  7,530  to  7,548 
feet.  On  the  top  is  a level  space  70  or  80  feet 
in  width.  Travellers  give  different  accounts 
of  the  view  from  this  spot.  Seetzen  and 
Burckhardt  could  see  nothing ; when  they 
visited  it  the  whole  district  was  covered  with 
a dense  mist.  Robinson  speaks  slightingly  of 
the  effect:  and  Ruppell  says  that  the  view  is 
shut  in  by  higher  mountains  on  all  sides  except 
the  north,  on  which  he  looked  over  a vast 
expanse  including  the  desert  of  Er  Ramleh, 
which  is  identified  in  these  notes  with  the 
wilderness  of  Sin.  Wellsted,  however,  who  ex- 
plored the  district  with  unusual  care,  gives  a 
most  impressive  description  of  the  view.  Vol. 
II.  p.  97.  He  ascended  the  mount  in  very  clear 
weather  in  January  1833,  took  accurate 
trigonometrical  measurements  over  an  extent  of 
90  miles.  ‘ ‘ The  view  comprehends  a vast  circle. 
The  gulphs  of  Suez  and  Akaba  were  distinctly 
visible,  and  from  the  dark  blue  waters  of  the 
latter  the  island  of  Tiran,  sacred  to  Isis,  rears 
itself.  Mount  Agrib  on  the  other  side  points 
to  the  land  of  bondage.  Before  me  is  St  Ca- 
therine, its  bare  conical  peak  now  capped  with 
snow.  In  magnificence  and  striking  effect  few 
parts  of  the  world  can  surpass  the  wild  naked 
scenery  everywhere  met  with  in  the  mountain- 
chain  which  girds  the  sea-coast  of  Arabia. 
Several  years  wholly  passed  in  cruising  along 
its  shores  have  rendered  all  its  varieties  fami- 
liar to  me,  but  I trace  no  resemblance  to  any 
other  in  that  before  me : it  has  a character  of 
its  own.  Mount  Sinai  itself  and  the  hills 
which  compose  the  district  in  its  immediate 
vicinity,  rise  in  sharp,  isolated  conical  peaks. 
F rom  their  steep  and  shattered  sides  huge  masses 
have  been  splintered,  leaving  fissures  rather 
than  valleys  between  their  remaining  portions. 
These  form  the  highest  part  of  the  range  of 
mountains  that,  spread  over  the  peninsula,  are 
very  generally  in  the  winter  months  covered 
with  snow,  the  melting  of  which  occasions 
the  torrents  which  everywhere  devastate  the 
plains  below.  The  peculiarities  of  its  conical 
formation  render  this  district  yet  more  distinct 
from  the  adjoining  heights  which  appear  in 
successive  ridges  beyond  it,  while  the  valleys 
between  them  are  so  narrow  that  they  can 
scarcely  be  perceived.  No  villages  and  castles 
as  in  Europe  here  animate  the  picture:  no 
forests,  lakes,  or  falls  of  water  break  the  silence 
and  monotony  of  the  scene.  All  has  the  ap- 
pearance of  a vast  and  desolate  wilderness 
either  grey,  or  darkly  brown,  or  wholly  black. 
Few  who  stand  on  the  summit  of  Mount 
Sinai,  and  gaze  from  its  fearful  height  upon 
the  dreary  wilderness  below,  will  fail  to  be 
impressed  with  the  fitness  of  the  whole  scene 
for  the  sublime  and  awful  dispensation,  which 
an  almost  universal  tradition  declares  to  have 
been  revealed  there.”  Schubert’s  description, 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX. 


44  r 


quoted  by  Ritter,  ‘Sinai,’  p.  587,  fully  corrobo- 
rates this  account.  “The  summit  of  the  mount 
was  reached,  a holy  place  to  the  mightier  half 
of  the  nations  of  the  earth,  to  Jews,  Moslems 
and  Christians.  The  view  from  its  height  of 
7000  feet  extends  over  a circle  of  more  than 
360  miles  in  diameter,  and  1600  miles  in  cir- 
cumference : a rugged  outline  of  a desert 
panorama  of  terrible  beauty  under  the  blue 
vault  of  the  purest  and  brightest  heaven  of 
Arabia.  No  other  place  comes  near  to  it  in 
all  this.  On  the  east  and  west  the  eye  catches 
glimpses  of  the  girdle  of  sea  which  encircles 
the  highlands  of  the  Peninsula : beyond  it  are 
seen  the  ranges  of  Arabian  and  Egyptian 
heights.  In  the  space  between  no  green 
meadow,  no  cultivated  field,  no  wood,  no 
brook,  no  village,  no  Alpine  hut.  Only  storm 
and  thunder  resound  in  the  wilderness  of 
Sinai,  else  for  ever  silent : a chain  of  rock 
standing  as  on  the  third  day  of  creation  when 
as  yet  there  was  no  grass,  no  tree  upon  the 
earth : a mass  of  granite,  unmingled  with  later 
formations;  none  of  its  abrupt  deep  ravines 
are  filled  up  with  sandstone,  or  chalk,  or  other 
alluvial  deposits : strata  of  Grey wacke  and  Ba- 
salt run  like  black  veins  for  leagues  through 
its  walls  and  peaks.  Here  on  such  a spot  as 
this  was  the  law  given,  which  pointed  to  Christ 
by  whom  it  was  fulfilled.” 

The  accuracy  of  these  descriptions  is  borne 
out  by  the  accounts  of  other  travellers.  Thus 
Henniker  quoted  by  Dr  Stanley,  ‘S.  P.’  p.  12: 
“The  view  from  Jebel  Musa  (where  the  par- 
ticular aspect  of  the  infinite  complication  of 
jagged  peaks  and  varied  ridges  is  seen  with  the 
greatest  perfection)  is  as  if  Arabia  Petrsea  were 
an  ocean  of  lava,  which,  whilst  its  waves  were 
running  mountains  high,  had  suddenly  stood 
still.” 

Unfortunately  for  this  hypothesis  the  raised 
model,  from  which  the  plan  is  taken,  proves 
that  the  valley  immediately  below  Jebel  Musa 
could  not  have  held  a considerable  portion  of 
the  Israelites ; it  is,  as  Dean  Stanley  describes 
it,  rough,  uneven,  and  narrow.  It  is  proved, 
moreover,  that  there  is  no  level  plain  in  the 
Wady  Sebaiyeh  on  which  the  Israelites  could 
be  assembled  within  sight  of  the  summit  of 
Jebel  Musa,  which  however  is  visible  at 
many  points  between  the  entrance  of  the 
Wady  (which  lies  to  the  south-east)  and  its 
farthest  end,  a distance  of  nearly  seven  miles. 
This  circumstance,  which  rests  on  the  au- 
thority of  military  surveyors,  seems  con- 
clusive. Jebel  Musa,  the  loftiest  and  grandest 
summit  of  the  group,  may  have  been  included 
in  the  tremendous  manifestations  of  divine 
power,  but  the  announcement  of  the  Law  must 
have  taken  place  elsewhere. 

On  the  northern  extremity  however  there 
is  a concurrence  of  cvi'cumstances  in  favour  of 
Ras  Sufsafeh.  At  its  foot  lies  the  plain  Wady 
ed  Deir  extending  to  the  north-east,  meet- 
ing the  Wady  es  Sheikh,  which  has  been  above 


(Photograph  by  the  Ordnance  Survey.) 


442 


EXODUS.  XVI.  XVII.  XIX. 


identified  with  Rephidim,  and  immediately 
in  front  the  far  wider  plain  Er  Rahah  ; to  the 
left  a plain  of  greater  extent  than  was  pre- 
viously supposed,  the  Seil  Leja.  From  every 
part  of  these  two  Wadys  the  granite  rock 
of  Ras  Sufsafeh  is  distinctly  visible,  and  there 
is  space  for  the  entire  host  of  the  Israelites, 
taking  the  highest  calculation  of  their  numbers. 
This  fact,  of  cardinal  importance  in  the  ques- 
tion, is  attested  by  the  military  officers  who 
conducted  the  survey. 

Indeed  Sir  Henry  James  concurs  with  those 
officers  in  the  opinion  that  no  spot  in  the 
world  can  be  pointed  out  which  comibines  in 
a more  remarkable  manner  the  conditions  of  a 
commanding  height,  and  of  a plain  in  every 
part  of  which  the  sights  and  sounds  described 
in  Exodus  would  reach  an  assembled  multi- 
tude of  more  than  two  million  souls.  The 
description  of  Ras  Sufsafeh,  the  central  height  in 
the  subjoined  engraving,  taken  from  the  pho- 
tographs, presents  many  remarkable  coinci- 
dences; and  though  inferior  in  height  to  the 
peak  of  Jebel  Musa,  it  satisfies  the  main  con- 
ditions of  the  narrative. 

Dean  Stanley,  ‘S.  P.’  p.  42 — 44,  has  drawn 
out,  with  his  usual  felicity  of  expression,  the 
most  striking  characteristics  of  the  scenery. 
He  observes  that  the  existence  of  such  a plain 
in  front  of  such  a cliff'  is  so  remarkable  a 
coincidence  with  the  sacred  narrative.,  as  to 
furnish  a strong  internal  argument,  not  only 
of  its  identity  with  the  scene,  but  of  the  scene 
itself  having  been  described  by  an  eye-witness. 
He  then  dilates  upon  other  not  less  impressive 
circumstances.  The  awful  and  lengthened 
approach  as  to  some  natural  sanctuary;  the 
plain  not  broken  and  narrowly  shut  in,  like 
almost  all  others  in  the  range,  but  presenting  a 
long  retiring  sweep  against  which  the  people 
could  remove  and  stand  afar  off' ; the  cliff 
rising  like  a huge  altar  in  front  of  the  Avhole 
congregation,  and  visible  against  the  sky  in 
lonely  grandeur  from  end  to  end  of  the  whole 


plain,  the  very  image  of  the  “mount  that 
might  be  touched,”  and  from  which  the 
“voice”  of  God  might  be  heard  far  and  wide 
over  the  stillness  of  the  plain  below,  widened 
at  that  point  to  the  utmost  extent  by  the  con- 
fluence of  all  the  contiguous  valleys;  the  place 
where  beyond  all  other  parts  of  the  Peninsula 
is  the  adytum  withdrawn  as  if  in  the  end  of 
the  world  from  all  the  stir  and  confusion  of 
earthly  things.  We  are  also  indebted  to 
Dean  Stanley  for  noting  other  details  which 
are  fully  borne  out  by  the  late  exploration,  and 
scarcely  leave  room  for  doubt  as  to  the  exact 
point  of  the  delivery  of  the  Law.  A small 
eminence  at  the  entrance  of  the  convent  valley 
is  marked  by  the  name  of  Aaron,  from  which 
he  is  believed  to  have  witnessed  the  festival  of 
the  golden  calf;  a tradition  which  fixes  the 
locality  of  the  encamption  on  Wady  Rahah. 
Two  other  points  meet  here  and  nowhere 
else;  first  Moses  is  described  as  descending  the 
mountain  without  seeing  the  people,  the  shout 
strikes  the  ear  of  his  companion  before  they 
ascertain  the  cause;  the  view  breaks  on  him 
suddenly  as  he  draws  nigh  to  the  camp,  and 
he  throws  down  the  tables  and  dashes  them  in 
pieces  “beneath  the  mount:”  now  anyone  de- 
scending the  mountain  path  by  which  Ras  Suf- 
safeh is  accessible  (according  to  Captain  Wilson 
in  three-quarters  of  an  hour  to  a practised 
mountaineer)  through  the  oblique  gullies  which 
flank  it,  would  hear  the  sounds  borne  through 
the  silence  of  the  plain,  but  would  not  see  the 
plain  itself  until  he  emerged  from  the  lateral 
Wady;  and  when  he  did  so  he  would  be  im- 
mediately under  the  precipitous  cliff  of  Sufsa- 
feh. The  brook  which  came  down  from  the 
mount  is  probably  identified  with  that  which 
flows  through  the  Seil  Leja. 

Taking  all  these  circumstances  into  con- 
sideration it  seems  impossible  to  resist  the 
conclusion  that  the  Law  was  delivered  on  Ras 
Sufsafeh,  to  the  Israelites  encamped  in  the  plain 
below. 


( ^43  ) 


ESSAY  I. 

ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 
UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


I.  Sources  of  Eg}^ptian  histoiy.  2.  General  results.  3.  List  of  Pharaohs  from  12th  to  20th  Dynasty. 
4.  Time  of  Abram’s  visit;  objections  and  proofs;  Story  of  the  two  Brothers;  Benihassan; 
Story  of  Saneha;  presents  to  Abram.  5.  Time  of  Joseph;  invasion  of  Hyksos  ; inquiry  into 
Manetho’s  statements;  era  of  Set  Nubte.  6.  Apepi  or  Apophis  not  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph. 
7.  Connection  of  I2th  Dynasty  with  On.  8.  Tomb  of  Chnumhotep  ; Egyptian  nomes.  9. 
Egyptian  irrigation  ; labyrinth  under  Amenemha  III.  10.  Probable  condition  of  the  Israelites 
under  the  Hyksos.  ii.  Inquiry  into  date  of  Exodus.  12.  Amosis  or  Aahmes  L,  a new  king, 
a conqueror,  builder  of  ports,  &c.,  employs  forced  labourers.  13.  Chronology,  dates  examined. 
14.  Last  year  of  Thotmes  II.;  probable  date  of  the  Exodus.  15.  Amenophis  I.  16.  Thotmes  I. 
17.  Thotmes  IL;  events  of  reign  ; character  of  Queen  Hatasou.  18.  Campaigns  of  Thotmes  III. 
concluded  40  years  after  decease  of  Thotmes  II.  19.  Objections  considered.  20.  Amenophis  II. 
and  Thotmes  IV.  21.  Amenophis  III.  and  the  Queen  Tei.  22.  Religious  revolution  in  Egypt. 
23.  Statements  of  Manetho,  Cheremon,  Lysimachus,  and  Diodorus.  24.  The  identification  of 
Rameses  II.  with  the  Pharaoh  of  Moses  considered.  25.  State  of  Palestine  under  the  early 
Judges.  26.  Campaigns  of  Seti  I.  against  the  Cheta.  27.  Rameses  IL,  length  of  reign,  first 
campaign  in  Syria.  28.  Fortresses  built  or  enlarged.  29.  Employment  of  Aperu  identified 
with  Hebrew  captives.  30.  Alliance  of  Rameses  with  Cheta.  31.  State  of  Palestine  described 
in  Egyptian  Papyrus.  32.  State  of  Goshen  at  the  same  time  incompatible  with  occupation  by 
Israelites.  33.  Reign  of  Merneptah  ; events  and  dates  coincide  wdth  the  first  hypothesis  in  this 
Essay.  34.  Rameses  HI. 


(i.)  Our  knowledge  of  early  Egyptian  history 
is  derived  chiefly  from  monumental  inscrip- 
tions and  papyri,  which  have  been  deciphered 
within  the  last  few  years:  partly  also  from 
fragments  of  Manetho,  and  from  the  accounts 
of  Greeks  who  visited  Egypt  after  the  close 
of  the  Old  Testament  history.^ 

The  historical  notices  drawn  from  the  last 
source  have  little  independent  value,  f'acts  of 
importance,  corroborated  by  modern  re- 
searches, are  recorded  by  Herodotus,  Dio- 
dorus, and  other  Greeks,  but  they  are  mixed 
with  legends,  disfigured  by  manifest  forgeries, 
and  their  statements,  so  far  as  regards  the 
chronology,  are  irreconcileable  with  contem- 
porary inscriptions. 

The  fragments  of  Manetho  ^ have  a higher 

J The  principal  object  of  this  dissertation  is  to 
bring  the  latest  discoveries  to  bear  upon  biblical 
questions,  reference  is  therefore  seldom  made  to 
works  of  great  value  already  well  known  to  all 
students.^  It  is  right  to  observe  that  it  was 
printed  in  1868  ; a few  references  have  been 
made  in  the  notes,  and  two  or  three  in  the  text, 
to  works  which  have  appeared  before  the  last 
revision  in  1870. 

2 The  best  aceount  of  Manetho  is  given  by  Rev. 
H.  Browne  in  Kitto’s  ‘ Cyclopsedia.’  All  the  frag- 


value.  He  was  a priest,  conversant  with  the 
literature  of  ancient  Egypt,  and  had  access  to 
monuments  which,  under  the  Ptolemies,  were 
for  the  most  part  in  a state  of  perfect  preser- 
vation. The  original  history  perished  at  a 
very  early  period,  and  is  only  known  from  ex- 
tracts in  Josephus.  The  catalogue  of  Kings 
begins  with  gods,  and  continues  through 
thirty  dynasties  of  mortals,  ending  with  Nec- 
tanebo  343  B.C.  The  list  is  derived  from 
authentic  sources,  but  there  are  numerous 
errors  and  mis-statements  attributable  in 
part  to  the  ignorance  or  carelessness  of 
transcribers.  This  remark  applies  to  names, 
but  still  more  to  dates,  which  are  seldom 
confirmed,  and  often  contradicted,  by  the 
monuments.^ 

The  facts  drawn  from  old  Egyptian  docu- 
ments are  to  be  found  in  the  first  volume  of 
Bunsen’s  ‘Egypt.’  The  extracts  in  Josephus 
are  taken  from  the  AlyvimaKd ; the  catalogue  of 
dynasties  is  preserved  by  Sy ocellus,  800  A.D., 
in  two  widely-differing  recensions,  one  from  the 
lost  ‘Chronographia  ’ of  Julius  Africanus,  220 
A.  D.,  the  other  from  the  ‘ Chronicon  ’ of  Euse- 
bius, of  which  we  have  now  the  Armenian 
version. 

3 The  regnal  years  of  many  kings  ?.re  deter- 


444 


ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


ments  are  of  the  highest  importance.  Some 
refer  to  past  transactions,  and  are  chiefly 
valuable  as  showing  what  view  the  Egyptiars 
took  of  their  ancient  history,  more  especially 
of  the  succession  and  character  of  their  an- 
cient kiugs.^  Other  inscriptions  relate  to 
contemporary  events,  which  they  describe  for 
the  most  part  in  highly  coloured  and  inflated 
language,  but  apparently  without  careless  or 
wilful  misstatement  of  the  facts. 

(2.)  From  these  monuments  the  history  of  a 
large  portion  of  the  ancient  and  middle  em- 
pire, with  which  alone  we  are  now  concerned, 
has  been  constructed,  though  not  without 
long  intervals  of  partial  or  total  obscurity. 
The  earliest  part  of  that  history  has  lately 
been  investigated  with  great  care,  and  the 
results  given  in  a work  by  M.  de  Rouge,®  to 
which  reference  will  frequently  be  made  in 
the  following  pages.  The  names  of  nearly  all 
the  Pharaohs  of  the  first  six  dynasties  have 
been  found,  together  with  notices  which 
prove  the  extent  and  complete  organisation  of 
their  kingdom. 

The  interval  between  the  sixth  and  the 
eleventh  dynasties  is  of  uncertain  duration. 
No  light  is*  thrown  upon  it  by  contemporary 
monuments.  M.  de  Rouge  ® considers  it  pro- 
bable that  “ the  royal  families  placed  here  in 
the  lists  of  Manetho  do  but  represent  sove- 
reigns of  a part  of  the  country,  contemporary 
with  other  Pharaohs,” 

The  twelfth  dynasty  again  stands  out  in 
clear  and  strong  relief  I'he  Pharaohs  were 
lords  of  all  Egypt ; their  monuments  repre- 
sent the  highest  development  of  sculpture  and 
architecture,  and  the  main  events  of  their 
reigns  are  recorded  in  numerous  inscriptions. 
Some  facts  of  importance  have  also  been  lately 
ascertained  in  reference  to  the  early  kings  of 
the  thirteenth  dynasty,  proving  that  they  too 
were  masters  of  all  Egypt,  and  therefore  that 
the  invasion  of  the  Shepherd  kings  could  not 

mined  from  contemporary  inscriptions.  The  dis- 
crepancies in  Manetho  are  so  numerous  that  they 
can  scarcely  be  accounted  for  by  errors  of  trans- 
cription. 

■*  The  two  most  important  documents  re- 
ferring to  the  past  are  the  Turin  Papyrus 
(published  by  Lepsius,  ‘ Auswahl,’  1842,  and 
‘ Koenigsbuch,’  1858),  and  the  list  of  kings 
lately  discovered  in  the  temple  of  Abydos  by 
M.  Mariette.  It  is  printed  in  the  ‘ Zeit- 
schrift,’  1864,  by  M.  de  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’ 
pi.  ii.,  and  by  M.  Mariette,  ‘ Fouilles,’  vol.  ii. 
It  represents  Seti  I.,  accompanied  by  his  son 
Rameses  II.,  in  the  act  of  rendering  homage  to 
sevenly-six  of  his  ancestors,  beginning  with  Mena 
or  .Menes. 

® ‘ Recherches  sur  les  Monuments  qu’on  pent 
attril/ucr  aux  six  premieres  Dynasties  de  Mane- 
thon.’  I’aris,  1866. 

® ‘ Recherches,’  p.  iv.  This  statement  is 
again  made  in  M.  de  Rouge’s  ‘Expose  de  I’Etat 
actuel  des  Etudes  egyptiennes,’  1867.  See 
p.  17. 


have  taken  place  at  the  time  formerly  assumed 
by  Lepsius.^ 

The  interval  between  the  fourth  king  of 
the  thirteenth  dynasty  and  the  last  of  the 
seventeenth  is  a period  of  confusion  and  dis- 
turbance. The  monuments  supply  rx  data  by 
which  the  order  of  events  and  the  chronology 
can  be  determined,  or  even  probably  conjec- 
tured. That  Egypt  during  that  time  was  in- 
vaded by  the  Hyksos,  who  were  masters  of 
the  north,  has  been  proved  by  the  researches 
of  M.  Mariette:  part  of  the  country  appears 
to  have  been  governed  throughout  the  period 
by  contemporary  dynasties,  ending  with  Rase- 
kenen ; but  the  most  complete  list  of  the  an- 
cestors of  Seti  I.  gives  the  name  of  no  Pha- 
raoh between  Amenemha,  the  last  king  but 
one  of  the  twelfth  dynasty,  and  Aahmes,  or 
Amosis,  the  first  of  the  eighteenth. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  dy- 
nasty, when  the  Hyksos  were  expelled  by 
Aahmes  L,  the  monumental  history  of  Egypt 
is  tolerably  complete ; the  succession  of  nearly 
all  the  Pharaohs  and  the  principal  events  in 
the  reigns  of  the  most  distinguished  are  dis- 
tinctly recorded.  The  chronology,  however, 
is  uncertain ; the  regnal  years  are  often  found 
on  the  monuments,  but  without  even  an  ap- 
proximation to  completeness ; with  one  excep- 
tion, to  be  noticed  presently,  no  general  era, 
or  computation  of  lengthened  periods,  is  based 
on  the  authority  of  ancient  inscriptions. 

(3.)  The  subjoined  list  embraces  the  whole 
period  within  which  the  Israelites  and  their 
ancestors  are  assumed  by  any  scholars  to 
have  been  in  contact  with  Egypt. before  or 
soon  after  the  settlement  in  Canaan. 

12th  Dynasty. — Amenemha,  Osirtasin  I., 
Amenemha  II.,  Osirtasin  II.,  Osirtasin  III,, 
Amenemha  III.,  Amenemha  IV.,  and  a Q^ueen, 
Ra-Sebek-Nefrou. 

13th  Dynasty. — A series  of  Pharaohs  bear- 
ing a general  name,  Sebek-hotep. 

14th  to  17th  Dynasty. — Hyksos,  and  Egyp- 
tians ; the  last  of  the  Hyksos,  Apepi,  or 
Apophis  : the  last  of  the  contemporary  Egyp- 
tians, Ta-aaken  Rasekenen. 

1 8th  Dynasty.  — Aahmes  I.  (Nefertari 
Queen),  Amenhotep  I.,  Thotmes  I.  (Aahmes 
Regent),  Thotmes  II.,  Thotmes  III.,  Amen- 
hotep II.,  Thotmes  IV.,  Amenhotep  III., 
Amenhotep  IV.  (who  took  the  name  Khun- 
Aten),  three  other  kings  not  recognised  as 
legitimate,  Horemheb. 

19th  Dynasty.— Rameses  I.,  Seti  I.,  Ra- 
mescs  II.,  Merneptah  I , Seti  II.  or  Merneptah 
II.,  Amemmeses,  Siptah,  and  Tausei. 

20th  Dynasty. — Rameses  III.,  twelve  kings 
bearing  the  name  Rameses  with  special  desig- 
nations. 

(4.)  The  first  contact  with  Egypt  is  generally 
admitted,*^  and  may  be  here  assumed  to  have 

7 See  M.  de  Rouge,  ‘Recherches,’  pp.  vi.  vii. 

Lepsius  is  the  only  exception.  All  other 
scholars  in  England,  France,  and  Germany,  are 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


445 


taken  place  before  the  eighteenth  dynasty; 
the  first  question  to  be  considered  is  whether 
the  visit  of  Abram,  and  the  immigration  of 
the  Israelites,  are  to  be  referred  to  the  period 
of  disturbance  and  general  misery  which  fol- 
lowed the  invasion  of  the  Hyksos,  and  lasted 
till  their  expulsion,  or  to  the  earlier  period 
when  Egypt  w^as  united  and  prosperous  under 
its  native  sovereigns. 

The  natural  impression  made  by  the  narra- 
tive in  the  Book  of  Genesis  would  certainly 
be  that  the  transactions  which  it  sets  before 
us  so  fully  and  distinctly,  belong  to  the  earlier 
period.  The  account  of  Abram’s  visit  (Gen. 
xii.  10-20)  is  very  brief,  but  it  evidently 
represents  Egypt  as  in  a condition  of  great 
prosperity.  It  was  the  resort  of  foreigners 
in  times  of  famine.  Pharaoh  and  his  princes 
are  rich  and  luxurious,  nor  are  there  any 
indications  of  war  or  intestine  troubles. 

It  has,  however,  been  argued  that  some 
facts  in  this  short  narrative  point  rather  to 
the  habits  of  a nomad  and  half-savage  race, 
than  to  the  polished  and  civilised  Pharaohs  of 
the  ancient  empire.  It  is  urged  that  repre- 
sentations of  camels  are  not  found  on  Egyp- 
tian monuments;  but  they  formed  part  of  the 
property  which  Abram  acquired  by  the  favour 
of  Pharaoh.  It  is,  however,  known  that  long 
before  that  period  the  Pharaohs  were  masters 
of  a large  part  of  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai,  and 
of  the  intervening  district,  nor  is  it  likely  that 
they  would  have  kept  up  their  communica- 
tions without  using  the  ‘ ships  of  the  desert.’ 
Camels  were  not  likely  to  be  represented  on 
the  sepulchral  monuments  at  Benihassan,®  far 
from  the  frontiers  of  Egypt:  they  were  not 
used  in  the  interior  of  the  country,  and  were 
probably  regarded  as  unclean. 

Two  objections  of  more  importance  rest  on 
the  supposed  habits  and  feelings  of  the  early 

so  far  agreed,  they  place  the  visit  of  Abraham 
before  the  eighteenth  dynasty.  Dr.  Ebers  places 
the  visit  of  Abraham  before  the  Hyksos,  and 
that  of  Joseph  some  time  after  their  expidsion. 
This  involves,  according  to  his  calculations, 
an  interval  of  some  eight  or  ten  centuries 
between  Abraham  and  Joseph.  The  argu- 
ments by  which  he  shows  that  neither  could 
have  visited  Egypt  during  the  Hyksos  period 
corroborate  the  position  taken  in  this  disserta- 
tion. Dr.  Ebers’  work,  ‘ Aigypten  und  die 
Bucher  Moses,’  published  a few  months  since, 
reached  me  after  this  dissertation  was  ready  for 
the  press.  Reference  will  be  made  to  it  in  the 
notes. 

® We  have  no  other  monuments  which  repre- 
sent the  habits  of  Egypt  under  the  twelfth 
dynasty.  There  are  no  representations  of  camels 
on  tnonuments  of  the  Ptolemaic  or  the  Roman 
period,  when  they  were  of  course  w^ell  known  to 
the  Egyptians.  Ebers  supposes  that  it  was  con- 
trary to  the  rules  of  Egyptian  art  to  represent 
these  uncouth  forms.  This  is  possible,  but 
scarcely  probable,  since  the  giraffe  and  other 
strange  animals  are  common  on  the  monuments. 
It  is  more  probable  that  they  were  held  unclean. 


Egyptian  kings : late  discoveries  have  con- 
verted these  objections  into  strong  argu- 
ments in  favour  of  the  earlier  date. 

T'he  fear  which  Abram  felt  lest  his  wife 
should  be  taken  from  him,  and  that  he  should 
be  slain  for  her  sake,  would  seem  to  indicate 
wild  and  savage  habits,  such  as  can  scarcely 
be  attributed  to  native  Egyptians,  but  in  the 
story  of  the  two  brothers,^®  the  Pharaoh  of 
the  time,  acting  on  the  advice  of  his  coun- 
sellors, sends  two  armies  to  fetch  a beautiful 
woman  by  force  and  then  to  murder  her  hus- 
band. The  story  is  full  of  wild  superstitions, 
but  the  portraiture  of  manners  is  remarkably 
simple  and  graphic,  and  it  unquestionably 
represents  the  feelings  of  the  Egyptians  at  the 
time  of  their  highest  civilisation.  It  belongs 
to  the  age  of  Rameses  II.,  and  the  act  is  at- 
tributed not  to  a tyrant  and  oppressor,  but  to 
a Pharaoh  beloved  by  his  people,  and  passing 
into  heaven  at  his  decease. 

Another  curious  coincidence  has  been 
pointed  out  by  M.  Chabas,  ‘ Les  Papyrus 
hieratiques  de  Berlin,’  p.  xiv.  In  a very  an- 
cient papyrus  of  Berlin,  referring  to  the  12th 
dynasty,  the  wife  and  children  of  a foreigner 
are  confiscated  as  a matter  of  course,  and 
become  the  property  of  the  king.  M.  Chabas 
observes,  “G’estainsi  qu’a  une  epoque  pro- 
bablement  un  peu  posterieure  a celle  des  cvtne- 
ments  que  raconte  notre  papyrus,  Abraham 
se  vit  enlever  sa  femme  Sarai,  qui  fut  placte 
dans  la  maison  dii  Roi.” 

It  is  again  objected  that  Abram  was  not 
likely  to  be  admitted  into  the  presence,  much 
less  into  the  favour,  of  a native  Egyptian  king, 
whereas  a nomad  of  kindred  origin  and  similar 
habits  might  willingly  receive  him. 

We  have,  however,  two  distinct  and  abso- 
lute proofs  that  under  the  twelfth  dynasty  a 
personage  of  the  race,  habits,  and  position  of 
Abram  would  be  welcomed  under  such  cir 
cumstances  as  those  described  in  Genesis. 

In  the  sepulchral  monuments  at  Benihassan, 
and  in  the  tomb  of  the  Governor  of  the  pro- 
vince, a man  of  the  highest  rank,  nearly  related 
to  the  reigning  Pharaoh,  Osirtasin  II.,  is  found 
one  of  the  most  interesting  and  best  known 
pictures  of  the  ancient  empire.  It  represents 
the  arrival  of  a nomad  chief,  with  his  family 
and  dependents,  to  render  homage  and  sedc 
the  protection  of  the  prince.  These  foreigners 
are  called  Amu,’^  a name  which  was  given 

This  curious  story,  the  earliest  fiction  in 
existence,  is  among  the  select  Papyri  in  the 
British  Museum : it  is  called  the  Papyrus 
d’Orbiney  : a fac-simile  is  published  by  the 
Tnaistees  of  the  Museum:  it  contains  nineteen 
pages  of  hieratic  writing,  remarkably  clear  and , 
legible : the  style  is  simple,  and  presents  fewer 
difficulties  than  any  similar  document.  It  has 
been  translated  in  part  by  Mr.  Goodwin,  Mr. 
Le  Page  Renouf,  and  M.  de  Rouge.  The  story 
abounds  throughout  with  illustrations  of  the  nar- 
rative in  the  Pentateuch. 

The  word  is  applied  to  pastoral  nomads, 


446  ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


specially  to  the  native  tribes  on  the  north-west 
of  Egypt  and  in  Palestine  of  Semitic  descent. 
I'he  chief  is  called  the  Hak,  or  prince,  corre- 
sponding to  Sheich,  as  used  chiefly  of  heads 
of  tribes ; his  name  is  Abshah.^^  The  features 
of  the  family,  their  colour,  and  their  costume, 
a rich  tunic,  or  “ coat  of  many  colours,”  are 
thoroughly  Semitic.  It  is  to  be  observed  also 
that,  although  they  are  represented  as  sup- 
pliants, making  lowly  obeisance,  and  bringing 
the  customary  gifts,  yet  the  prince  receives 
them  as  persons  of  some  distinction  : a scribe 
who  presents  them  holds  a tablet  describing 
their'number  and  purpose,  and  a slave  behind 
the  governor  bears  his  sandals,  which  were 
only  taken  off  on  ceremonial  occasions. 

Not  less  striking  is  the  evidence  drawn 
from  one  of  the  oldest  papyri  in  existence, 
lately  translated  by  Mr,  Goodwin.  He  calls 
it  the  Story  of  Saneha:  the  events  which  it 
relates  belong  to  the  reigns  of  the  first  two 
kings  of  the  twelfth  dynasty,  Amenemha  and 
Osirtasin.  Saneha  (i.e.  son  of  the  Sycomore, 
a name  probably  given  or  assumed  on  his 
adoption  by  the  Egyptians)  was,  like  the  chief 
above  described,  an  Amu;  he  was  not  only 
received  into  the  service  of  the  Pharaoh,  but 
rose  to  high  rank,  and,  even  after  a long  resi- 
dence as  a fugitive  in  a foreign  land,  he  was 
restored  to  favour,  made  “ a counsellor  among 
the  officers,  set  among  the  chosen  ones : pre- 
cedence is  accorded  to  him  among  the  cour- 
tiers, he  is  installed  in  the  house  of  a prince, 
and  prepares  his  sepulchre  among  the  tombs 
of  the  chief  officers.”  Mr.  Goodwin  points 
out  the  resemblance  between  this  narrative  and 
the  History  of  Abraham  ; but  it  proves  some- 
thing more,  for  it  shows  that  to  an  Egyptian  of 
that  early  age  the  circumstances  in  the  history 
of  Abraham  and  of  Joseph  which  are  often 
regarded  as  improbable  would  appear  most 
natural,  facts  if  not  of  frequent,  yet  of  certain 
occurrence. 

M.  Chabas,  in  a treatise  on  the  same  papy- 
rus, observes — “ Ce  narrateur  devint  le  favori 
de  ce  monarque  {sc.  Asirtasin)  et  fut  pendant 
quekjue  temps  propose  a I’administration  de 


and  specially  those  of  Arabia  and  Palestine. 
It  is  an  I'.gyptian  word,  derived  from  Amu 


Hi? 


? a herdsman’s  scourge. 


The 


word  Shasous,  which  will  occur  frequently,  is 
aho  applied  to  nomads,  but  probably  with 
reference  to  their  w'andering  habits,  equivalent 
to  }5edouins.  Ilyksos  is  not  the  name  of  a 
people,  but  of  the  dynasty,  and  probably  means 
Prince  of  the  Shasous.  M.  Chabas  objects  to 
this  etymology,  but  it  is  generally  accepted,  and 
re'.ts  on  strong  grounds. 

Some  have  thought  that  the  name  is  iden- 
tical with  Abraham,  an  ojiinion  which  is  un- 
doubtedly incorrect ; but  there  is  a very  remark- 
able resemblance  between  the  names,  both  in 
form  and  meaning:  since  “shah”  means  sand, 
and  “ raham  ” means  multitude.  \Vhen  Abshah 
was  received,  Abraham  would  not  be  rejected. 


I’Egypte,  pour  en  de'velopper  les  res  sources.  Ce 
detail  nous  rappelle  le  role  que,selon  TEcriture, 
Pharaon  attribua  au  patriarche  Joseph.” 

It  may  also  be  argued  that  such  a reception 
was  far  less  likely  to  be  accorded  to  either 
of  these  Patriarchs  at  any  later  period.  The 
little  that  is  positively  known  of  the  Hyksos, 
the  masters  of  Tanis,  indicates  a certain  harsh- 
ness and  even  ferocity  of  character ; nor  after 
their  expulsion  were  the  kings  either  of  the 
eighteenth  or  nineteenth  dynasty  likely  to  look 
with  favour  upon  foreigners  bearing,  as  may 
be  probably  inferred,  a close  resemblance  to 
them  in  features  and  language.  The  presents 
too  which  the  Pharaoh  made  to  Abram  in- 
clude sheep,  oxen,  asses,  and  slaves,  all  of 
which  are  frequently  represented  on  the  early 
monuments,  and  specially  at  Benihassan,^^--  a 
fact  the  more  important  to  be  noticed  since 
V.  Bohlen  and  others  ventured  to  deny  that 
either  sheep  or  asses  were  common  in  Egypt : 
the  ass  was  looked  upon  as  unclean  under  the 
middle  and  later  Empire,  as  Typhonian,  and 
would  not  probably  have  been  presented  to  a 
favoured  stranger.  The  omission  of  horses  is 
remarkable.  The  Plyksos,  admitted  to  be 
Arabians,  probably  brought  the  horse  into 
Egypt,  and  no  animal  was  more  prized  by  the 
later  Pharaohs but  it  was  wholly  unknown, 
so  far  as  we  can  judge  from  the  monuments, 
to  the  Egyptians  of  the  twelfth  or  any  earlier 
dynasty.^^ 

In  fact,  the  notices  of  Abram’s  visit  to  Egypt 
agree  so  entirely  with  all  that  is  certainly 
known  of  the  Egyptians  under  the  twelfth 
dynasty,  and  differ  in  so  many  material  points 
from  what  is  known  from  the  monuments  or 
early  tradition  of  the  Hyksos,  and  of  the 
Middle  Empire,  that  critics  of  very  opposite 
schools  have  concurred  in  adopting  the  earlier 
date,  notwithstanding  the  difficulty  presented 
by  their  acceptance  of  the  chronology  of 
Manetho  as  given  by  Africanus  or  Josephus. 
For  my  own  part  I regard  it  as  all  but  cer- 


This  alludes  particularly  to  the  hard,  sullen 
features,  wholly  unlike  those  of  Egyptian  princes, 
found  on  the  lately-discovered  monuments  \vhich 
represent  the  Ilyksos  at  Tanis.  See  ‘ Rev. 
Archeologique,’  1861,  p.  105.  Dr.  Ebers  gives 
the  head  of  the  Sphinx  from  M.  Mariette, 
1.  c.  208. 

Sheep  are  represented  on  the  Pyramids — in 
one  inscription  3208  as  the  property  of  an 
individual.  Asses  of  great  size  and  beauty  are 
found  in  many  pictures  at  Benihassan.  I believe, 
but  may  be  mistaken,  that  they  occur  compara- 
tively seldom  on  the  monuments  of  later  periods. 

V.  Bolden  infers  from  this  omission  that 
Genesis  could  not  have  been  written  by  an 
author  conversant  with  higyi)tian  manners.  The 
true  inference  is  that  he  describes  exactly  what 
took  place  at  the  time  which  he  gives  an  account 
of.  It  is  very  ])robable  that  horses  were  first 
introduced  under  the  12th  dynasty,  after  the 
reign  of  Osirtasin.  From  that  time  the  inter- 
course with  Asia  appears  to  have  been  constant. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


447 


tain  that  Abraham  visited  Egypt  in  some  reign 
between  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  and  the 
thirteenth  dynasty,  and  most  probably  under 
one  of  the  earliest  Pharaohs  of  the  twelfth. 

(5.)  The  history  of  Joseph  belongs  to  a period 
about  two  centuries  later.’®  The  duration  of 
the  twelfth  dynasty  is  estimated  at  2 1 3 years ; 
and  as  the  monuments  were  numerous  and 
complete  in  Manetho’s  time,  it  is  probable 
that  the  regnal  years  are  drawn  from  them, 
and  that  the  numbers  are  tolerably  correct. 
It  has  been  lately  proved  beyond  all  doubt 
that  the  invasion  of  the  Hyksos  could  not 
have  taken  place  immediately  afterwards,  as 
was  formerly  supposed.  Colossal  figures  of 
great  beauty,  and  inscriptions,  have  been  found 
at  Tanis,  the  head-quarters  of  the  Hyksos, 
which  prove  that  the  fourth  king  of  the  thir- 
teenth dynasty  was  still  in  undisturbed  posses- 
sion of  that  city ; and  monumental  notices  of 
even  later  kings  are  found,  both  at  Tanis  and 
in  other  parts  of  Egypt,  scarcely  reconcileable 
with  the  presence  of  the  Arabian  invaders.’' 

So  far  as  the  monuments  and  other  Egyp- 
tian documents  are  concerned,  we  are  at 
liberty  to  place  the  visit  of  Joseph  either  to- 
wards the  end  of  the  twelfth  dynasty,  the  ear- 
lier portion  of  the  thirteenth,  or  under  the 
first  Hyksos. 

We  are  bound  to  give  special  attention  to 
this  last  alternative ; it  was  maintained  by  all 
ancient  writers,  and  is  accepted,  with  few  but 
important  exceptions,  by  modern  critics. 
Thus  Syncellus:  “ It  is  asserted  unanimously 
by  all  that  Joseph  ruled  over  Egypt  in  the 
time  of  Apophis  Eusebius,  speaking  of  the 
seventeenth  (Shepherd)  dynasty,  says  Kara 

TOVTOvs  AlyvTTTioiu  [iaaiXfVS  Icocr/'/c/)  ^eiKwrat. 

This  unanimous  consent,  however,  refers 
only  to  Josephus  and  to  those  who  drew 
their  information  exclusively  from  his  account 
of  Manetho’s  work.  It  depended  wholly 
upon  chronological  calculations,  and  it  is  of 
course  quite  clear  that,  if  the  Shepherd  dynasty 
had  lasted  some  800  years,  all  the  narrative  in- 
Genesis  would  have  fallen  within  it. 

This  necessitates  a brief  inquiry  into  the 
grounds  for  the  statements  in  IVIanetho. 

We  have  first  an  account  of  a dynasty  of 
six  Shepherd  kings:  their  names  in  Josephus 
are  Salatis,  Beon,  Apachnas,  Apophis,  Jannes, 
Assir.  The  general  accuracy  of  this  list 
may  be  admitted,  transposing  one  name  only, 
viz.,  Apophis,  who  is  known  to  have  been 
the  last  of  the  Shepherd  kings.  The  late 
discoveries  of  M.  Mariette  at  Tanis  have 
given  us  contemporary  authority  for  the 
first  name.  It  is  Semitic,  old  Arabian  pro- 
bably (2aXaTi?  = L3’*W’  mighty,  ruler),  but  the 

The  dates  are  not  certain,  but  Isaac  was 
born  some  years  after  Abraham’s  visit  to  Egypt, 
lived  180  years  (Gen.  xxxv.  28),  and  died  before 
Joseph  .was  sold  by  his  brethren. 

SeeM,  de  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  vii.  We 
owe  these  important  facts  to  M.  Mariette. 


Egyptians  transcribe  it  accurately  and  give 
the  full  title,  with  the  invariable  adjuncts 
of  Egyptian  etiquette,  “ the  Good  Deity,  star 
of  both  worlds.  Son  of  the  Sun,  Set  Shalti,’® 
beloved  by  Sutech,  Lord  of  Avaris.”'  So  that 
Salatis,  the  first  of  the  Shepherd  dynasty, 
assumed  at  once  the  state  and  title  of  the 
Pharaohs,  and  at  least  claimed  to  be  sovereign 
of  all  Egypt.  The  second  name  Beon  or 
“ Benon,”  the  m^ore  correct  reading  of  Afri- 
canus,  is  also  found.'®  Like  many  other  words 
it  has  probably  the  same  meaning in  Semitic 
and  Egyptian,  Son  of  the  Eye,  i.e.  the  beloved 
one.  T he  order  of  the  three  last  names  is 
proved  by  the  T urin  Papyrus,  and  by  the  well- 
ascertained  position  of  Apophis. 

Up  to  this  point  we  have  a solid  foundation  ; 
six  kings,  foreigners,  two  bearing  Semitic 
names,  and  recognised  by  ancient  Egyptian 
documents.  The  duration  of  the  dynasty 
may  have  been  between  two  and  three  cen- 
turies. 

But  in  addition  to  these  kings,  Manetho, 
according  to  Josephus,  states  that  a dynasty 
or  dynasties  of  Shepherds  ruled  over  all  Egypt 
r.p wards  of  500  years.  Africanus  gives  two 
dynasties,  one  lasting  284  years,  the  other 
518.  For  this  statement,  however,  no  evidence 
is  adduced.  Not  a single  name  is  given  by 
Josephus.  The  Turin  Papyrus  has  no  indi- 
cation of  the  dynasty.  The  monuments  are 
absolutely  silent.  The  statement,  indeed,  is 
in  glaring  contradiction  to  the  fact  that  Salatis 
was  the  first  and  Apophis  the  last  of  the 
Shepherd  kings.  It  involves  an  admission  of 
the  most  improbable  of  all  assumptions,  for 
which  not  a shadow  of  resemblance  can  be 
found  in  ancient  or  modern  history, — an  as- 
sumption that,  after  a total  suspension  of  the 
national  life  lasting  from  five  to  ten  centuries, 
after  a complete  overthrow  of  their  govern- 
ment, institutions,  and  religion,  the  Egyptians 
reverted  to  the  exact  point  of  civilisation  in 
which  the  invaders  found  them,  speaking  and 
writing  their  own  language  without  a trace  of 
foreign  infusion,*’  worshipping  the  old  gods 
with  the  old  rites,  retaining  their  old  theology, 

The  group  is  noticeable  jj 

It  is  found  also  in  a mutilated  form  in  the 
Turin  Papyrus. 

In  the  Papyrus  Sailier  i,  pi.  i,  1.  7. 

I'V  p.  The  Eg}fptian  is  Beben-an,  which 
Dr.  Ebers  derives  from  Ben,  “son,”  and  “fi;;,” 
the  eye.  The  Egyptians  have  the  well-known 
Hebrew  and  classical  term,  “child  of  the  eye  ” 
for  “ darling.” 

21  The  strong  infusion  of  Semitic  belongs  to 
the  age  of  Rimeses  11.  The  inscriptions  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty  are  nearly  free  from  it.  A 
very  remarkable  confirmation  of  the  above  state- 
ments is  found  in  the  account  of  the  mummy  of 
Aah-hotep,  mother  of  Ahmes  I.,  given  by  M.  Ma- 
riette, ‘ Musee  de  Boulaq,’  p.  254: — “ L’Egypte 
est  revenue  sous  la  xvii™®  dynastie  avec  la  plus 
singuliere  persistance  au  style  de  la  xi“®.” 


448  ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


and  recognising  in  the  descendants  of  their 
old  Pharaohs  the  inheritors  of  all  their  titles 
and  prerogatives.  It  seems  quite  incredible 
that  such  a statement  should  have  been  adopted, 
as  adopted  it  has  been  by  critics  remarkable 
for  sagacity,  and  some  for  caution  approaching 
to  scepticism.  It  is  the  only  ground  for  the 
assumption  that  Joseph  must  needs  have 
visited  Egypt  while  it  was  under  the  dominion 
of  the  Hyksos. 

A\  e do  not  attach  much  importance  to 
the  chronology  of  this  remote  period,  so  far 
as  it  rests  on  Egyptian  documents : it  is  to  a 
great  extent  conjectural,  and  incapable  of  proof 
or  disproof.  But  it  is  a remarkable  fact  that 
the  only  inscription  on  Egyptian  monuments 
of  any  age  which  mentions  an  era  distinct 
from  the  regnal  year  of  the  actual  sovereign, 
is  found  on  a monument  referring  to  the 
Hyksos.  The  importance  of  this  inscription 
was  pointed  out  by  M.  de  Rouge, ^ and  it  has 
been  carefully  examined  by  M.  Chabas.  The 
personage  who  set  up  the  tablet  was  an 
official  of  high  rank.  Governor  of  Tanis  under 
Raineses  II.  The  date  which  he  gives  is  the 
four  hundredth  year  from  the  era  of  Set  Nubte, 
i.e.  Set  the  golden,  under  the  reign  of  a 
Hyksos  king,  Set-aa-Pehti,  ue.  Set  the  mighty 
and  victorious,  d'here  is  of  course  a wide 
field  for  conjecture  here.  The  reign  of 
Rameses  was  a very  long  one  (see  further 
on,  p.  464),  and  the  Hyksos  king  is  not  posi- 
tively iclentitied.  AVe  may  consider  it  as 
almost  certain  that  the  Egyptian  governor, 
a descendant  of  the  Hyksos,  believed  that 
400  years  had  elapsed  between  the  era  of 
Set  and  some  year  in  the  reign  of  Rameses. 
AVheii,  again,  we  consider  the  analogy  of  all 
ancient  eras,  and  the  natural  course  of  events, 
we  are  all  but  forced  to  infer  that  this  era 
must  coincide  with  the  formal  recognition  of 
Set  as  the  chief  object  of  worship  to  the 
dynasty.  If  the  Papyrus  Sallier  were  our 
only  authority,  that  recognition  might  be  as- 
signed to  Apophis:  but  the.  late  discovery  of 
the  style  and  title  of  the  first  of  the  Shepherd 
Kings,  Salatis  the  beloved  of  Set,^  proves 
that  the  establishment  of  Set  worship  at 
d'anis  was  far  more  ancient,  contemporary  in 
fact  with  the  inauguration  of  the  Shepherd 
dynasty. 

d'he  inferences  from  these  facts  tally  very 
remarkably  with  the  chronology  which  upon 
the  whole  appears  to  be  best  supported  by 

‘ Revue  Archeologique,’  Feb.  1864.  M. 
Mariette  sent  a copy  to  the  same  Review,  March, 
1865.  M.  Clialias  lias  two  articles  on  it  printed 
in  the  ‘ Zeitschrift,’  April  and  May,  1865.  The 
tablet  was  found  in  a mass  of  ruins  in  the 
sanctuary  of  the  great  temple  at  San,  i.e. 
Tanis. 

It  is  probable  that  Set-aa-pehti,  i.e.  Set 
the  mighty  and  victorious,  was  either  the 
Egyptian  translation  of  the  Semitic  Set-Shalt, 
Set  the  mighty  ruler,  or  a second  title  borne  in 
accordance  with  Egyptian  usage. 


Biblical  and  documental  evidence.  The  end 
of  the  reign  of  Rameses  is  most  probably 
about  1340  B.c.  From  this,  400  years  would 
bring  us  to  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  about  1750  b.c.  The  expulsion  of 
the  Hyksos  being  taken  about  1500,  we  have 
thus  250  years  for  their  dynasty,  and  250 
more  would  bring  us  to  the  time  of  Abraham. 
Such  arguments  are  of  course  open  to  objec- 
tions, nor  are  they  given  here  as  conclusive, 
but  they  have  weight  when  they  harmonize 
with  a system  resting  on  wholly  independent 
grounds.  One  point  at  least  is  clear:  if  the 
date  is  accepted  it  involves  a considerable  re- 
duction in  the  length  of  the  period  assigned 
by  Lepsius  and  Brugsch  to  the  dynasties 
preceding  the  age  of  Rameses. 

(6.)  But  the  name  of  Apophis  is  specially 
mentioned  as  that  of  the  king  by  whom  Joseph 
was  received.  The  question  whether  this  is 
possible  or  probable  may  now  be  decided  by 
the  positive  evidence  of  contemporary  inscrip- 
tions,^'*  and  of  the  ancient  papyrus,  Sallier  i. 

AA^e  know  now  that  Apophis  was  the  con- 
temporary of  Rasekenen,  the  immediate  pre- 
decessor of  Aahmes  I.,  and  that  Aahmes  cap- 
tured Avaris,  the  capital  or  chief  fortress  of 
Apophis,  and  afterwards  drove  out  all  the 
adherents  of  the  hostile  dynasty,  pursuing 
them  as  far  as  Palestine. 

This  fact  is  conclusive.  Joseph  was  a very 
young  man  when  he  came  first  under  the 
notice  of  Pharaoh,  and  lived  to  an  advanced 
age,  no  years,  the  utmost  limit,  as  has  been 
lately  shown,^  of  Egyptian  life.  He  would 
therefore  have  long  outlived  Apophis,  but  no 
one  supposes  that  he  could  have  lived  a pros- 
perous and  powerful  man  after  the  extermina- 
tion of  the  dynasty  by  which  he  was  raised  to 
the  highest  rank  in  the  state.  Nor  do  other 
notices  of  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  at  all  accord 
with  what  is  known  of  Apophis. 

Apophis  was  not,  properly  speaking.  Lord 
of  all  Egypt.  Upper  Egypt  was  governed  by 
ah  independent  dynasty ; and  the  very  terms 
which  describe  the  extent  of  his  infiuence 
prove  the  limits  of  his  dominion.  Rasekenen, 
his  antagonist,  retained  possession  of  the  The- 
baid  to  the  end  of  his  life,  and  buildings  of 
great  extent  were  erected  by  him  in  Mem- 
phis and  Thebes  after  the  termination  of  a 
successful  campaign  against  Apophis.^®  The 

The  inscriptions  are  found  in  the  sepulchres 
of  officers  who  served  under  Ra-sekenen  and  the 
first  Pharaohs  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty.  They 
are  given  by  Lepsius,  ‘Denkmaler,  ’ and  have 
been  explained  by  M.  de  Rouge  (whose  treatise 
on  the  tomb  of  Aahmes  marked  a crisis  in  the 
advance  of  Pigyptian  studies),  and  are, quoted 
repeatedly  in  M.  Brugseh’s  ‘ Histoire  d’Egypte.’ 

By  Mr.  Goodwin,  in  the  second  part  of  the 
‘ Melanges  egyptologiques  ’ of  M.  Chabas.  The 
argument  is  good  for  Egypt,  not  for  the  patri- 
archs, living  the  simple  life  and  breathing  the 
pure  air  of  the  desert. 

26  See  Brugsch,  ‘ Die  Geographic  des  alten 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


449 


Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was  certainly  in  a different 
position. 

We  have  also  evidence  touching  the  general 
condition  of  Egypt  under  the  dynasty  or 
which  Apophis  was  the  most  powerful  king, 
and  to  whose  reign  the  notice  specially  applies. 
The  account  given  by  Manetho  of  their  devas- 
tations is  probably  exaggerated.  It  is  certain 
that  they  did  not  deface  the  monuments  to 
the  extent  which  is  generally  supposed.  The 
pyramids,  the  obelisk  at  Heliopolis,  colossal 
figures  and  inscriptions  even  at  Tanis  (see 
above),  and  monuments  in  Middle  and  Upper 
Egypt,  still  bear  witness  in  their  favour.  'I'he 
Labyrinth  in  the  Eayoum,  and  the  great 
temples  at  Memphis  and  Heliopolis,  were  cer- 
tainly left  by  them  uninjured.  Still  the  im- 
pression made  by  their  ravages  upon  the 
Egyptians  was  profound : the  name  by  which 
they  were  designated  means  pestilential  deadly 
enemies.^^  From  an  inscription  at  Karnak,^^ 
we  find  that,  under  the  nineteenth  dynasty, 
when  the  Egyptians  would  describe  a period 
of  dreadful  calamity,  they  could  find  no  pre- 
cedent so  strong  and  apt  as  that  of  the  Shep- 
herd Kings.  “ One  had  not  seen  anything  like 
it  even  in  the  time  of  the  kings  of  Lower 
Egypt,  when  the  land  of  Egypt  was  in  their 
power,  when  wretchedness  prevailed,  in  the 
time  when  the  kings  of  Upper  Egypt  had  not 
power  to  repel  them.”  I'he  account  in  the 
Papyrus  Sallier  I.  quite  agrees  with  this,  show- 
ing that  the  reign  of  Apophis  was  cruel  and 
oppressive  throughout,  and  occupied  towards 
the  end,  as  we  have  seen,  by  an  internecine 
war. 

Again,  no  fact  about  Apophis  is  more  cer- 
tain than  that  he  repudiated  the  national  reli- 
gion.^^  The  testimony  of  the  Papyrus  Sallier 
is  clear  and  explicit : “ the  King  Apepi  adopted 


yEgyptens,’  p.  i8o.^  M.  Chabas  in  a treatise, 

‘ Lcs  Pasteurs  en  Egypte,’  published  within  the 
last  two  months,  assumes  that  three  Pharaohs 
bore  the  name  Ra-sekenen,  Ra  the  conqueror. 
If  this  were  granted,  it  would  leave  all  other 
arguments  untouched. 

See  M.  Chabas,  ‘ Mel.  egypt.,’  i. 

See  ‘ Revue  Archeologique  ’ for  July  and 
August,  1867.  M,  de  Rouge  gives  a full  account 
of  the  inscription,  which  has  been  lately  pub- 
lished by  M.  Duemichen,  ‘ Historische  In- 
schriften.’  I observe  that  the  reference  to  the 
Shepherd  kings  is  adopted  by  Dr.  Ebers, 

‘ yEgypten,’  See.,  p.  207. 

The  name  Apepi,  the  Egyptian  form  of  the 
woi'd,  signifies  the  great  serpent,  the  enemy  of 
Ra  and  Osiris.  It  was  probably  given  to  this 
king,  or  assumed  by  him,  to  mark  his  antagonism 
to  the  old  national  religion.  It  has,  however, 
been  shov/n  by  M.  de  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’ 
p.  9 and  p.  45,  that  the  worship  of  Sutech,  or 
Set,  as  the  tutelary  god  of  lower  Egypt,  dates 
from  the  ancient  empire.  The  peculiarity  of 
Apepi,  and  probably  of  his  predecessors,  would 
seem  to  be  his  exclusive  devotion  to  this  deity, 
who  represented  force  and  destruction. 


Sutech  as  his  God,  he  did  not  serve  any  God 
which  was  in  the  whole  land.”  Sutech,  or  Set, 
in  later  ages  the  representative  of  the  evil 
principle  Typhon,  is  identified,  and  was  cer- 
tainly confounded  with  Baal  of  the  Phoe- 
nicians. The  only  monument  on  which  the 
name  of  Apophis  is  found  calls  him  “ the  be- 
loved of  Sutech :”  an  appellation,  as  we  have 
seen,  borne  by  the  first  Shepherd  king,  and 
probably  common  to  all  the  dynasty.  If  we 
accept  the  probable  tradition  of  Porphyry 
(‘  de  Abst.’  II,  55),  that  Aahmes  1.  suppressed 
human  sacrifices  offered  under  the  Shepherd 
kings  at  Heliopolis,  the  form  of  worship  must 
have  been  Typhonian,  and  in  all  probability  of 
Phcenician  origin.^^ 

Each  and  all  of  these  points  are  quite  irre- 
concileable  with  the  account  in  Genesis.  The 
Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was  unquestionably  Lord 
of  all  Egypt:  the  country  was  in  a state  of 
great  pi'osperity  : the  religion,  all  the  usages 
and  institutions  of  the  Pharaoh  and  his  cour- 
tiers, were  those  of  ancient  Egypt.  There 
is  not  a single  fact^^  in  the  history  of  Joseph 
which  is  not  illustrated  by  the  inscriptions 
and  sculptures  of  the  best  and  most  pros- 
perous periods  of  Egypt ; not  one  which  gives 
the  least  indication  of  the  predominance  of  a 
foreign  religion,  habits,  or  race.^^ 

The  question,  however,  still  remains,  if 
Joseph  did  not  enter  Egypt  when  the  Shep- 
herds were  there,  did  his  visit  and  the  immi- 
gration of  the  Israelites  take  place  before  or 
after  that  period  ? We  may  assume  that  it 
did  not  occur  at  a later  time.  With  very  few'’ 
exceptions,  critics  agree  that  the  Israelites 
were  in  Egypt  at  the  accession  of  the  eigh- 
teenth dynasty.  If  before,  we  have  still  to 
inquire  at  what  time. 

This  part  of  the  inquiry  is  beset  with  con- 
siderable difficulties.  We  have  no  means  of 
ascertaining  the  duration  of  the  interval  be- 
tween the  last  sovereign  of  the  twelfth  dynasty 
and  the  invasion  of  the  Shepherds.  The  titles 
of  forty-eight  kings  of  the  thirteenth  dynasty 
are  given  in  the  papyrus  of  Turin;  and  the 
names  of  three  of  them  bear  a very  remark- 

The  inscription  is  given  by  Burton,  ‘Ex- 
cerpta  Hieroglyphica,’  at  San  {i.e.  Tanis),  No.  7, 
pi.  XV. ; and  by  Brugsch,  ‘ Geog.  Inschr.,’  p.  88, 
No.  576.  Like  Salatis,  Apepi  takes  the  style  of 
a legitimate  Pharaoh. 

Sutech  is  identified  with  Baal  in  numerous 
inscriptions,  and  is  represented  specially  as  the 
chief  deity  of  the  Cheta,  masters  of  northern 
Syria  under  the  nineteenth  dynasty. 

32  This  statement  is  strongly  corroborated  by 
the  work  of  Dr.  Ebers. 

33  It  must  be  remembered  that  in  Joseph’s 
time  the  Egyptians  would  not  eat  with  shep- 
herds ; they  were  an  abomination  to  them.  This, 
of  itself,  is  almost,  if  not  quite,  conclusive  against 
the  supposition  that  he  was  at  the  court  of  a 
Shepherd  king.  M.  Chabas  has  shown  this  to 
be  a true  and  monumental  designation  of  the 
invaders. 


450 


ON  TI-IE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


able  resemblance  to  the  name  given  by 
Pharaoh  to  Joseph.^^  There  appear  to  be 
good  grounds  for  the  opinion  that  they  were 
driven  out  of  Lower  Egypt,  and  retained  a 
partial  and  precarious  hold  on  Middle  or 
Upper  Egypt  within  a century  or  two  after 
their  accession ; and  if  so,  Joseph,  at  the  latest, 
may  have  lived  under  one  of  the  early  kings, 
such  as  the  Sebekhotep,  whose  colossal  statue 
111  the  Louvre  belongs  to  the  best  age  of 
Egyptian  art,  and  evidently  also  to  a period  of 
unbroken  prosperity. 

It  is  however  scarcely  possible  to  resist 
the  impression  made  by  monuments  cf  the 
twelfth  dynasty,  which  seem  to  connect  the 
history  of  Abraham,  as  we  have  already  seen 
(p.  446),  and  still  more  specially  that  of  Joseph, 
with  this  m.cst  important  and  interesting  period 
of  Egypt. 

(7.)  We  have  the  fact  that  the  princes 
of  this  great  dynasty  stood  in  very  special 
relation  to  On  or  Heliopolis,  d'he  tem- 
ple there  was  built  by  Osirtasin  I.,  whose 
name  and  official  title,  Osirtasin  Cheperkara, 
stand  out  in  clear  and  perfect  characters 
on  the  oldest  and  most  beautiful  obelisk  of 
Egypt,  still  standing  at  On,  the  only  but 
certain  evidence  of  the  magnihcence  of  the 
temple.  The  priest  of  that  city  and  temple, 
judging  from  the  general  usage  of  the  ancient 
Pharaohs,^^  was  in  all  probability  a near  rela- 
tive of  the  sovereign.  We  have  abundant 
notices  on  the  monuments  of  that  dynasty 
which  agree  with  the  intimations  of  Gene- 
sis ; proving,  on  the  one  hand,  that  the  forms 
of  worship  were  purely  Egyptian,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  the  fundamental  principles 
which  underlie  those  forms,  and  which  be- 
ong,  as  we  may  not  doubt,  to  the  primeval 
religion  of  humanity,  were  still  distinctly 
recognised,  although  they  were  blended  with 
speculation  and  superstitious  errors  U®  they 


Viz.  Zaf.,  t.e.  food.  See  note  on  the  name 
Zat'nath  Paaneah. 

See  M.  cle  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  34. 
Nearly  all  the  chief  priests  bear  the  titles 
Suten  sa  or  Suten  rech  — son,  grandson,  or 
relative  of  the  king.  Ewald  justly  observes  that 
Heliopolis  was,  so  to  speak,  the  true  sacerdotal 
city  and  university  of  Northern  Egypt.  Ge- 
schichte,  ii.,  p.  51. 

See  especially  Lepsius,  ‘Allteste  Texte  des 
Todtenbuchs.  ’ The  earliest  known  text  of 
the  seventeenth  chapter  of  the  Ritual  be- 
longs to  the  eleventh  dynasty.  Its  import- 
ance is  recognised  as  the  most  ancient 
statement  of  Egyptian  views  as  to  the  origin 
anrl  government  of  the  universe.  It  undoubt- 
edly indicates  the  previous  existence  of  a pure 
Monotheism,  of  which  it  retains  the  great 
principles,  the  unity,  eternity,  self-existence  of 
the  unknown  Deity.  I'iach  age  witnessed  some 
corruption  and  amplification  of  the  ancient 
religion,  and  corresponding  interpolations  of  the 
old  texts.  The  very  earliest  has  several  glosses, 
and  the  text  taken  apart  from  them  approaches 


were  moreover  associated  with  a system 
which,  on  many  essential  points,  inculcated 
a sound  and  even  delicate  morality.  In  the 
priest  of  On  a Shepherd  king  would  have  seen 
the  antagonist  of  his  ov/n  special  superstition, 
the  last  man  in  Egypt  whom  he  would  have 
brought  into  connection  with  his  favourite 
and  prime  minister;  to  an  Osirtasin  and  to 
Joseph  himself  the  alliance  would  present 
every  inducement  of  policy,  interest,  and  suit- 
ableness. 

(8.)  The  tombs  at  Benihassan  have  already 
supplied  us  with  illustrations  of  the  history  of 
Abraham,  which  are  equally  applicable  to  that 
of  Joseph.  The  inscriptions,  which  describe 
the  character  of  Chnumhotep  (a  near  relative 
and  favourite  of  Osirtasin  I.  and  his  immediate 
successor),  and  the  recorded  events  of  his 
government,  remind  the  reader  irresistibly  of 
the  young  Hebrew.  It  is  said  of  him^'^  ‘‘he 
injured  no  little  child  : he  oppressed  no  widow ; 
he  detained  for  his  own  purpose  no  fisher- 
man : took  from  his  work  no  shepherd ; no 
overseer's  men  were  taken.  There  was  no 
beggar  in  his  days : no  one  starved  in  his  time. 
When  years  of  famine  occurred  he  ploughed 
all  the  lands  of  the  district  producing  abun- 
dant food : no  one  was  starved  in  it : he  treated 
the  widow  as  a woman  with  a husband  to 
protect  her.”  The  mention  of  famine,  and  of 
unusual  precautions  to  guard  against  its  re- 
currence, together  with  other  obvious  traits  of 
resemblance,  led  some  critics  a few  years  since 
to  see  in  Chnumhotep  the  Egyptian  original 
of  Joseph.  At  present  the  antecedents  and 
connections  of  that  personage  are  too  well 
known  to  admit  of  any  confusion;  but  the 
probability  must  be  admitted  that  a king,  be- 
longing to  a dynasty  which  sought  and  re- 
warded such  characteristics  in  the  great  offi- 
cers of  state,  should  have  advanced  Joseph  to 
a position  such  as  the  Bible  describes,  such 
too  as  the  old  Egyptian  papyrus  already  quoted 
(p.  446)  shows  to  have  been  then  within  the 
reach  of  a foreigner. 

(9.)  There  are  still  more  specific  reasons  for 
fixing  on  this  period.  According  to  Genesis, 
one  permanent  consequence  of  the  visitation 
was  a new  division  of  all  Egypt,  a redistri- 
bution of  the  land  and  property : probably,  as 
is  pointed  out  by  the  Bishop  of  Ely,®*^  a neces- 
sary and  politic  measure,  after  the  complete 
break-down  of  the  ancient  system.  Now  we 
are  told  by  Herodotus  and  Diodorus  that  an 
ancient  Egyptian  king  so  divided  the  lands, 
and  that  the  same  system  continued  to  their 
time.  This  king  must  evidently  have  be- 
longed to  a native  dynasty : had  the  division 
been  made  by  a foreigner  and  invader,  it 

very  nearly  to  the  truth  as  revealed  in  the 
Bible. 

Lepsius,  ‘Denkmiiler,’  ii.  pl.  122.  Dr. 
Bircli,  who  gives  an  interlinear  translation  in 
Bunsen’s  ‘Egypt,’  vol.  v.  p.  726-729. 

See  notes  on  Genesis. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


451 


would  have  been  swept  away  when  the  line  of 
tlie  so-called  legitimate  Pharaohs  was  restored. 
Those  two  historians  indeed  attribute  the 
division  to  the  sovereign  called  Sesostris  by 
Herodotus,  and  Sesoosis  by  Diodorus:  an 
appellation  which  was  afterwards  appropriated 
to  Rameses  11.,  or  perhaps  to  his  father,  Seti  I. 
Hut  it  is  well  known  that  the  exploits  of  the 
great  sovereigns  who  preceded  Rameses  II. 
were  transferred  to  him  by  popular  tradition 
it  is  certain  also  that  the  division  into  nomes, 
and  the  exemption  of  the  priestly  lands  from 
taxation,  were  anterior  to  him  by  many  cen- 
turies. The  system  appears  to  have  been  coeval 
with  the  monarchy,  certainly  with  the  pyra- 
mids, but  in  all  probability  was  modified,  and 
extended,  if  not  completed,  under  the  great 
Pharaohs  of  the  twelfth  dynasty.  No  occa- 
sion can  be  pointed  out  more  likely  to  have 
suggested  it,  and  to  have  enabled  the  Pha- 
raoh to  accomplish  it,  than  that  described  in 
Genesis. 

Again,  we  learn  from  Egyptian  sources  that, 
under  Amenemha  III.,  in  some  respects 
the  greatest  king  of  this  noble  dynasty, 
whose  reign  is  separated  from  the  first  by  an 
interval  of  some  two  centuries  (see  above)'  a 
work  of  extraordinary  magnitude  and  import- 
ance was  undertaken  and  completed : one  that 
proves  at  once  the  terror  caused  by  the  pre- 
vious liability  to  famines,  and  the  enormous 
resources,  skill,  and  forethought  of  the  Pha- 
raoh. Amenemha  III.  first  established  a 
complete  system  of  dykes,  canals,  locks,  and 
reservoirs,  by  which  the  inundations  of  the 
Nile  were  henceforth  regulated.'*®  The  im- 
mense artificial  lake  of  Mceris  in  the  Fayoum 
was  made  by  his  orders;  it  communicated 
with  the  Nile  by  a canal,  received  the  over- 
flowing waters  at  the  time  of  the  inundation, 
and  secured  the  complete  irrigation  of  the 
adjoining  nomes  in  the  dry  season.  M.  Li- 
nant  de  Bellefonds,^^  to  whose  industry  and 

Josephus  expressly  states  that  Manetho 
gives  the  name  of  Sesostris  to  the  third  king  of 
the  twelfth  dynasty,  whom  he  represents  as  con- 
queror of  Asia.  The  researches  of  M.  Mariette 
have  lately  shown  that  Rameses  II.  was  in  the 
habit  of  appropriating  the  exploits  of  his  prede- 
cessors, and  substituting  his  own  name  on  the 
monuments  (see  below,  p.  465).  This  evil  habit 
was  adopted  by  his  son  Merneptah.^ 

See  Brugsch,  ‘ Histoire  d’Egypte,’ p.  69. 
Lepsius  found  a Nilometer  of  Amenemha  and 
several  accurate  notices  of  the  height  of  the 
inundations  under  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth 
dynasties  at  Semneh  and  Kumme. 

‘ Memoire  sur  le  Lac  Mceris  Alexandrie, 
1843.  Mceris  is  not  the  name  of  a king,  but 
he  Egyptian  word  “mer,”  a lake  or  reservoir. 
Fayoum  is  the  Arabic  corruption  of  the  Coptic 
ctlOJUL,  an  old  Egyptian  word,  “the  sea.” 
According  to  Ptolemy,  near  the  lake  was  a 
place  called  Bakkhis  or  Banchis.  M.  Brugsch 
identifies  this  with  a place  called  Pi-aneh,  “ the 
house  of  life,”  which  is  found  on  the  monuments 


ability  we  are  indebted  for  ascertaining  the 
exact  site  and  extent  of  this  lake,  observes 
that  the  restoration  of  this  magnificent  work 
would  be  one  of  the  greatest  benefits  that 
could  be  conferred  on  modern  Egypt.  Under 
Amenemha  III.  also  the  great  labyrinth,  the 
most  stupendous  work  of  that  great  age,  was 
erected.  This  building  was  probably  con- 
nected with  the  same  series  of  events : it 
consisted  of  a vast  number  of  halls  and  build- 
ings, in  which  the  representatives  of  the  Egyp- 
tian nomes  were  assembled  periodically  to 
consult  on  subjects  of  national  interest ; and 
certainly  not*  without  a special  view  to  the 
conservation  of  a system  which  afforded  the 
best — indeed  the  only  real— security  against 
the  recurrence  of  the  most  formidable  calamity 
to  which  this  people  could  be  exposed.  At 
no  period  would  an  Egyptian  king  have  such 
special  reasons  for  undertaking  these  works  : 
at  none  would  he  have  such  peculiar  oppor- 
tunities of  carrying  them  into  effect  — the 
reasons  enforced  by  the  seven  years  of  famine, 
and  the  means  supplied  by  the  reconstruction 
of  the  territorial  organisation,  which  placed 
the  whole  resources  of  the  nation  at  the  dis- 
posal of  this  Pharaoh."*^ 

In  the  absence  of  positive  evidence  for  or 
against  any  hypotheses,  these  coincidences 
may  justify  us  in  regarding  it  at  least  as  a 
very  probable  conjecture  that  the  visit  of 
Abraham  may  have  taken  place  under  the  first 
king  of  the  dynasty,  and  that  of  Joseph  under 
Amenemha  III.,  the  Pharaoh  who  is  repre- 
sented on  the  lately-discovered  table  of  Aby- 
dos  as  the  last  great  king  of  all  Egypt  in  the 
ancient  empire,  and,  as  such,  receiving  divine 
honours  from  his  descendant  Rameses. 

(10.)  But  if  Joseph  and  the  Israelites  were 
received  and  treated  with  great  favour  by  the 
native  dynasty,  it  may  seem  improbable  that 
they  should  have  remained  undisturbed  under 
the  Shepherd  kings.  We  have  of  course  no 
conclusive  evidence  either  for  or  against  the 
objection;  but  we  have  facts  enough  to  show 
that  it  is  quite  possible  that  they  may  have 
occupied  a relative  position  under  the  fo- 
reigners not  diflering  widely  from  that  in 
which  the  invasion  found  them.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  the  invaders  directed  their 
assaults  at  once  against  the  great  cities  cf 
Egypt;  both  to  enrich  themselves  with  the 
spoil,  and  to  secure  their  dominion  over  the 
lands.  We  may  also  feel  pretty  confident 
that  they  overthrew  the  national  forms  of 
worship,  although,  as  we  have  above  shown. 


in  connexion  with  Sebek,  the  tutelary  deity  of 
the  district.  See  ‘ Geographic  des  Alten 
Avgyptens,’  p.  233.  This  name  has  a special 
interest  for  its  bearing  upon  Joseph’s  Egyptian 
name  Zafnath  Paaneah,  “ the  food  of  life.” 

■*2  The-copper  mines  at  Wady  Muglftira  were 
worked  under  this  prince ; there  is  a curious 
notice  of  the  expedition  in  Brugsch,  ‘PI.  E.,’ 
p.  69.  See  also  ‘ Introduction’  to  Exodus. 

F F 2 


452 


ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


there  is  no  evidence  that  they  destroyed  or 
defaced  the  temples.  The  Israelites,  then  a 
small  colony  lately  established,  would  offer  no 
temptation  to  their  cupidity;  no  buildings, 
no  temples,  no  elaborate  ritual  which  could 
provoke  their  animosity.  It  must  also  be 
borne  in  mind  that  all  historians  are  agreed 
that  the  invasion  of  the  Hyksos  was  most 
probably  preceded  by  peaceful  visits  of  the 
chieftains  of  Arabia  and  the  adjoining  districts 
of  Palestine,  of  which  we  have  numerous 
traces  in  early  monuments;  from  them  they 
may  have  learned  at  once  to  appreciate  the 
riches  of  Egypt,  and  to  ascertain  the  state  of 
the  country.  The  jealousy  with  which  such 
visitors  were  watched  is  distinctly  noted  in 
Genesis : every  nomad  company  might  be 
suspected  of  a desire  to  see  the  nakedness — 
that  is,  to  spy  the  assailable  approaches  to  the 
land ; a jealousy  of  which  also  we  have  dis- 
tinct notices  in  the  story  of  Saneha  and  the 
inscriptions  of  Benihassan.  But  when  the 
fathers  of  those  invaders  visited  Egypt  in 
the  time  of  the  great  famine,  which,  as  we 
know  from  other  documents,  wnould  draw 
them,  with  their  flocks  and  herds,  to  the 
frontier,  the  person  with  whom  they  were 
brought  into  contact,  and  for  whom  they 
would  feel  the  deepest  reverence,  was  the 
master  of  the  granaries,  the  distributor  of 
food.  Joseph  could  not  be  unknown  by  name 
or  by  character  to  the  early  Hyksos,  who 
were  little  likely  to  disturb  the  kindred  and 
descendants  of  the  man  to  whom  they  were 
indebted  for  their  lives.  It  is  also  evident 
that  the  rapid  multiplication  of  the  Israelites 
might  be  favoured  by  the  withdrawal  of  the 
native  princes  from  their  immediate  neigh- 
bourhood : they  would  be  relieved  from  a 
superintendence  ever  vigilant  and  suspicious. 
It  is  not,  however,  necessary  to  assume  any 
special  favour  shown  to  the  Israelites  by  the 
Shepherds ; the  absence  of  any  motive  for 
cruel  and  oppressive  treatment  is  obvious,  and 
suffices  for  the  removal  of  all  objection  on  this 
score  to  tlie  historical  combination  we  have 
proposed. 

(i  I.)  We  are  nowin  a position  to  consider 
the  question  at  what  period  in  Egyptian  history 
the  liixodus  took  place.  Some  points  of  im- 
portance may  be  assumed  as  all  but  certain, 
there  being  no  difference  of  opinion  between 
Egyptologers,  (i.)  At  whatever  period  the 
Israelites  came  into  Egypt,  they  were  settled 
in  the  district  assigned  to  them  when  the  first 
sovereign  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty  conquered 
and  expelled  the  Shepherd  dynasty.  (2.)  d'he 
I'ixodus  is  admitted  to  have  taken  place  under 
the  eighteenth  or  nineteenth  dynasty,  under 
which  is  a question  to  be  settled,  but  certainly 
under  the  one  or  the  other.  (3.)  d he  dates  re- 
ferring to  this  period  are  still  generally  uncer- 
tain, they  rest  on  doubtful  calculations ; it  may 

See  the  account  of  the  admission  of 
Edomites  under  Merneptah,  infra,  p.  486. 


suffice  to  quote  the  words  of  M.  de  Rouge, 
adopted  by  M.  Ghabas,  ‘ M Ganges  egypto- 
logiques,’  ii.  p.  112  : “On  restera  dans  la 
limite  du  probable  en  pla9ant  Seti  I.  vers  1500, 
et  le  commencement  de  la  ly^dynastie  vers 
le  18®  siecle.  Mais  il  n’y  aurait  nullement 
a s etonner  si  Ton  s’etait  trompe  de  deux  cents 
ans  dans  cette  estimation,  tant  les  documents 
sont  vicies  dans  Thistoire,  ou  incomplets  stir 
les  monuments.”  In  a work  of  great  interest 
and  importance  published  lately  by  M.  Ghabas, 
he  reiterates  this  assertion,  and  rejects  all  the 
dates  derived  from  astronomical  notices.  See 
‘ Voyage  d’un  Egyptien,’  p.  26.'*^  This  un- 
certainty must  always  be  borne  in  mind : the 
dates  derived  from  Egyptian  monuments  may 
be  implicitly  relied  upon  so  far  as  they  go, 
but,  with  one  exception  already  noticed,  they 
never  refer  to  any  general  epoch,  and  do  not 
supply  materials  for  a complete  chronological 
arrangement  of  events  under  either  of  the 
dynasties  with  which  we  are  at  present  con- 
cerned. 

Egyptian  scholars  have  hitherto  been  divided 
between  two  opinions,  some  recognising  in 
Aahmes,  or  Amosis,  the  first  sovereign  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty,  the  first  persecutor  of 
the  Israelites,  and  in  one  of  his  descendants 
the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus;  others  regard- 
ing the  third  sovereign  of  the  nineteenth 
dynasty,  i.e.  Rameses  II.,  the  Sesostris  of  the 
Greeks,  and  his  son  Merneptah,  or  his  grand- 
son Seti,  as  the  contemporaries  of  Moses. 
We  will  examine  the  grounds  on  which  each 
of  these  opinions  rests ; and  proceeding  in 
order  of  time  will  first  inquire  into  the  claims 
of  the  eighteenth  dynasty 

(12.)  The  circumstances  under  which 
Aahmes  I.  the  Amosis  of  Josephus,  obtained 
possession  of  Lower  Egypt,  make  it  extremely 
probable  that  he  should  have  adopted  such 
measures  towards  the  Israelites  as  are  de- 
scribed in  the  beginning  of  Exodus. 

His  accession  constitutes  one  of  the  most 
important  epochs  in  Egyptian  history  ; with 
it  terminates  the  broken  and  confused  period 
of  the  ancient  Empire;  with  it  begins  a 
continuous  series  of  events  under  succes- 
sive dynasties.  Previous  to  his  accession,  or 
shortly  afterwards,  he  married  an  Ethiopian 
Princess,  Nefertari,  whose  name  and  portrait 
are  found  on  many  monuments,'*^  in  which  she 

A single  clear  notice  of  a solar  eclip.se  would 
settle  a vast  number  of  questions.  M.  Ghabas 
has  completely  shown  that  hitherto  none  has 
been  found  (sec  ‘ Zcitschrift,’  May,  1868).  On 
the  various  attempts  to  establish  a system  on 
astronomical  calculations,  see  Mr.  Browne  in 
Kitto’s  ‘ Cyclopiedia,’  vol.  iii.  p.  52. 

One  of  the  most  striking  portraits  of 
Nefertari  is  the  first  plate  in  the  third  volume  of 
Lepsius’  ‘ I )enkmaler.  ’ See  also  a coloured  tablet 
in  the  British  Museum.  She  is  there  represented 
as  jet  black,  but  not  Avith  negro  features.  She 
was  probably  of  the  higher  Nubian  race.  It 
has  been  observed  that  the  portraits  of  the  earlier 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


453 


is  represented  as  a personage  of  singular  dis- 
tinction, daughter,  wife,  sister,  and  mother  of 
kings,  and  worshipped  centuries  after  her 
death  as  a tutelary  deity.  It  is  inferred, 
with  great  probability,  that  this  alliance  with 
Ethiopia,  which  under  the  ancient  empire  had 
furnished  large  contingents  of  auxiliary  troops 
to  Egypt, supplied  Aahmes  with  resources 
which  enabled  him  soon  after  his  accession  to 
undertake  an  expedition  against  the  Northern 
dynasty.  That  expedition  was  completely  suc- 
cessful: it  terminated  the  struggle.  A con- 
temporary inscription  on  the  tomb  of  one  of 
his  chief  officers  (the  naval  captain  Ahmes), 
gives  an  account  of  the  siege  of  Avaris,  of  a 
battle  fought  in  its  vicinity,  and  of  the  capture 
of  that  city,  the  stronghold  of  Apepi.  It  also 
informs  us  that  the  expulsion  of  the  enemy 
was  followed  by  an  expedition  to  the  borders 
of  Canaan,  when  Sarouhen  was  taken  by 
storm.^' 

It  is  at  once  clear  that  the  expressions  used 
in  Exodus  to  describe  the  Pharaoh  by  whom 
the  Israelites  were  first  persecuted,  apply,  in 
the  fullest  and  most  literal  sense,  to  tfiis 
sovereign.  To  the  people  of  the  greater  part 
of  Egypt,  and  most  especially  to  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  North,  he  was  emphatically  “a 
new  king of  him  it  might  be  said,  as  of  no 
native  king,  succeeding  without  a struggle  (as 
was  most  especially  the  case  of  Rameses  II.), 
“ he  arose  up  over  ” Egypt ; he  was,  in  the  true 
sense  of  the  word,  like  the  Norman  William, 
a conqueror.  The  name  of  Joseph,  whether 
as  a minister  of  the  ejected  dynasty,  or  of  one 
more  ancient  than  that,  would  probably  be 

kings  of  the  dynasty  bear  distinct  traces  of  black 
blood.  Rosellini  gives  a portrait  of  Amenophis  I. 
(whom,  however,  he  confounds  with  Aahmes), 
in  which  he  is  represented  as  a black.  ‘ Monum. 
R.,’  pi.  xxix.  At  Karnak  there  is  a representa- 
tion of  the  shrine  of  Nefertari  borne  by  twelve 
priests;  she  is  there  associated  with  Rameses  II., 
after  an  interval  of  some  three  centuries. 

M.  de  Rouge  gives  a very  curious  account 
of  the  organisation  of  a negro  army,  under  Pepi, 
of  the  sixth  dynasty.  As  in  our  Indian  posses- 
sions, these  alien  troops  were  drilled  and  com- 
manded by  native  Egyptians.  See  ‘Recherches,’ 

P-  ^^3-  . . 

This  is  a very  important  point.  It  shows 
the  inaccuracy  of  the  account  given  by  Josephus 
from  Manetho,  and,  before  this  inscription  was 
known,  adopted  by  Egyptian  scholars,  viz.,  that 
the  war  between  upper  and  lower  Egypt  con- 
tinued to  the  third  or  fourth  reign  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty.  There  can  be  no  question 
as  to  the  correctness  of  the  contemporary  inscrip- 
tion. Ptolemy,  a priest  of  Mendes,  quoted  by 
Apion  (ap.  Clem.  Alex.  ‘Sor.,’  i,  2i,  p.  178,  ed. 
Potter),  says  of  Amosis  that  he  Kar^cTKaxpe 
Avapiu.  He  was  better  informed  than  Manetho. 
M.  de  Rouge  justly  claims  the  credit  of  having 
proved  this  capital  point  (question  capitale). 
See  the  ‘ Report  on  Egyptian  Studies’  for  1867, 
p.  18  ; and  compare  M.  Chabas,  ‘ Les  Pasteurs 
en  Egypte,’  1868,  where  the  whole  inscription  is 
translated. 


unknown  to  him.  Nor  can  there  be  any 
reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  feelings  with  which 
a king  in  his  position  must  have  regarded  the 
Israelites.  There  is  no  question  as  to  his 
finding  them  in  Goshen ; that  is  admitted 
by  all.^®  They  were  there  as  the  subjects, 
apparently  the  favoured  subjects,  of  the  ex- 
pelled dynasty,  under  whom  they  retained 
undisturbed  possession  of  the  richest  district 
of  Egypt,  commanding  the  western  approach 
to  the  very  heart  of  the  land.  The  first  point 
that  would  naturally  strike  him  would  be 
their  number  (Exod.  i.  9),  which,  after  the 
expulsion  of  his  enemies,  would  bear  an 
alarming  proportion  to  the  native  population 
of  the  Delta.  A prudent  man  under  such 
circumstances  would  not  be  likely  to  provoke 
rebellion  by  proceeding  to  extremities,  but 
nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  he  should 
do  just  what  Moses  tells  us  the  new  king 
actually  did,  deal  with  them  craftily,  prevent 
their  increase,  utilise  their  labour,  and  cut  off 
all  communication  with  foreigners.  The  most 
advantageous  employment  which  would  sug- 
gest itself  would  of  course  be  the  construction 
of  strongly-fortified  depositaries  of  provisions 
and  arms  near  the  eastern  frontier.  The  line 
of  fortresses  was  enlarged  and  strengthened 
by  Rameses  II.,  but  that  king  was  not  the 
original  founder.  Traces  are  found  which 
prove  the  existence  both  of  the  canal  and  of 
several  forts  under  the  ancient  empire.^^  One 
of  these  forts,  bearing  the  name  Pa-chtum  en 
Zaru,  is  mentioned  in  the  monumental  annals 
of  Thotmes  III.  It  is  identified  by  M.  Brugsch 
with  the  Pithom  of  the  Exodus."'"  The 
name  signifies  “ the  fortress  of  foreigners  or 
sojourners,”  i.e.  a fortress  either  built  by 
foreigners  or  assigned  to  immigrants  as  a 


by  M.  de  Rouge,  Brugsch,  &c. 

An  officer  who  fled  from  Egypt  in  the  reign 
of  Osirtasin  speaks  of  a wall  which  the  king 
had  built  to  keep  off  the  Sakti,  i.e.  Asiatic  in- 
vaders. See  the  story  of  Saneha  ; and  Chabas, 
‘ Voyage  d’un  Egyptien,’  p.  293  ; and  on  the 
Sakti,  p.  321.  Dr.  Ebers,  1.  c.  p.  8t,  entirely 
corroborates  the  view  taken  by  the  writer.  Pie 
shows  that  the  line,  previously  existing,  inust 
have  been  strengthened  by  one  of  the  earliest 
kings  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty,  and  completed 
in  all  probability  by  the  fortress,  called  the  fort, 
or  the  “close”  of  Zar.  The  word  rendered  “fort,” 
viz.  chetem,  is  retained  in  Coptic,  as 
or  to  shut.  This  fort  is  very  specially 

the  key  of  Egypt,  r]  K\e\s  ttjs  Alyvirrou,  the  fron- 
tier station  for  the  armies  of  the  Pharaohs,  and 
for  Asiatic  immigrants. 

50  This  identification  is  not  accepted  by  M. 
Chabas,  who  gives  another  and  more  probable 
etymology  for  the  Plebrew  Pithom,  viz.  the 
sanctuary  of  Turn.  But  it  is  probable,  indeed  all 
but  certain,  that  the  fortress  and  the  sanctuary 
were  contiguous,  and  formed  together  the  princi- 
pal rendezvous  of  the  Egyptian  troops^nd  foreign 
embassies  on  the  frontier.  On  the  name  Raamses, 
see  infra,  under  Rameses. 


454 


ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


residence.^^  We  learn  from  Genesis  that 
Raamses  was  the  name  of  the  district  in 
the  time  of  Jacob,  and  from  the  Egyptian 
monuments  that  one  of  the  sons  of  Aahmes 
was  named  Rames ; probable  grounds  are 
thus  found  for  the  designation  of  the  second 
fort  built  at  the  same  time.  It  is  also  well 
known  that  during  the  latter  part  of  his  reign 
Aahmes  was  occupied  in  building  and  repair- 
ing the  cities  of  Northern  Egypt.  In  an 
inscription  lately  deciphered, dated  in  his 
twenty-second  year,  certain  Fenchu  are  stated 
to  be  employed  in  the  transport  of  blocks  of 
limestone  from  the  quarries  of  Rufu  (the 
Troja  of  Strabo)  to  Memphis  and  other  cities. 
I'hese  Fenchu  are  unquestionably  aliens,  either 
mercenaries  or  forced  labourers.  According 
to  Brugsch,  the  name  means  “ bearers  of  the 
shepherd’s  staff ; ” and  he  describes  their 
occupation  as  precisely  corresponding  to  that 
of  the  Israelites.’^'^  No  proper  name  for  the 
Israelites  is  found  on  the  monuments  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty  ; during  which  period  all 
Egyptologers  admit  their  presence  in  Egypt; 
they  could  certainly  not  be  designated  more 
exactly  whether  we  regard  the  name  or  the 
occupation  of  these  Fenchu. 

(13.)  It  has  been  shown  that  little  depend- 
ence can  be  placed  on  systems  of  Egyptian 
chronology,  yet  it  may  be  observed  that  either 
of  those  which  are  most  generally  accepted  is 
quite  reconcileable  with  this  hypothesis. 

Two  dates,  which  differ  very  widely,  are 
given,  not  as  certain,  but  approximative  and 
probable. 

Brugsch,  following  Lepsius,  fixes  the  acces- 
sion of  Aahmes  I.  at  1706  b.c.  This  would 
be  in  very  near  accordance  with  Hebrew 
history  if  the  dates  drawn  from  notices  in  the 
Book  of  Judges  were  accepted  in  preference 
to  that  given  in  i Kings  vi.  The  last  year  of 
Thotmes  II.,  which,  as  will  be  shown,  is  very 


This  is  a point  of  considerable  importance, 
brought  out  by  Brugsch  in  the  third  volume. of 
the  ‘ Geographische  Inscliriften,’  p.  21.  lie 
says,  “I  believe  that  I am  nearer  than  formerly 
to  the  trace  of  the  meaning  of  this  name.  The 
old  Egyptian  Zaru,  orZalu,  is  evidently  related  to 
the  Coptic  XUOiXl,  whence  pe.«JLXaOI2vI, 
peregrinus,  advena.” 

vSee  Brugsch,  ‘ Zeitschrift  ’ for  November, 
1867. 

Brugsch  observes,  “With  this  name  are 
designated  the  pastoral  and  nomad  tribes  of 
Semitic  origin,  who  lived  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  I'igyjJt,  and  who  are  to  be  thought  of  as  stand- 
ing to  i'.gypt  in  the  same  relation  as  the  Jews,” 
1.  c.  p.  92.  This  is  the  more  important  since 
Brugsch  does  not  connect  the  narrative  of 
Ibxodus  with  this  period. 

On  the  name  “ Aperu,”  supposed  to  repre- 
sent Hebrews,  see  further  on.  It  is  found  first 
in  papyri  of  a later  date,  under  tlie  nineteenth 
dynasty. 


probably  that  of  the  Exodus,  falls  on  the  same 
system  in  1647  b c.  Now,  the  interval  between 
the  building  of  the  Temple,  about  1010  A.c., 
and  the  Exodus,  is  calculated  to  amount  to 
638  years  by  the  advocates  of  the  longer 
chronology : certainly  a most  remarkable  co- 
incidence, the  more  so  since  neither  Brugsch 
nor  the  other  Egyptian  chronologers  adopt 
that  date  for  the  Exodus. 

The  other  date,  given  also  approximately, 
is  1525  B.c.  for  Aahmes  I.,  and  1463  for  the 
last  year  of  Thotmes  II.  This  accords 
pretty  nearly  with  the  shorter  interval  of  480 
years  given  in  i Kings  vi.  i. 

This  later  date  has  been  lately  supported  in 
a very  remarkable  way  by  a discovery  which, 
if  it  could  be  absolutely  relied  upon,  would 
settle  the  chronology.^^  Thotmes  III.  built  a 
temple  at  Elephantine : it  has  been  destroyed 
within  the  last  few  years  by  the  natives,  but 
on  one  stone  found  near  the  ruins  the  name 
of  the  king  is  distinctly  read ; on  another 
stone  is  an  inscription  stating  that  the  28th  of 
the  month  Epiphi  was  the  festival  of  the  rising 
of  Sothis,  i.  e.  Sirius.  From  this  M.  Biot 
calculates  the  date,  which  he  fixes  as  1445  b.c. 
Now  the  reign  of  Thotmes  III.  lasted  about 
forty-eight  years;  the  temple  was  probably 
built  towards  the  end  of  his  reign,  which  up  to 
the  last  seven  years  was  occupied  in  foreign 
warfare ; we  should  thus  get  the  date  from 
1485  to  1 49 2 for  the  last  year  of  Thotmes  II., 


This  date  has  given  occasion  to  much  con- 
troversy. It  is  utterly  irreconcileable  with  the 
system  of  some  chronologers.  Lepsius  at  once 
met  it  with  the  assumption  that  the  Egyptian 
sculptor  committed  the  error  of  adding  a line, 
the  effect  of  which  would  be  to  alter  the 
calculations  to  the  extent  of  130  years. 
He  was  followed  by  ’ Bunsen,  and,  though 
with  some  misgiving,  by  Brugsch.  If  any 
answer  were  needed,  it  might  be  given  in  the 
words  of  M.  de  Rouge:  “ Ce  n’est  pas  ainsi 
qu’on  pent  lever  une  difficulte  de  cette  gravite  : 
le  monument  aujourd’hui  a Paris  est  comme 
gravure  de  la  plus  grande  beaute  ; il  appartient 
du  reste  a I’epoque  oil  les  inscriptions  presentent 
la  correction  la  plus  parfaite.”  See  also  M. 
Chabas,  M.E.  ii.  p.  18.  A more  serious  objection 
has  since  been  raised  and  defended  with  great  abi- 
lity by  M.  Chabas.  The  inscription  which  gives  the 
official  name  of  Thotmes  HI.,  and  that  which  gives 
the  name  of  the  month  on  which  the  calculation  is 
based,  are  on  different  stones,  and  cannot  be  proved 
to  refer  to  the  .same  date.  The  latter  may  possi- 
bly refer  to  additions  to  the  temple.  M.  Chabas 
w’rites  with  a strong  bias,  so  much  so  that  he 
even  attempts  to  explain  away  the  well-known 
phrase  for  the  coming  forth  or  heliacal  rising  of 
Sothis  ; and  Mr.  Goodwin,  a very  high  authority, 
does  not  consider  that  he  has  proved  his  points. 
In  the  present  state  of  the  question,  all  that  we 
are  entitled  to  assume  is  that  the  inscriptions 
may  probably  refer  to  the  same  time,  viz.  that 
of  the  erection  of  the  temple,  and  give  a date 
which  presents  a very  striking  coincidence  with 
that  taken  from  the  statement  in  i Kings  vi. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH, 


455 


a date  exactly  in  accordance  with  that  derived 
from  I Kings  vi.  i “ 

In  the  present  state  of  inquiry  it  is  suffi- 
cient to  point  out  the  singular  accordance 
between  two  very  different  systems  of  Biblical 
and  Egyptian  chronology,  whichever  may  be 
ultimately  adopted, 

(14.)  Assuming  for  the  present  that  the  perse- 
cution of  the  Israelites  began  under  Aahmes 
I.,  the  question  still  rem^lins  under  which  of 
his  successors  the  Exodus  took  place.  In  the 
absence  of  monumental  evidence  the  question 
cannot  be  decisively  settled,  but  there  appear 
to  be  substantial  grounds  for  the  conclusion 
that  it  occurred  at  the  close  of  the  reign  of 
Thotmes  11. 

The  length  of  the  interval  between  the 
accession  of  Aahmes  I.  and  of  Thotmes  III. 
cannot  be  accurately  determined.  The  calcu- 
lations of  Brugsch  (which  are  quite  irrespective 
of  our  question)  give  an  interval  of  eighty-one 
years.  According  to  Josephus,  Manetho  gives 
100  years  5 months  for  the  period  between 
the  expulsion  of  the  shepherds  and  the  acces- 
sion of  the  Pharaoh  whom  he  calls  Mephra- 
muthosis.  These  dates  are  wholly  uncertain, 
each  recension  of  Manetho  giving  different 
numbers ; but  the  interval  probably  extended 
over  one  hundred  years.  I'his  coincides  very 
closely  with  the  period  required  by  the  Scrip- 
tural narrative ; some  years  elapsed  before  the 
birth  of  Moses,  eighty  years  between  his 
birth  and  the  Exodus. 

(15.)  The  events  of  the  succeeding  reigns 
under  which  Moses  must  have  lived,  assuming 
the  correctness  of  this  hypothesis,  accord  with 
inferences  suggested  by  the  brief  narrative  of 
Exodus,  and  also  with  notices  in  Josephus, 
which  though  of  a legendary  character  may 
have  some  foundation  in  facts.  On  the  death 
of  Aahmes  the  government  appears  to  have 
been  in  the  hands  of  Nefertari,  the  Ethiopian 
princess,  either  as  sovereign,  or  more  probably 
as  regent.^'  Little  was  known  of  Amenophis 

A very  curious  corroboration  of  this  hypo- 
thesis may  be  drawn  from  some  calculations  of 
Mr.  Goodwin  in  the  ‘ Zeitschrift  ’ for  1867,  p. 
78.  He  shows  that,  if  certain  data  are  admitted, 
one  of  the  following  dates  would  fall  within  the 
reign  of  Thotmes  III.,  viz.  1481,  1480,  1479, 
1478.  He  says,  “According  to  the  system  of 
some  of  the  chronologists  this  would  suit  the 
reign  of  Thotmes  HI.”  It  certainly  suits  that 
chronology  of  the  Bible  which  appears  most 
probable  to  the  writer  of  this  Essay.  On 
grounds  quite  independent  of  the  astronomical 
calculation,  he  would  have  us  go  back  120  years, 
and  take  1601,  1600,  1599,  1598  as  the  date, 
fixing  the  accession  of  Thotmes  HI,  as  1623, 
1622,  1621,  or  1620.  This,  as  he  points  out, 
agrees  very  nearly  with  the  date  of  Brugsch,  viz. 
1625  A.c.  It  certainly  agrees  also  with  the 
system  of  those  chronologers  who  adopt  the 
longer  interval. 

_ It  is  an  obvious  conjecture  that  such  an  asso- 
ciation may  have  had  some  influence  upon  the 


(or  Amenhotep)  her  son,  until  the  following 
facts  were  elicited  from  contemporary  monu- 
ments. Ahmes,  the  naval  officer  already 
mentioned,  went  with  Amenophis  in  an  expe- 
dition into  Ethiopia  against  an  insurgent 
chieftain.  The  expedition  was  successful. 
Josephus  gives  a long  and  evidently  legendary 
account  of  an  expedition  of  Moses  into 
Ethiopia.  As  a member  of  the  royal  house- 
hold, the  adopted  child  of  the  King’s  sister, 
he  would  naturally  accompany  his  master ; 
while  gratitude  to  his  benefactress  would 
of  course  give  additional  impetus  to  his  efforts 
against  an  Ethiopian  rebel.  Amenophis  was 
undoubtedly  an  able  and  prosperous  king, 
leaving  a great  name,  and  worshipped  as  a god 
in  after  ages. 

The  circumstances  which  led  to  the  flight 
of  Moses  may  have  taken  place  at  the  close  of 
this  reign,^*^  Syncellus  mentions  a tradition 
that  Moses  left  the  court  after  the  death 
of  Amosis  and  of  his  daughter,  whom  he 
calls  Pharie : it  is  more  probable  that  this 
occurred  some  years  later,  since  Moses  could 
not  have  reached  manhood  when  Aahmes 
died.  At  the  death  of  Amenophis  he  would 
be  about  forty.  It  has  been  represented  as 
improbable  that  the  adopted  son  of  Pharaoh’s 
daughter  found  no  protector  when  he  slew  an 
Egyptian  subject,  a most  unreasonable  objec- 
tion even  if  the  princess  were  still  living  ; her 
death  would  of  course  leave  him  friendless, 

(16,)  During  the  reign  of  Thotmes  I.,  Moses, 
on  this  supposition,  must  have  been  in  Midian, 
but  the  events  are  not  without  bearings  upon 
his  history.  The  reign  was  one  of  great 
prosperity.  The  complete  subjugation  of  the 
district  between  Upper  Egypt  and  Nubia 
Proper  is  attested  by  the  inscirption  previously 
quoted  and  by  another  found  by  the  Prussian 
expedition  on  the  rock  opposite  the  island  of 
Tombos.^®  The  latter  years  of  his  reign  vrere 
employed  in  a w'ar  of  greater  interest.  We 
learn  from  the  sepulchral  inscription  already 
mentioned  that  he  invaded  Mesopotamia,  won 
a great  victory,  and  brought  back  an  immense 
number  of  captives.  A great  advance  was 
thus  made  in  the  condition  of  Egypt.  Its 

feelings  of  Moses  when  in  later  years  he  married 
an  Ethiopian. 

58  All  the  recensions  of  Manetho  give  thirteen 
years  for  Chebron,  i.e.  Nefertari  (see  above),  and 
twenty-one  for  Amenophis.  Moses  is  said  to 
have  been  forty  years  old  at  the  time  of  his 
flight.  The  coincidence  of  dates  is  perfect,  as 
he  was  in  all  probability  born  a few  years  before 
the  death  of  Aahmes. 

Ivthiopia  was  henceforth  governed  by  princes 
of  the  blood  royal.  A list  of  twenty,  bearing 
the  style  Prince  Royal  of  Cush,  beginning  with 
this  reign,  is  drawn  from  the  monuments.  The 
first  bears  the  name  Me-Mes,  an  odd  coincidence. 
See  ‘ Exc.’  on  Moses. 

The  duration  of  the  reign  is  uncertain  ; the 
m'onuments  give  no  information,  and  the  dates 
of  Manetho  are  in  utter  confusion. 


ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


456 

permanent  resources  were  increased  by  the 
acquisition  of  Nubia,  the  land  of  gold,*^'  and 
henceforth  we  find  the  Pharaohs  in  possession 
of  numerous  chariots,  which,  though  not 
unknown,®^  are  not  represented  on  early 
monuments.  We  have  here  every  indication 
of  national  greatness. 

(17.)  On  the  death  of  Thotmes  I.  the  govern- 
ment was  once  more  for  some  years  in  the 
hands  of  a woman.  His  wife  and  sister 
Aahmes,®^  called  Amessis  by  Josephus,  was 
regent  or  sovereign,  according  to  Manetho, 
for  upwards  of  twenty  years.  Thotmes  II.®* 
showed  energy  in  the  beginning  of  his  reign ; 
he  carried  on  a successful  war  against  the 
Shasous,  the  nomad  tribes  on  the  north-eastern 
frontier.  No  other  notice  is  found  of  his  acts 
on  the  monuments.  His  reign  was  probably 
short  and  certainly  inglorious.  The  following 
facts  are  however  certain  from  contemporary 
monuments.®^  He  was  married  to  his  sister 
Hatasou ; after  his  decease,  of  which  the 
circumstances  are  unknown,  she  succeeded 
him  as  Queen  Regnant.  His  death  was  im- 
mediately followed  by  a general  revolt  of  the 

Nub  is  the  well-known  Egyptian  name  for 

gold. 

The  war  chariot  of  Aahmes  I.  is  expressly 
mentioned  in  the  inscription  at  Elkab. 

In  these  reigns  there  are  several  instances 
of  marriages  between  brother  and  sister.  M.  de 
Rouge  observes  that  it  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  a custom  under  the  early  Pharaohs. — 

■ Recherches,’  p.  62. 

The  joint  reigns  of  Amesses  and  Mephres, 
or  IMisaphris,  are  computed  at  thirty-five  or  thirty- 
three  years  in  the  tables  of  Bunsen,  from  Jose- 
])hus  and  Africanus.  Eusebius  omits  both 
Thotmes  I.  and  Amesses.  We  may  not  place  any 
reliance  on  the  numbers  of  Manetho,  but  they 
were  probably  taken  from  old  monuments, 
and,  though  often  corrupted  and  distorted,  may 
occasionally  be  correct.  In  this  case  they  coin- 
cide very  strikingly  with  the  narrative  of  Exodus, 
allowing  an  interval  of  some  forty  years  between 
the  decease  of  Amenophis  and  of  Thotmes  II. 

According  to  the  monuments,  Tliotmes  II., 
I'lis  Vidfe  Hatasou,  and  Thotmes  III.,  were 
children  of  the  same  parent  or  parents.  If  the 
joint  reigns  of  Amesses  and  Thotmes  II.  extended 
over  thirty  years,  or  even  a much  shorter  period, 
'I'liotmes  III.  could  not  have  been  the  son  of 
Thotmes  I.,  since  he  was  a mere  child  at  the 
death  of  Thotmes  11.  He  is  represented  as  a 
boy  of  some  ten  or  twelve  years  old,  sitting  on 
the  knees  of  Hatasou,  on  the  monuments.  If 
we  might  assume  that  Thotmes  1 1,  and  his  wife 
were  children  of  Thotmes  I.  and  Amesses,  and 
that  'rhotincs  HI.  was  a son  of  Amesses  by 
another  husband,  this  would  meet  The  difficulty. 
It  is  certain  that  Thotmes  1 1,  was  son  of 
Thotmes  I.  Sec  ‘Denkmaler,’  iii.  pi.  xvi. 
a.  1.  7. 

This  is  probably  the  true  reading  of  the  name, 
which  means  “chief  of  the  illustrious.”  The 
phonetic  value  of  one  of  the  signs  is  disputed  by 
Mr.  Goodwin,  but  is  shown  to  be  correct  by 
Renouf  and  Eauth. 


confederated  nations  on  the  north  of  Palestine, 
which  had  been  conquered  by  his  father : no 
attempt  was  made  to  recover  the  lost  as- 
cendancy of  Egypt  until  the  22nd  year  of 
Thotmes  III. 

Certainly  no  conjunction  of  circumstances 
can  be  conceived  which  would  adjust  itself 
more  naturally  to  the  Scriptural  narrative,  if 
we  assume  that  the, Exodus  took  place  at  this 
time.  In  a history  drawn  entirely  from  public 
inscriptions  and  monuments,  no  one  would 
expect  to  find  records  of  events  humiliating  to 
the  national  pride ; a period  of  heavy  and 
disgraceful  calamity  would  present  but  a 
blank.®^  Now  the  reigns  of  all  other  early 
kings  in  this  great  dynasty  were  prosperous 
and  glorious,  filled  with  great  events  attested 
by  numerous  monuments.  This  king  suc- 
ceeded to  a great  place ; his  first  years  were 
brilliant,  he  cleared  his  frontiers : there  is  no 
indication  of  rebellion  or  of  foreign  invasion, 
and  yet  the  last  years  are  a complete  blank ; 
there  is  a sudden  and  complete  collapse ; he 
dies,  no  son  succeeding:  his  throne  is  long 
occupied  by  a woman : and  no  effort  is  made 
to  regain  the  former  possessions  of  Egypt  for 
more  than  twenty  years.  We  have  ample 
space  for  the  events  which  preceded  the 
Exodus ; we  find  the  conditions  presupposed  in 
the  accounts  of  the  mission  of  Moses,  and  the 
results  which  might  have  been  anticipated 
from  calamities  which,  though  not  sufficient  to 
crush  the  nation,  would  cripple  its  resources, 
and  for  a time  subdue  its  spirit. 

Assuming  for  the  present  the  truth  of  this 
hypothesis,  we  may  consider  what  might  be 
the  probable  course  of  events.  On  the  return 
of  Moses  from  Midian,  in  the  eightieth  year 
of  his  age,  and  therefore  towards  the  close  of 
the  reign  of  Thotmes  II.,  he  found  the  Pharaoh 
in  lower  Egypt,  probably  at  Zoan  (see  Psalm 
Ixxviii.  12), /T.  'I'anis,  or  as  the  Egyptians  call 
it  Avaris,  the  city  captured  by  his  ancestor. 
'The  residence  of  the  court  for  a great  part  of 
the  year  would  naturally  be  in  that  district 
The  upper  country  was  quiet  after  the 
conquest  of  Nubia,  whereas  the  territory 
occupied  by  the  Israelites  required  watching, 
and  the  neighbouring  Shasous,  or  Bedouins, 
caused  constant  alarms.  The  character  of 
the  king  as  described  in  Exodus  was  at  once 
weak  and  obstinate,  cruel  and  capricious. 


M.  de  Rouge,  .speaking  of  the  name  Aperu 
(see  further  on),  observes,  “ C’est  la  seule  trace 
que  la  captivite  dTsrael  aura  lai.ssee  probable- 
nicnt  sur  les  monuments  : il  n’est  pas  a penser 
que  les  klgyptiens  y aient  jamais  consigne  ni  le 
souvenir  des  jilaies,  ni  celui  de  la  catastrophe 
terrible  de  la  Mer  Rouge  ; car  leurs  monuments 
ne  consacrent  (jue  bien  rarement  le  souvenir  de 
leurs  defaites.”  See  also  the  memoir  lately 
published  (1869),  ‘ Mo'ise  et  les  Hebreux,’  p.  2. 

•'S  M.  Brugsch  says  strongly  and  truly,  “as  it 
seems,  all  that  had  been  previously  conquered 
was  completely  lost. — ‘ Geographie,’  i.  p.  54* 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


457 


such  a character  as  is  calculated  to  provoke 
or  accelerate  great  national  calamities.  Nor 
can  we  lose  sight  altogether  of  the  queen. 
She  was  a very  remarkable  woman,  daughter, 
sister,  and  wife  of  kings,  with  the  antecedents 
of  her  mother  and  grandmother,  both  of 
whom  had  been  regents,  and  she  was  able  to 
retain  the  government  of  the  nation  during  the 
prolonged  minority  of  the  greatest  and  most 
energetic  king  of  the  dynasty.  Such  a woman 
may  well  have  helped  her  brother  and  husband 
to  “ harden  his  heart,’"  after  each  ague  fit  of 
misgiving  and  terror.  That  she  was  a woman 
of  strong  religious  prejudices  is  proved  by  her 
own  inscriptions : as  such  she  could  not  but  be 
revolted  by  the  insults  heaped  upon  the  sooth- 
sayers, priests,  temples,  and  idols  of  Egypt. 
W hen  her  heart  was  crushed  by  the  loss  of  her 
first-born  son,  we  can  conceive  the  mingled 
feelings  which  would  send  her  to  the  king,  if 
not  to  suggest,  yet  ‘to  strengthen  his  resolution 
to  make  one  more  effort  to  save  his  kingdom 
from  disgrace,  and  to  avenge  the  long  series 
of  calamities  upon  Israel.^^-*  '1  hese  are  of  course 
but  conjectures,  but  they  rest  upon  facts  dis- 
tinctly recorded  on  contemporary  Egyptian 
monuments,  and  they  harmonize  thoroughly 
with  the  narrative  of  Exodus. 

The  history  of  the  next  reign  supplies  some 
remarkable  coincidences. 

(i8.)  Thotmes  I Il.remained  in  reluctant  sub- 
jection to  his  sister  at  least  seventeen  years.'® 
On  taking  possession  of  the  throne  he  defaced 
her  titles  on  the  monuments,  and  reckoned  his 
own  reign  from  the  death  of  his  predecessor, 
without  any  notice  of  the  intervening  period. 
It  may  be  inferred  from  this  that  her  rule  was 
distasteful  to  the  people,  associated,  it  may 
be,  with  national  disasters.  It  is  certain  that 
during  her  regency  there  was  a general  revolt 
and  confederacy  of  the  nations  on  the  north- 
west of  Egypt  from  Palestine  to  Mesopotamia. 

It  was  not  until  the  twenty-second  year  of 
his  reign — a date,  as  will  appear,  of  singular 
importance  in  this  inquiry — that  Thotmes  III. 
began  a series  of  expeditions  unparalleled  for 
extent  and  grandeur  in  Egyptian  history 

The  following  facts  are  clearly  proved. 


The  inscriptions  on  her  obelisk,  the  most 
beautiful  now  remaining  at  Thebes,  give  a strong 
impression  of  this  queen’s  character.  She  speaks 
of  her  favour  with  Ammon,  boasts  of  her  gra- 
cious and  popular  manners,  and  is  represented 
in  this,  and  also  in  other  monuments,  in  mascu- 
line attire,  including  a beard.  See  the  inscrip- 
tions in  the  ‘ Zeitschrift  ’ for  1865,  p.  34,  and 
Brugseh,  ‘ Recueil,’  ii.  p.  79. 

Dr.  Birch  finds  a higher  date  for  the  joint 
government,  twenty-one  years. 

A full  account  of  these  expeditions  was  in- 
scribed on  the  walls  of  a temple  dedicated  to 
Ammon  after  his  last  return  to  Egypt.  They 
are  given  by  Lepsius  in  the  ‘Denkmaler,’  vol.  iii., 
and  in  the  ‘Auswahl  some  are  published  by 
Brugseh,  ‘ Recueil,’  and  by  M.  de  Rouge,  ‘ Etude 


The  king  left  Zaru,  or  Pithom,  early  in  the 
year,  and  advanced  without  encountering  any 
opposition  to  Sarouhen  on  the  southern  fron- 
tier of  Palestine.  He  was  detained  by  the 
siege  of  Gaza,  which  he  took  early  in  the 
spring  of  the  following  year.  On  the  i6th  of 
Pachon,  early  in  March,  at  a fort  named 
Souhem,  he  heard  of  the  advance  of  the  allied 
kings  of  all  the  districts  between  the  Euphrates 
and  the  Mediterranean.  The  decisive  battle 
was  fought  at  Megiddo,  the  earliest  and  one 
of  the  most  important  of  the  conflicts  in  that 
great  battle-field  of  Western  Asia.  The  allies 
were  completely  defeated,  the  dead  covered  the 
plain,  horses  and  chariots  in  vast  numbers 
were  taken,  and  on  the  following  day  the 
chiefs,  who  had  fled  to  Megiddo,  came  to 
ofi'er  submission  and  tributes,  consisting  of 
gold,  silver,  bronze,  lapis-lazuli,  coders  of  pre- 
cious metals,  chariots  plated  with  gold  and 
silver,  magnificent  vases  of  Phoenician  work- 
manship, a harp  of  bronze  inlaid  with  gold, 
ivory,  perfumes,  and  wine.  The  proofs  of  an 
advanced  civilisation  in  the  nations  then  domi- 
nant in  Palestine  accord  with  all  the  repre- 
sentations in  Scripture.  The  point,  however, 
of  main  importance  in  the  present  inquiry  is 
that  the  power  of  the  confederacy  which  gave 
unity  and  strength  to  the  people  of  Canaan 
was  completely  broken  by  'Thotmes  III.,  just 
seventeen  years  before  the  date  when,  on  the 
hypothesis  we  are  now  considering,  the  Israel- 
ites entered  Palestine. 

The  incursions  of  Thotmes  continued 
without  intermission  during  this  interval. 
We  have  accounts  of  repeated  invasions  of 
Phoenicia,  conquests  over  the  Rutens^^  in 
Mesopotamia,  where  the  king  established  a 
fortress  or  military  colony:  we  find  the 
great  names  of  Assur,  Babel,  Nineveh,  Shinear, 
the  Remenen,  or  Armenians,  and  most  fre- 
quently of  the  Cheta,  the  sons  of  Heth, 
the  Hittites  of  Scripture."'^ 

sur  divers  monuments  du  regne  deToutmes  III,’ 
1861.  Mr.  Birch  first  encountered,  and  to  a great 
extent  overcame,  the  formidable  difficulties  of 
decipherment  and  translation.  His  labours,  and 
those  of  M.  de  Rouge  and  Brugseh,  have  made 
them  accessible  to  students. 

892  chariots  are  mentioned  ; a very  curious 
coincidence  with  the  statement  in  Judges  v., 
where  we  are  told  that  Jabin,  in  the  same  battle- 
field, had  900  chariots. 

<r>  ■JTJ  0 y 

^ Q.  j Rutennu,  as  M.  Chabas 

has  proved,  designates  the  northern  Syrians. 
The  name  may  be  read  Lutennu,  or  even  Lu- 
dennu,  and  is  identified  with  Lud  by  M.  do 
Rougemont,  ‘Age  du  Bronze.’  The  presence  of 
Egyptians  in  Mesopotamia  under  the  eighteenth 
dynasty,  and  in  the  time  of  Thotmes  III.,  is 
proved  by  scarabaei  found  at  Arban,  on  the 
Cabus,  a tributary  of  the  Euphrates. 

M.  Chabas  denies  the  identity  of  the  Hittites 
with  the  Cheta,  chiefly  on  philological  grounds, 
since  the  names,  of  which  several  are  given,  indi- 


458  ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


One  object  was  steadily  pursued  by  the 
king  during  these  campaigns.  In  accordance 
with  the  ancient  policy  of  the  Pharaohs/^  but 
as  it  would  seem  because  such  a measure  was 
especially  important  at  that  time,  and  probably 
one  main  motive  for  the  repeated  razzias, 
Thotmes  brought  an  immense  number  of 
captives  into  Egypt.  These  are  his  own 
words ; “ I made  a great  offering  to  Ammon 
in  recognition  of  the  first  victory  which  he 
granted  me,  filling  his  domain  with  slaves,  to 
make  him  stuffs  of  various  materials,  to  labour 
and  cultivate  the  lands,  to  make  harvests,  to 
fill  the  habitation  of  Father  Ammon.’’ At 
Abd  el  Kurna,  in  the  temple  before  mentioned, 
there  is  a well-known  picture  of  such  captives 
employed  in  making  bricks.  It  is  an  ad- 
mirable illustration  of  the  labours  of  the 
Israelites,  whom  it  was  formerly  supposed  to 
represent : the  inscription,  however,  states  that 
they  are  “ captives  taken  by  his  Majesty  to  build 
the  temple  of  his  Father  Ammon.” 

We  have  now  to  call  special  attention  to 
this  fact.  The  wars  of  I'hotmes  III.  were 
terminated  by  the  complete  overthrow  of  all 
his  foes  in  Syria  and  Mesopotamia  in  the 
fortieth  year  of  his  reign.  No  question  is 
raised  about  this  date.  But  according  to  our 
present  hypothesis  this  took  place  exactly  forty 
years  after  the  Exodus,  immediately  before 
the  entrance  of  the  Israelites  into  Palestine. 

They  would  then  have  found  the  country 
in  a state  of  utter  prostration.  With  the 
exception  of  such  strongholds  as  might  be 
retained  by  the  Egyptians  to  command  the  road 
into  Syria,  the  petty  kings  would  keep  each 
his  own  ■ fortress,  with  no  common  head,  no 
powerful  ally,  accustomed  to  see  their  neigh- 
bours and  kinsmen  beaten  and  subjugated,  and, 
though  warlike,  well  supplied  with  arms,  and 
occupying  forts  well-nigh  impregnable,'®  yet 
habituated  to  defeat,  and  liable,  as  the  Scrip- 


cate  a different  origin.  Most  Egyptologers, 
however,  retain  the  older  view,  which  is  de- 
fended by  very  convincing  arguments  by  M,  de 
Kouge.  It  is  confirmed  also  by  the  Assyrian 
inscriptions,  which  make  the  Kliati  or  llatti 
occupy  the  country  between  the  Mediterranean 
and  Carchemish,  their  frontier  city  in  tlie  times 
of  Tiglath  Pileser  I.,  see  Rawlinson’s  ‘Ancient 
Monarchies,’  vol.  ii.  pp.  315,  317,  and  Menant, 

‘ Syllabaire  Assyrien,’  p.  155,  who  identifies 
them  with  the  Hittites.  The  identification  of  the 
Kemenen  is  proposed  by  Brugsch. 

We  have  a very  early  record  of  this  policy 
in  the  reign  of  Pepi,  of  the  sixth  dynasty.  See 
M.  de  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  128. 

See  Brugsch,  ‘ Recueil  de  Monuments 
F'.gypliens,’  vol.  i.  p.  53. 

.See  Brugsch,  ‘ Recueil,’  i.  p.  53. 

The  history  of  the  siege  of  Gaza,  which 
lasted  more  than  a year,  may  account  for  the 
Egyptians  leaving  so  many  cities  untouched,  re- 
taining a partial  or  entire  independence.  This 
applies  to  campaigns  under  the  nineteenth  and 
twentieth  dynasties. 


tural  narrative  describes  them,  to  wild  fits  of 
panic  at  the  approach  of  a new  foe.  If 
again,  as  there  is  reason  to  believe,  the  kings 
of  Bashan,  and  other  districts  east  of  th^ 
Jordan,  were  among  the  confederates  defeatea 
on  his  first  invasion  by  Thotmes,  it  would 
account  for  their  exhaustion,  and  the  extreme 
terror  of  the  princes  of  Midian  and  Moab.'*^ 

(19.)  It  may  be  asked  how  could  the  Israel- 
ites during  that  period  escape  the  notice  of  the 
king  ? It  is  certain  that  the  high  road,  always 
followed  by  the  Egyptian  armies,  ran  along 
the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean  till  it  turned 
off*  towards  Megiddo.  The  Israelites  were 
in  the  desert  of  Tih,  a district  not  easily 
accessible  and  offering  no  temptation  to  a. 
conqueror  whose  energies  were  concentrated 
in  a desperate  war.  Flad  they  remained  in 
the  peninsula  of  Sinai  they  would  have  been 
within  his  reach,  for  its  western  district  was 
subject  to  Egypt  from  a very  early  period.®*^ 
It  is  possible  that  their  flight  might  have  been 
one  motive  for  an  expedition  which,  as  we 
learn  from  an  inscription  in  the  Wady 
Mughara,  was  undertaken  by  the  forces  of 
Hatasou  and  Thotmes  in  the  sixteenth  year 
of  their  joint  reign. 

A far  more  serious  objection  rests  on  the 
improbability  that  the  powerful  kings  of  the 
eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties  would 
have  permitted  the  invasion  or  the  continued 
occupation  of  Palestine  by  'the  Israelites. 

We  might  answer  in  the  first  place  that 
this  objection  applies  to  every  other  date 
suggested  by  chronologers.  The  very  latest 
date  assumes  that  the  Exodus  took  place  under 
the  son  or  grandson  of  Raineses  II.,  and  that 
the  Israelites  passed  the  Jordan  in  the  time 
of  Rameses  III.  But  that  Pharaoh  was  one 
of  the  most  powerful  sovereigns  of  Egypt, 
and  it  is  certain  that  his  descendants,  the 
princes  of  the  twentieth  dynasty,  retained 
command  of  the  communications  by  land  and 
water  with  Mesopotamia.  This  is  proved  by 


This  gives  a peculiar  force  and  suitableness 
to  the  words  of  Balaam,  twice  repeated,  “God 
brought  them  out  of  Egypt.  He  hath,  as  it 
were,  the  strength  of  an  unicorn.”  Num.  xxiii. 
22,  xxiv.  8. 

The  intercourse  between  Egypt  and  the 
west  of  the  peninsula  began  under  .Snefru,  the 
last  Pharaoh  of  the  third  dynasty.  He  defeated 
the  Anu,  the  ancient  inhabitants,  and  founded 
a colony  at  the  Wady  Mughara.  'I'he  most 
ancient  monument  in  existence  records  this 
event,  d'he  copper-mines  tliere  were  worked 
under  Chufu  (Cheops)  and  other  sovereigns  of 
tlie  fourth  and  following  dynasticsr  We  read 
of  a formal  inspection  by  Pepi.  See  M.  de  Rouge, 
‘Recherches,’  pp.  7,  30,  31,  42,  81,  115.  The 
mines  were  worked  under  Amenemha,  twelfth 
dynasty,  and  the  influence  or  sovereignty  of 
Egypt  continued  unbroken  till  long  after  the 
Fixodus.  M.  Chabas  shows  that  under  the 
twentieth  dynasty  the  communications  were 
regularly  carried  on. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


459 


an  inscription  of  great  interest  and  import- 
ance, well  known  to  Egyptian  scholars,  which 
belongs  to  the  reign  of  Raineses  XII.,  towards 
the  close  of  the  dynasty.  M.  de  Rouge 
says,  “ Elle  suppose  line  domination  encore 
incontestce  sur  la  Mesopotamie,  des  relations 
amicales  entreles  princes  d’Asie  et  le  Pharaon, 
ainsi  que  des  routes  habituellement  parcourues 
par  le  commerce.’'  However  it  may  be 
accounted  for,  it  is  certain  that  during  the 
whole  period  between  Joshua  and  Rehoboam 
the  Israelites  were  not  disturbed  in  the  posses- 
sion of  the  strongholds  of  Palestine,  although 
the  Pharaohs,  as  we  have  just  seen,  retained 
an  undisputed  supremacy  in  Western  Asia  up 
to  the  time  of  Samuel  or  Saul. 

There  are,  however,  facts,  which,  though 
seldom  noticed,  are  sufficiently  obvious,  and 
may  enable  us  to  understand  the  policy  of  the 
Pharaohs. 

It  is  clear,  even  from  the  history  of  the 
campaigns  of  T+iotmes  1 1 1.,  that  at  the  end  of 
each  campaign  the  Egyptians  withdrew  their 
forces  altogether  from  the  countries  which 
they  overran,  content  with  the  plunder,  and 
especially  the  capture  of  prisoners,  with  the 
submission  of  the  chiefs,  and  the  tributes 
’which  they  were  secure  of  exacting.  This 
might  be  a result  of  the  constitution  of  the 
Egyptian  armies.  The  Calasirians  and  Her- 
motybians,  the  warrior  caste,  had  settled 
homes  to  which  they  would  certainly  choose 
to  return,  probably  each  year  after  the  sub- 
sidence of  the  inundation,  when  their  labours 
would  be  required  for  the  cultivation  of  the 
fields.  We  have  no  trace  of  permanent  occu- 
pancy of  foreign  stations,  excepting  one  in 
Mesopotamia,  another  at  the  copper-mines  in 
the  Wady  Mughara,  and  perhaps  of  a few 
fortresses  on  the  route  through  Syria.  A 
rapid  campaign  directed  against  the  nations 
to  the  north  of  Palestine,  who  were  in  a state 
of  chronic  insurrection,  and  threw  off  the 
yoke  at  every  opportunity,  would  give  an 
Egyptian  king  neither  the  leisure  nor  the 
inclination  to  assail  the  strongholds  occupied 
by  the  Israelites.  It  must  also  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  Israelites  attacked  the  most 
powerful  enemies  of  Egypt,  the  Hittites  and 
Amorites,  and  that,  whereas  their  conquest 
certainly  did  not  result  in  the  establishment 
of  a formidable  empire,  it  was  an  effectual 
check  to  the  restoration  and  consolidation  of 
the  powers  which  Thotmes  had  overthrown. 
IfV  e do  not  find  notices  of  many  incursions 
under  the  immediate  successors  of  Thotmes. 
That  which  is  recorded,  under  Amenophis  II., 
appears  from  the  inscription  to  have  been 

‘Journal  Asiatique,’  5th  series,  vol.  viii. 
p.  204. 

The  word  used  in  reference  to  the  invasions 
of  Asia  in  the  reigns  of  Amenophis  II.  and  III.,  is 

which  indicates  a naval  expe- 
dition. See  ‘ Denkmaler,’  iii.  pi.  82.  M. 


carried  on  by  sea.  The  three  invasions  under  the 
nineteenth  and  twentieth  dynasties,  by  Seti  I., 
Rameses  II.,  and  Rameses  III.,  had  each  the 
same  general  object,  and  was  pursued  on  the 
same  system  and  with  the  same  general  results, 
although  as  we  shall  find  presently  a con- 
siderable number  of  Israelites  were  probably 
carried  into  captivity  by  the  two  last-named 
kings. 

If  the  date  which  is  here  assumed  be  correct, 
we  shall  expect  that  those  events  which  are 
ascertained  from  later  Egyptian  monuments 
of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties  will 
harmonise  with  it.  An  absolute  contradiction 
would  be  fatal  to  the  hypothesis,  which  of 
course  will  be  materially  strengthened  by 
general  and  special  coincidences. 

(20.)  The  reign  of  Thotmes  1 1 1,  was  followed 
by  a period  of  great  prosperity.  The  supre- 
macy of  Egypt  in  Western  Asia  was  unbroken, 
certainly  during  the  two  following  reigns.  Is 
this  general  statement  compatible  with  the 
conquest  of  Palestine  by  the  Israelites  ? To 
answer  this  question  we  must  look  closely  at 
the  events  in  each  reign,  not  forgetting  that, 
as  we  have  already  shown,  a general  supre- 
macy was  undouHedly  retained  from  the 
accession  of  the  nineteenth  to  the  termination 
of  the  twentieth  dynasty : that  is  throughout 
the  period  which  all  chronologers  hold  to 
have  extended  to'  the  end  of  the  book  of 
Judges. 

Immediately  after  the  accession  of  Ameno- 
phis II.  he  undertook  an  expedition  against 
the  Rutens.  He  appears  to  have  advanced 
as  far  as  Nineveh ; he  certainly  returned  to 
Egypt  with  the  trophies  of  a great  victory. 
An  inscription  at  Amada  in  Nubia,  quoted 
by  M.  Brugsch,  ‘ H.  E.,’  p.  iii,  and  by  M. 
Chabas,  ‘ Voyage  d’un  Egyptien,’p.  194,  states 
that  this  king  slew  seven  princes  of  the  con- 
federates at  Tachis  (a  city  in  Syria),  and  that 
“ they  were  hung  head  downwards  on  the 
prow  of  his  Majesty’s  ship.” 

These  facts  are  of  considerable  importance. 
They  show  that  the  whole  energies  of  the 
Pharaohs  were  directed  against  the  confede- 
rates on  the  north  of  Palestine,  whose  defeat 
and  prostration  would  of  course  effectually 
prevent  them  from  marching  into  Palestine 
either  to  support  their  allies,  or  to  avenge 


Chabas,  who  quotes  the  inscription,  ‘Voyage 
d’un  Egyptien,’  p.  194,  refers,  of  course  by 
oversight,  to  Amenophis  I.  It  is  a point  of 
much  importance  in  this  inquiry  to  have  this 
intimation  of  the  transport  of  troops  to  Phfjenicia 
by  water.  It  is  more  than  probable  that  the 
Egyptians  had  a considerable  navy  under  the 
vigorous  administration  of  the  early  kings  of 
this  dynasty.  We  have;  in  fact,  the  representa- 
tion of  the  transport  of  chariots  and  horses  on 
ships  in  the  tomb  of  Ahmes  at  El  Kab,  which 
belongs  to  this  very  period.  See  Rosellini, 
M.  C.,  pi.  cx.,  and  Duemichen,  ‘Fleet  of  an 
Egyptian  Queen,’  taf.  xxviii.  5. 


46o  on  the  bearings  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


their  fall  before  Joshua.  The  mention  of  the 
ship  of  war  has  a special  interest.  It  is 
obvious  that,  as  the  Pharaohs  were  the  undis- 
puted masters  of  the  sea  after  the  conquest  of 
Phoenicia  under  Thotmes  1 1 1.,  the  most  ready 
and  effectual  way  of  transporting  their  troops 
would  be  by  ships.®^  We  have  not  sufficient 
data  to  prove  that  they  did  adopt  this  mode 
of  carrying  on  their  communications,  but 
there  are  other  indications  which  make  it 
extremely  probable.  The  word  used  in  the 
inscriptions  which  record  invasions  of  Asia 
under  Amenophis  III.  is  specially  if  not.  ex- 
clusively used  of  naval  expeditions.  (See 
note  82.)  It  has  been  shown  very 
lately  by  a contemporary  inscription  that 
at  a far  earlier  period,  under  the  sixth 
dynasty,  the  Pharaoh  Pepi  sent  large  forces 
by  sea  against  the  Herusha,  probably  Asi- 
atics. See  De  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  126. 
The  rapid  march  of  an  Egyptian  army  along 
the  coast  of  Palestine  some  seven  or  eight 
years  after  the  passage  over  the  Jordan  would 
not  present  any  considerable  difficulty,  directed 
as  it  was  against  the  confederates  of  the  Amo- 
rites,  but  every  semblance  of  a difficulty  dis- 
appears if  the  expedition  was  by  sea. 

Under  I'hotmes  IV.  we  have  no  notice  of 
Asiatic  war.  The  tributes  were  probably 
paid  without  any  farther  attempt  at  resist- 
ance during  that  reign,  which,  though  un- 
distinguished and  probably  short,  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  a period  of  disturbance.*^* 

(21.)  The  reign  of  Amenophis  III.  was  long 
and  prosperous.  His  supremacy  in  Syria  and 
Mesopotamia  was  uncontested;  but  though 
the  inscriptions  speak  of  expeditions  into  the 
Soudan,  and  of  tributes  brought  from  all 
nations,  there  is  no  indication  of  Asiatic 
warfare.  It  was  a period  of  almost  uninter- 
rupted peace.  I'here  is  no  probability  that  the 
struggles  in  Palestine  would  have  attracted 
the  attention  or  called  for  the  interposition 
of  a monarch  engaged  in  magnificent  works 
which  surpass  in  beauty  and  rival  in  extent 
those  which  were  completed  under  any  suc- 
ceeding dynasty. 

There  are,  however,  facts  which  may 
perhaps  justify  a conjecture  that  the  relations 
iietween  Egypt  and  the  Israelites  underwent 
some  modification  in  the  interval  after  the 


It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  current  of  tlie 
Ivivicra  di  Ponente  runs  along  the  Delta  and 
thence  to  the  coast  of  Palestine  or  Syria,  carrying 
with  it  so  much  of  the  Kile  mud  as  to  fill  up 
the  harbours.  The  sea  voyage  would  be  easy 
and  rapid.  We  find  notice  of  the  transport  of 
corn  from  Egyjit  to  the  land  of  the  Kheta  under 
Merneptah.  ‘ Ilistor.  Ins.,’  iii.  24. 

Some  scholars  hokl  that  the  Pixodus  took 
place  at  the  clo.se  of  this  reign.  This  theory  is 
supjiorted  by  ingenious  arguments,  but  is  scarcely 
reconcileable  with  the  condition  of  ligypt  at  the 
beginning  of  the  next  reign,  nor  does  it  present 
the  coincidences  which  arc  drawn  from  the  reign 
of  Thotmes  II.  and  his  successors. 


occupation  of  Palestine  which  corresponds  to 
this  period.  In  i Chron.  iv.  17,  we  read  that 
Mered,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  founded  two 
families,  one  by  an  Egyptian  wife  Bithia,  who 
is  called  a daughter  of  Pharaoh.  This  family 
was  settled  at  Eshtemoa,  on  the  hilly  district 
of  Judah,  south  of  Hebron,  now  Isemna;  the 
ruins  indicate  the  site  of  a considerable  city. 
The  exact  place  of  Ezra,  the  father  of  Mered, 
in  the  genealogy  is  uncertain,  but  it  belongs 
apparently  to  the  second  generation  from 
Caleb.  Now  we  have  the  fact  that  Ameno- 
phis III.  was  married  to  a very  remarkable 
personage  who  was  not  of  royal  parentage 
and  not  an  Egyptian  by  creed.  Under  her  in- 
fluence Amenophis  I V.,  her  son  (whose  strongly 
marked  features  have  a Semitic,  not  to  say 
Jewish  character),®'^  completely  revolutionised 
the  religion  of  Egypt,  more  especially  attack- 
ing its  most  loathsome  form,  the  phallus- 
worship  of  Khem.  The  names  of  this  princess, 
Tei,  and  of  her  parents,  luaa  and  Tuaa,  bear 
a singularly  near  resemblance  to  that  of 
Mered ’s  wife.®® 

(22.)  However  this  may  be,  the  few  known 
facts  of  Egyptian  history  from  the  accession 
of  Amenophis  IV.,  or  Khu-n-Aten  {t.e.  Glory 
of  the  Sunbeam),  are  readily  adjusted  to 
the  early  annals  of  the  Judges.  For  a 
few  years  the  ascendancy  of  Egypt  in  Meso- 
potamia was  unimpaired.  The  Rutens  and 
their  allies  were  kept  in  submission ; no 
indication  of  an  occupation  of  Palestine  by 
Egypt  or  its  opponents  is  to  be  found : then 
comes  a time  of  internal  struggle  and  confu- 
sion, during  which  all  the  Asiatics  threw  off 
the  yoke.  We  have  here  a place  for  the  inva- 
sion of  Cushan  Rishathaim,  the  King  of  Meso- 
potamia ; which  must  have  taken  place  about 
a century  after  the  death  of  Joshua.  The 


85  The  most  striking  portraits  of  this  king 
are  in  Prisse,  ‘Monumenis,’  pi.  x.,  and  in  the 
‘Denkmaler  III.  all  the  portraits  have  the 
strongest  character  of  individuality,  wild,  dreamy, 
fanatic,  with  features  in  some  points  unlike  those 
of  his  predecessors,  and  approaching  closely  to 
the  Hebrew  type.  Ewald  recognises  and  attaches 
much  importance  to  the  traces  of  an  attempt  to 
introduce  a more  spiritual  form  of  religion  at 
this  period:  see  ‘ Geschichte,’  v.  I.  ii.,  p.  51, 
note,  2nd  edition. 


In  Egyptian,  ^ ^ ^ name 

Bithia,  exactly  transcribed,  would  be 

The  name  of  the  father  of  Tei, 

lua,  is  markedly  Jewish.  See  the  inscription  in 
Brugsch,  ‘ Gcographische  Inscriften,’ i.,  taf.  ix., 
333.  In  a work  lately  published  (1868), 
‘The  Fleet  of  an  Egyptian  Queen,’  M.  Due- 
michen  points  out  the  resemblance  and  apparent 
connection  between  Aten  and  pTN,  Lord,  ob- 
serving that  the  hieroglyphic  group  is  certainly 
used  with  reference  to  this  Semitic  name  of  God. 
See  explanation  of  pi.  iii. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


growth  of  the  power  of  the  Moabites,  and  of 
the  nomads  bearing  the  general  denomina- 
tion of  Shasous  in  Egyptian,  of  Amalek,  Edom, 
Ammon,  &c.,  in  Hebrew,  was  a natural  result 
of  the  expulsion  of  the  Mesopotamians  on  the 
one  side,  and  the  prostration  of  Egypt  on  the 
other.^'  In  the  mean  time  the  Gheta  were  gra- 
dually acquiring  the  ascendancy  from  Cilicia 
to  the  Euphrates,®'^  occupying  the  strongholds 
in  Syria,  and  encroaching  gradually  on  the 
borders  of  Palestine,  a position  which,  not- 
withstanding repeated  and  triumphant  inva- 
sions of  their  own  territory,  they  occupied 
during  the  whole  period  of  the  nineteenth 
and  apparently  also  the  twentieth  dynasties. 

The  duration  assigned  by  M.  Brugsch  to 
the  eighteenth  dynasty  from  the  decease  of 
Thotmes  HI.  is  about  loo  years.  The  cor- 
responding period,  on  the  hypothesis  we 
are  now  considering,  brings  us  near  to  the 
occupation  of  Palestine  by  Eglon  King  of 
Moab.  It  will  be  observed  that,  although  the 
results  of  comparison  of  Egyptian  and  Hebrew 
annals  are,  and  must  be  to  a great  extent  con- 
jectural, inasmuch  as  no  direct  or  distinct 
notice  of  the  events  preceding  the  Exodus 
or  following  the  occupation  of  Palestine  by 
the  Israelites  is  found  on  Egyptian  monu- 
ments, and  no  notice  of  Egyptian  history 
occurs  in  the  books  of  Joshua,  Judges,  and 
Samuel,  yet  the  conjectures  rest  on  data 
established  beyond  all  contradiction.  They 
do  not  profess  to  do  more  than  show  that  the 
two  series  of  events  dovetail,  and  mutually 
sustain  and  explain  each  other:  the  coinci- 
dences, whether  they  be  held  complete  and 
convincing  or  not,  are  unsought ; they  forced 
themselves  on  the  writer’s  attention,  and  gra- 
dually led  him  to  give  a decided  preference  to 
the  hypothesis  which  has  been  here  defended, 
over  that  which  is  at  present  generally  sup- 
ported by  Egyptian  scholars. 

(23.)  We  have  now  to  consider  what  argu- 
ments favourable  or  unfavourable  to  this  hypo- 
thesis are  drawn  from  Manetho  and  other  docu- 
ments known  to  us  through  the  medium  of 
Greek.  Here  we  must  carefully  distinguish 
between  facts  borne  out  by  contemporary 
monuments,  and  statements  which,  whether 
correctly  or  incorrectly  represented  by  the 
translators  and  epitomizers,  are  contradicted 
or  not  corroborated  by  such  authority. 

The  Exodus  is  assumed  by  all  ancient 
chronologers,  who  derived  their  information 
from  Egyptian  sources,  to  have  taken  place 
under  the  eighteenth  dynasty.®®  Josephus, 


It  is  also  to  be  remarked  that  the  Rutens,  or 
Assyrians,  were  so  weakened  towards  the  end  of 
the  eighteenth  dynasty  that  they  lost  the  ascen- 
dancy ; a fact  sufficiently  explained  by  the  over- 
throw of  Cushan  Rishathaim. 

See  Brugsch,  ‘ H.  E,,’  p.  127,  and  M. 
Chabas,  ‘Voyage,’  p.  325. 

All  the  passages  are  collected  in  the  first 
volume  of  Bunsen’s  ‘Egypt.’ 


461 

who  regards  the  expulsion  of  the  Hyksos  to 
be  but  a confused  tradition  of  the  departure 
of  the  Israelites,  places  it  under  the  first 
king  whom  he  calls  Tethmosis ; Africanus, 
who  follows  Ptolemy  the  Mendesian,  under 
Amos,  ue.  Amosis,  or  Aahmes.  Eusebius 
brings  the  transaction  lower  down,  but  still 
long  before  the  nineteenth  dynasty,  viz.  under 
Achencherses  or  Achencheres,  i.  e.  probably 
Khunaten,  the  son  of  Amenophis  III.  This 
opinion  is  said  by  Syncellus  to  be  avowedly 
in  contradiction  to  all  other  authorities. 
Eusebius  was  probably  led  to  it  by  the  evident 
indications  of  great  disturbances  under  that 
reign,  and  by  the  tradition  that  emigrations 
of  considerable  extent  took  place  soon  after- 
wards.®® 

Passing  to  Manetho’s  own  statements,  we 
find  that  he  represents  the  kings  of  the 
Thebaid  and  of  Upper  Egypt  as  engaged  in 
a great  and  long-continued  warfare  with  the 
Hyksos:  he  asserts  that  the  king,  Misphrag- 
muthosis,  drove  them  out  of  all  the  other 
districts  in  Egypt,  and  confined  them  within 
the  vast  enclosure  of  Avaris.  His  son  Teth- 
mosis besieged  the  city  with  an  immense  army, 
and,  being  unable  to  capture  it,  made  a treaty 
with  them,  permitting  their  departure:  they 
are  said  to  have  gone  forth  with  their  funii- 
ture  and  their  cattle,  forming  a host  not  less 
than  240,000  in  number,  then  to  have  tra- 
versed the  desert  between  Egypt  and  Syria, 
and  at  last,  fearing  the  Assyrians,  at  that  time 
masters  of  Asia,  to  have  settled  in  Judaea, 
where  they  built  the  city  of  Jerusalem. 

Setting  the  account  which  has  been  given 
in  these  pages  side  by  side  with  the  statement 
of  Manetho,  we  see  at  once  the  character  of 
his  history,  and  the  corroboration  which  it 
supplies  to  what  has  been  advanced. 

(i)  A war  of  considerable  duration  was  car- 
ried on  between  the  kings  of  Upper  Egypt 
and  the  Shepherds.  Here  Manetho  and 
the  monuments  agree.  (2)  The  king  whom 
Manetho  calls  Misphragmuthosis  achieved 
great  successes  in  war,  but  did  not  capture 
Avaris.  It  is  true  that  the  Shepherds  were 
attacked  by  the  first  king  of  the  dynasty,  but 
untrue  that  Avaris  was  not  captured  by  him. 
Here  we  have  a partial  agreement,  but  the  name 
of  the  king  is  not  correct.  (3)  Certain  enemies 
of  the  Egyptians  were  in  possession  of  a 
limited  district  under  his  successor.  The 
monuments  are  silent,  but  from  the  Penta- 
teuch we  know  that  the  Israelites  occupied 
Goshen  at  this  time,  as  nearly  all  Egyptian 
scholars  agree.  (4)  These  enemies  left  Egypt 
by  permission,  traversed  Syria,  and  occupied 
Palestine.  Their  forces  amounted  to  240,000. 
The  monuments  are  silent.  We  have  the 
Scriptural  account  with  scarcely  a variation. 


_ Viz.  the  expulsion  of  Danaus  and  his  settle- 
ment at  Argos.  See  the  statement  of  Diodorus, 
p.  462. 


ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


462 

The  principal  inference  bearing  on  our 
present  subject  is  that  all  these  notices  refer 
to  the  same  period,  viz.  the  early  years  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty. 

In  another  work  Manetho  gives  what  may 
have  been  in  his  time  the  Egyptian  account 
of  the  Exodus ; it  is  utterly  worthless,  and,  as 
nearly  all  critics  have  observed,  was  evidently 
invented  by  a person  who  had  the  Scripture 
narrative  before  him.®^  It  represents  the 
Israelites  as  lepers,  and  identifies  Moses  with 
Osarsiph,*^-  a priest  of  Heliopolis,  evidently 
Joseph.  The  Egyptian  king,  in  whose  reign  the 
enemies  first  made  themselves  masters  of  all 
Egypt,  committing  atrocities  far  beyond  those 
attributed  to  the  Hyksos,  is  called  Amenophis. 
According  to  this  strange  figment,  Amenophis 
committed  his  son  Sethos,  called  also  Rhamses, 
to  the  charge  of  some  private  individual,  and 
retired  into  Ethiopia,  whence  he  returned 
with  a great  army,  and  finally  ejected  the 
lepers  ‘ind*  their  allies  the  Shepherds  from 
Egypt,  pursuing  them  unto  the  borders  of 
Syria. 

All  names  and  events  are  here  in  hopeless 
confusion ; but  each  name  and  each  event  is 
found,  though  under  very  difi'erent  circum- 
stances, either  in  Egyptian  or  in  sacred  history. 
Osarsiph  and  Moses,  the  character  of  the 
Mosaic  law,  the  prevalence  of  leprosy,  the 
connection  of  Osarsiph  with  Heliopolis,  are 
taken  from  Scripture:  the  names  of  Avaris, 
Amenophis,  Sethos,  Rhamses,  from  Egyptian 
monuments.  The  expulsion  of  the  Shepherds 
by  an  Egyptian  king  with  forces  brought 
from  Ethiopia  is,  as  we  have  seen,  historical. 
Amenophis  himself,  the  son  of  Amosis,  made 
an  expedition  into  Ethiopia.  There  was  a 
religious  aspect  of  the  struggle  between  the 
Shepherds  and  the  Egyptians.  No  inference 
of  any  value  can  be  clrawn  from  the  whole 
narrative  in  favour  of  either  hypothesis  now 
under  consideration.  On  the  one  side  the 
names  of  Sethos  and  Rameses  would  point  to 
tlie  nineteenth  dynasty,  but  it  is  scarcely  con- 
ceivable that  a man  having  the  least  acquaint- 
ance with  Egyptian  history  should  have 
confounded  Sethos  and  his  son,  or  have  re- 
presented Amenophis  as  the  father  of  Sesostris. 
On  the  other  sicle,  the  name  of  Amenophis 
would  point  distinctly  to  the  eighteenth 
dynasty,  and  the  whole  narrative  might  get 
into  the  shape  which  it  here  assumes,  if  the 
facts  above  proved,  and  the  combinations 
which  we  have  assumed,  had  been  manipulated 
by  an  Egyptian  priest  under  the  Ptolemies. 

'I'he  story  told  by  Chasremon  (see  Jose- 
phus c.  Apion,  i.  32)  is  a modification  of  this, 
i he  Israelites  are  led  by  Moses  and  Joseph, 

See  Ihowne,  ‘ Ordo  Sccclorum,’  p.  581. 

There  is  an  evident  reference  to  one  or 
both  of  Joseph’s  names.  The  last  syllable, 
Siph,  answers  to  sejdi,  and  also  to  Zaf,  food, 
Osir  means  rich,  powerful,  &c.  ; Osersiph*  rich 
in  food. 


whose  Egyptian  names  are  said  to  be  Tisithen 
and  Peteseph.®^  They  join  an  army  of  300,000 
men,  whom  Amenophis  had  left  at  Pelusium, 
because  he  did  not  wish  to  bring  them  into 
Egypt.  Amenophis  retreated  into  Ethiopia, 
where  he  had  a son  named  Mepenes,  who, 
when  he  became  a man,  drove  the  Jews  into 
Syria,  and  recalled  his  father  Amenophis  from 
Ethiopia. 

An  extract  from  Lysimachus,  given  also  by 
Josephus,  is  a mere  corruption  of  the  Scriptural 
narrative,  invented  under  the  Ptolemies,  It 
names  Bocchoris  (b.c.  721)  as  the  Pharaoh 
of  the  Exodus:  a striking  instance  of  con- 
temptuous disregard  of  all  historical  proba- 
bilities. 

Diodorus  has  two  accounts : in  one  (c. 
xxxiv.  i)  the  adherents  of  Antiochus  Sidetes 
represent  the  Jews  as  a despicable  race  ex- 
pelled from  Egypt,  hateful  to  the  gods  on 
account  of  foul  cutaneous  diseases;  in  the 
other  (c.  xl.  i)  he  relates  that  in  ancient 
times  a pestilence  which  raged  in  Egypt  was 
ascribed  to  the  wrath  of  the  gods  on  account 
of  the  multitude  of  aliens  who  with  their 
strange  worship  were  ofi'ensive  to  the  gods  of 
the  land.  The  aliens  were  therefore  expelled. 
I'he  most  distinguished  among  them  betook 
themselves  to  Greece  and  other  adjoining 
regions,  among  whom  were  Danaus  and  Cad- 
mus. The  main  body,  however,  retired  into 
the  country  afterwards  called  Judaea,  which 
at  that  time  was  a desert.  This  colony  was 
led  by  Moses. 

From  what  source  Diodorus  derived  this 
latter  statement  is  quite  uncertain,  but  the 
colouring  is  Egyptian.  It  undoubtedly  points 
to  an  earlier  period  than  the  nineteenth  dynasty ; 
most  probably  to  that  assigned  by  Eusebius  to 
the  emigration  into  Palestine  and  Greece,  viz. 
the  latter  reigns  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty. 

As  a general  result  from  this  part  of  our 
inquiry,  we  find  that,  with  two  exceptions, 
all  the  names  and  transactions  noticed  by 
Manetho,  and  by  Greek  writers,  whether 
heathen  or  Christian,  harmonise  with  the 
course  of  events  under  the  eighteenth  dynasty. 
One  exception  is  simply  noticeable  for  its 
absurdity,  bringing  the  Exodus  down  to  the 
eighth  century  and  the  twenty-fourth  dynasty : 
the  other  is  more  important  since  it  intro- 
duces the  names  of  Sethos  and  Rameses,  but 
under  circumstances  and  in  a relationship 
which  evince  cither  an  entire  ignorance  or 
a wilful  perversion  of  the  best  known  facts 
of  Egyptian  history. 

One  argument  remains  of  which  the  im- 
portance will  not  be  questioned.  Critics  of 
the  most  opposite  schools  who  have  carefully 

,Seph,  the  last  syllable  of  Joseph’s  Hebrew, 
and  the  first  of  his  Egyptian  name,  .seems  to 
have  left  a permanent  impression,  and  that  a very 
natural  one,  as  meaning  “food.”  See  Essay 
II. 

Sec  Browne,  ‘ Ordo  Soeclorum,’  p.  584. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


463 


considered  the  bearings  of  the  facts  drawn 
from  Egyptian  sources  upon  the  narrative  of 
Exodus,  concur  in  the  conclusion  that  the  ac- 
cession of  the  eighteenth  dynasty  was  the  be- 
ginning of  the  persecution,  and  that  the  Exodus 
took  place  in  some  reign  before  the  acces- 
sion of  the  nineteenth.  Thus  Knobel,  Winer, 
and  Ewald. 

(24.)  We  have  now  to  consider  whether  the 
facts,  admitted  by  all  Egyptologers  and  attested 
by  monuments  and  other  documents  of  un- 
questionable authority,  which  appertain  to 
the  history  of  the  19th  dynasty,  accord  with 
the  hypothesis  here  adopted,  or  whether  we 
should  acquiesce  in  the  conclusion  to  which 
eminent  scholars  have  been  led  ; that 
which  identihes  Rameses  II.  with  the  first 
persecutor  of  the  Israelites,  and  places  the 
Exodus  under  his  son  Merneptah.  It  may  be 
well  to  say  at  once  that  the  reader  might 
accept  that  conclusion  without  repugnance : 
on  certain  conditions  it  may  be  reconciled 
with  the  narrative  of  Exodus,  which  some  at 
least  of  its  chief  supporters  accept  as  an 
authentic  document,  if  not  as  the  production 
of  Moses.  It  is,  however,  a question  to  be 
determined  not  by  authority,  but  by  circum- 
stantial evidence.  It  is  now  universally  ad- 
mitted that  no  monuments  of  this  or  of  any 
other  period  make  mention  of  the  events 
which  preceded  or  immediately  followed  the 
departure  of  the  Israelites.^®  In  the  following 
pages  every  fact  bearing  upon  this  question 
will  be  fairly  and  fully  stated,  together  with 
the  arguments  on  both  sides. 

(25.)  W e have  first  to  inquire  into  the  known 
or  probable  condition  of  Palestine  during  the 
interval  between  the  early  Judges  and  the  time 
of  Deborah  and  Barak.  It  is  an  interval  of 
considerable  duration,  extending  over  some 
two  centuries,  if  we  take  the  numbers  in 
the  book  of  Judges  literally,®^  and  covering 


M.  de  Rouge  says  in  his  ‘ Report  on 
Egyptian  Studies,’  1867,  p.  27,  “ Les  rapports 
de  temps  et  de  noms  ont  fait  penser  a M.  de 
Rouge  que  Rameses  11.  devait  etre  considere 
egalement  comrne  le  Pharaon  sous  lequel  JMoise 
dut  fuir  I’Egypte  et  dont  le  tres-long  regne  for^a 
le  legislateur  futur  des  Hebreux  a un  tres-long 
exil.  A defaut  d’un  texte  precis  qui  manque 
dans  la  Bible,  cette  conjecture  rend  Lien  compte 
des  faits,  et  elle  a ete  generalement  adoptee.’’ 
It  has  in  fact  been  adopted  by  Egyptian  scholars 
in  Germany,  France,  and  England.  The  sobriety 
and  reserve  with  which  M.  de  Rouge  states  this 
conjecture,  to  which  he  attaches  great  value, 
stand  out  in  strong  contrast  to  the  confidence 
with  which  it  is  maintained  as  a proved  fact  by 
most  of  his  followers. 

9®  See  the  statement  of  M.  de  Rouge  quoted 
above,  note  67. 

97  The  numbers  in  Judges  iii.  are  a long  but 
uncertain  time  from  the  conquest  under  Joshua, 
X,  Cushan  Rishathaim,  8 years ; peace,  40  years ; 
Eglon,  18  years  ; rest,  80  years  ; Philistines,  x ; 
i.e.  146  + X 4-  X.  Brugsch  calculates  the  in- 


certainly  as  much  time  as  is  occupied  by  the 
annals  of  Egypt  between  Amenophis  III.  and 
the  later  kings  of  the  nineteenth  dynasty. 

During  the  whole  of  that  period  it  is  dis- 
tinctly stated  that  the  Israelites  were  not  in 
exclusive  possession  of  Palestine;  they  dwelt 
among  the  Canaanites,  Hittites,  and  .Amorites, 
and  Peri/zites,  and  Hivites,  and  Jebusites. 
(Judges  iii.  5.)  Many  of  the  most  important 
strongholds  were  occupied  by  these  nations, 
including  nearly  all  those  which  are  men- 
tioned in  the  records  of  Seti  and  Rameses  II.”® 
Generally  speaking,  the  open  country  was  re- 
tained by  the  Amorites,  against  whose  iron 
chariotry  the  Israelites  could  not  make  head 
even  in  Judah  (Judges  i.  19).  The  whole 
district  from  the  southern  frontier  upward 
belonged  to  them,  and  was  apparently  called, 
as  we  find  it  even  in  inscriptions  of  the 
twentieth  dynasty,  the  land  of  the  Amorites.'*® 
This  was  the  case  even  when  the  land  was 
at  rest : in  some  portions  of  Palestine  the 
Israelites  brought  the  inhabitants  into  partial 
subjection  and  made  them  tributaries,  but  the 
process  was  slow,  alternating  with  many  dis- 
asters, and  not  completed  until  a very  late 
period,  long  after  that  which  is  now  under 
consideration.  When  the  Israelites  were 
themselves  brought  under  subjection  the 
whole  country  was  in  a state  described 
incidentally  in  the  song  of  Deborah ; the 
highways  were  unoccupied,  the  villages 
ceased,  there  was  war  in  the  gates,  i.e.  the 
strongholds  were  blockaded ; while  not  a 
spear  or  shield  was  to  be  seen  among  40,000 
in  Israel  (Judges  v.  6). 

It  is  clear  therefore  that  an  Egyptian  army 
traversing  Palestine  at  any  part  of  this  time 
would  not  encounter  Israelitish  forces  in  the 
open  field;  Israel  had  no  chariotry, no  horses, 
and  would  not  be  concerned  with  expeditions 
which  were  invariably  directed  against  its 
own  enemies  in  Syria.^®® 

We  have  now  to  remark  the  very  exact 
correspondence  between  the  Hebrew  and 


terval  between  Amenophis  III.  and  Merneptah 
at  200  years.  The  elements  of  uncertainty  on 
both  sides  are  considerable,  but  the  general 
correspondence  is  noteworthy. 

99  E.g.,  Jerusalem,  Bethshean,  Taanach, 
Dor,  Megiddo,  Zidon,  Bethshemesh,  Bethanath. 
Gaza  and  the  other  four  cities  in  the  district 
were  evidently  recovered  during  this  period  by 
the  Philistines.  Compare  Judges  i.  18  with  iii. 
3 and  31.  In  the  inscriptions  of  the  nineteenth 
dynasty,  I cannot  find  any  Palestinian  city  which 
the  book  of  Judges  represents  as  occupied  by 
Israelites  in  the  period  after  the  conquest. 

99  See  e.g.  Duemichen,  ‘ Hist.  Inschriften,’ 
pi.  xxviii.,  xxix. 

^99  The  strongholds  which  the  Egyptians, 
under  Seti  and  Rameses  II.,  had  occasion  to 
attack,  and  some  of  which  they  appear  to  have 
garrisoned,  were,  with  scarcely  an  exception,  in 
the  posses.sion  of  Canaanites  or  Hittites.  See 
note  98. 


ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


464 

Egyptian  notices  of  the  power  predominant 
in  W estern  Asia. 

The  Assyrians,  called  Riitens  by  the  Egypt- 
ians, were  masters  of  the  north  lof  Syria,  and 
of  ail  the  countries  extending  from  Cilicia  to 
Mesopotamia,  when  that  district  was  invaded 
by  the  early  kings  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty.'®^ 
Their  influence  in  the  confederacy  opposed  to 
Egypt  was  gradually  superseded.  Up  to  the 
time  wlien  Seti  1.  invaded  Syria,  i.e.  according 
to  our  computation  about  150  years  after  the 
Exodus,  they  were  the  leaders  of  the  con- 
federacy, which  was  then  broken,  dispersed, 
and  for  a season  crushed  by  repeated  defeats. 
M.  Ghabas  observes  (p.  328)  that  under 
Rameses  II.  they  disappear  altogether,  they 
are  not  even  mentioned  in  the  great  campaign 
of  his  5th  year.  Their  name  is  found  on  a 
small  number  of  monuments  belonging  to 
later  reigns,  but  there  is  no  indication  that 
they  had  recovered  their  former  importance. 

In  accordance  with  this  we  find  that  their 
last  appearance  in  Palestine  was  soon  after 
its  occupation  by  the  Israelites,  when  Gushan 
Rishathaim  was  finally  expelled  by  Othniel  the 
nephew  of  Caleb. 

Nothing  more  probable  than  that  such 
an  event  should  have  occurred  under  the 
eighteenth  dynasty  (see  above,  p.  460);  its 
occurrence  at  the  late  period  which  the  ac- 
ceptance of  the  other  chronological  system 
would  involve  is  inconceivable. 

In  place  of  the  Rutens  or  Assyrians  we  find 
the  Gheta  in  possession  of  Syria  at  the  acces- 
sion of  Seti  I.  The  identification  of  this  people 
with  the  Hittites  of  Scripture  has  been  ques- 
tioned, chiefly  on  philological  grounds,^'(-  by 
M.  Ghabas;  but  is  still  generally  admitted 
by  Egyptian  scholars,  and  appears  to  rest  on 
very  sulheient  evidence.  It  is  certain  that  the 
Hittites,  Ganaanites,  Zidonians,  and  Amorites, 
formed  part  of  the  confederacy  opposed  to 
Seti  and  Rameses  II.  VVe  learn  from  the 
book  of  Judges  (i.  26)  that  the  country 
north  of  Palestine  was  called  the  land  of  the 
Hittites,  that  Phoenicia  retained  its  inde- 
pendence, and  further,  that  at  the  close_  of  the 
period  the  whole  country  was  in  subjection 
to  Jabin  King  of  Ganaan,  the  captain  of 
whose  host  was  “Sisera,^*^^  which  dwelt  in 
Plarosheth  of  the  Gentiles.” 

Taking  now  the  contemporary  history  of 
Eg\'pt  derived  exclusively  from  public  inscrip- 
tions, we  have  the  following  coincidences : — ^ 

(26.)  In  the  first  year  of  his  reign  Seti 

'0*  I'or  proofs  see  M.  Brugseh,  ‘II.  E.  and  G.,’ 
and  the  dissertation  by  xM.  Ghabas,  ‘Voyage 
d’un  Kgypticn,’  p.  318-332. 

i.e.,  from  the  comparison  of  Chetan  names 
(of  which  seventeen  are  preserved  in  the  treaty 
between  Rameses  II.  and  Khetasar)  with  the 
names  of  Hittites  found  in  the  Bible. 

The  name  is  evidently  Chetan  ; it  has  the 
most  marked  characteristic  of  the  names  collected 
by  M.  Ghabas  (see  note  74),  viz.  the  termination 
Sera  or  Sar:  see  further  on. 


marched  against  the  Shasous,  who  at  that  time 
occupied,  or  were  masters  of,  the  countries 
from  Pithom  to  Pakanana.  He  defeated 
them  with  great  slaughter,  and  advanced  into 
Mesopotamia.  On  a second  invasion  he  again 
traversed  the  territory  occupied  by  the  Shasous 
and  took  several  forts. 

The  word  Shasous,  as  we  have  before  seen, 
was  a general  denomination  for  the  warlike 
tribes  who  at  various  times  overran  Palestine. 
About  the  time  which  the  synchronism  of 
Egyptian  and  Hebrew  history,  on  our  hy- 
pothesis, assigns  to  Seti  and  the  Israelites,  we 
find  Eglon  King  of  Moab  in  combination 
with  the  children  of  Ammon  and  Amalek, 
master  of  the  country.  At  any  time  within 
the  period,  as  we  have  also  observed,  the 
opponents  whom  the  Pharaohs  would  en- 
counter in  Palestine  would  come  under  the 
same  general  designation. 

The  fortresses  named  in  the  inscriptions 
which  refer  to  this  campaign  were  one  and 
all  occupied  by  the  enemies  of  Israel. 

The  Shasous  conquered  by  Seti  were  in 
alliance  with  the  Syrians  and  the  Rutens : 
both  mentioned  as  foes  or  oppressors  of  the 
Israelites. 

The  great  object  of  Seti  and  his  successor 
was  to  conquer  Syria,  and  to  occupy  its 
principal  city  called  Kadesh,  which  is  probably 
identified  by  Egyptologers  with  Edessa,  or 
Ems,  on  the  Orontes. 

At  the  close  of  this  reign  Egypt  was  domi- 
nant in  Syria,  and  held  some  fortresses,  but 
the  power  of  the  Gheta  was  unbroken,  and 
we  have  no  traces  whatever  of  a permanent 
occupation  of  Palestine.  As  in  the  time  of 
Sham  gar,  the  Israelites  were  in  the  state  de- 
scribed as  that  of  Seti’s  foes  in  the  inscriptions, 
either  hidden  in  caves  or  entrenched  in  inac- 
cessible strongholds.^^^  The  principal  effect  of 
the  invasion,  so  far  as  the  Hebrews  were 
concerned,  would  be  a diminution  in  the 
power  and  resources  of  their  foes. 

The  transactions  in  the  reign  of  Rameses  II. 
will  require  very  special  attention.  W e shall 
best  arrive  at  a conclusion  by  considering  each 
point  in  detail  which  may  tell  for  or  against 
either  hypothesis. 

(27.)  Rameses  Merammon,  the  Sesostris^°®of 


^0-*  It  is  questioned  whether  this  means  a fort 
in  Syria  or  Ganaan. 

See  Brugseh,  ‘ Recueil  I.,’  pi.  xlv.  e: 
“throwing  av/ay  their  bows  they  fled  to  caves 
in  terror  from  his  majesty.”  The  word  “caves” 

here  is  Hebrew,  ^ q IGT  1 1 
magaratha  = DHyD. 

106  This  is  generally  held,  but  is  not  certain. 
Dr.  G.  Ebers  doubts  whether  Herodotus  does 
not  refer  the  name  to  Seti  I.,  and  suggests  that 
the  hieroglyphic  group  may  perhaps  be  read 
Sesetres,  or  Sesetresu,  which  comes  very  near 
Sesostris.  See  ‘ Egypten  und  die  Bucher 
Moses,’  i.  p.  79.  1868. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


465 


the  Greeks,  succeeded  Seti  I.  It  was  supposed 
until  very  lately  that  he  was  very  young,  a 
mere  lad,  on  his  accession  ; but  the  researches 
of  M.  Mariette^^^'  have  brought  to  light  the 
curious  and  interesting  fact  that  he  had  been 
associated  with  his  father  from  infancy  in  the 
royal  dignity,  and  that  he  had  been  admitted 
to  the  full  prerogatives  of  a Pharaoh  long 
before  the  death  of  Seti : in  the  first  year  after 
that  event  he  is  represented  as  surrounded 
with  a family  of  twenty-seven  princes  and  as 
many  princesses.  This  is  important  in  its 
bearings  on  Egyptian  chronology.  There  is 
no  doubt  that  he  reigned  full  sixty-seven  years, 
a date  found  lately  on  a monument  at  Tanis, 
but  from  what  epoch  the  year  is  dated  re- 
mains uncertain ; probably  from  an  epoch 
long  anterior  to  his  father’s  decease.^*^®  The 
argument  is  of  still  more  importance  in  its 
bearing  upon  another  t)iblical  question.  Of 
no  king  in  the  whole  series  of  Pharaohs  could 
it  be  asserted,  in  such  direct  contradiction  of 
w'cll-known  facts,  that  he  was  a ne^u  king, 
rising  up  over  Egypt : of  none  can  it  be  proved 
more  certainly  that  he  did  not  at  once  make 
an  entire  change  in  the  policy  of  this  kingdom. 
The  argument  upon  which  much  stress  is 
laid,  viz.  that  his  lengthened  reign  accords 
with  the  notices  in  Exodus,  falls  with  the 
assumption  that  he  outlived  his  father  some 
sixty-seven  years. 


‘ Fouilles  executees  en  F,g}^pte,  en  Nubie,  et 
au  Soudan,  d’apres  les  ordres  de  S.  A.  le  Viceroi 
d’Egypte,  par  Auguste Mariette Bey.’  Paris,  1867. 
The  second  volume,  in  two  parts,  contains  text 
and  plates  ; the  first  volume  is  not  yet  published. 
The  most  important  inscription,  from  the  temple 
at  Abydos',  has  been  carefully  analysed  by  M. 
Maspero,  1867.  It  belongs  to  the  first  year  of 
the  sole  reign  of  Rameses  II.,  Avho  is  represented 
as  associated  from  his  infancy  with  his  father,  and 
formally  crowned  while  yet  a boy.  Compare 
Maspero,  p.  29,  with  Mariette,  p.  15.  Mariette’s 
work  throws  an  unexpected  and  curious  light  on 
the  character  of  Rameses,  and  on  the  state  of 
Egyptian  art  towards  the  end  of  his  reign.  In 
the  earlier  inscriptions  Rameses  expresses  the 
highest  veneration  and  gratitude  to  his  father  ; in 
the  latter  he  effaces  the  name  of  Seti,  and  sub- 
stitutes his  own.  The  earlier  portions  of  the  build- 
ing and  inscriptions  are  remarkable  for  beauty 
and  breadth  of  style  ; the  later  sculptures  are  in- 
correct, and  the  style  detestable.  See  ‘Fouilles,’ 
especially  p.  99,  Since  this  note  was  printed, 
M.  Mariette  has  withdrawn  the  volume  here 
quoted  from  circulation,  and  substituted  another, 
in  which  much  valuable  matter  is  suppressed. 

108  materially  affects  the  argument  to 

which  M.  de  Rouge  has  always  attached  special 
importance  (see  above,  note  95).  Moses  could  not 
have^  been  born  until  some  years  after  the  be- 
ginning of  the  persecution,  i.e.,  according  to  M. 
de  Rouge,  Brugsch,  and  others,  after  the  Syrian 
campaign ; when  Rameses  is  now  proved  to  have 
been  at  least  in  the  maturity  of  middle  life.  We 
thus  lose  the  space  of  eighty  years  required  by 
the  Biblical  narrative  before  the  Exodus. 


In  the  5th  year  of  his  sole  reign  Rameses 
invaded  Syria.  In  the  neighbourhood  of 
Kadesh,  on  the  Orontes,  he  defeated  the  con- 
federates, who  as  usual  had  revolted  when 
their  conqueror  died.  The  battle  would  almost 
seem  to  be  the  only  one  in  which  the  Icing 
distinguished  himself ; it  is  described  on 
numerous  monuments,  and  forms  the  subject 
of  what  is  called  the  epic  poem  of  Pentaour.^°^ 
The  campaign  was  successful : one  of  the 
most  important  results  for  this  inquiry  was 
the  capture,  and  perhaps  the  occupation,  of 
some  fortresses  in  Palestine.  We  have  the 
name  of  Sharem,  or  Shalem ; it  is  doubtful 
whether  this  is  to  be  Identified  with  Jeru- 
salem ; if  so,  it  was,  as  we  know,  long  after 
the  conquest,  in  possession  of  the  Jebusites ; 
Maram  and  Dapur,  in  the  land  of  the  Amorites, 
are  also  mentioned ; Bethanath,  still  occupied 
by  Canaanites  (see  Judges  i.  33);  and  lastly 
Askelon.  The  notices  of  Askelon  in  Judges 
show  that  it  was  taken  at  first  by  the  Israelites 
(i.  i8j,  and  imply  probably  that  it  came 
again  into  the  occupation  of  the  Philistines 
some  time  later,  perhaps  in  the  time  of  Shamgar. 
See  Judges  iii.  31. 

So  far  the  argument  remains  stationary. 
The  condition  of  Palestine  under  Rameses 
continues  as  under  Seti,  quite  in  agreement 
with  that  which  we  find  in  the  3rd  chapter  of 
J udges ; Egypt  commanding  the  high  roads, 
occupying  some  fortresses  taken  principally 
from  the  Canaanites,  but  concentrating  its 
forces  and  developing  all  its  energies  in  its 
attempt  to  retain  supremacy  in  Syria.  We 
should  of  course  expect  to  find  among  the 
numerous  prisoners  of  war  brought  back  by 
Rameses  some  Israelites,  if,  as  we  have 
assumed,  they  were  then  dwelling,  though 
not  dominant,  in  the  land. 

(28.)  It  was  after  the  king’s  return  to  Egypt 
that  the  events  occurred  upon  which  the  hypo- 
thesis rests  that  he  reduced  the  Israelites  of 
Goshen  to  bondage.  Diodorus  relates  that  he 
constructed  a line  of  fortifications  from  Pelu- 
sium  to  Heliopolis.  It  is,  however,  proved  by 
the  monuments  that  such  a line  existed  under 
the  ancient  empire,  and  that  it  had  been  en- 
larged and  strengthened  by  his  father  Seti. 
It  is  also  known  that  in  the  latter  years  of  his 
reign  Rameses  effaced  his  father’s  name  and 
substituted  his  own  on  many  of  the  principal 
constructions  of  Egypt ; still  there  can  be 
no  reasonable  doubt  that  he  employed  vast 
numbers  of  captives  in  the  fortresses  which 


109  This  curious  and  important  document  was 
first  explained  and  afterwards  translated  by  M.  de 
Roug4  M.  Chabas,  and  Mr.  Goodwin.  The  trans- 
lation in  Brugsch,  ‘Flistoire  d’Egypte,’  p.  140, 
is  that  of  M.  de  Rouge.  The  original  exists  in  a 
hieratic  papyrus,  Sallier  III,,  in  the  Select  Papyri 
of  the  British  Museum,  and  more  or  less  complete 
in  hieroglyphic  inscriptions  at  Karnak  and  Abu 
Simbel. 

See  note 


G G 


466  ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


he  enlarged,  or  erected  on  the  banks  of  the 
great  canal,  now  called  the  Wady  Tumilat. 
Among  these  fortresses  two  are  mentioned 
specially,  the  fort  of  Zaru  and  Pe-Ramesses, 
'l'h«se  are  assumed  by  Brugsch  to  be  the 
Pithom  and  Rameses  of  Exodus.  The 
question  is-  fully  discussed  in  another  part 
of  this  work.  Here  it  is  enough  to  ob- 
serve that  these  two  cities  or  forts  existed 
previously.  That  which  Brugsch  calls  Pithom, 
but  of  which  the  true  name  in  Egyptian  is 
Pa-Ghetem  en  Zalou,  was  at  least  as  old  as 
the  time  of  Thotmes  III.  Pithom  itself,  the 
Pa-T um  of  the  inscriptions,  the  Udrovixos  of 
Herodotus,  may  have  been,  and  probably  was, 
in  its  immediate  neighbourhood,  but  it  is 
nowhere  mentioned  in  connexion  with  Ra- 
meses. The  case  is  much  stronger  for  the 
other  city.^^^  Pa-Ramessou,  or  A-Ramessou, 
■i.e.  the  residence  of  Rameses,  was  undoubtedly 
•enlarged  by  this  king:  it  was  a city  of  the 
highest  importance,  the  capital  of  a rich 
district,  the  residence  of  the  sovereign,  where 
he  received  foreign  embassies,  reviewed  his 
troops,  and  held  a magnificent  court.  Still 
it  is  proved  by  contemporary  documents  that 
it  was  not  founded  by  Rameses.  In  the  fifth 
year  of  his  reign,  before  the  great  works  for 
the  defence  of  the  frontier  were  constructed, 
Rameses  received  the  ambassadors  of  the 
Cheta  in  this  city,  which,  according  to  M. 
Brugsch,  is  mentioned  by  name  in  the  reign 
of  Seti.^^- 

Considering,  however,  the  great  importance 
of  this  citadel,  to  which  additions  were  made 
continually  under  this  reign,  we  should  expect 
that  a large  number  of  captives  would  be 
employed  in  the  works,  and  among  the  captives 
brought  into  Egypt  at  the  end  of  the  Syrian 
campaign  Israelites  would  naturally  be  looked 
for.  Although  it  was  the  usual  policy  of 
Rameses  to  employ  prisoners  in  the  parts 
of  his  dominions  most  remote  from  their  own 
country,  there  were  obvious  reasons  why  this 
system  should  be  departed  from  in  their  case  : 
there  was  a grim  irony,  quite  in  keeping  with 
Egyptian  character,  in  reducing  Israelites  to 


The  identity  of  this  city  with  Rameses  is  the 
main,  in  fact  the  only  substantial  argument  for 
making  Moses  the  contemporary  of  Rameses  II. 
Even  were  it  admitted  that  the  name,  in  the 
exact  form  which  it  takes  in  Exodus,  v/as  first 
given  by  Rameses,  the  argument,  though  strong, 
would  not  be  conclusive,  for  all  hold  that  the 
names  of  places  may  have  been  altered  at  succes- 
si\e  revisions  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  new  and 
well-known  name  being  substituted  for  the  old, 
when  a modern  editor  would  give  a note.  The 
argument,  moreover,  has  no  weight  at  all  when 
urged  by  critics  who  suppose  that  the  Pentateuch 
was  written  after  the  Israelites  were  connected 
with  Egypt  under  Solomon,  or  later.  In  that 
case  the  names  of  the  district  and  city  would  of 
course  have  been  taken  from  actual  usage.  I 
’lieve  the  truth  to  be  as  stated  in  the  text. 

Brugsch,  ‘II.  E.,’  p.  156, 


servitude  on  the  scene  of  their  forefathers’ 
oppression ; and  their  escape,  difficult  under 
all  circumstances,  could  be,  and,  as  we  shall 
see,  actually  was,  guarded  against  by  measures 
of  peculiar  stringency. 

(29.)  Now,  that  Israelites  were  actually  em- 
ployed then  and  there  has  been,  though  not 
really  proved,  yet  shown  to  be  so  probable 
that  nearly  all  Egyptian  scholars  accept  it  as 
a fact.  M.  Ghabas^^^  first  called  attention 
to  the  circumstance  that  the  Egyptian  word 
“ Aperu  ” corresponds  very  closely  to  “He- 
brews,” the  name  by  which  the  Israelites  were 
perhaps  best  known  to  foreigners.  The  tran- 
scription is  not  quite  accurate : the  letter  “p” 
is  by  no  means  the  proper  representation  of  the 
Hebrew  “ b,”  norffiave  I found  any  conclusive 
example  of  a substitution  but  the  general 
acquiescence  of  Egyptologers  may  be  regarded 
as  a sufficient  ground  for  admitting  the  identifi- 
cation. 

Still  the  question  remains  whether  these 
Hebrews  were  in  the  condition  described  in 
Exodus,  inhabitants  of  the  district  in  which 


See  ‘Melanges  Egyptologiques,’  i.  p.  42-54, 
and  ii.,  on  Rameses  and  Pithom. 

After  a repeated  examination  of  the  Semitic 
names  transcribed  on  Egyptian  documents,  I 
find  no  instance  upon  which  full  reliance  can  be 
placed.  Many  names  occur  in  which  the  B is 
represented  by  the  Egyptian  homophones.  The 
Egyptian  “p”  represents  the  “ph”  of  the 
Hebrews.  Mr.  Birch  concurs  in  this  statement. 


The  word  '*^3*  <3>  “tN—  Aper,  or  Apher, 

occui'S  in  the  annals  of  Thotmes  III.  twice  in 
an  inscription  at  Karnak.  See  M.  de  Rouge, 
‘ Album  Photographique,’  pi.  lii.,  and  is  tran- 
scribed by  M.  de  Rouge,  The  exact  and 

proper  transcription  of  the  Aperu  would  be 
'“IDy,  not  '“lHy.  A still  stronger  objection, 
which  seems  indeed  insurmountable,  is  sug- 
gested by  one  account  of  these  Aperu.  In  the 
inscription  at  Hamamat,  under  Rameses  IV.  (see 
further  on),  they  are  called  Aperu  n napetu  Anu, 
i.e.  Aperu  of  the  Anu.  The  Anu  are  often  men- 
tioned as  a warlike  race  in  Nubia,  who  rebelled 
frequently  against  the  Pharaohs.  They  are  here 
written  with  a group  which  always  represents 
bowmen,  whether  auxiliaries  or  enemies. 


The  inference  is  almost  irresistible  that  these 
Aperu,  and,  if  these,  the  others  also,  were 
Nubians,  condemned  to  work,  in  the  quarries. 
See  Brugsch,  ‘Geog.  Inschriften,’  iii.  p.  77  ; and 
on  the  Anu,  see  the  ‘Excursus  II.,’  article 
Anamim.  It  seems  after  all  doubtful  whether 
Aperu  is  a proper  name,  or  simply  denotes  work- 
men. Maspero  says  that  they  were,  as  one 
knows,  the  servants  of  the  temple.  ‘Essai,’  p,  22. 
Neither  Birch  nor  Brugsch  give  this  in  their  Dic- 
tionaries, but  the  etymology  points  to  such  a 
meaning,  “ Aper,  to  sujjply  or  prepare,”  and 
Maspero  is  a gootl  authority.  Aperu  is  given  as 
a variant  of  Shennin,  attendants  in  the  Ritual, 
c.  Ixxviii.  37. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH.  467 


they  were  employed,  or  prisoners  of  war.  The 
former  alternative  is  generally  assumed:  a 
close  examination  of  the  original  documents 
seems  decidedly  to  point  to  the  latter. 

Four  Egyptian  documents  give  an  account 
of  these  Aperu.  Two  belong  to  the  reign 
ofRamesesII.  They  are  official  documents 
of  very  peculiar  interest.  One  of  them  was 
written  by  a certain  Kawisar,  an  officer  of 
the  commissariat  at  Pa-Ramesson.  He  reports 
that  he  has  executed  his  orders,  which  were 
to  distribute  corn  to  the  soldiers  and  to  the 
Aperu,  or  Apuriu,  who  are  employed  in  draw- 
ing stones  for  the  great  Bek  ken  {i.e.  fortified 
enclosure)  of  Pa-Ramesson : the  corn  was 
delivered  to  a general  of  mercenary  troops; 
the  distribution  was  made  monthly.  In  another 
report  (which  however  does  not  mention  the 
Aperu)  he  speaks  of  large  supplies  of  fish  for 
the  city. 

The  obvious  inference  from  this  account 
would  seem  to  be  that  persons  employed  in 
such  labours,  fed  by  rations,  and  under  military 
superintendence,  were  captives,  and  not  in- 
habitants of  the  district.^'^  The  name  “ Ka- 
wisar ” resembles  the  well-known  names  of 
Cheta:  Chetan  officers  are  found  in  the 
service  of  Rameses,  and  such  a man  was 
peculiarly  qualified  for  the  office,  both  as  a 
natural  enemy  of  the  Hebrews  and  as  familiar 
with  their  language.’^® 

The  second  document  has  special  claims  to 
attention,  since  M.  Ghabas  has  shown  that  it 
is  probably  the  original  report  addressed  by  a 
scribe  Keniamen  to  an  officer  of  high  rank, 
the  Kazana,  or  General  Flui,'^^  of  the  house- 
hold of  Rameses.  It  proves  that  strict  in- 
junctions were  given  to  provide  food  for  the 
officers  of  the  garrison  and  also  for  the 
“ Aperu  ” who  drew  stones  for  the  Pharaoh 


This  inference  is  in  fact  the  first  which 
would  suggest  itself  to  a*  scholar  looking  at  any 
of  these  documents.  M.  Brugsch  observes  (in 
the  third  part  of  his  great  work  on  Egyptian 
Geography,  published  in  i860,  see  p.  77),  “This 
name,  as  the  determinative  shows,  evidently 
belonged  to  a foreign  people,  who  had  been 
taken  prisoners  in  the  Egyptian,  campaigns,  and 
condemned  to  work  in  the  quarries,  a custom 
noticed  by  all  ancient  writers  on  Egypt,  and 
especially  with  reference  to  Rameses  II.” 

In  the  ‘Mel.  E^pt.’  M.  Chabas  assumes 
that  the  name  is  Semitic.  He  has  since  taken 
much  pains  (see  ‘ Voy.  E.’,  pp.  326-330)  to  prove 
that  the  Chetan  names  are  altogether  of  a dif- 
ferent origin.  The  argument  stands  good  in  the 
form  above  proposed,  whichever  view  is  taken. 

M.  Chabas  treats  this  as  a proper  name.  M. 
de  Rouge  shows  that  it  is  equivalent  to  j'^p,  and 
means  general  of  cavalry.  See  ‘ Revue  Archeo- 
logique,’  Aout,  1867,  The  name  Hui  is 
^.bYphan,  and  is  found  under  the  ancient  em- 
pire. This  does  not  support  Dr.  Ebers’  state- 
ment, that  the  cavalry  u^as  always  under  the 
management  of  Semitics  in  this  time.  See 
‘A^gypten,’  &c.,  p.  229. 


Rameses  Merammon  in  a district  south  of 
Memphis. 

This  is  a strong  corroboration  of  the  con- 
clusion that,  if  Israelites,  they  were  prisoners 
of  war.  The  Israelites  of  the  Exodus,  from 
first  to  last,  are  represented  as  forced  to 
labour  in  their  own  district  under  Egyptian 
taskmasters,  wdio  were  certainly  not  soldiers, 
and  with  a complete  national  organization  of 
superintendents. 

The  other  documents  complete  the  argu- 
ment. Aperu  were  employed  in  considerable 
numbers  in  reigns  which  all  admit  to  be 
posterior  to  the  Exodus.  In  a document  of 
great  importance,  of  which  M.  Chabas  gives 
an  account  (see  ‘ Voyage  d’un  Egyptien,’  p. 
211),  we  find  a body  of  2083  Aperu  residing 
upon  a domain  of  Rameses  III.  under  the 
command  of  officers  of  rank  called  Marinas ; 
from  the  signs  attached  to  these  names  it  is 
evident  that  they  were  not  subjects  but 
captives.^^®  Here,  again,  the  inference  is 
natural  that  they  were  brought  by  Rameses 
III.  on  his  return  from  a campaign  in  Syria. 
(See  further  on.)  Another  notice  (see  note 
1 14)  is  found  under  Rameses  IV.:  800 
Aperu  were  employed  in  the  quarries  of 
Hamamat,  accompanied,  as^in  all  the  cases 
where  they  are  mentioned,  by  an  armed  force, 
generally  a detachment  of  mercenaries.  With 
regard  to  the  Aperu  in  both  reigns,  M. 
Chabas  supposes  that  they  may  have  remained 
after  the  Exodus  as  mercenaries.  It  may  be 
so  ; if^so,  the  same  explanation  would  apply 
to  the  Aperu  under  Rameses  II.;  but  it 
scarcely  agrees  with  the  descriptions  of  their 
condition,  and  it  seems  very  improbable  that 
any  considerable  number  of  Israelites  should 
have  wished  or  dared  to  stay,  or  that  their 
presence  would  have  been  tolerated  by  the 
Egyptians  at  all  for  a long  time  after  the 
Exodus. 

It  is  to  be  observed  .that  in  every  case,  far 
from  wishing  to  diminish  the  numbers  of  these 
labourers,  the  Egyptian  kings  took  great  pains 
for  their  maintenance;  they  were  valuable  as 
slaves,  not  objects  of  suspicion  as  disafiected 
and  dangerous  subjects. 

( 3 o.)  Reverting  now  to  the  condition  of  W est- 
ern  Asia,  we  find  that  during  the  latter  years 
of  this  reign  the  Cheta  retained  their  position 
as  the  dominant  pow'er  in  Syria.  I n the  twenty- 
first  year  of  Rameses  he  made  a formal  treaty 

In  addition  to  the  stake,  which  denotes 
foreigners  or  slaves,  they  have  for  a determinative 
“a  leg  in  a trap.”  This  is  used  sometimes  for 
dwellers  in  general ; but  the  proper  meaning,  as 
given  by  Birch  (‘Diet.  Hier.’),  is  “entrap, 
ravish,  trample and  Ebers  gives  the  same 
meaning  to  the  word  which  is  used  in  this  pas- 
sage. 

1^®  This  curious  document  is  printed  in  Bnigsch’s 
‘ Recueil.’  It  has  been  translated,  first  by 
Brugsch,  and  lately  by  M.  Chabas,  * Voyage 
d’un  Egyptien.’  Among  the  terms  is  one,  to 
which  b^oth  parties  evidently  attached  great  iin- 
G G 2 


468  ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


with  Chetasar,  their  king;  both  parties  treat- 
ing on  terms  of  equality  and  pledging  them- 
selves to  perpetual  amity.  The  alliance  was 
confirmed  by  the  marriage  of  Rameses  with 
the  daughter  of  Chetasar.  Between  two  great 
powers  thus  evenly  balanced  Palestine  might 
be,  and  probably  was,  in  a state  of  comparative 
tranquillity  for  a period  corresponding  with 
the  uncertain  interval  between  Eglon  and 
Shamgar.  At  the  close  of  that  interval,  which 
would  cover  the  time  of  Rameses  and  extend 
into  the  reign  of  Merneptah,the  sacred  history 
represents  the  south  of  Palestine  as  occupied, 
for  the  first  time  after  the  Exodus,  by  the 
Philistines,  and  the  north  completely  subju- 
gated by  Jabin  King  of  Canaan. 

(31.)  Notices  are  found  in  papyri  of  this 
period  which  give  some  notion  of  the  state  of 
Palestine.  The  most  important  is  that  which 
was  first  analysed  by  Mr.  Goodwin,  and 
has  since  been  translated  and  explained  with 
remarkable  ingenuity  and  learning  by  M. 
Chabas.*^'^  It  recites  the  adventures  of  an 
officer  of  cavalry  employed,  as  it  would  seem, 
on  a mission  into  Syria  towards  the  end  of 
the  reign  of  Rameses  II.  Whether  the  ad- 
ventures are  real,  or,  as  M.  de  Rouge  and 
others  maintain,,  the  narrative  is  fictitious, 
composed  for  the  instruction  of  students  pre- 
paring for  military  service,  may  be  uncertain, 
but  the  notices,  so  far  as  they  go,  are  valuable, 
and  were  probably  derived  from  persons  who 
had  been  engaged  in  the  campaigns  of  Rameses. 
A considerable  number  of  names  have  been 
identified,  some  with  certainty,  others  with 
more  or  less  of  probability,  with  cities  well 
known  from  the  Scriptural  narrative.  It  is, 
however,  to  be  remarked,  that  of  these  a very 
small  proportion,  and  those  for  the  most  part 
very  doubtful,  belong  to  the  interior  of  Pales- 
tine : and  that  these  lie  almost  exclusively  on 
the  high-road,  followed,  as  we  have  before 
seen,  by  the  Egyptian  armies.  The  traveller 
is  represented  in  the  first  part  of  the  narrative 
as  proceeding  at  once  to  Syria,^^  where  the 
transactions  occur  which  occupy  the  greater 
part  of  the  story 'That  country  was  held 
by  the  Cheta,  but  it  w^s  in  a state  of  general 

portance,  viz.  the  mutual  extradition  of  fugitives. 
Stress  is  laid  upon  this  as  bearing  upon  the 
narrative  in  Exodus,  but  with  little  cause  : it 
was  a condition  not  likely  to  be  omitted,  under 
any  circumstances,  between  the  owners  of  im- 
mense numbers  of  slaves  and  the  lailers  of  dis- 
affected districts. 

Under  the  attractive  title,  ‘Voyage  d’un 
Pgyptien  en  .Syrie,  cn  Phenicie,  en  Palestine, 
&c.,  au  siecle  avant  notre  ere.’  1866. 

See  ‘ Revue  Archeologique,’  Aout,  1867, 
p.  TOO,  note  I. 

This  is  noticed  by  M.  Chabas,  p.  96  ; it 
accords  with  the  view  above  stated,  that  the 
communications  between  Egypt  and  Syria  were 
most  commonly  by  sea. 

123  least  three  sections,  from  p.  18  to  p. 
23- 


disorganisation,  overrun  by  Shasous,  and  the 
supremacy  of  Egypt  was  evidently  recognised. 
On  his  return  the  officer  crossed  the  Jordan, 
and  touched  apparently  at  some  places  in  the 
north  of  Palestine;  this  part  of  the  journey 
was  beset  by  almost  insurmountable  diffi- 
culties : the  country  seems  to  have  been  almost 
impassable  to  a charioteer ; until  he  entered 
Megiddo  (which,  as  we  before  saw,  was  in 
possession  of  the  Canaanites  in  the  time  of  the 
early  Judges)  he  had  to  encounter  the  Shasous^ 
from  whom  he  escapes  by  a precipitate  flight, 
not  without  serious  detriment  to  his  person 
and  property.  The  description  reminds  tL*e 
reader  of  all  the  notices  in  the  book  of  Judges 
which  refer  to  periods  when  the  Israelites 
were  driven  to  their  fastnesses,  or  hiding  in 
caves,  while  the  open  country,  or  the  passes, 
were  infested  by  robber  hordes  from  the  ad- 
joining deserts.  At  Joppa,  where  the  authority 
of  Egypt  appears  to  be  recognised,  the  journey 
seems  to  come  to  an  end.  No  mention  is 
made  of  Israelites  in  this  papyrus,  none  indeed 
was  to  be  expected : the  only  designation  for 
the  inhabitants  with  whom  the  officer  came 
into  contact  was  Shasous — that  which  the 
Egyptians  gave  to  all  the  nomad  and  pastoral 
tribes,  probably  including  the  Hebrews,  who 
occupied  the  countries  between  their  frontiers 
and  Syria. 

(32.)  One  point  of  great  importance  in  re- 
ference to  this  and  the  succeeding  reigns,  in 
which  the  events  recorded  in  Exodus  are  so 
generally  assumed  to  have  occurred,  remains  to 
be  considered.  The  collection  of  papyri  in  the 
British  Museum,  of  which  the  principal  have 
been  published  by  the  trustees,  belong  for  the 
most  part  to  this  period.  They  were  written 
either  under  Rameses  II.  or  his  imm.ediate 
successors.  They  indicate  a very  considerable 
development  of  Egyptian  literature.  The 
writing  is  legible,  and  the  composition  in- 
cludes a varied  treatment  of  many  distinct 
subjects,  giving  a tolerably  complete  idea  of 
the  social  and  political  condition  of  the  people, 
especially  of  those  employed  in  the  district 
adjoining  Pa-Ramesson.  It  was  quite  natural 
to  expect  that,  if  the  Israelites  were  settled  in 
Goshen,  or  had  been  very  lately  expelled, 
when  those  documents  were  written,  some 
notices  of  them  would  be  found,  some  allu- 
sions at  least  to  the  events  preceding  the 
Exodus.  Accordingly  a writer,^-®  to  whose 
industry  and  ingenuity  we  are  indebted  for 
some  of  the  first  attempts  to  decipher  and 

^2^  The  places  named  in  the  first  part  of  the 
fourth  section  are  in  great  confusion,  and,  though 
evidently  Palestinian,  are  not  clearly  identified. 

125  M.  Chabas  (‘Voyage,’  p.  220)  draws  an 
argument  against  the  })resence  of  Israelites  from 
the  mention  of  camels  as  used  for  food  ; but  the 
explanation  of  the  passage  is  doubtful,  and  the 
Shasous  named  in  it  were  nomads  of  the  desert, 
who,  as  M.  Chabas  observes,  ate  camel’s  flesh. 

12®  Mr.  Dunbar  Heath,  ‘Papyri  of  the  Exodus.’ 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


explain  the  select  papyri,  believed,  and  for  a 
time  persuaded  others,  that  he  found  abun- 
dance of  such  notices.  He  speaks  of  a true, 
original,  and  varied  picture  of  many  of  the 
very  actors  in  the  Exodus,  a Jannes  mentioned 
five  times,  a Moses  twice,  a Balaam  son  of 
Zippor,  and  the  sudden  and  mysterious  death 
of  a prince  royal,  8cc.  Since  his  work  was 
written  all  the  passages  adduced  by  him  have 
been  carefully  investigated,^^  and  every  indica- 
tion of  the  presence  of  the  Israelites  has  dis- 
appeared. The  absence  of  such  indications 
supplies,  if  not  a conclusive,  yet  a very  strong 
argument  against  the  hypothesis  which  they 
were  adduced  to  support.  It  may  be  added 
that  the  descriptions  of  that  part  of  Egypt 
which  had  been  occupied  by  the  Israelites 
happen  to  be  both  full  and  graphic  in  these 
documents,  and  they  represent  it  as  remarkably 
rich,  fertile,  and  prosperous,  the  centre  of  an 
extensive  commerce,  occupied  by  a vast  native 
population,  a land  of  unceasing  festivities  and 
enjoyment,  such  as  the  district  might  well  be 
some  centuries  after  the  departure  of  the 
Israelites,  such  as  it  certainly  was  not  during 
the  period  of  their  cruel  persecution,  and  of 
the  long  series  of  plagues  which  fell  on  their 
oppressors. 

(33.)  We  now  come  to  the  reign  of  Merne- 
ptah,  in  which  M.  Brugsch,  and  many  distin- 
guished scholars,  consider  that  the  Exodus 
took  place.  Merneptah  succeeded  his  father 
Rameses  II.,  and  is  said  to  have  reigned  twenty 
years.^^®  The  notices  pf  this  Pharaoh  in  M. 
Brugsch’s  ‘ Histoire  d'Egypte’  are  but  scanty ; 
few  monuments  were  erected  in  his  reign ; 
even  his  father's  tomb  was  left  unfinished; 
and  the  indications  of  a decline  in  art,  and 
exhaustion  of  national  resources  observable 
towards  the  close  of  his  father's  reign,  are 
numerous  and  strong.  There  are  not,  how- 
ever, on  the  monuments,  or  in  the  papyri  of 
that  period,  any  notices  of  internal  disturb- 
ances towards  the  end  of  his  reign  ; it  can  be 
shown  that  the  eastern  frontier  was  vigilantly 
guarded,  and  nomad  tribes  admitted  under 
due  precautions  to  feed  their  cattle  in  the 
extensive  district  occupied  by  the  herds  of 
Pharaoh.^^®  • 

The  beginning  of  this  reign  was,  however, 
signalised  by  the  complete  discomfiture  of  an 

See  Mr.  Goodwin’s  article  in  the  ‘ Cambridge 
Essays’  for  1858.  This  remarkable  essay  at- 
tracted little  notice  in  England,  but  made  an 
epoch  in  one  of  the  most  difficult  and  important 
branches  of  Egyptian  studies.  This  opinion  is 
completely  confirmed  by  M.  Chabas  and  M.  de 
Rouge,  ‘ Mo’i'se  et  les  Hebreux,’  p.  6. 

12s  This  is  quite  uncertain  : different  recensions 
of  Manetho  give  nineteen  and  forty  years.  The 
highest  regnal  year  in  Egyptian  documents  is  the 
seventh. 

See  ‘ Excursus  II.,’  p.  i.  The  passage  here 
referred  to  is-.quoted  and  translated  by  M.  Chabas, 
‘Mel.  Egypt.,’  ii.  p.  155,  from  the  papyrus  in 
the  British  Museum,  Anastasi  vi.  pi.  iv.  1.  13. 


469 

invasion,  which  presents  some  points  of  pecu- 
liar interest  in  reference  to  general  history  as 
well  as  to  our  present  inquiry The  names 
of  the  confederates  are  partly  African  (not 
negro,  but  Libyan),  and  partly  Asiatic  or 
European;  if  M.  de  Rouges  conclusions  are 
admitted,  they  consisted  of  Tyrrhenians  or 
Etrurians,  Siculi,  Sardinians,  Achieans,  and 
Lycians,  the  first  appearance  of  these  well- 
known  names  in  history.  None  of  the  names 
here  mentioned  enter  into  the  register  of 
ancient  people  given  in  the  tenth  of  Gene- 
sis.^^^  They  were  therefore  evidently  un- 
known to  Moses,  who  must,  however,  have 
had  his  attention  specially  drawn  to  them  had 
he  returned  to  Egypt  at  that  time.  The 
ravages  committed  by  these  invaders  on  the 
north-west  of  Egypt  are  described  in  language 
which  has  an  important  bearing  on  a point 
already  discussed;  “nothing,”  the  king  says, 
“ has  been  seen  like  it  even  in  the  times  of  the 
kings  of  lower  Egypt,  when  the  whole  coun- 
try was  in  their  power  and  reduced  to  a state 
of  desolation.” 

Merneptah  appears  to  have  conducted  the 
campaign  with  considerable  ability : he  boasts 
of  the  supplies  of  corn  by  which  he  saved  his 
people  in  some  districts  from  perishing  by 
famine,  and  of  a successful  incursion  into  the 
enemies’  territories:  unlike  the  Pharaoh  of 
the  Exodus,  who  led  his  own  army  and 
perished  with  it  in  the  Red  Sea,^^^  but  like 
Louis  XIV.,  of  whom  the  reader  is  constantly 
reminded  in  this  ostentatious  period,  Merne- 
ptah did  not  expose  his  sacred  person  to  the 
chances  of  war : “ his  grandeur  was  chained  to 
the  bank  of  the  river  by  the  divine  command.” 
The  result  was  a complete  viatory,  the  ene- 
mies were  driven  out  of  Egypt,  vast  num- 
bers of  prisoners  and  spoils  of  great  value 
rewarded  the  conquerors,  obelisks  were 
erected  to  commemorate  the  event,  and  the 
customary  self-laudations  of  the  Pharaoh 
were  accepted  and  echoed  by  a grateful 
people.  M.  de  Rouge  observes  that  the 
terms  in  which  the  Egyptian  writer  de- 


^30  M.  de  Rouge  gives  a full  account  of  the 
inscription  at  Karnak  (since  published  by  M. 
Duemichen)  which  describes  this  invasion. 
See  ‘ Revue  Archeologique,’  Juillet  et  Aout, 
1867.  The  general  tenour  was  known  to  M. 
Brugsch;  see  ‘ H.  E.,’  p.  172.  The  identifica- 
tions of  M.  de  Rouge  are  maintained  with  equal 
learning  and  acuteness,  and,  as  I have  observed 
(since  this  note  was  written),  they  are  for  the  most 
part  accepted  by  Dr.  Ebers,  p.  154. 

131  It  is  more  than  probable  that  every  name  in 
that  register  was  known  in  Egypt,  in  Phoenicia, 
or  Assyria,  before  Moses  wrote  ; names  not  men- 
tioned by  him  were  first  known  in  Egypt  under 
the  nineteenth  dynasty.  If  the  register  had  been 
written  under  the  kings,  as  M.  Ewald  assumes, 
the  absence  of  these  great  names  is  incon- 
ceivable. 

‘3=1  See  notes  on  Exodus.  • 

133  < Revue  Archeologique,’  1.  c.  M.  Rouge 


470 


ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY 


scribes  his  triumph  are  in  striking  opposition 
to  the  severity  with  which  late  historians  have 
judged  his  character. 

M.  Brugsch  lays  some  stress  on  an  inscrip- 
tion which  proves  that  Merneptah  lost  a son 
who  is  named  on  a monument  at  Tanis.'^^ 
This  he  connects  with  the  death  of  Pharaoh’s 
first-born ; but  it  is  evident  from  that  inscrip- 
tion that  Merneptah  lived  some  time  after  his 
son’s  death,  certainly  a longer  time  than  can 
be  reconciled  with  the  account  in  Exodus. 

The  little  that  is  actually  known  of  the 
later  years  of  this  Pharaoh  militates  against 
the  assumption  that  they  were  disturbed  by  a 
series  of  tremendous  losses.  The  papyri 
written  about  that  time  or  a few  years  later 
represent  the  district  of  Rameses  or  Goshen 
as  enjoying  peace  and  remarkable  prosperity 
(see  above),  and  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that  the  Cheta  and  Egypt  were  still  in  alli- 
ance (see  the  last  note) : a state  of  affairs 
which  ensured  peace  on  the  eastern  frontier. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  facts  thus  made 
known,  and  the  probable  inferences  from 
them,  harmonise  with  the  account  of  the  con- 
dition of  Palestine  in  Judges  iii.  and  iv.  Jabin, 
king  of  Canaan,  obtained  the  complete  mas- 
tery of  the  north  at  the  close  of  the  period. 
The  designation  of  this  king  is  obscure; 
Canaan  can  scarcely  be  the  name  of  the  whole 
country  or  of  the  whole  people  descended 
from  the  son  of  Ham.  It  is  possible  that  Jabin 
may  have  taken  his  title  from  the  great  fortress 
in  the  north,  Pakanana,  of  which  mention  is 
repeatedly  made  in  the  campaigns  of  Seti  and 
Rameses  II.,  retaining  that  title  after  his  occu- 
pation of  Hazor.  In  that  case  he  was  a Cheta, 
whether  or  nflt  we  are  to  identify  that  people 
with  the  Hittites.  The  name  of  t he  captain  of 
his  host,  Sisera,  is  still  more  striking.  It  bears 
the  closest  possible  resemblance  to  the  prin- 
cipal Chetan  names  in  the  treaty  with  Rameses, 
of  which  one  main  characteristic  is  the  termina- 
tion Sar  (see  note  103).  Sisera’s  position  is  alto- 
gether peculiar,  and  the  most  natural  explana- 
tion of  it  is  that  he  was  the  chief  of  the  con- 
federates of  Syria,  and  as  such  commanding 
the  forces  of  jabin.  The  number  of  chariots, 
900,  as  I have  already  remarked,  corresponds 
most  remarkably  with  the  892  taken  by 


translates  the  passage  addressed  to  Merneptah, 
‘ lionlieur  e.xtrcine  dans  ton  retour  a Thebes  en 
vainqueur.  On  traine  ton  char  avec  les  mains. 
Les  chefs  garrottes  sont  devant  toi,  et  tu  vas 
les  conduirea  ton  })ere  Amon,  mari  de  sa  mere.’ 
Anastasi,  iv.  ])1.  v.  1.  i,  2. 

'I'he  defunct  prince  is  represented  in  the  act 
of  offering  a liljation  and  incense  to  Suteh,  the 
god  of  Avaris.  The  deity  wears  a crown  exactly 
resembling  that  of  the  Chetan  king.  It  is 
curious,  and  may  indicate  special  amity  between 
Merneptah  and  that  family,  with  which  his  own 
was  nearly  connected  : he  may  have  been  a son 
ef  the  Chetan  princess  married  by  Rameses  II. 
in  the  twenty-second  year  of  his  reign. 


Thotmes  III.,  after  defeating  the  confederates 
of  Syria  on  the  same  battle-field  of  Megiddo. 

The  important  question  of  dates  has  still  to 
be  considered.  The  chronology  even  of  this 
comparatively  late  period  may  still  be  regarded . 
as  open  to  question : but  at  present  nearly 
all,  if  not  all,  Egyptian  scholars  consider  it 
certain  that  the  year  1320  occurred  in  the 
reign  of  Merneptah.  This  rests  on  calcu- 
lations too  lengthy  and  difficult  to  be  here 
discussed:  the  agreement  of  scholars  may 
suffice,  especially  as  no  one  assigns  an  earlier 
date  to  the  reign.  But  we  have  thus  very 
little  more  than  300  years,  at  the  utmost  320, 
between  the  Exodus  and  the  building  of  the 
temple.  When  we  deduct  from  this  number 
the  40  years  in  the  wilderness  and  some 
30  years  up  to  the  death  of  Joshua  on  the 
one  hand,  and  on  the  other  at  least  100  from 
the  death  of  Eli  to  the  building  of  the  temple, 
we  get  only  150  years  for  the  whole  period  of 
the  Judges,  including  the  long  government  of 
Eli : little  more  in  short  than  100  years  for 
the  interval  between  Joshua  and  Eli.  The 
events  which  the  most  sceptical  criticism  ac- 
cepts as  historical  can  by  no  possibility  be  com- 
pressed within  so  limited  an  interval:  200 
years  is  the  very  least  that  any  manipulation 
of  the  narrative  can  elicit  for  those  transac- 
tions ; the  contradiction  is  fatal  either  to  the 
hypothesis  of  Egyptologers  or  to  the  Hebrew 
records,  i.e.  either  to  a conjecture  resting  on 
coincidences  which  scarcely  bear  a search- 
ing criticism,  or  to  written  documents  which 
all  scholars  admit  to  contain  a series  of  au- 
thentic transactions.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  the  reign  of  Merneptah  be  assumed  to 
coincide,  as  we  have  shown  to  be  probable, 
with  the  ascendancy  of  the  Chetan  Jabin  or 
Sisera,  we  have  as  elsewhere  a very  near  ap- 
proximation to  complete  agreement : Hebrew 
chronologers  fixing  the  date  of  the  temple 
building  at  1010,  and  the  defeat  of  Jabin  some- 
where about  1320.^^^ 

(34.)  Little  is  known  of  the  interval  between 
Merneptah  and  Rameses  III.:  that  it  was  a 
period  of  weakness  and  disturbance  is  tolerably 
certain,  and  as  such  it  may  supply  arguments 
for  either  hypothesis,  for  the  Israelites  would 
be  left  in  peace  whether  they  were  in  the 
wilderness  or  in  Palestine : if  the  calculations 
of  Brugsch  and  other  scholars  can  be  depended 
upon,  the  duration  of  the  interval  was  some 
33  years,  nor  can  there  be  much  room  for 
doubt,  since  the  dates  of  Merneptah  and  Ra- 


This  odd  coincidence  is  unsought.  The 
dates,  1340  for  Jabin,  1320  for  Barak,  are  given 
by  Browne,  ‘Ordo  Soedomm,’ p.  281.  Thenius, 
‘ Excgetisches  Ilandbuch,’ vol.  iii.  p.  469,  gives 
1429  for  the  death  of  Joshua,  adding,  “Von  da 
bis  1188  Othniel,  Ehud,  Jair,  Deborah  und 
Barak,  Gideon,  Abimelech,  Thola,  Jair”  {a  mis- 
print for  Jephtha).  This  leads  nearly  to  the  same 
conclusion,  and  gives  ample  scope  for  the  events 
of  the  scriptural  narrative. 


UPON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


471 


meses  III.  are  generally  accepted.  The  im- 
portance of  this  calculation  will  be  shown 
presently. 

Rameses  III.  was  the  last  Egyptian  king 
whose  reign  was  signalised  by  great  victories 
in  Syria.  The  events  are  recorded  in  numerous 
inscriptions  at  Medinet  Abou,  published  by 
M.  Duemichen:  a manuscript  of  great  extent 
in  the  possession  of  Mr.  Harris  has  not  yet 
been  printed,  but  the  contents  so  far  as  can 
be  ascertained  conlirm  the  inscriptions,  espe- 
cially in  the  historical  details.  The  first  years 
were  occupied  by  wars  with  the  same  con- 
federation of  Libyans  and  Mediterraneans 
who  had  been  repulsed  by  Merneptah:  these 
wars  began  in  the  fifth  and  were  terminated  in 
the  twelfth  year  of  his  reign.  AVe  have,  more- 
over, notices  of  an  expedition  into  Syria  in  the 
eighth  year,  probably  in  the  interval  between 
two  campaigns  in  Africa.  A decisive  battle 
was  fought  in  Northern  Syria,  in  which  the 
Cheta  are  represented  as  undergoing  a com- 
plete defeat.^^^  A long  list  of  places  attacked  or 
taken  in  this  campaign  is  given  by  M.  Brugsch 
(‘ Geographische  Inschriften,’  vol.  ii.  p.  75), 
and  some  are  identified  with  names  well  known 
in  Scripture.  Of  these  by  far  the  larger 
number  belong  to  Syria,’^**  and  the  general 
result  from  the  notices  of  the  war  in  the  in- 
scription would  seem  to  be  that  this  Pharaoh, 
like  his  predecessors,  traversed  Palestine 
rapidly,^^^  not  diverging  from  the  usual  high 


136  gf  ^]^g  niost  beautiful  and  inte- 

resting of  existing  papyri ; it  may  be  hoped  that 
it  will  be  ere  long  in  the  British  Museum,  and 
published  and  translated  by  Dr.  Birch,  a scholar 
to  whom  Egyptian  students  are  under  the  very 
deepest  obligation. 

‘^7  Rameses  III.  employed  a large  fleet  in  this 
wai',  and  of  course  transported  the  greater  part 
of  his  forces  into  Syria  by  sea.  See  Brugsch 
and  De  Rouge. 

The  only  names  which  are  held  to  belong  to 
Palestine  proper  are  each  and  all  questionable  : 
Jamnia,  Azer,  Duma,  Hebron,  alone  are  iden- 
tified by  Brugsch  ; the  last  is  more  probably  the 
name  of  a city  often  mentioned  in.  the  inscrip- 
tions referring  to  Northern  Syida.  A repeated 
examination  of  the  names  in  this  list,  and  ot 
those  which  occur  in  Duemichen’s  inscriptions, 
confirm  my  impression  that  Rameses  did  not 
occupy  Palestine  either  before  or  after  his 
Syrian  campaign  ; some  few  places  he  may  pro- 
bably have  captured  on  his  way.  If,  however, 
Chibur  or  Hebron  be  the  city  in  Judaea,  it  would 
be  a strong  argument  that  Rameses  HI.  found 
the  Hebrews  there;  the  Canaanitish  name  was 
Kirjath  Arba  ; the  old  name  given  at  its  first 
building  before  Abraham,  was  probably  restored 
after  the  conquest. 

The  Philistines  were  in  possession  of  their 
five  cities  in  the  time  of  Rameses  HI.,  and  are 
represented  among  his  captives  : see  Brugsch, 
‘ G.  I.,’  ii.  pi.  xi.  This  agrees  with  the  notices 
of  a considerable  advance  of  the  Philistines 
in  Judges  iii.  They  probably  retook  the  cities 
which  had  been  conquered  by  Joshua. 


road,  nor  losing  time  in  the  siege  of  strong- 
holds occupied  by  a people  who  were  cer- 
tainly not  confederates  of  his  formidable 
enemies.  Among  the  conquered  chiefs  repre- 
sented on  the  walls  of  Medinet  Abou  are 
found  the  king  of  the  Cheta  and  the  king  of 
the  Amorites : from  other  notices  it  is  known 
that  both  designations  at  that  period  belong  to 
the  district  north  of  Palestine. 

Bringing  these  facts  to  bear  upon  the  two 
hypotheses,  we  observe  that,  on  the  assump- 
tion that  the  Exodus  took  place  under  Merne- 
ptah, the  campaign  of  Rameses  III.  would 
exactly  coincide  with  the  entrance  of  Joshua ; 
and  inasmuch  as  this  king  reigned  at  least 
twenty-six  years,^'^®  the  conquest  of  Canaan 
would  have  been  begun  and  nearly  completed 
while  his  ascendancy  was  undisputed.  The 
improbability  is  obvious. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  have  the  following 
indications  in  support  of  the  opposite  hypo- 
thesis. Accepting  the  Aperu  as  Hebrews,  we 
find  that  a considerable  number,  evidently 
prisoners  of  war,  were  employed  on  the  royal 
domain  in  this  reign,  and  in  the  quarries  of 
Hamamat  under  his  immediate  successor  (see 
note  1 1 4).  We  observe  also  that  after  the 
overthrow  of  Jabin  the  peace  of  Palestine  was 
undisturbed,  as  might  be  expected  after  the 
discomfiture  of  the  Chetan  confederacy,  when 
the  Pharaohs  w^ere  occupied  with  the  internal 
affairs  of  Egypt.^**^  The  outbreak  of  the 
Midianites,  described  in  the  sixth  of  Judges, 
took  place  some  years  later,  and  was  probably 
a result  of  the  increasing  weakness  of  the 
monarchy.  It  wall  be  remembered,  however, 
that  the  general  ascendancy  of  Egypt  in  Syria 
and  Mesopotamia  was  unimpaired  to  the  very 
end  of  the  twentieth  dynasty,  an  era  which, 
according  to  all  systems  of  chronology,  syn- 
chronises with  the  termination  of  the  period 
embraced  in  the  book  of  Judges.  Palestine 
in  the  mean  time  went  through  a series  of 
alternate  struggles  and  successes.  That  Israel 
was  not  crushed  or  absorbed  by  the  great 
empires  between  whom  its  little  territory  lay, 
and  by  whom  it  was  ultimately  subjugated, 
may  be  attributed,  under  God’s  providence, 
to  their  mutual  rivalry  and  nearly  balanced 
power;  it  was  frequently  overrun  by  nomad 
hordes  and  conterminous  nations,  Midianites, 
Amalekites,  Ammonites,  and  Philistines;  but 
the  character  of  the  people  was  gradually 
matured,  and  prepared  for  the  vast  develop- 
ment of  its  resources  and  institutions  under 


The  date  26  is  found  in  the  Serapeum  of 
Memphis:  Brugsch,  ‘H.  E.,’  p.  193. 

Numerous  inscriptions  and  some  papyri 
prove  that  Rameses  HI.  and  his  successors  were 
employed  in  developing  the  resources  of  Egypt, 
and  in  building  palaces  and  temples.  Rameses 
IV.,  his  son,  boasts  that  he  had  erected  as  many 
monuments  in  a few  years  as  Rameses  II.  had 
done  in  his  long  reign.  M.  de  Rouge,  ‘ Etudes 

egypt.,’  P-  29. 


472  ON  THE  BEARINGS  OF  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY,  ETC. 


Saul,  David,  and  Solomon,  in  whose  reigns  it 
vindicated  its  claim  to  equality  with  the  con- 
temporary empires  in  Africa  and  Asia. 

It  would  be  too  much  to  expect  that  the 
conclusions  to  which  the  writer  of  this  dis- 
sertation has  been  irresistibly  led  will  be  ac- 
cepted by  those  who  are  satisfied  with  a 
system  which  rests  on  the  authority  of  many 
great  names ; but  the  greatest  care  has  been 
taken  throughout  to  separate  the  facts,  which 
are  positively  ascertained,  from  the  inferences 
which  must  to  a certain  extent  vary  according 
to  the  state  of  the  reader's  mind,  his  judgment, 
or  his  prepossessions.  Those  facts  are  stated 
with  all  possible  care,  and  with  as  much  of 
completeness  as  is  compatible  with  the  limits 


of  an  Excursus.  They  have  been  submitted 
to  the  judgment  of  scholars,  and  have  an  inde- 
pendent value ; nor,  although  every  year  brings 
important  additions  to  our  knowledge  of  the 
texts  and  of  their  interpretation,  is  it  to  be 
feared  that  what  has  hitherto  been  gained  will 
be  overthrown,  or  the  fair  and  legitimate  in- 
ferences be  considerably  modified.  The  truth 
of  the  scriptural  narrative  does  not  need  such 
support,  but  some  important  links  are  sup- 
plied; the  series  and  meaning  of  events  are 
better  understood  in  the  light  thrown  upon 
them  by  contemporary  documents  which 
present  coincidences  and  suggest  combinations 
hitherto  unknown,  or  imperfectly  appreciated, 
by  the  students  of  Holy  Writ. 


Since  this  Essay  was  printed,  two  points  of  great  importance  to  the  argument  have  been 
illustrated,  (i.)  In  the  work  lately  published  by  Duemichen,  ‘ The  Fleet  of  an  Egyptian 
Queen  from  the  seventeenth  century  before  our  Era,’  we  have  an  account  of  an  expedition 
into  Poumt,  i.e.  Arabia.  It  proves  that  a considerable  navy  was  fitted  out  early  under  the 
1 8th  dynasty:  on  one  plate  (xxviii.)  the  gradual  improvement  in  ship-building  is  shown  by 
drawings  from  the  6th,  12th,  17th,  and  i8th  dynasties;  on  two  ships  the  transport  of  horses 
and  chariots  is  represented.  (2.)  M.  Lieblein  has  published  in  the  last  number  of  the  ‘ Revue 
Archeologique ’ (October,  1868)  a letter  to  M.  de  Rouge,  in  which  he  gives  very  strong 
reasons  for  bringing  down  the  date  of  Rameses  II.  to  the  twelfth  century.  Without 
accepting  all  his  conclusions,  we  can  scarcely  resist  the  impression  that  the  lowest  date 
hitherto  assigned  to  the  i8th  dynasty  is  remarkably  confirmed  by  his  arguments.  See  also 
‘ Zeitschrift,’  1869,  p.  122,  where  the  same  writer  fixes  the  date  of  Rameses  II.  at  1134  b.c. 
This  argument,  however,  rests  on  genealogical  calculations,  which  are  always  open  to  objec- 
tion. 

The  writer  has  lately  ascertained  that  the  copper-mines  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  were 
not  worked  by  the  Egyptians  from  the  time  when  they  obtained  supplies  of  copper  from 
Syria,  i.e.  from  theTcign  of  Tothmosis  I.^^^  to  the  seventeenth  year  of  Tothmosis  III.,  when 
an  expedition  was  sent  under  military  escort — the  last  occasion  on  which  the  presence  of 
Egyptians  is  noticed.  There  were  therefore  no  Egyptians  settled  on  the  peninsula  at  the  date 
assigned  to  the  Exodus  in  this  Essay.  This  important  fact  is  established,  though  without 
reference  to  the  Exodus,  in  an  essay  by  Dr.  Gensler,  in  the  Egyptian  ‘Zeitschrift,’  for 
October  and  November,  1870. 


This  transcription  now  appears  to  the  writer  preferable  to  that  which  has  been  adopted  ia 
these  Essays. 


SUMMARY  VIEW,  ETC. 


473 


A SUMMARY  VIEW  OF  THE  TRANSACTIONS  ATTESTED  BY  EGYPTIAN 
MONUMENTS,  AND  OF  THEIR  CONNECTION  WITH  HEBREW  HISTORY. 


Connection  with  Scriptural  History. 

Dynasties. 

Transactions  known  from  Contemporary 
Monuments. 

According  to  this 
Excursus. 

According  to 
Brugsch  ■ 
and  others. 

Xllth  Dynasty : 

seven  Pharaohs, 

from  Amenemha  I. 
to  Amenemha  IV., 
and  a queen  regnant. 

A period  of  great  prosperity  ; foreigners, 
especially  from  Western  Asia,  re- 
ceived and  promoted  under  the  early 
kings ; and  under  the  later  kings 
works  of  extraordinary  magnitude 
executed  to  secure  the  irrigation  of 
Egypt,  and  to  guard  against  the  re- 
currence of  famine. 

Abraham  re- 

ceived and  fa- 
voured. 

Joseph  saves 

Egypt  from  fa- 
mine ; the  Pha- 
raoh master  of 
the  resources  of 
Egypt. 

Xlllth  to  XVIIth  Dy- 
nasty : 

The  early  pharaohs  still  masters  of 
Egypt.  Invasion  of  the  Hyksos. 
Salatis  master  of  Avaris,  i.e.  Tanis,  or 
Zoan.  Egypt  divided:  the  worship  of 
Set,  Sutech,  or  Baal,  established  by 
the  Hyksos  in  the  north  ; wars  be- 
tween the  Theban  dynasty  and  Apepi 
or  Apophis,  the  last  king  of  the 
Hyksos. 

The  Israelites  in 
Goshen  rapidly 
increasing  and 
occupying  the 
whole  district, 
but  in  a con- 
dition of depen- 
dence, or  partial 
servitude. 

Abraham  in 
Egypt  under 
the  Hyksos. 
Joseph  mini- 
ster of  Apo- 
phis. 

XVIIIth  Dynasty : 

Aahmes  I.  (Amosis) 

Aahmes  I.  or  Amosis  captures  Avaris 
and  expels  the  Hyksos.  Buildings  of 
great  extent  undertaken  or  completed 
with  the  aid  of  forced  labourers  or 
mercenaries.  The  worship  of  the 
Theban  deities  re-established. 

Beginning  of  a 
systematic  per- 
secution of  the 
Israelites,  who 
are  employed  as 
forced  labourers 
in  restoring  or 
building  forts 
and  magazines 
in  their  own 
district. 

The  Israelites 
are  supposed 
to  remain 

during  the 
whole  period 
of  the  I 8th 
dynasty  in 
undisturbed 
possession  of 
the  district  of 
Goshen. 

Nefertari, 

The  Egyptian  Queen,  a Nubian  by 
birth,  possessed  of  great  influence, 
both  before  and  after  the  death  of 
Aahmes. 

Moses  saved  and 
adopted  by 

an  Egyptian 
princess. 

Amenotep  I.  or  Ame- 
nophis. 

Expeditions  into  Ethiopia  : the  Queen- 
sister  in  power ; succeeding  as  Regent. 

Flight  of  Moses 
into  Midian. 

Thotmes  I, 

Expeditions  into  Nubia  and  Mesopo- 
tamia ; immense  increase  of  the  Egyp- 
tian power. 

Thotmes  II,  and 
Hatasou. 

First  part  of  the  reign  prosperous  ; no 
indication  of  foreign  or  intestine  war  ; 
latter  part  of  the  reign  a blank,  fol- 
lowed by  a general  revolt  of  the  con- 
federates in  Syria.  Blatasou,  queen 
regnant,  and  retaining  power  for 
seventeen  or  twenty-two  years. 

Return  of  Moses, 
the  Exodus, 

destruction  of 
Pharaoh  and 
his  army. 

474 


SUMMARY  VIEW  OF  TRANSACTIONS 


Dynasties. 


Thotmes  III. 


Amenotep  (Ameno- 
phis)  II. 

Thotmes  IV. 
Amenotep  III. 


Amenotep  IV.  or 
Khu-en-Aten. 
Princes  not  considered 
legitimate. 

Horemheb. 

XIXth  Dynasty  : 
Rameses  I. 


Seti  I. 


Rameses  II. 


Merneptah. 


Transactions  known  from  Contemporary 
Monuments. 


First  attempt  to  recover  the  ascendancy 
in  Syria  in  the  22nd  year.  Wars  ; 
repeated  incursions  into  Palestine, 
Phoenicia,  Syria,  and  Mesopotamia, 
terminating  in  the  fortieth  year 
of  this  reign. 


Connection  with  Scriptural  History. 


According  to  this  According  to 
Excursus.  Brugsch 

and  others. 


The  Israelites  in 
the  wilderness  ; 
entrance  into 
Palestine  of 
Joshua  in  the 
fortieth  year 
after  the  Exo- 
dus. 


Expedition  into  Syria  by  sea  : over- 
throw of  the  confederated  nations  to 
the  north  of  Palestine. 


Progress  of  the 
Israelites  in 
Palestine. 


A reign  without  notable  occurrences. 


A prosperous  reign  ; supremacy  main- 
tained in  Syria  and  Mesopotamia  : no 
intimations  of  warfare  in  Palestine  : 
the  Queen  Tei  of  foreign  origin 
favours  a new  and  purer  form  of 
religion. 


The  religious  revolution  completed  : 
followed  by  a period  of  disturbance 
and  exhaustion. 


Cushan  Risha- 
thaim  in  Pales- 
tine. 


End  of  eighteenth  dynasty. 

No  considerable  events  ; notices  of  war 
with  the  Cheta,  who  from  this  time 
are  dominant  in  Syria. 

The  Shasous  or  Nomads  from  Egypt  to 
Syria,  and  the  Cheta  and  nations  of 
Mesopotamia,  broken  and  subdued  by 
a series  of  invasions.  The  empire 
reaches  its  highest  point  of  civilisation 
and  power. 

During  many  years  Rameses  II.  is 
co-regent  with  his  father  with  royal 
dignity.  On  his  accession  as  sole 
monarch,  he  invades  Syria,  defeats 
the  Cheta,  with  whose  king,  how- 
ever, he  afterwards  contracts  an 
alliance  on  equal  terms,  marrying  his 
daughter.  Captives  are  employed  in 
great  numbers  in  building,  restoring, 
or  enlarging  fortresses,  cities,  and 
temples  ; ixmong  them  Apera  at  Pa- 
Rameses  and  Memphis.  Tlie  reign 
lasts  sixty-seven  years,  but  the  date 
of  its  commencement,  whether  from 
his  father’s  death,  or  his  admission  to 
royalty,  is  uncertain. 

Beginning  of  reign  signalised  by  victory 
over  Libyan  and  Mediterranean  in- 
vaders : no  expeditions  into  Asia : 
general  state  of  amity  with  the 
Cheta  : eastern  frontier  of  Egypt 
carefully  guarded  ; indications  of  un- 
broken peace  and  prospciity  in  the 
district  about  Pa- Rameses. 


The  interval  be- 
tween Cushan 
Rishathaim,  and 
Jabin,  extends 
to  the  latter 
reigns  in  this 
dynasty.  Pales- 
tine remains,  to 
a great  extent, 
in  the  posses- 
sion of  the 
Amorites  and 
other  people  of 
Canaan;  sonie- 
times  overrun 
by  neighbour- 
ing people,  and 
towards  the 
close  of  the 
period  subject 
to  the  Philis- 
tines in  the 
south,  and  the 
Cheta,  or  Ilit- 
tites,  in  the 
north. 


First  begin- 
ning of  the 
persecution 
of  the  Israel- 
ites ; the 
birth,  early 
life,  and  exile 
of  Moses. 


The  plagues 
of  Egypt,  fol- 
lowed by  the 
Exodus. 


ATTESTED  BY  EGYPTIAN  MONUMENTS. 


475 


( 

Connection  with  Scriptural  History. 

Dynasties. 

Transactions  known  from  Contemporary 
Monuments. 

According  to  this 
Excursus. 

According  to 
Brugscti 
and  others. 

Seti  II.,  Siptah  ; is 
close  of  XIXth 
Dynasty. 

A period  not  distinguished  by  foreign 
wars  : letters,  however,  flourish,  and 
the  nation  appears  to  be  peaceful  and 
contented. 

Palestine  in  a 
state  of  depres- 
sion, Philis- 

tines in  the 
south,  Jabin  in 
the  north  ; re- 
volt against 

Jabin,  over- 

throw of  Sisera, 
war  against  Ja- 
bin continued 
for  some  years. 

The  Israelites 
in  the  wil- 
derness. 

XXth  Dynasty  : 
Rameses  III. 

A long  series  of  successful  wars  in 
Africa  and  Asia  : Palestine  traversed, 
Syria  invaded,  and  the  Cheta  over- 
thrown. The  reign  lasts  at  least 
twenty-seven  years.  Aperu  employed 
on  the  royal  domains. 

Israelites  recover 
possession  of 
Palestine  after 
the  overthrow 
of  J abin. 

The  conquest 
of  Palestine 
begun  under 
Joshua. 

Rameses  IV. 

A peaceful  reign  occupied  chiefly  in 
great  buildings.  Aperu,  captives  of 
war,  employed  in  the  quarries. 

Rameses  V.  to  XI. 

A period  of  uncertain  duration,  the 
reigns  generally  short  and  undistin- 
guished. 

The  events  re- 
corded in  the 
book  of Judges 
' after  the  time 
of  Deborah  and 
Barak. 

The  entire 
series  of 

events  from 
the  passage 
over  the  Jor- 
dan to  the 
close  of  the 

Rameses  XII. 

In  this  reign  the  Egyptians  retain  an 
acknowledged  pre-eminence  in  Syria 
and  Mesopotamia. 

book  of 

Judges. 

Rameses  XIII. 

Close  of  the  twentieth  dynasty. 

/ 

( 476  ) 


ESSAY  II. 

ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS  IN  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


One  important  result  of  late  Egyptian  re- 
searches is  the  establishment  of  a complete 
system  of  transcription  of  Hebrew  and  Egyp- 
tian characters.  At  present  no  doubt  remains 
as  to  the  exact  correspondence  of  the  Hebrew 
letters  with  phonetic  signs,  or  groups  of  com- 
mon occurrence  in  papyri  and  monumental 
inscriptions.  An  attempt  will  be  here  made  to 
bring  this  result  to  bear  upon  the  transcription 
and  explanation  of  the  names,  titles,  and  other 
words  of  Egyptian  origin  in  the  Pentateuch.^ 
In  the  first  place,  the  Hebrew  word  will  be 
represented  in  those  Egyptian  characters  which 
are  accepted  by  all  Egyptologers  as  the  exact, 
and  for  the  most  part  the  invariable,  equiva- 
lents. In  the  next  place,  the  meaning  of  the 
Egyptian  words  thus  represented  will  be 
investigated.  In  no  case  will  any  doubtful 
transcription  be  admitted ; nor  will  any  mean- 
ing be  proposed  for  which  conclusive  autho- 
rity cannot  be  produced  from  monuments  or 
papyri  of  the  i8th,  19th,  and  20th  dynasties, 
or  from  still  earlier  periods.  If  the  interpre- 
tation thus  elicited  give  a clear,  complete, 
and  satisfactory  meaning,  one  in  perfect  ac- 
cordance with  the  context,  and  the  evident 
intention  of  the  writer  of  the  Pentateuch,  there 
can  be  no  question  as  to  its  value,  whether 
in  regard  to  the  bearings  upon  the  exegesis  of 
the  Book  or  upon  the  question  of  authorship. 
It  is  highly  improbable  that  any  Hebrew  born 
and  brought  up  in  Palestine,  within  the  period 
extending  from  the  Exodus  to  the  accession 
of  Solomon,  would  have  had  the  knowledge 
of  the  Egyptian  language  which  will  thus  be 
shown  to  have  been  possessed  by  the  writer  ; 
it  is  certain  that  no  author  would  have  given 
the  words  without  any  explanation,  or  even 
indication,  of  their  meaning,  had  he  not  known 
that  his  readers  would  be  equally  familiar  with 
them. 

7'hc  following  table,  which  gives  the  Hebrew 
characters  and  the  corresponding  phonetic 
signs  or  letters  in  Egyptian,  will  enable  the 
reader  to  judge  foi*  himself  of  the  accuracy 
of  the  transcription.  The  transcription  in 
Roman  characters  is  that  which  has  been 
lately  proposed  by  M.  de  Rouge,  and  ac- 
cepted by  Lepsius,  Brugsch,  and  other  Egyp- 
tologers. See  ‘ Zeitschrift  fUr  Aigyptische 
Sprache,’  8cc.,  1866. 

’ This  Essay  was  printed  in  1868.  Since  that 
time  Dr.  I’lbers’  work  has  appeared,  to  which 
allusion  is  occasionally  made  in  the  notes. 


Hebrew 

1 

Egyptian. 

Conven- 

tional 

Transcrip. 

tion. 

The  nearest 
equivalent  in 
ordinary  cha- 
racters. 

a,  or  a 

a 

n 

J-3- 

b 

b 

k 

g 

t 

d 

n 

h 

h 

1 

u 

11 

n 

or  Q 

hj  or  X 

h,  or  ch,  hard 

+ t 

t,  or  th 

1 

i,  or  ee 

D 

k 

k 

1,  or  r 

1,  or  r 

m 

ra 

: 

— 

n 

n 

D 

L„,.^ 

s 

s 

V 

a 

a,  0,  or  ao 

Q 

1 

p,  orf 

p,  ph,  or  f 

i 

t 

z,  or  ts 

P 

i 

k 

k 

*1 

r 

r 

lilt/,  rrvSJ.  or  C 1 

s 

sh,  or  s 

<1 

t 

th,  or  t 

In  addition  to  the  phonetic  letters  in  this 
list  there  are  many  homophones,  and  syllabic 
signs,  representing  the  combination  of  two 
or  more  letters.  Full  lists  of  these  are  given 
by  Mr.  Birch  in  the  first  and  last  volumes  of 
the  latest  edition  of  Bunsen's  ‘Egypt;’  and 
by  M.  de  Rouge,  in  the  ‘ Chrestomathie,’ 
now  in  course  of  publication.  These  signs 
will  be  explained  when  they  occur  in  this  ex- 
cursus ; they  are  especially  important  in 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS. 


477 


reference  to  the  names  of  places  and  official 
designations. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  vowels 
are  of  secondary  importance  both  in  Hebrew 
and  Egyptian.  They  might  be  disregarded  in 
the  transcription  were  it  not  that  certain 
affinities  between  some  consonants  and  vowels 
are  observable  in  both  languages. 

The  first  name  in  the  Bible  of  purely  Egyp- 
tian origin,  form,  and  meaning,  is  Pharaoh. 

riynQ 

The  vocalisation  and  diacritic  points  show 
that  the  Hebrews  read  this  Par-aoh,  not 
Pa-raoh.  This  is  important,  since  the  name, 
whatever  it  might  signify,  was  v/ell  known  as 
the  proper  official  designation  of  the  kings  of 
Egypt,  and  its  correct  pronunciation  must 
have  been  familiar  to  the  translators  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  probably  also  to  the  punctua- 
tors of  the  Bible.  The  cuneiform  inscrip- 
tions have  the  same  division,  Pir-u,  not  Pi-ru. 

The  transcription  gives  one  of  these  forms  : 

{Pa  Ra),  or,  adopting  a syllabic 
form  of  very  common  occurrence,  tm  i.  e. 

Per,or  Phar,  ID, and  the  elongated  form  -=> 

which  more  exactly  represents  liy,  we  have 
Cj  J (Par-aoh),  or  one  of  the  ordi- 

nary variants  of  this  well-known  word. 

The  first  of  these  transcriptions  gives  a 
clear  and  not  improbable  meaning,  viz.,  ‘ The 
Sun.’  Ra  is  the  well-known  designation  of 
the  sun  from  sunrise  to  sunset ; and  it  is 
certain  that  the  King  of  Egypt  was  regarded 
as  the  favourite  or  living  representative  of 
Ra:  the  question  is,  whether  this  was  the 
usual  and  formal  designation  of  the  king,  recog- 
nised by  his  subjects  and  known  to  foreigners. 

Several  arguments  are  used  in  support  of 
this  assumption. 

1.  From  a very  early  period,  long  before 
the  Hebrews  came  into  contact  with  the 

Egyptians,  the  sign  Q ^ pronounced  Ra,  was 

the  first  and  most  prominent  word  in  the 
cartouche,  or  ring,  which  contained  the  offi- 
cial name  of  every  Pharaoh,  that  is,  the  name 
which  he  assumed  at  his  accession. 

But  this  word  was  not  read  apart  from  the 
other  words  in  the  ring,  in  most  cases  it  was 
read  at  the  end,  not  at  the  beginning  of  the 
designation ; it  had  not  the  article  prefixed, 
and  could  not  therefore  be  pronounced  Pa 
Ra,  or  Pharaoh. 

2.  The^  king  is  always  called  Si  Ra,  son  of 
Ra.  This  designation  comes  between  the 
two  rings.  It  is  very  ancient,  being  first 
borne  by  Ghafra  or  Ghephren.  See  M.  de 
Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  56. 

But  this  is  in  reality  an  argument  against 
the  assumption.  The  king  was  not  likely  to 
be  called  both  Son  ot  Ra,  and  The  Ra. 


3.  The  word  Pa  Ra  actually  occurs  as  a 
title  of  Merneptah  Hotephima,  the  son  of 
Rameses  II.,  in  a contemporary  papyrus, 
Anastasi,  VI.  PI.  v.  1.  2. 

The  sovereign,  living,  sound,  and  mighty,  the 
good  Sun  of  the  whole  land. 

But  “the  good  Sun”  here  is  not  a title, 
properly  speaking.  It  is  simply  one  of  the 
numerous  epithets  applied  by  the  Egyptians  to 
their  king ; a fact  sufficiently  evident  from  the 
addition  of  the  adjective  good.^  The  title  in 

this  passage  is  the  first  word  however, 

that  may  be  read  and  explained. 

4.  A stronger  argument  is  drawn  from  the 
Papyrus  Rollin  (No.  1888),  which  gives  an 
account  of  the  trial  and  execution  of  a sor- 
cerer under  Rameses  III.  It  is  explained  by  M. 
Ghabas,  in  his  curious  and  valuable  work,  ‘ Le 
Papyrus  magique  d’H arris.’  He  writes  thus 

(p.  173,  n.  2),  “ G pera,  le  Soleil, 

Memph.  ^pa,  Heb.  designation  ordi- 

naire des  rois  d’Egypt.”  This  seems  con- 
clusive, considemg  the  high  authority  which 
always  attaches  to  M.  Ghabas’  opinion.  It 
must,  however,  be  observed  that  no  other 
passage  is  adduced,  nor,  so  far  as  I am  aware, 
can  be  adduced,  in  support  of  the  statement 
that  it  is  the  ordinary  designation  of  the  sove- 
reign ; and  in  this  passage  the  word  is  under- 
stood by  Mr.  Deveria,  and  by  M.  Pleyte  (who 
has  lately  published  the  papyrus)  to  mean  “ the 
Sun  God,”  to  whom  the  frustration  of  the 
sorcerer  is  attributed.^  It  is  true  that  the  kings 
of  Egypt  were  called  “Horus,”  orthe  “ Growned 
Hawk”  (the  Sun  God,  as  symbol  of  vic- 
tory), a title  taken  at  their  accession,  and 
borne  upon  their  standard ; but  this  was 
equivalent  to  the  epithet  Si  Ra,  Son  of 
Ra,  and  constitutes,  therefore,  an  argument 
against  the  assumption,  which,  if  not  disproved, 
must  be  regarded  as  not  proven. 

We  have  now  to  consider  the  other  and 

well-known  form,  CT^Vl  < — more  com- 
monly as  above,  in  the  title  of  Merneptah, 
If  the  transcription  Per-ao,  or 

Phar-ao,  can  be  relied  upon,  of  which  we 
have  presently  to  consider  the  evidence,  the 
proof  of  the  identity  of  the  title  with  Phu- 


^ Thus  Rameses  II.  is  called  “ Ra,  the  life  of 
the  world,”  not  as  an  appellation,  but  an  epithet. 
Mariette,  ‘ Abydos,’  pi.  18,  1.  36. 

^ Mr.  Goodwin  observes,  “I  am  now  con- 
vinced that  Pa-Ra  in  the  Rollin  Papyrus  means 
the  Sun,  or  God,  and  not,  as  I supposed  ten 
years  ago  when  I first  deciphered  that  papyrus, 
the  king  or  Pharaoh.”  Mr.  Goodwin’s  remarks, 
quoted  in  these  notes,  are  taken  from  a letter 
lately  received  on  this  Essay,  which  was  for- 
warded to  him  by  the  writer  in  1868. 


478 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS 


raoh  will  be  conclusive,  for  the  following 
reasons : — 

The  regular  title  of  the  King  of  Egypt, 
the  title,  i.  e.,  as  distinguished  from  honorary 
epithets,  by  which  it  is  always  accom- 


panied, 


cm 


written  also  crp 


and  ^ J j or  ^ These  forms  occur 

very  frequently  under  the  ancient  Empire,  in 
the  inscriptions  of  the  Denkmaeler  of  Lepsius, 
and  in  those  exam.ined  and  illustrated  by  M. 
de  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches  sur  les  Monuments 
qu’on  peut  attribuer  aux  six  premieres  Dynas- 
ties de  Manethon.’  The  simpler  form  is  more 
commonly  found  in  the  earlier  inscriptions. 
On  monuments  of  the  19th  and  following 
dynasties  the  latter  is  almost  exclusively  used. 
The  meaning  of  the  group  is  not  questioned, 
viz.,  the  great  house,  or  the  great  double 
house,  i.  e.,  the  royal  palace : nor  is  it  doubted 
that  it  stands  absolutely  for  the  sovereign. 
It  is  further  to  be  observed  that  whenever 
the  sovereign  is  spoken  of  as  such,  not  by  his 
proper  name,  or  by  his  distinctive  official 
name,  this  and  no  other  designation  is  found. 
In  official  letters,  in  reports  and  in  treaties, 
this  designation  generally  precedes  the  proper 
and  official  names : in  narratives,  when  the 
name  of  the  king  is  not  given,  it  is  used  pre- 
cisely in  the  same  way  as  Pharaoh  in  the 
Bible.^  There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  this 
was  the  title  which  to  Egyptians  and  foreigners 
represented  the  person  of  the  king. 

It  is  perhaps  difficult  to  present  the  full 
force  of  this  argument ; but  no  one  can  look 
through  the  Papyrus  D’Orbiney,  or  other 
papyri  of  the  19th  and  20th  dynasties,  without 
feeling  that,  so  far  as  the  usage  is  con- 
cerned, we  have  in  this  group  the  exact  equi- 
valent of  Pharaoh.  It  is  the  group  which 
would  necessarily  be  used  if  Genesis  were 
translated  into  ancient  Egyptian.  Pharaoh 
alone  would  represent  to  a Hebrew  the 
central  group  in  the  Egyptian  formula : — “ His 
majesty  the  So'vereign^  full  of  life,  health,  and 
might.” 

But  the  transcription  presents  a difficulty, 
which  for  a long  time  prevented  Egyptian 
scholars  from  recognising  the  identity  of  the 

designations.  The  group  CjT  is  undoubt- 
edly equivalent  to  'S,  or  “ Pi  ” in  the  names 
of  cities,  as  in  Pithom,  Pihahiroth,  &c.  M. 
de  Rouge,  however,  and  xM.  Brugsch,  men  of 
the  highest  eminence  among  Egyptologers, 
whose  authority  on  such  a point  is  especially 
important,  hold  that  the  original  and  proper 


* The  word  occurs  ten  times  in  seven  lines  of 
the  Papyrus  D’tJrbiney,  from  p.  x.  1.  9,  to  p.  xi. 
1.  4.  It  has  almost  invarialdy  the  addition  of 

, living,  sound,  and  mighty  ; and  is  gene- 
preceded  by  “ honef,”  his  majesty. 


pronunciation  of  L jd  was  “ per,”  or  “ pere,” 

in  Hebrew  “IS.®  It  is  possible  that  the  r, 
by  the  common  process  of  phonetic  decay, 
was  gradually  disused  in  a word  of  common 
occurrence,  but  it  may  have  been,  and  pro- 
bably was,  retained  in  a title  of  such  dignity, 
especially  as  it  preceded  the  vowel  sound 
“ a o.” 

Another  difficulty  is  presented  by  the  dual 
form.  If  L J CiTJ  actually  represented  two 

distinct  houses,  it  would  be  read  either  Pere 
pere  or  Pere-ti : but  as  representing  not  a 
numerical  dual,  but  a form  of  majesty,  the  old 
pronunciation  might  be,  and  probably  was, 
retained  unchanged.  M.  Brugsch  (D.  H.,  p. 
452)  gives  several  instances  which  seem  to 
prove  that  though  the  sign  of  the  house-plan 

j— 3 is  doubled,  it  was  pronounced  in  the  sin- 
gular. However  this  may  be,  it  is  a sufficient 
answer  to  the  objection  that  the  original  form, 
as  we  have  already  seen,  the  form  most  com- 
monly found  in  inscriptions  unquestion- 
ably much  older  than  the  Pentateuch,  was 

Crp  «=— = of  which  the  nearest  possible 

transcription  in  Hebrew  is  ny"iS,  Pharaoh. 

Another  argument,  which  may  be  regarded 
as  conclusive,  has  been  adduced  by  M.  G. 
Lenormant,  and  Professor  Lauth,  a dis- 
tinguished Egyptologer.  It  is  clear  that 


® See  ‘ Chrestomathie  Egyptienne,’  p.  79,  and 
‘ Dictioiinaire  Hieroglyphique,’  pp.  452,  482-3. 
This  is  questioned  by  M.  Page  Renouf,  a very 
high  authority  ; but  a reference  to  Mr.  Birch’s 
Dictionary,  in  Bunsen’s  ‘Egypt,’  vol.  v.  p.  464, 
will  shew  the  invariable  connection  between 

cm  and  <0  , and  one  variant  at  least  of  q-yj 


for  cd  points  in  the  same  direction.  I believe 


M.  de  Rouge  to  be,  as  usual,  right  in  his  con- 
clusion. See  also  M.  Chabas,  ‘ Pap.  Mag. 
Harris,’  p.  48,  and  ‘ MH.  Eg.’  ii.  p.  204.  The 

m is  found  in  ancient  in- 


group 


CD 


scriptions,  and  proves  the  phonetic  value  of  the 
shorter  form.  Mr.  Goydwin  observes,  “there 


can  be  no  doubt  that  L J was  originally  par:” 


he  adds,  ‘ ‘ I agree  with  your  remark  that  in  such 
a title  the  pronunciation  would  very  probably  be 
retained.” 

® Thus,  for  instance,  M.  de  Rouge  renders 

Q suten  rech  (he.,  near  relative,  perhaps 

grandson),  du  Pharaon,  ‘ Rech.’  p.  97.  Numerous 
inscriptions  in  the  Denkmceler,  Abt.  II.,  leave 
no  doubt  as  to  the  usage.  I find  that  Dr.  Ebers 
adopts  the  same  view,  and  considers  it  as  un- 
questionably correct,  p.  264.  Thus  also  Due- 
inichcn,  who  gives  an  example  from  the  time 
of  Thotmes  III.  See  ‘ Elect  qf  an  Egyptian 
Queen,’  pi.  vi. 


IN  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


479 


this  transcription  exactly  explains  the  asser- 
tion of  Horapollo,  i,  6i  ; viz.  that  oIkos  /xe-yay, 
“ the  great  house,”  is  the  true  meaning  of  the 
hieroglyphic  group  which  formally  represents 
the  Egyptian  king,  and  which  therefore  is  the 
equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  Pharaoh. 

Other  derivations  of  the  w^ord  have  been 
proposed,  more  or  less  unsatisfactory.  The 
late  Duke  of  Northumberland  suggested  that 
it  might  be  identified  with  the  Urscus  (in 

Egyptian  ^ ^ , arat),  the  basilisk  on 

the  diadem  of  every  Pharaoh.  To  this  the 
objections  are  insuperable.  The  transcription 
is  inexact ; the  w^ord  is  never  found  as  a 
royal  designation;  and  when  the  sign  stands 
alone  it  represents  a female  deity. 

The  identification  with  the  Coptic  TTO'^TpO 
w^as  natural.  It  is  the  general  designation  of 
a king ; but  it  appears  to  represent  Pa-Oer,  a 
word  constantly  employed  in  the  texts  to 
represent  a prince,  whether  native  or  foreign, 
but  which  is  never  applied  to  the  Pharaoh. 
Mr.  Birch  has  lately  shown  the  writer  two 
passages  in  the  5th  volume  of  the  Denkmaeler, 

pi.  53,  in  wTich  > OJ*  appears 

to  stand  for  Pharaoh.  It  would  seem,  how- 
ever, to  be  a proper  name,  not  a title  or 
general  designation. 

ynD'OIS,  Potiphera, 
and 

“ID'IOID,  Potiphar. 

The  first  part  of  both  names  is  admitted  to 
correspond  to  the  Egyptian  ^ , Pa-ti, 

“ the  given,”  i.  e.,  a person  devoted  to,  de- 
pendent upon,  &c.  Instances  are  given  by 
Champollion  (not  in  the  Grammar,  but  in  the 
Precis),  and  by  Rosellini,  who  says  that 
the  form  occurs  frequently  in  the  name 

□ 0 ^ , Patipara,  of  which 

is  an  exact  transcription.  The  name  signified 
“ devoted  to  Ra,”  the  most  natural  designation 
for  the  High, Priest  of  On  or  Heliopolis,  the 
head-quarters  of  Sun  worship.  This  deriva- 
tion is  well  known  and  universally  accepted. 
It  may  perhaps  be  used  as  an  additional 

argument  that  El  O,  Pa  R a,  represented  the 

Sun-God,  not  the  Sovereign. 

The  other  name  presents  more  difficulty. 
Gesenius  and  others  assume  that  Potiphar  is 
simply  anabbrevia’ion  or  a variant  of  Potiphera. 
This  is  very  improbable.  The  transcription 
of  Egyptian  words  in  Hebrew  is  now  ad- 
mitted by  scholars  to  be  exceedingly  accurate, 
and  the  omission  of  the  characteristic  letter 

a,  V,  w^ould  be  without  a parallel. 

The  meaning  of  the  word  must  be  “ devoted 


to  Par,”  or  Phar.  If  the  transcription  of 
cn , "IQ,  Phar,  be  accepted  (see  above), 

Potiphar  would  signify  devoted  to,  or  de- 
pendent upon  the  house  or  palace,  and  would 

be  written  in  Egyptian  ^ Though 

this  name  does  not  occur  in  the  texts  it 
seems  to  be  in  accordance  with  the  usage 
of  the  language,'^  and  is  a very  suitable  desig- 
nation for  the  captain  of  Pharaoh's  body- 
guard. The  priest  thus  takes  his  name  from 
the  deity  to  whose  service  he  is  attached,  the 
courtier  from  his  master’s  house. 


Asenath,  wife  of  Joseph. 

The  first  syllable  may  be  transcribed  by 
the  exact  phonetic  equivalent,  or  by 


either  of  two  well-known  groups 


or 


io  name  of  Isis,  which  has  the 


same  phonetic  value. 

The  second  part  may  be  read  with 

the  determinative  yv.  or  any  of  the  nu- 


merous variants.  It  represents  the  goddess 
Neit,  or  Neith,  the  Athene  of  Greece. 

The  combination  of  these  transcriptions, 
whichever  is  adopted,  gives  a clear  meaning 
in  accordance  with  Egyptian  usage. 

As-Neit  would  mean  favourite  of  Neith,  or 
Minerva:  the  word  “as”  signifies  precious, 
sacred,  or  consecrated.  ^ 

-til  A ^ mean  Isis-Neith. 

The  double  name  seems  strange,  but  it  was 
not  uncommon  in  Egypt  thus  to  combine  the 
names  of  two  Deities  in  one  proper  name. 
The  first  example  of  a man’s  name  taken  from 


7 We  have  xerp-pere,  mer-pere  = house- 
steward,  major-domo  : common  titles  under  the 
ancient  empire.  I must  add  that  Mr.  Goodwin 
does  not  admit  the  probability  of  this  transcrip- 
tion, which  n^ds  the  support  of  ancient  inscrip- 
tions. 

® Mr.  Goodwin  has  lately  proposed  a different 
reading  for  this  sign,  viz.,  “sheps,”  and  he  is 
followed  by  Brugsch;  but  both  M.  Le  Page 
Renouf  and  Professor  Lauth  have  since  proved 
that  “as”  is  the  true  value  in  the  older  texts. 


See  ‘ Zeitschrift  fiir  /Egyptische  Sprache,’  &c., 
1868,  pp.  42  and  45.  Thus  also  Ma.spero, 
‘ ’ p.  16.  Since  this  was  printed,  I have 


Essai 

observed 


as  a variant  in  Mariette’s 


‘ Fouilles  d'Abydos.’  Mr.  Goodwin  now  says 
he  can  only  admit  that  the  group  is  a polyphone, 
and  may  have  both  values.  He  adds  that  he 
considers  the  combination  Isis  Neit  supplies  a 
much  more  plausible  explanation. 


480 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS 


the  gods,  given  by  Champollion  in- the  Gram- 
mar, p.  135,  combines  the  two  divine  names 
Hor  Phre,  a second  in  the  same  page  com- 
bines Chons  and  Thot.  It  is  a strong  argu- 
ment in  support  of  this  explanation  that  a 
Priest  of  On  would  naturally  give  to  his 
daughter  the  name  of  a Deity  specially  con- 
nected with  the  locality.  The  principal  ob- 
jects of  worship,  next  to  the  Sun-God,  were 
Seb  and  Nut  (not  Neit),  who  were  honoured 
as  the  parents  of  Osiris  and  Lis,  the  two  tute- 
lary Deities.  See  Brugsch  ‘ Geographische  In- 
schriften,’  vol.  i.  p.  255.  Isis  moreover  was  a 
name  commonly  given  to  women,  and  most 
likely  to  be  borne  by  a daughter  of  Potiphera. 
It  is  also  to  be  remarked  that  there  was  a 
close  connection  between  Isis  and  Neith.  Isis 
wa.s  worshipped  at  Sais  in  the  temple  of 
Neith,  under  the  name  As-ta-oert,  Isis  the 
Great.  See  Brugsch,  1.  c.,  p.  245. 

The  connection  of  Joseph  with  this  family 
would  seem  to  have  had  lasting  and  very 
serious  consequences.  Asenath  may,  or  may 
not,,  have  adopted  her  husband’s  faith — pro- 
bably she  did  so ; but,  like  the  Avives  of  Jacob, 
she  may  not  have  separated  herself  altogether 
from  her  father's  iniluence,  or  have  cast  away 
altogether  the  traditional  superstitions  of  her 
family.  It  is  natural  to  refer  the  idolatry 
of  the  Ephraimites  to  this  origin.  Mnevis, 
the  black  bull,  was  Avorshipped  at  Oft  as  a 
local  Deity,  the  living  representative  of  the 
God  Turn,  the  unseen  principle  and  first  cause 
of  all  existence. 

The  question  whether  a priest  of  On 
Avould  be  disposed  to  give  his  daughter  to  a 
HebreAv,  the  favourite  and  prime  minister  of 
Pharaoh,  ought  not  to  be  regarded  as  a diffi- 
cult^-. There  was  nothing  to  create  a scruple. 
The  Avorship  of  JehoA-ah  AA'as  certainly  not 
knoAvn  at  that  age  to  Egyptians  in  its  ex-  « 
elusive  character.  Foreigners,  especially  of 
Semitic  origin,  Avcrc  received  with  honour, 
and  raised  to  the  highest  rank  by  the  greatest 
sovereigns  of  the  ancient  Empire,®  and  the  de- 
scendant of  Abraham,  Avho  had  been  admitted 
to  the  intimacy  of  a former  Pharaoh,  Avould  be 
acknoAvledged  as  of  noble  birth.  The  circum- 
cision of  Joseph  Avould  be  a strong  recommen- 
dation ; it  AA'as  a sign  of  consecration  and  purity 
to  Avhich  the  Egyptian  priests  artached  peculiar 
importance.  If  the  rite  Avere  previously 
knoAvn  as  an  Egyptian  custom,  more  especially 
in  priestly  and  royal  families,  it  Avould  mark 
Joseph  both  to  Pharaoh  and  Potiphar  as  spe- 
cially qualified  for  the  alliance.  If  it  Avere 
previously  unknoAvn,  no  person  Avas  more 
likely  than  Joseph  to  have  introduced  it 

° This  curious  fact  is  proved  beyond  all  doubt 
by  the  ‘ .Story  of  Saneha,’  a hieratic  papyrus  of 
extreme  anticjuity,  lately  translated  by  Mr. 
Goodwin.  See  especially  pp.  39  and  43.  It  is 
also  to  be  observed  that  Saneha,  Son  of  the 
Sycomore,  was  a name  probably  given  to  the 
foreigner  on  his  adoption  by  the  Egyptians. 


among  the  Egyptians ; and  this  is  possibly  the 
true  solution  of  an  acknowledged  difficulty 
The  first  distinct  representation  of  the  rite  is 
found  on  a monument  of  the  19th  dynasty, 
long  after  the  time  of  Joseph : tAvo  sons  of 
Rameses  II.  are  pictured  as  undergoing  it. 
See  M.  Ghabas’  art.  in  ‘Revue  Archeo- 


logique,’  1861,  p.  298.  The  w'ord 


“ sabu  ” (wdiich  is  translated  “ circumcise  ” by 
Champollion,  and  after  him  by  Mr.  Birch, 
D.  H.),  is  not  found  AA'ith  that  sense  in  any 
ancient  inscription.'®  A passage  in  the  ‘ F uneral 
Ritual’  (c.  xvii.  1.  23,  ed.  Leps.)  is  supposed 
by  M.  de  Rouge  to  refer  to  circumcision,  but 
the  meaning  is  very  doubtful,  nor  if  his  ex- 
planation were  accepted,  would  it  be  con- 
clusive : for  although  portions  of  the  chapter 
are  undoubtedly  older  than  Joseph,  the 
passage  is  a gloss  of  doubtful  antiquity,  and 
is  omitted  in  the  ancient  copy  lately  published 
by  M.  Lepsius.  . See  ‘ Aelteste  Texte,  Sarko- 
phag  I des  Mentuhotep,’  pi.  i,  1.  16,  17. 

Zaphnath  Paaneah. — Gen.  xli.  45. 

The  history  of  the  attem.pts  to  explain  this 
designation  of  Joseph  is  curious  and  instruc- 
tive. The  most  natural  process  before  the 
hieroglyphic  inscriptions  AA'ere  deciphered  was 
to  compare  the  HebreAv  form  with  the  Cop- 
tic ; no  explanation  w'as  derived  from  this 
source  Avhich  was  generally  satisfactory  to 
scholars,  and  most  interpreters  resorted  to 
the  Septuagint,  which  gwes  several  forms  all 
differing  from  the  FlebreAV.  Gesenius  holds 
that  the  HebreAv  writer  must  have  modified 
the  Egyptian  Avords  in  order  to  bring  them 
into  accordance  with  his  own  language : a 
singular  assumption,  since  the  word  is  com- 
pletely inexplicable  in  HebreAV.  It  Avill  be 
found  that  an  exact  transcription  of  the 
Hebrew  letters  gives  a clear  sense  in  Egyp- 
tian. 

The  word  stands  thus — 

z f n t p anch. 


M.  Brugsch  gives  no  such  meaning  in  his 
dictionary.  Mr.  Goodwin  adds,  in  the  letter 
lately  received  by  me ; the  meaning  adopted  by 
Birch  from  Champollion’s  Dictionary  is  probably 
based  only  on  the  Copic  CG^  I?  little 

authority.  Ebers  gives  another  Avord 

Avhich  he  translates  “ circum- 


ili 


cise.”  Brugsch  and  Birch  have  no  such  meaning, 
nor  do  I find  any  example.  A stronger  but  not 
conclusive  argument  is  drawn  from  the  well- 
known  hieroglyphic  for  nit.  The  representations, 
hoAvever,  to  which  Ebers  alludes,  and  the  mum- 
mies which  have  been  examined,  are  much  later 
than  the  time  of  Joseph. 


IN  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


The  letter  f is  invariably  transcribed  by 
I or  T-  , and  most  commonly  by  the 

latter.  the  nearest  form  for  ?],  ^ 


could  only  be  represented  in  Hebrew  by  ri3 
or  0!) ; and  in  the  Pentateuch  Cx  is  gene- 
rally transcribed  by  n,  as  in  Pithom  and 
Asenath.  No  doubt  can  be  entertained 
about  the  remaining  letters : all  scholars 
would  accept  the  identification  of  the 
Egyptian  word  here  given  with  the  Hebrew. 
In  fact  every  letter  in  this  transcription 
rests  on  the  unanimous  authority  of  Egyptian 
scholars,  and  is  confirmed  by  a vast  number  of 
unmistakable  words  in  ancient  inscriptions 
and  papyri. 

The  meaning  is  quite  clear.  The  first  syllable 


zaf,”  is  a word  of  very  common  occur- 


rence, both  in  this  simple  form,  and  with  ex- 
planatory signs  called  determinatives,  as  a 
“ bushel,’’  or  a “ widgeon,”  indicating  abun- 
dance.^^ Its  v/ell-ascertained  meaning  is 
“ food,”  especially  “ corn,”  or  “ grain,”  in 
general.  A few  instances  will  show  this  usage, 
and  serve  to  illustrate  the  biblical  account  of 
Joseph’s  position.  Under  the  early  dynasties 
of  the  ancient  empire  the  officer  of  state  who 
received  the  tributes  in  kind  and  had  the 
superintendence  of  the  public  granaries  bore 
the  title  “ master  of  the  house  of  (‘  zaf’  or 
‘zafa’)  provisions.”  M.  de  Rouge  gives  the 
names  of  three  officers  who  bore  this  title. 
Ptah-ases,  the  son-in-law  of  a Pharaoh  of 
the  4th  dynasty,  Chafra  or  Chefren,  was 
called  “ mer  set  zafa,”  which  M.  de  Rouge 
renders  “ charge  de  la  maison  des  pro- 
visions de  bouche.”  This  remark  on  the 
office  is  important,  the  more  so  since  he 
does  not  connect  the  word  with  the  history 
of  Joseph.  “ Les  tributs  verses  en  nature 
rendaient  cette  fonction  tres  importante,  ainsi 
qu’on  peut  le  voir  par  I’histoire  de  Joseph.” 
The  grandson  and  chief  minister  of  Nepher- 
kara  bore  the  same  title,  1.  c.  p.  86.  Another 
great  official  of  the  same  early  age 'held  the 
three  offices,  master  of  the  arsenals,  of  the 
Treasury,  and  of  the  depots  ot  provisions, 
“ zaf.”  De  Rouge  renders  the  last  title, 
“ chef  des  lieux  des  offrandes,  des  denrtes,” 
p.  87.  From  the  last  passage  it  is  also  clear 
that  the  granaries  throughout  Egypt  were 
under  the  superintendence  of  one  great  officer 
of  state.  M.  de  Rouge  observes,  “ Ges  trois 
titres  pouvaient  constituer  une  sorte  de  minis- 
tere  des  finances.” 


The  next  word  “ nt  ” is  the  prepo- 


” This  complete  form  is 

The  last  two  signs  are  not  phonetic  ; they  repre- 
sent a widgeon  or  duck,  and  bread. 

See  ‘ Recherches, 

VoL.  L 


p.  69. 


481 

sition  “ of,”  used  very  commonly  on  the 
early  monuments.  Two  examples  may  be 
found  in  Egyptian  words  quoted  by  M.  de 
Rouge  on  the  last  passage  which  has  been 
discussed. 

The  meaning  of  “ Anch  ” is  not  questioned. 
It  signifies  “ life,”  or  with  the  article  it  may 
mean  “ the  living.”  Thus  one  name  of  Mem- 
phis is  ta-anch  for  the  land  of  life  or  of  the 
living.'^ 

The  meaning,  therefore,  of  the  whole  name, 
the  only  meaning  which  it  could  bear  to  an 
Egyptian,  and  of  course  to  a Hebrew  of  the 
age  of  Moses,  is  “ the  food  of  life”  or  “the 
food  of  the  living.”  No  question  can  be 
raised  as  to  the  appropriateness  of  this  desig- 
nation : it  only  remains  to  show  that  the  word 
“ zaf”  was  likely  to  be  applied  to  a person. 
To  this  it  is  a complete  answer  that  it  occurs 
in  the  rings  of  three  Pharaohs  of  the  13  th 
dynasty.  See  Brugsch,  ‘ Histoire  d’Egypte,’ 
pi.  viii.,  nos.  162,  164,  and  167;  or  Lepsius, 

‘ Kdnigsbuch,’  taf.  xix.  282,  284.^^ 

We  have  now  to  consider  the  remarkable 
reading  of  the  Septuagint.  The  Egyptian  was 
a living  language,  though  it  had  undergone 
considerable  modification^,  when  the  Penta- 
teuch was  translated,  and  it  is  evident  from 
Jerome’s  account  that  the  Jews  in  Egypt 
attached  a definite  meaning  to  the  word 
yj/'ovdo^  <pavr})(,  which  on  their  authority  he 
renders  salvator  mundi.  The  latter  part  cor- 
responds with  the  interpretation  above  given.- 
Life,  or  the  living,  is  the  equivalent  of  “the 
world.”  The  first  part  is  more  difficult  to 
explain.  The  transcription  of  yj^ovd  would 

give  f p-sont,  i.  e.,  “ foun- 

dation.” It  might  possibly  be  used  in  the 
sense  of  “ support,”  “ sustentation  ; ” but  I 
am  not  aware  that  any  example  of  such  a 
meaning  can  be  adduced.^^ 


Jablonski,  ‘Opuscula,’  tom.  i.  p.  210,  sug- 
gests from  the  Coptic  'jS’CDq  ItWG  nGn6C|, 


caput  mundi  ; La  Crozius,  UTG 

TKJOn..^?  thus  agreeing  with  the  transcription 


here  given  so  far  as  the  last  part  is  concerned. 
There  can,  however,  be  no  doubt  that 


represents  ; whereas  the  phonetic  value  of 
the  Egyptian  sign  for  head  differs  from  it  con- 
siderably. 

The  transcription  of  Brugsch  is  more  accu- 


Traces  of  the  word  are 


found  in  other  rings,  probably  also  in  the  name 
of  a Pharaoh  of  much  earlier  date.  See  De 
Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  155.  In  choosing  the 
name.  Pharaoh  might  possibly  have  had  some 
regard  to  the  name  Joseph  ; seph  and  zaph 
bear  a near  resemblance. 

Gesenius  renders  the  word  “the  support  of 
life  3”  but  the  imperfect  knowledge  of  hiero 


H H 


482 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS 


Another  transcription  of  the  Greek  form 
may  be  suggested;  one  more  exact,  since  it 
retains  the  consonants  without  any  modifi- 
cation. 


The  meaning  would  be  “he  who  gives  joy 
to  the  world.”  This  name  has  a strong 
Egyptian  colouring.  It  occurs  precisely  in  the 
same  form  as  that  of  a royal  favourite  under 

the  5th  dynasty,  ^ J ^ ^ sntm  het, 

or,  as  M.  de  Rouge  reads,  “senotem  het,” 
“ deligliting  the  heart.”  The  example  shows, 
also,  that  the  construction  is  correct : “ seno- 
tem ” is  a transitive  form,  and  does  not  re- 
quire or  admit  a preposition.  It  may  be 
observed  that  the  same  root  occurs  in  the 
names  of  two  princes  of  the  21st  dynasty. 
(^See  Brugsch,  H.  E.,  PL  xiv,,  Nos.  299  and 
302.) 

, One  or  other  of  these  forms  may  have  been 
before  the  minds  of  the  Greek  translator — 
probably  the  latter;  but  the  reading  of  the 
LXX  is  uncertain,  and  there  is  no  reason  what- 
ever for  departing  from  the  simple,  intelligible, 
and  well-ascertained  sense  of  the  words  which 
is  elicited  by  transcription  of  the  Hebrew. 


This  word,  which  Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  tO 
calls  “ vox  perdubia,”  has  never  had  a satis- 
factory explanation.  It  is  admitted  to  be 
Egyptian,  though,  its  usual,  Gesenius  supposes 
that  it  was  modified  in  the  transcription  in 
order  to  give  it  a Hebrew  character.  The  ex- 
planation suggested  by  Rosellini,  and  adopted 
by  Gesenius,  is  A-nGpCR?  i.e.  incline  or  bow 
the  head.  This,  however,  is  inadmissible.  The 
transposition  of  the  two  words  pGK  and 
A-UG  is  not  in  accordance  with  old  Egyptian 
usage.  A-UG  may  possibly  be  the  true  sound 
-of  the  hieroglyphic  for  head  (see  De 


Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p.  91,  n.  2.),  but  it  would 
not  be  correctly  transcribed  by  3^5.  pGK  is 
not  found  in  the  sense  “ bow  ” or  “ incline  ’’ 
in  old  Egyptian. 


The  exact  transcription  is 


If  this  give  a meaning  exactly  applicable, 
there  can  b^e  no  need  of  further  inquiry. 

The  context  tells  us,  not,  as  is  commonly 
assumed,  that  a herald  went  before  Joseph, 
addressing  the  people,  but  “ they  cried  before 
him,”  i.  e.  the  people  or  the  attendants  shouted 
out  with  reference  to  Joseph,  “ Abrek.” 

But  ab-rek  is  the  imperative,  and  the  em- 
phatic imperative,  of  the  verb  “ Ab,”  which  is 
a word  specially  used  in  reference  to  public 
demonstrations  of  rejoicing.  Thus,  in  an  in- 
scription of  Rameses  II.  we  find  ^i>-sen-nek, 
“ they  rejoice  before  thee : ” and  in  another  of 
later  date,  “ the  world  is  in  a state  of  rejoicing,” 
in  Ab  ni.  The  termination  “rek”  is  e(|uiva- 
lent  to  the  Hebrew  as  M.  Chabas  has 
pointed  out  in  explaining  the  word  mai-rek, 
/.  e.  come.^'^  ‘ Voyage  d un  Egyptien,’  p.  285. 

The  chief  objection  to  this  explanation  is 
that  the  verb  is  in  the  singular  number, 
addressing  an  individual,  not  a multitude. 
But  it  seems  quite  natural  that  the  attendants 
should  address  Joseph,  calling  upon  him  to 
rejoice,  together  with  all  the  people,  in  his 
deliverance  and  exaltation.  Some  support  may 
be  found  for  this  explanation  in  the  fact  that 
subject  princes  address  the  Pharaoh  in  the 
same  form,  hotep-rek.  See  the  vignette  to 
the  Sttle  Pianchi  in  Mariette’s  ‘ Fouilles 
d’Abydos.’ 

Another  transcription,  which  comes  very 
near  to  the  Hebrew,  would  give  Ab  Rekh, 
i.e.  “pure”  and  “wise:”  but  it  is  unlikely  to 
have  been  used  as  an  exclamation.^^ 


Moses. 

In  examining  the  form  which  this  name 
would  properly  assume  in  Egyptian,  we  must 
bear  in  mind  the  following  points: — i.  The 


glyphics  in  his  time  led  him  to  the  error  of 

identifying  “sont”  with  ^j-*  ^ ^ y,  to  which 

it  bears  no  real  resemblance.  1 have  since  found' 
the  name  Sont-ur,  i.e.  the  “great  foundation,” 
as  that  of  a high  priest  at  Thebes.  See  Maricttc, 

'*  Fouilles,’  pi.  vii.  1.  12.  The  LXX.  m.ay  therefore 
have  meant  to  represent  Pa-sont-om-I’aanch 
(om  = t i.e.  am,  or  ami),  belonging  to  the  support 
of  the  world.  A good  sense,  but  not  so  good  as 
that  given  Vjy  the  Hebrew.  Mr.  Goodwin  con- 
siders the  transcription  of  the  LXX,  which  is 
given  al)ovc,  to  be  very  probable.  He  trans- 
lates it  “making  life  ])leasant,”  which  is  equiva- 
lent in  meaning.  He  observes  also  that  the 
article  in  old  ligyptian  would  not  have  been 
Avritten,  but  probably  it  was  often  supplied  in 
reading  and  speaking.  This  applies  to  the  pre- 
ceding account 'of  the  Hebrew  form. 


letter  is  generally  represented  by  j //  t i.  e. 

sh  and  its  homophones,  but  in  very  ancient 
transcriptions,  and  specially  in  monuments  of 
the  1 8th  and  19th  dynasties,  it  corresponds 

in  proper  names  to  ^ , s.  Thus  we  find 

for  nW, 


It  is  especially  used  in  exclamations,  thus  : 
harek — stand  up,  see  ‘ Br.  D.  H.’,  p.  814, 
equivalent  to  “ up  with  you.”  The  form  occurs 
repeatedly  in  the  texts. 

” In  the  ‘/Eg.  Zeitschrift’  for  1869,  p.  1869, 
the  Egyptian  Ap-Rech,  i.e.  Chief  of  the  Wise. 
The  transcription  is  not  accurate,  p for  b,  and 
ch  for  k. 


IN  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


483 


I ) Askelna,  for  As- 

kalon,  and  ^ ^ [| , Pulistha,  for 

M.  Brugsch,  a high  authority  in  all 
such  questions,  gives  d or  as  the  corres- 
ponding letters  to  the  Egyptian  ^ (See 

‘ Geographische  Inschriften,’  p.  15).  This  is 
a point  of  importance,  considering  the  remark- 
able accuracy  of  the  transcriptions  in  the 
Pentateuch. 

2.  The  final  letter  n is  adequately 
represented  by  a vowel  sound,  either  \\  =/, 


or  more  commonly  by  «,  corresponding 


to  the  Hebrew  v 

3.  The  vowel  sound  in  Mo  is  not  repre- 
sented either  in  Hebrew  or  Egyptian,  but  in 
the  transcription  a preference  should  be  given 
to  the  vowel  0,  which  appears  from  Coptic 
and  Greek  to  be  associated  witl^the  con- 
sonants Ms. 

4.  It  is  also  to  be  observed  that  Moses 
undoubtedly  lays  the  stress  on  the  verb  “ draw 
out,”  not  on  the  noun  “ water.”  The  name 
in  Egyptian  ought  to  bear  the  sense  “drawn 
out,”  “ brought  forth.”  The  verb  may  have 
borne  the  same  sense  in  Hebrew  also  (a  fact 
of  extremely  common  occurrence),  but  if  the 
writer  knew  Egyptian  he  certainly  would  not 
have  chosen  a word  for  which  that  language 
does  not  supply  a natural  interpretation. 

Among  transcriptions  which  are  probable 
or  possible,  one  exactly  fulfils  all  these  condi- 
tions. The  word  ^ unquestion- 


ably corresponds  in  form  to  the  Hebrew, 
letter  for  letter,  on  the  principles  laid  down 
above.  The  vowel  sound,  which  is  required 
for  the  first  syllable,  may  be  assumed  to  have 
been  0,  and  this  for  several  reasons.  The 

syllable  (ttr  occurs  in  many  names  of  the 

1 8th  dynasty,  and  is  always  transcribed  by 
Manetho  or  his  Greek  translators  by  mos  ; 
thus  we  find  Amosis  and  Thotmosis. 

The  question  of  equal  importance  as  to  the 
meaning  remains  to  be  answered. 

The  explanation,  suggested  first  as  it  would 
seem  by  Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  -v.)  “ child  ” or 
“ son,”  is  quite  accurate  so  far  as  it  goes. 
Mesu,  or  Moses,  undoubtedly  does  bear  that 
signification,  and  may  be  rendered  exactly  by 
“ son.”  But  if  we  had  no  other  information 
as  to  the  original  and  common  sense  of  the 
verb  from  which  it  is  derived,  this  interpreta- 
tion, which  contradicts  the  statement  in  Exo- 
dus, would  present  an  insuperable  difficulty, 
unless  we  were  satisfied  with  the  usual  evasion 
that  the  word  was  altered  so  as  to  adapt  it  to 
a Hebrew  etymology.  The  difficulty,  how- 
ever, is  entirely  removed  when  the  original 


meaning,  as  well  as  usage,  of  the  word  in 
Egyptian  is  examined.  In  his  ‘ Hieroglyphic 
Dictionary’  M.  Brugsch  shows  that  the  sense 
“ drawing  out  ” is  the  original  one.  It  is  taken 
from  the  work  of  the  potter  (p.  705).  It  there 
means  “ produce,”  “ bring  forth,”  and,  as  M. 
Brugsch  affirms  in  another  passage  (p.  698), 
the  derivation  of  from  the  Hebrew  root 
traxit,  extraxit,  suitably  also  in  the  sense 
“ extraxit  e ventre  matris,”  would  preserve 
the  true  sense  of  the  Egyptian.*** 

The  word  used  by  Moses  may  of  course 
be  Semitic ; although  it  must  be  observed  that 
it  occurs  only  in  this  passage,  and  in  one 
other  which  is  evidently  taken  from  it,  Ps. 
xviii.  17  (repeated  2 Sam.  xxii.  17);  but  at 
any  rate  it  is  so  exceedingly  rare  that  we  can 
best  account  for  its  selection  by  Moses  by  the 
supposition  that  it  came  exceedingly  near  to, 
or  exactly  represented,  the  Egyptian.  It  is 
far  from  improbable  that  it  was,  in  fact,  a 
simple  transcription  of  words,  which  must 
have  been  perfectly  intelligible  to  the  Israelites 
of  that  age.  What  the  Egyptian  princess 
said— and  her  words  were  not  likely  to  be 
forgotten  or  misrepresented  by  her  adopted 
son — was  this:  “ I give  him  the  name  Moses 
— ‘ brought  forth  ’ — because  I brought  him 
forth  from  the  water.” 

The  probability  that  this  was  actually  the 
Egyptian  name  of  Moses  comes  very  near  a 
certainty  when  we  learn  that  it  was  very  com- 
mon under  the  Middle  Empire.  In  the  se- 
lect papyri  (Anastasi,  vi.  p.  3,  1.  4)^**  it  occurs 
as  the  names  of  a keeper  of  goats,  the  super- 
intendent of  the  “ house  of  measures,”  where 
corn  was  measured  or  weighed.  It  was  also 
borne  by  a prince  of  the  blood-royal  of  Egypt 
who  held  the  office  of  Viceroy  of  Nubia 
under  the  nineteenth  dynasty.  There  is  no 
reason  for  identifying  either  of  these  persons 
with  Moses,  but  the  coincidences  with  the 
biblical  history  and  with  the  legends  in  Jose- 
phus and  other  writers  are  curious.  This  ascer- 
tained use  of  the  word  appears  to  give  it  a 
very  decided  preference  over  two  other  senses 
suggested  by  a faithful  transcription.  The 


A family  of  words  closely  resembling,  or 
identical  with,  is  found  in  Egyptian. 

See  Brugsch  D.  H.,  p.  711,  j.  z/.  |j  ^ 4 

In  the  Egyptian  the  translation  would  run 
thus  : 

/■  S’ = 2x0 

iliP5TUt^£= 

An  set  hi  tat  naf  pa  ran  Mesu  em  tat  pe-un 
mesna  su  emta  pa  mu. 

See  Brugsch,  D.  H.,  p.  1162. 


H H 2 


484 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS 


word 


-ScT-a 


in  the  sense 


“ to  bring,”  is  common,  not  only  as  the  in- 
stances given  by  Birch  and  Brugsch  would 
lead  us  to  suppose,  in  reference  to  tributes, 
but  to  the  simple  transfer  of  objects.^^  It 
would  be  quite  intelligible  in  Egyptian  were 
we  to  read,  “ She  called  his  name  Masi^  saying 
because  I brought  (masi)  him  out  of  the 
waters.”  It  is,  however,  doubtful  whether 
such  a proper  name  would  be  in  accordance 
with  Egyptian  usage.  Again,  it  might  be 
possible,  with  our  present  knowledge  of  Egyp- 
tian, to  give  a more  plausible  etymology  de- 
rived from  the  word  “ water,”  than  either  of 
those  which  Jablonski  and  other  scholars 
formerly  proposed.  The  phonetic  value  of 


the  group  admitted  to  be  Mu,  or 


Mo,  and  Il2ZZf 


shl,  denotes  a child. 


Mo-shi,  a water-child,  would  not  be  an  im- 
possible transcription  or  rendering,  were  it 
justified  by  Egyptian  usage.  Still  it  is  clear 
that  the  stress  is  laid,  not  on  the  noun,  but 
on  the  verb,  and  there  appears  no  reason  to 
depart  from  the  simple  and  natural  explana- 
tion which  has  been  given  above. 

It  may,  however,  appear  to  require  some 
additional  evidence  that  Moses  should  have 
used  an  Egyptian  word,  or  have  selected,  to 
,say  the  least,  a very  unusual  Hebrew  word  to 
represent  it.  Here  we  may  call  attention  to  a 
fact  which  has  hitherto  been  unnoticed.  In 
that  part  of  the  narrative  which  deals  specially 
with  Egyptian  matters,  words  are  constantly 
used  which  are  either  of  Egyptian  origin  or 
common  to  Hebrew  and  Egyptian.  The 
following  instances  are  taken  from  one  verse, 
that  in  which  Moses  gives  the  history  of  his 
exposure.  His  mother  made  him  an  ark  of 
bulrushes.  The  word  “ark,”  n::n  (of  which 
Rbdiger  says,  “ falsi  sunt,  qui  etymon  in  lin- 
gnis  Semiticis  qinererent),  is  admitted  to  be 
Egyptian.  It  is,  indeed,  very  common  in  the 
sense  “ chest  ” or  “ cofl'er,”  also  in  the  sense 

“ cradle,”  ^ ^ , teb,  with  several 


variants.  (Birch  D.  N.,  p.  5359;  Br.  D.H., 
1628.)  The  Septuagint  retains  the  Hebrew 
doubtless  as  a well-known  Egyptian 
word.  '\  he  material  of  Avhich  this  ark 
was  m.ade  is  called  ND3.  Brugsch(‘  Diet. 
Hier.,’  p.  145)  identifies  this  word  with 
the  Coptic  KA-JULi  “ junciisquo  fiunt  funes.” 
Brugsch  show's,  moreover,  that  it  wms  specially 
used  for  making  the  light  boats  of  the  Nile. 


**  It  is  used  for  bringing  a harp  to  a man  in  a 
tavern.  See  ‘ Stele  Pianchi  ap.  Brugsch,  1).  II.’, 
p.  157.  Jirugsch  writes  the  word  Masib,  but 
ijirch  gives  Masi,  wliich  seems  correct.  I'he  leg 
is  not  phonetic,  but  determinative. 


He  gives  the  word  K A. JLR.,  papy- 

rus myopea,  p.  1452.  See  also  p.  2320, 
where  a basket  of  green  papyrus  (kam  nat) 
is  mentioned. 

Again,  “ when  .she  made  it,  she  daubed  it 
with  slimeJ^  The  w'ord  is  used  in  the 
original  both  for  the  process  and  the  material. 
This  corresponds  exactly  with  the  original 
meaning  and  use  of  the  Egyptian  word 

0 ^ ’ which  has  the  same  letters,  though, 

as  is  very  commonly  the  case,  in  a different 
order.  The  Hebrew  is  ch-m-r,  the  Egyp- 
tian m-r-ch.  Brugsch  (‘  Diet.  Hier.,’  p.  7*69) 
says,  “ Die  Grundbedeutung  der  W urzel  Merh 
ist  ‘ beschmieren,  bestreichen,  iiberzeichen  et- 
was  mit  einem  feuchten  gegenstande.”  Mr. 
Goodwin  has  very  lately  shown  the  identity 
of  the  words.  “The  root  appears  again  in 
A.iLJLpH^ej  bitumen,  pitch, 

in  Hebrew  TOH.” — ‘ Zeits.,’  1867,  P-  86- 
Whether'iiHoses  had  this  word  in  mind  may, 
of  course,  be  questioned,  but  it  is  evidently 
the  most  suitable  that  could  be  suggested. 

The  next  word,  “pitch,”  is  common  to 


Hebrew  and  Egyptian.  nST, 


The  Egyptian  w^ord  is  very 


common;  the  Hebrew  occurs  only  twice  in 
the  Bible,  but  is  well  known  in  Arabic,  and  was 
probably  common  to  Egyptian  and  HebrewA 
Jochebed  then  placed  the  ark  in  “ the  flags.” 
The  Hebrew  is  for  which  no  plausible 
etymology  has  been  suggested,  nor  is  the  word 
found  in  any  Semitic  language.  It  answers, 
however,  very  nearly  to  the  Egyptian  name 
for  a species  of  papyrus  found  in  marshy 
places  and  on  the  banks  of  rivers.  The 


word  was  written  either 


(Sallier,  i,  4,  9),  ie.,  tufi,  or  ^ ^ , 


also  to  be  read  “tufi.”  The  Coptic  equivalent 
is  XOOCj,  which  indic!?ites  a predominance  of 
the  sibilant  sound  common  to  dentals.  It 
seems  probable  that  it  was  also  written  with 


, “ z,”  both  because  of  the  Coptic  form, 

and  because  ? “ f^et  ” (which  seems 

to  be  an  abbreviation),  also  m.eans  papyrus. 
In  that  case  “tufi”  would  be  translated 
“ zufi  ” = qiD-  The  identification  of  the 
Egyptian  and  Hebrew  is  so  probable  as  to 
approximate  to  a certainty.  In  the  last  num- 
ber of  Brugsch ’s  Dictionary,  published  since 
this  was  printed,  I find  that  he  also  identifies 


tufi,  XOO^q  and  P]fD,  p.  1580. 

Lastly,  we  read  “ by  the  river’s  brink.” 
"iN'n  hv-  T be  form  and  meaning  are 
Egyptian.  It  is  well  known  that  IN'  is 


IN  THE  PENTATEUCH.  485 


Egyptian.  The  Nile  has  two  names : the  sa- 
cred name  Hapi,  and  the  common  name, 
meaning  “ river,”  which  is  here  exactly  tran- 
scribed /)  ^ ^ Aor.  The  word 


/.  e.  “ lip,”  for  “ brink,”  is  sufficiently  common 
in  Hebrew,  but  it  is  interesting  to  find  in  a 
papyrus  of  the  1 9th  dynasty  precisely  the  same 
word  with  the  same  meaning.  “ I sat  down  by 


the  lip  of  the  river, 


/.  e.  “ spot  Atur.”  Atur  is  another  form  of 
“ Aor.”  The  same  idiom  occurs  in  the 
‘ Funeral  Ritual,’  c.  ii.  3,  1.  2. 

It  would  be  very  difficult  to  resist  the  im- 
pression that  this  verse  was  written  by  a man 
equally  familiar  with  both  languages,  or,  on 
the  other  hand,  to  admit  the  possibility  that 
coincidences  coming  so  near  together  were 
purely  accidental,  as  they  must  have  been  in 
the  mouth  of  a Palestinian  Jew. 

One  more  instance  of  equal  interest  is  taken 
from  the  ist  chapter  of  Exodus,  ver.  1 1.  We 
there  read  that  the  Egyptians  set  CDD  '"ibs 
“ sari  massim,”  over  Israel.  The  words  are 
both  common  in  Hebrew,  but  they  are  also 
common  in  Egyptian,  and  precisely  in  the 


same  signification.  Birch  gives 


mas,  tribute.  ‘ Dictionary  of  Hieroglyphics,’ 
s.n).  The  official  name  “ser”  is  still  more 
striking.  It  is  common  in  the  sense  “ chief- 
tain,” but  we  find  it  specially  applied  to  the 
officer  appointed  by  Tothmosis  III.  to  su- 
perintend the  work  of  captives  employed  in 
making  bricks.  In  the  inscription  on  the 
well-known  picture  which  represents  the  pro- 
cesses, we  find  the  proper  official  designation 
of  the  overseers, who  were  armed  with 
heavy  whips,  and  also  of  the  chief  superintend- 
ent. He  is  called  of  which  the 

Hebrew  “ ser,”  is  the  exact  transcription. 
His  rank  is  denoted  by  the  long  staff,  and 
by  the  determinative,  viz.  the  head  and  neck 
of  a giraffe.  Had  this  title  occurred  first 
under  the  19th  dynasty  it  might  have  been 
regarded  as  Semitic  (for  a vast  number  of 
military  and  civil  titles  were  then  introduced 
into  Egypt) ; but  occurring,  as  it  does,  under 
the  1 8th  dynasty,  it  is  unquestionably  Egyp- 
tian. It  is  found,  indeed,  in  inscriptions  far 
more  ancient,  e.  g.  under  Pepi  of  the  6th 
dynasty.  See  De  Rouge,  ‘ Recherches,’  p. 
118.^  We  have,  in  any  case,  a proof  that  in 
relating  Egyptian  transactions  Moses  either 
used  the  native  Egyptian  word,  or  that  he 


adopted  the  Hebrew  word  which  expressed  it 
most  exactly  both  in  meaning  and  form. 

QHQ,  Pithom.  This  city  was  formerly 
identified  by  Brugsch  with  the  fort  of  Djar, 
Pachtum  n Zar.  This  was  a point  of  im- 
portance, since  it  is  certain  that  that  fort  or 
city  was  in  existence  early  in  the  i8th  dynasty, 
before  the  accession  of  Tothmosis  IIP,  the 
grandson  of  Amosis  I.,  to  whom  its  erection 
may  be  unhesitatingly  ascribed.  The  fortress 
in  question  is  shown,  on  grounds  which  ap- 
pear conclusive,  to  have  been  known  at  a later 
period  by  the  name  Heroopolis,  near  the  ruins 
of  Mukfar,  or  Abn  Kasheb.  See  Brugsch, 
‘ Geographic  des  Alien  Aiigyptens,’  p.  263. 
The  word  Pithom,  however,  does  not  corre- 
spond to  the  Egyptian  form  with  sufficient 
accuracy,  and  it  is  now  admitted  to  be  iden- 
tical with  ’ Pe-tum,  the 

house,  i.  e.  dwelling  or  temple  of  Turn.  Still 
the  conclusions  drawn  by  Brugsch  do  not 
lose  their  interest,  since  it  has  lately  been 
shown  that  this  place  was  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  of  the  fortress,  and  was  in  all  proba- 
bility built  at  the  same  time  as  the  adjoin- 
ing sanctuary,  giving  name  to  the  whole  set 
of  edifices,  or  it  might  have  been  a second 
name  of  the  same  place.  Thus  On  is  called 
Pitum,  with  the  same  meaning,  “ house  of 
Turn.”  This  is  probably  the  true  explana- 
tion. The  passage  translated  by  M.  Chabas, 
‘Met.  Egypt.,’  ii.,  p.  155,  shows  that  certain 
nomads  of  Atema  (or,  as  the  name  should  be 
transcribed,  Edom)  applied  to  the  guards  of 
Merneptah  Hotephima,  the  son  of  Rameses, 
for  permission  to  feed  their  cattle  in  the  dis- 
trict adjoining  the  fortress,  to  which  that  so- 
vereign had  then  given  his  own  name.  The 
place  of  conference  was  the  great  reservoir  at 
Pithom.  F rom  this  we  learn  that  Pithom  was 
on  the  frontier  of  the  desert.  The  name  here 
used  for  reservoir  in  the  papyrus  is  Semi- 

J ^ J y]  4 Chabas 

transcribes  it  Bere-koavota,  i.  e.  ni3“l3,  cis- 
terns or  reservoirs:  a curious  illustration  of 
the  biblical  narrative,  built  as  the  place  was 
by  Israelites,  and  probably  occupied  by  them 
up  to  the  date  of  the  Exodus.  In  the  time 
of  Merneptah  there  is  no  indication  of  their 
presence,  nor  is  it  at  all  probable  that  had  the 
Delta  at  that  time  been  in  the  state  supposed 
by  Brugsch  (see  ‘ Histoire  d'Egypte,’  p.  174), 
the  king  would  have  admitted  a nomad  tribe 
into  the  district. 


The  meaning  of  the 

group  is  the  head  work-givers,  the  eye  denot- 
ing superintendence. 

In  the  eleventh  line  of  the  inscription,  which 
is  read  ffom  right  to  left.  See  Brugsch,  ‘ His- 
toire d’Egypte,’  p.  106. 


DnX,  Etham.  Exod.  xiii.  20.  The  tran- 
scription of  this  name  comes  exceedingly 

near  to  Pithom.  ^ , A-tum, 


I 


A 


Pitum.  The  meaning  is 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS 


486 


identical,  ^ ra  -A,and  ■*  per,  mean 

“ house,”  “ dwelling,”  and  are  applied  indif- 
ferently as  designations  of  one  and  the  same 
locality:  thus  Pi  Ramessu  and  A-Ramessu 
(Chab.,  ‘ Mel.  Eg.’)  Etham  and  Pithom  are  to 
be  rendered  “ house  of  T um.”  The  site  of 
Etham  was  on  the  extreme  border  of  the 
desert,  such,  as  we  have  seen,  must  have  been 
the  site  of  Pithom.  The  identification  of  the 
two  names  which  M.  Chabas  (‘Voy.  Eg.,’ 
p.  286)  proposes  as  probable,  may  therefore 
be  regarded  as  all  but  certain.  The  LXX. 
give  ’O^d/Li,  or  ’Odaix,  for  Etham.  This  repre- 
sents the  Egyptian  exactly,  for  the  ^ ' 

corresponds  generally  to  O.  In  Numbers 
xxxiii.  6,  7,  they  give  Bovddv,  or,  as  it  should 
be  read,  BovOdfx.  The  Bou,  as  in  the  well- 
known  Busiris  for  Pe-bsiri,  represents  the 

Egyptian  (not  the  article,  but  the  group 

for  “ house  ” or  Pe) : this  corroborates  the 
argument  for  the  identification. 

The  derivation  proposed  by  Jablonski,  and 
accepted  by  F orster,  viz.  At-iom,  not-sea,  may 
illustrate  the  shifts  to  which  men  of  learning 
were  formerly  driven  by  their  ignorance  of 
the  ancient  language  of  Egypt. 

DDOyn,  Gen.  xlvii.  ii  ; DD)Oy"),  Exod.  i.  it. 
In  the  former  passage  the  name  “ Rameses”  is 
that  of  a district;  in  the  latter,  “ Raamses,” 
it  is  the  name  of  a city.  The  pointing  of  the 
former  name  is  preferable.  The  first  syllable 

yi  is  the  exact  transcription  of  Ra,  the 

well-known  name  of  the  Sun -God.  The 
second  part  of  the  word,  DDtD,  represents  with 

equal  fidelity  the  Egyptian  ^ ^ P “ meses.” 
This  latter  part  is  a reduplicated  form  of  the 
very  common  w^ord  [{]  P ? “ nies,”  a child.  It 

occurs  in  the  name  Rameses,  wTich  was  borne 
by  two  Pharaohs  of  the  19th,  and  by  all  the 
kings  of  the  20th  dynasty.  In  the  name  of 
the  sovereign  the  meaning  of  the  word  is  either 
“ Ra  begat,”  or  “ Ra  begat  him.”  Hence  it  is 
inferred  that  the  name  both  of  the  district 
and  of  the  city  must  have  been  derived  from 
that  of  the  king. 

It  is,  however,  clear  that  the  writer  of  the 
Pentateuch  represents  the  name  as  that  of 
the  district  at  the  time  of  its  occupation  by  the 
Israelites,  that  is,  at  a time  admitted  by  all  to 
be  ages  before  the  19th  dynasty.  Had  the  pas- 
sage in  Genesis  occurred  in  a papyrus  of  the 
age  of  the  Exodus,  it  would  have  been  held  as 
a sufficient  proof  that  the  name  must  have  been 
ancient ; nor  is  there  any  reason  to  doubt  the 
statement,  or  to  suppose  that  the  name  was 
simply  given  as  that  by  which  the  district  was 
know'n  at  the  time  when  Moses  wrote.  The 
only  question  is  whether  it  was  a name  likely 


to  be  given  to  a place  or  district  at  an  early 
age,  in  accordance  with  Egyptian  usage. 

Late  researches  have  shown  that  “ Ra,”  the 
first  part  of  the  word,  entered  very  commonly 
into  names  of  places,  districts,  and  cities  under 
the  ancient  empire : far  more  commonly  than 
at  a later  period.  Thus  we  find,  from  in- 
scriptions in  the  tomb  of  Tei  (son-in-law  of  a 
Pharaoh  of  the  5th  dynasty.  An,  or  Ranuser), 
that  not  less  than  four  cities,  or  districts,  in 
his  government  were  called  Ra-asket,  Ra- 
shephet,  Ra-Seket,  and  Ra-hotep  (De  Rouge, 

‘ Recherches,’  p.  94;  see  also  p.  72,  where 
M.  de  R.  observes  that  the  frequent  notices 
of  Ra  have  been  much  overlooked).  Under  a 
preceding  Pharaoh  we  meet  with  Ra-heb,  i.e., 
festival  of  Ra;  this  w'as  a royal  residence. 
Such  names  might  be  expected  to  be  found 
very  frequently  in  the  country  about  On, 
Which  was  called  Pe-Ra,  Es-Ra,  Nes-Ra,  and 
Aa-Ra.  (See  Brugsch,  ‘ Geog.,’  Nos.  1213, 
1214.) 

Ra-meses  may  therefore  well  have  been 
the  old  name  of  the  district : whether  it 
represents  the  original  form,  “ Ra-messon,” 
with  the  sense  “ Ra  the  self-begetting,”  an 
ancient  appellation  of  Ra  in  the  Ritual ; or 
Ra-meses,  “ Ra  the  creator,  former,  or  be- 
gotten,” a sense  equally  suitable  and  harmo- 
nizing with  Egyptian  notions;  or“Ra-mesu,” 
children  of  Ra.  The  Egyptians  called  them- 
selves children  of  Ra,  i.e.,  Ra-mesu,  from  the 
earliest  times ; it  was  probably  their  character- 
istic name  as  distinguished  from  foreigners: 
this  appears  from  a well-known  inscription  on 
the  tomb  of  Seti  Merneptah,  the  father  of 
Rameses  II.  A city,  of  which  the  site  is 
unknown,  bore  the  name  Mis-Ra  rfor  is  it 
at  all  improbable  that  this  is  connected  with 
the  name  given  to  the  Egyptians  in  the  Bible, 
viz  , Mizraim.^^  That  some  district  should 
have  borne  the  name,  and,  if  any  district,  that 
which  was  peculiarly  associated  with  the 
earliest  forms  of  Sun  worship,  presents  no 
improbability,'^®  nothing  which  can  justify  us 
in  questioning  the  accuracy  of  Moses. 

The  same  arguments  apply  to  the  name  of  the 
city  of  Rameses.  It  was  a name  very  naturally 
given  to  the  capital  of  the  district.  The  certain 
fact  that  Rameses  II.  gave  his  own  name  to  a 
fortress  of  considerable  extent  in  this  district, 
as  well  as  to  others  in  different  parts  of  Egypt, 
has  been  regarded  by  Egyptologers  as  a 


.See  Brugsch,  ‘Geog.,’ No.  1517. 

This  lias  been  suggested  by  M.  Rouge- 
mont,  ‘ Age  de  Bronze,’  and  is  supported  by 
M.  Rheinisch.  Dr,  Ebers  rejects,  but  does  not 
disprove,  the  identification.  In  an  Essay  lately 
published  by  Mr.  Birch,  on  the  trilingual  in- 
scription of  San,  he  observes  that  Mizraim  is 
supposed  by  some  to  represent  the  common 
Egyptian  word  for  Egypt,  viz.  ta-men.  This 
requires  two  transpositions,  mer-ta  and  met-ra. 

This  is,  in  fact,  admitted  even  by  M.  Chabas, 
‘ Mel,  egypt.,’  ii.  p.  125. 


IN  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


487 


conclusive  proof  that  it  could  not  have  borne 
the  name  previously.  It  should,  however,  be 
observed  that  Moses  does  not  call  the  city, 
or  arsenal.  Pi  Ramessu,  but  simply  Rameses. 
The  word  Pi,  or  its  equivalent  signifying 
house  or  residence,  so  far  as  I can  ascertain, 
is  never  omitted  in  the  Egyptian  designations 
of  places  named  after  the  king.  It  is  found 
in  all  the  names  given  by  M.  Chabas,  ‘ Mel. 
Eg.,’  ii.  p.  126.  It  is  extremely  unlikely  that 
it  should  have  been  omitted  by  Moses  in  the 
very  same  sentence  in  which  he  gives  the  full 
and  accurate  transcription  of  Pithom.  Again, 
the  name  which  the  fortress  bore  after  its 
enlargement  by  Rameses  was  invariably  that 
of  the  Sovereign,  who  is  not  called  in  Egyptian 
documents  Rameses  simply,  but  Rame.ses 
Meiamon,  or  Meramon.  I'his  is  not  con- 
clusive, but  it  adds  some  weight  to  the  argu- 
ment. it  is  known,  moreover,  that  the  fortress 
was  in  existence  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign 
of  Rameses,  and  apparently  bearing  the  name 
Rameses. In  addition  to  these  facts  we  find 
that  Amosis,  or  Aahmes,  to  whom  the  build- 
ing of  several  cities  in  the  Delta  is  attributed 
by  contemporary  monuments,  gave  the  name 
“ Rames  ” to  one  of  his  own  sons.  It  has 
been  observed  above,  that  in  the  names 
of  early  kings,  the  Greeks  transcribe  Mes 
by  Moses,  which  points  to  a duplicate  s 
in  Egyptian.  It  may  not  be  assumed  that 
the  name  of  the  city  was  taken  from  this 
prince,  but  the  probability  that  the  same,  or 
that  a similar  name  should  be  given  to  both  at 
the  same  time,  is  sufficiently  obvious.  It  may 
be  added  that  Ramesses  was  likely  to  be  the 
true  name  of  one  of  the  treasure  cities  built 
by  Aahmes,  because  the  king  was  a restorer 
of  the  worship  of  Ra.  He  was  a great  builder, 
and  had  special  reasons  for  fortifying  the  East- 
ern district,  which  previously  bore  the  name 
Rameses.  It  is  also  certain  that  Egyptian 
cities  often  took  their  name  from  a district, 
in  which  case  the  prefix  “ Pi  ” is  not  used 
One  argument  of  great  weight  remains  to 
be  considered.  The  city  of  Rameses  Meiamon, 
with  its  parks,  lakes,  and  the  whole  adjoining 
district,  was  the  centre  of  a great  Egyptian 
population,  a place  of  festivities ; whereas,  at 
the  time  described  in  the  Pentateuch,  the  two 
fortresses  built  by  the  Israelites  were  in  the 
district  which  they  occupied,  and  of  which  there 
is  no  indication  whatever  that  they  were 
dispossessed.  In  the  time  of  Rameses  it 
was  a rich,  fertile,  and  beautiful  district, 
described  as  the  abode  of  happiness,  where 

Brugsch,  ‘ Histoire  d’Egypte,’ p.  156.  “ Les 
papyrus  mentionnent  ces  deux  endroits  existants 
deja  sous  Sethos  I.  par  leurs  noms  egyptiens.” 

Thus  the  fortress  of  Zar  is  found"  without  the 
prefix  in  numerous  inscriptions.  See  Brugsch, 
‘Geog.,’  p.  260,  and  Nos.  1263,  1267,  taf.  xlvii. 
Dr.  Haigh  suggests. that  a synonym  of  Zar  may 
be  read  Ka-sen,  or  Kashen  ; but  his  arguments 
are  not  very  satisfactory.  See  ‘Zeits.’  1861, 
p.  47. 


all  alike,  rich  and  poor,  lived  in  peace  and 
plenty;  but  in'the  time  of  Moses  it  was  the 
abode  of  a suflering  race,  resounding  not  with 
the  jubilant  shouts  of  Egyptians,  but  with  the 
groans  and  execrations  of  an  oppressed  popu- 
lation. A stronger  contrast  can  scarcely  be 
drawn  than  that  of  the  state  of  the  district  at 
the  Exodus  and  that  which  it  presented  under 
Rameses  II.  and  his  successors. 


ri"l'nn''2^  Pihahiroth.  It  is  not  certain 

that  the  word  is  Egyptian.  If  so,  it  may, 
like  some  other  names,  have  been  adopted 
and  modified  either  by  the  Israelites  or  other 
Semitic  occupants  of  the  district.  There 
appear  to  be  indications  of  the  name  in  one 
of  the  Select  Papyri  (Anast.  iii.  i,  2),  in 
which  the  scribe  Penbesa  gives  an  account 
of  a visit  of  Rameses  to  the  adjoining  dis-r 
trict.  The  passage  is  translated  by  M. 
Chabas,  ‘ Mel.  Egypt.,’ ii.  p.  133.  Garlands 
of  flowers  were  sent  from  a place  called 

^ > z.  from  the  de- 


terminatives, it  appears  that  the  place  was 
on  a river  or  reservoir.  Chabas,  however, 

connects  the  word  “ hir,” 


with  the  Hebrew  q^n.  We  may,  there- 
fore, translate  Pihahiroth  (regarding  it  as 
partly  Egyptian,  partly  Semitic)  “the  house 
of  wells,  the  watering-place  in  the  desert.” 

M.  Brugsch,  however,  compares  Pihahiroth 
with  the  name  of  a place  called  “ Pehuret,” 
but  of  which  nothing  is  known.  ‘ Geog.,’  p. 
298. 


There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  name 
is  Egyptian,  although,  as  the  Israelites  occupied 
the  district  during  the  whole  period  of  their 
sojourn,  the  form  may  have  been  modified. 
No  probable  interpretation  is  supplied  by  the 
Coptic,  nor  does  any  name  exactly  corres- 
ponding to  Goshen  appear  on  the  monuments. 
It  is,  however,  to  be  remarked  that  three 
Egyptian  nomes,  situate  in  the  Delta,  and 
extending  over  great  part  of  the  district  of 
Goshen,  bore  each  a name  beginning  with  the 
word  Ka,  i.  e.  a bull.  This  word  would  be 
represented  in  Hebrew  by  the  first  syllable 
of  Goshen.  The  Egyptian  for  bull  is  written 

either  with  |_J  or  ^ (see  Birch,  D.  H.,  p. 
417,  75  regular  tran- 

scription of  ( |_J  being  a homophone) 

is  g.  The  vowel  sound  is  vague,  but 
the  Greek  transcription  of  Ka-kem  is 
Kcox^jj-r].  See  Brugsch,  ‘ Geographic,’  Index. 
We  may  accept  “ go  ” as  the  transcription  of 
the  first  syllable  without  any  hesitation.  That 
of  the  second  remains  doubtful. 

If,  again,  we  can  depend  upon  the  transcrip- 
tion of  M#  Brugsch,  the  name  of  the  12th 


488 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS 


Romos  in  Lower  Egypt  was  Ka-she,  of  which 
the  Hebrew  transcription  would  be 
This  comes  exceedingly  near  to  the  form  now 
in  question.  The  Egyptian  ideographs  to 
which  Brugsch  gives  this  phonetic  value, 
represent  a bull  and  a leaping  calf.^®  See 
Brugsch,  ‘ Geographic  des  Alten  Aiigyptens,’ 
p.  253.  The  name  of  the  principal  city  in 
the  district  was  She-nefer,  i.e.  “the  sacred* 
calf,”  a name  which  has  an  obvious  and 
striking  bearing  upon  the  history  of  the 
Israelites.  From  another  notice  it  is  proved 
that  this  city,  Neter-she,  was  situate  in  a dis- 
trict adjoining  that  of  which  Zar  was  the 
capital.  But  Zar,  or,  as  it  is  written  more 
fully,  “the  fortress  of  Zar,”  was  close  to 
Pithom,  and  was  formerly  identified  with  it 
by  Brugsch.  So  that  there  is  sufficient  reason 
to  assume  that  the  Egyptian  name  of  the 
district  may  have  been  pronounced  Goshe. 
It  is  of  course  possible  that  the  name  Goshen 
may  have  represented  to  the  Israelites  an 
adjoining  district  beginning  with  the  word 
Ka;  or  that  some  name  even  nearer  than 
“ Goshe  ” may  have  been  in  use.  Ka-kem, 
u e.  the  black  bull,  appears  to  have  been  the 
origin  of  the  LXX.  and  Coptic  K6C6.SJL* 
The  monumental  inscriptions  in  Lower  Egypt 
are  scanty. 

The  bull  represented  in  the  names  of  these 
districts  was  Mnevis,  worshipped  specially  at 
On  as  the  living  representative  of  Turn,  the 
unknown  principle  and  source  of  all  existence. 
See  Brugsch,  /.  c. 

Gershom.  Moses  explains  this  name 
to  mean  a sojourner  in  a strange  land,  Exodus 
ii.  22.  Gesenius  finding  no  Hebrew  authoiity 
for  this  meaning  of  assumes  a double 
error,  viz.  that  the  writer  took  “ there,” 

The  leaping  calf  is  the  D.  o{ A b,  “thirst.” 

I do  not  find  the  value  assigned  to  it  by  Brugsch. 


to  be  the  equivalent  of  a strange  land,  and 
that  he  was  ignorant  of  the  true  derivation 
from  banished.  The  Egyptian  gives  a 
complete  etymology.  The  first  syllable  is 
common  to  both  languages:  is  the  exact 

equivalent  and  transcription  of  S 

® » dweller,  or  sojourner.  The 

word  is  preserved  in  Coptic  in  the  form 
ZCOI2xL  inwhichX  = /I\  and  X ==  . 

Moses,  as  we  have  seen,  usually  takes  a word 
common  to  both  languages.  The  second 
syllable  is  pure  Egyptian,  retained  in  the 
Coptic  in  the  common  word 
shemmo,  a foreigner,  or  a foreign  land.  Thus 
in  this  passage  the  Coptic  version  of  n'lDi 
a foreign  land,  is  Ft 

The  meaning  to  an  Egyptian  would  be  exactly 
what  the  Hebrew  expresses  “ a dweller  in  a 
foreign  land.”  The  Coptic,  according  to 
Brugsch,  D.  H.,  is  the  equivalent  of 
“ shumer,”  a bow,  used  commonly  as  the 
hieroglyphic  of  “ foreigners.” 


Genesis  xli.  2,  .in«,  LXX.  axei,  Coptic 
The  word  has  long  been  recognised 
as  Egyptian.  It  occurs  only  in  this  passage  and 
in  Job  viii.  ii,  where  it  is  used  in  parallelism 
with  (see  above,  p.  485),  and  described  as 
a water  plant.  The  old  Egyptian  corresponds 

exactly,  1]  (§)  [j  ^ as  a verb  to  be 

green,  to  grow  and  fiower.  The  determinative 
points  to  herbage  by  a stream.  Another  form 


of  the  word 


axu,  is  used  for 


reeds,  rushes,  &c.  The  radical  meaning  is 
bright  luxuriant  growth. 


In  the  Introduction  to  Exodus  the  atten- 
tion of  scholars  was  specially  called  to  a list 
of  words  taken  from  the  first  fifteen  chapters 
of  Exodus,  which  contain  the  history  of 
the  transactions  in  Egypt.  They  are  either 
a-ira^  Xf-yo/xei/a,  01*  peculiar  to  the  Pentateuch, 
occurring,  if  at  all  elsewhere,  only  in  the 
Psalms  of  later  date,  which  recapitulate  the  his- 
tory. Nearly  all  are  words  which  are  found  in 
Egyptian  documents  of  unquestioned  antiquity, 
either  older  or  not  much  later  than  Moses. 

C.  i.  7.  In  Pentateuch  only, 

except  in  Psalm  cv.,  taken  from  this  pas- 
sage, the  root  is  found  in  Arabic  and  Aithio- 

pic.  The  Egyptian  ^ s wr  itten  with 

all  the  dentals,  e.  g.^  with  \ , which  is 

the  exact  equivalent  of  P.*  It  exactly  corre- 

* Thus  do  Rouge,  Chr.  p.  103.  Br.*D.  H.  s.  v. 


sponds  to  the  Tthiopian  pullulavit; 

the  p represents  the  impulsive  mood,  equi- 
valent to  Hiphil.  This  accounts  for 
being  followed  by  the  objective  of  the  object 
produced. 

niD,  not  an  uncommon  word,  but  far  moro 
frequently  found  in  the  Pentateuch  (nineteer 
times)  than  elsewhere  (eleven  times  alto- 
gether): the  Eg.  root  is  per,  i.e.,  come 
forth,  grow  abundantly,  corn  and  all  kinds  c. 
grain. 

1 1.  D'D/D  'Td*.  see  above,  p.  486. 

13.  T122  occurs  once  only,  Ez.  xxxiv.  4 
out  of  the  Pent. 

16.  D'iDNn,  the  two  stones.  Th. 
meaning  is  purely  conjectural:  there  is 
trace  of  the  expression  in  Hebrew,  or  of  th*" 
usage  to  which  it  is  supposed  to  refer  ?./ 

Pale/i»ne.  The  root  A , ben.  Is 


IN  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


489 


in  many  derivatives  in  Egyptian ; it  has  the 
sense  to  roll,  twist,  turn,  Sec. ; also  to  pro- 
duce, engender.  Brugsch  connects  it  with 
I DIN-  Possibly  it  may  have  some  connexion 
with  die  very  doubtful  Hebrew. 

G.  ii.  3-  nnn,  ark.  27  times  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch, not  found  elsewhere.  It  is  only 
used  of  the  ark  of  Noah,  and  of  the  cradle  of 
Moses.  It  has  no  Semitic  root  or  equiva- 
lent, the  Arabic  being  derived  entirely  from 
this  passage.  In  Egyptian  it  is  a common 
word  in  the  sense  of  chest,  coffer,  and  cradle. 

N^:!,  a word  found  in  Job  and  Isaiah  ; but 
from  Egyptian,  see  above. 

riDT?  pitch,  occurs  twice  only  out  of  Pen- 
tateuch, Isaiah  xxxiv.  9 ; xxxv.  9 : common 
in  Egyptian,  see  above.  "IN',  the  Nile,  long 
known  as  Egyptian. 

5.  }*m,  wash,  a common  word,  but  used 
in  Egyptian  rakat,  and  recht  in  the  same 
sense. 

10.  HD’D,  “to  draw  forth,”  only  here 
and  in  the  i8th  Psalm  ; no  satisfactory  ety- 
mology in  Semitic,  but  common  in  the  form 
mesu,  and  with  variants  in  the  sense  bring 
forth,  draw  forth,  &c.  See  above. 

16.  Dm,  once  only  in  Cant.  i.  17. 

hi,  2.  n::D,  only  in  Exodus  and  Deut. ; 
shown  in  note  ad  loc.  to  be  Egyptian  in  the 
sense  “ thorny  acacia.” 

7.  pn,  straw,  common  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch, rare  elsewhere.  In  Egyptian  tebn 
means  chaff.”  Pap.  Sail.  4,  p.  5.  D’p, 
stalk,  not  uncommon  in  Hebrew,  but 
Egyptian  in  exactly  the  same  form  and 
sense. 

9.  look  to,  trust  in  ; very  rare  in  this 
sense,  occurs  nine  times  in  Pent.,  thirty 
times  in  Job,  very  rare  in  later  books. 

vi.  25,  The  father-in-law  and  the  son  of 
Eleazer  both  bear  Egyptian  names,  Putiel, 
“ devoted  to  El.”  Phineas  occurs  under 
Rameses  II. 

vii.  3.  On  the  names  of  magicians  and 
sorcerers  see  note  on  this  chapter,  at  the  end. 

Dn^,  a.  X.,  and  v.  22,  12^,  correspond  to 
Egyptian  words  for  magic  and  medical 
formulae. 

2 7-  y“nD\*,  zeparda,  frog:  only  found  in 
Exodus  and  in  one  Psalm  taken  from  it.  It 
is  a purely  local  name,  adopted  by  the  Arabs 
in  Egypt.  The  radicals  of  which  it  is  com- 
posed ^ occur  in  a modified  form  in  the 
Egyptian  for  “ tadpole,”  hefennu,  or  hefenr  : 

\ j and  > which  Brugsch 

renders  “ tadpoles,”  giving  as  the  Arabic  equi- 


valent the  young  dofda.  The 

■word  has  also  the  secondary  meaning  100,000 
or  an  indefinite  number.  'I'he  interchange  of 
aspirates^  and  sibilants  is  common,  indeed 
regular  in  Zend  and  Sanscrit,  in  Greek  and 
Latin.  Another  word  comes  even  nearer. 


LnV  , tsfdt,  which  has  the  exact  corre- 


spondents of  y,  t],  and  ^ ; the  word  means 
snake  or  “ viper,”  but  appears  to  be  generic 
for  reptiles.  It  is  to  be  observed  also  that 

hefed,  means  to  squat ; a very 
probable  etymology. 

19-  D3N:  found  in  Isaiah,  but  uncommon. 
No  satisfactory  etymology  is  given,  nor  does 
the  word  occur  in  the  same  sense  in  the 
cognate  languages.  In  this  passage  four 
words  are  given,  rivers,  streams,  agammim, 
and  generally  every  reservoir  or  collection  of 
water.  “ Agam  ” may  be  assumed  to  be  a 
well  knov/n  local  term.  I find,  no  exact 
Egyptian  equivalent,  and  the  Hebrews  pro- 
bably modified  that  which  they  adopted.  But 


, chnum,  le  puits,  la  citerne, 


Brugsch,  D.  H.,  p.  1100,  would  answer  the 
conditions  of  an  exact  correspondence  in 
sense,  and  resemblance  in  sound.  A well  120 
cubits  deep  is  mentioned  in  an  inscription 
quoted  p.  246.  Another  word  occurs  in  the 
Ritual,  99,  26,  which  comes  nearer  in  form, 
viz.,  Achem,  which  is  mentioned  in  con- 
nexion with  the  Nile,  but  the  meaning  is  un- 
certain. 

viii.  3.  The  combination  of  these  words, 
shown  above  to  be  probably  Egyptian,  is 
remarkable,  D'yTID^  “iN'r!  It  is'  an 

instance  of  the  custom  of  Moses,  in  describing 
Egyptian  events,  to  use  words  either  purely 
Egyptian  or  common  to  the  two  languages. 

"llJn,  oven.  The  word  is  not  uncom- 
mon, but  occurs  more  frequently  in  the 
Pentateuch  than  elsewhere.  The  etymo- 


logy is  uncertain.  The  Coptic  op!p> 
or  Tplp,  comes  very  near  ; the  permutation 
of  p and  It  is  common.  The  Egyptian  sup- 
plies “ nennu’’  to  bake  or  roast,  D.  H.,  p.  784, 
and  “ hir,”  an  oven ; combined,  the  two  words 
give  all  the  elements,  but  the  connection  is 
scarcely  probable.  The  old  Egyptian  must 
have  had  a form  from  which  the  Coptic  cer- 
tainly, and  probably  the  Hebrew  also,  was 
derived. 

14.  “iDn,  in  the  sense  “ heap,”  is  peculiar  to 
this  passage. 

16.  D'DD : the  word  occurs  six  times  in  this 
passage,  and  nowhere  else,  except  in  Ps.  cv. 
31,  which  is  taken  from  it.  , No  probable 
Hebrew  root  is  suggested,  nor  is  the  word 
extant  in  the  Semitic  dialects.  The  Arabic 
Chaldee  and  Syriac  translators  use  a word 
quite  distinct  from  it.  The  Egyptian  has  no 
name  for  an  insect  corresponding  to  this,  but 


it  has  the  root  “ken,” 


A X 


in  the 


sense  force  and  abundance,  a sense  which  in 
one  word  is  developed  into  multitudinous 

, one  of  the  commonest 

words  in  the  language;  and  in  another, 

H H 5 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS 


490 


^ , takes  t}ie  sense  plague,  calamity, 

&c.  The  Coptic  has  xrtG>  percussit.  This 
sense  is  further  determined  in  one  variant  by  the 

sign  ^ , which  associates  the  plague  with  a 

bad  smell  and  corruption.  One  passage  quoted 
by  Brugsch  is  curious,  since  it  points  to  a peri- 
odical visitation  : “ The  year  did  not  bring  the 
plague  (ken)  at  the  usual  time,”  This  quotation 
gives  a peculiar  force  to  the  exclamation  of 
Pharaoh’s  magicians,  “ It  is  the  finger  of  God;  ” 
they  recognised  it  as  a severe  visitation. 
The  word  is  identified  by  Brugsch  with  the 

Egyptian  ^ ^ J} 


chenemms, 

the  mosquito.  It  is  retained  in  the  Coptic 
^oXj?Jl.e5  Ka>u(o\l/,  culex.  See  D.  H.,  p. 
1x03, 

21.  : the  word  occurs  nowhere  but 

in  the  description  of  this  plague,  seven  times 
here,  and  twice  in  Psalms  Ixxviii.  45,  and  cv. 
31.  The  Semitic  root  iny  is  very  common, 
but  is  nowhere  connected  with  insects  or  a 
plague  of  any  kind.  A late  Egyptian  word, 

S.J  Abeb,  /.  e.  a beetle,  resembles 

the  Hebrew  in  form,  and  is  connected 
with  several  words, 

which  represent  species  of  flies : as  for 


I find  no  Egyptian  equivalent;  the  nearest 
in  form  and  sense  is  © J P 2 , a burn- 


instance 


, D.  H.,  p.  183,  Cham- 

pollion  Gr.,  p.  74,  which  evidently  de- 
notes a venomous  fly.  It  is  possible  either 
that  the  Hebrews,  adopting  the  Egyptian 
word,  accommodated  it  to  their  own  common 
root,  or  that  the  middle  letter  “i  may  have 
been,  for  the  same  reason,  substituted  for  2 
in  the  transcription.  The  oldest  forms  of 

"1  and  3,  i.e.  ^ ^ , are  scarcely  distinguish- 
able ; and  even  in  the  Samaritan,  which  adds 
a line  to  the  b,  they  are  easily  confused, 
0 q Y'-  Coptic  Pentateuch  uses  the 

wordaf,  adding  “ dog,” 

to  express  the  kvvuixvux  of  the  LXX.  This 
conjecture  is  somewhat  confirmed  by  the 
affinity  thus  brought  out  with  3inT,  the  fly, 
especially  “the  fly  that  is  in  the  uttermost 
parts  of  the  rivers  of  Egypt,”  Isaiah  vii.  18. 

23.  nn2,  separation,  not  found  elsewhere 
in  this  sense : it  is  from  Semitic. 

ix.  8.  ri'D,  (!•  A.  Gesenius  derives  it  from 
niQ  = n^j.  If  this  probable  connection  be 
correct,  the  word  would  be  common  to  the 
Egyptian  and  Hebrew,  nef,  nefu,  to  breathe, 
or  blow. 

lL‘’3D  occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch. 
The  Arabic  has  ignem  extudit,  which 

may,  or  may  not,  be  the  root.  No  Semitic 
etymology  is  satisfactory.  The  Chaldee, 
Syriac,  and  Arabic  employ  a different  word. 


ing  lamp.  Perhaps  , to  bake,  of 

which  would  be  the  trans:;ription,  may 
have  had  a variant  nearer  to  the  Hebrew. 
The  word  is  used  in  a late  variant  in  the 
sense  of  baking  bricks,  or  more  probably 
“ using  a lime  kiln.”  A curious  word  lately 
discovered  by  Mr.  Birch,  very  probably  gives 

the  true  form  ’ kabusa,  in 

Coptic  fi  eCj  av6pa^,  carbo.  ‘ Egypt. 
Zeitschrift,’  1868,  p.  121.  Mr.  Birch  widtes 

XA,iKcc;  Peyron  gives  x£.KeC  ; and 

X.^6C- — Copt.  This  meets  the  two 
conditions  of  agreement  in  sense  and  radical 
letters. 

9.  p3N*,  “fine  dust,”  is  a very  rare  word, 
twice  in  the  Pentateuch,  four, times  in  later 
books. 

I'niix,  A.  V.  boils.  The  word  occurs  in 
Job  ii.  7,  and  in  reference  to  Hezekiah. 

Gesenius  compares  the  Arabic  ^ to 

be  hot,  used  specially  of  fever  heat : but  the 
word  never  occurs  in  connection  with  erup- 
tions. A Coptic  MS.,  quoted  by  Peyron, 
renders  this  and  the  word  niD  which  follows 
XltOTq  ^ep^-Cp,  in  which  the  radical 
letters  partly  correspond  with  the  Hebrew, 
X often  ==  ^ . Possibly  the  Egyptian  came 
nearer  still.  The  true  derivation,  however,  ap- 
pears to  be  ^UO^,  prurire,  of  which  the  Egyp- 
tian form  was  A ^ t , to  scratch,  a 

word  which  occurs  frequently  in  early  papyri. 
The  exact  transcription  is  ;)^aku.  A variant 
somewhat  nearer  probably  existed,  or  the 
Hebrews  may  have  adopted  and  modified  it, 
substituting,  as  in  many  words,  sh  for  x,  and 
ch  for  k. 

me.  = jS.epS-ep»  see  last  note, 
nynynx,  a.  X.  The  assumed  root,  3;n,  is 

not  extant.  Egyptian  has  ‘—r* 

baba.  Cop.  overflow.  The  x pre- 

sents no  difficulty. 

15.  "iriD,  cut  off.  In  this  sense  it  occurs 
once  in  Zechariah,  otherwise  only  here  and  in 
Job  iv.  7;  XV.  28;  xxii.  20.  The  Coptic 
KUOp'tr  casdere,  abscindere,  is  connected 

with  the  root  A j , HD-  ^ , cut, 

, engrave,  carve  ; still  nearer  is 

(JctGcOT,  concidere,  caedere. 

31-.  nntJ’Q,  flax,  a common  word,  is  pro- 
bably Egyptian.  No  satisfactory  Semitic 


IN  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


491 


etymology  is  proposed  ; the  Arabic  has 
to  which  Fuerst  gives  the  sense  “ carminar,” 
without  authority  as  it  would  seem : nor  is 
the  meaning  assigned  to  it  by  Gesenius  sup- 
ported by  Arabic  Lexicographers.  A glance 
at  Freytag  will  show  ho-w  utterly  uncon- 
nected the  meaning  is  with  flax.  Gesenius 
observes  that  it  is  found  in  Avicenna.  I 
believe  that  in  Syriac  and  Arabic  it  is  merely 
a derivative  meaning.  Gesenius  observes 
that  the  word  does  not  occur  in  any  Semitic 
dialect.  He  had  good  reason  to  reject  the 
conjectures  of  Forster;  he  would  probably 
not  have  hesitated  to  adopt  the  etymology 

suggested  by  the  Egyptian  ® , Pek,  flax, 

(a) 

linen,  and  linen  stuffs.  It  is  a very  common 
word,  known  first  from  the  Rosetta  stone. 
The  change  of  “k”  to  “sh”  is  normal. 
Briigsch,  p.  515,  compares  it  with  nnS^Q- 

«•  The  assumed  root  ^33  does 
not  occur  in  any  Semitic  dialect.  In  Egyp- 


tian ^ ,gabu, blossom, corre- 

sponds very  nearly.  ‘D.  H.,’  p.  755. 

32.  nf3DD,  “spelt,”  occurs  very  seldom. 
The  Arabic  which  resembles  it  is  uncommon. 


it  is  used  by  Saddia  in  translating 

Is.  xxviii.  25.  Freytag  gives 
vicia,  vetch,  but  without  a root,  and 
it  evidently  is  a strange  word,  probably 
a compound  word,  and  of  Egyptian  origin. 


, sim,  Coptic  CIAiLj  is  a general 


name  for  herbs,  and  is  used  in  the  Coptic 
Version  of  v.  25.  A compound  word  of 
uncertain  meaning,  but  denoting  some  vege- 
table food,  is  found  in  the  ‘Ritual,’  c.  124,  4: 


m 


5 chersemau,  which  corre- 
sponds very  nearly  to  the  Hebrew  grain 
, kemetta,  or  kemdut,  written  also 


, means  a kind  of  corn,  represented 

on  the  Sarcophagus  of  Seti;  Bon.,  p.  2, 

B.  1.  43;  B.  43;  D.  H.,  p.  1497. 

32.  «.  X.  No  Semitic  root  is  found  ; 

that  suggested  by  Gesenius  is  unsatisfactory, 

S' 

has  the  sense  deficit,  latuit,  whence 
G.  elicits  the  meaning,  late  in  season,  tender. 


In  Egyptian  ^ , pirt,  or  pilt.  Brugsch 

renders  the  word  “ jeunes  plantes  qui  viennent 
de  pousser,”  the  exact  meaning  of  the 
Hebrew. 


xii.  II.  nDS»  passover.  The  Semitic  de- 
rivations are  doubtful,  see  note  in  loc. 
The  Egyptian  *13  X , pesh-t,  corre- 

sponds  very  nearly  in  form,  and  exactly  in 
meaning  and  construction.  Champollion,  Gr., 
p.  446,  gives  two  examples,  to  extend  the 
arms  or  wfings  over  a person,  protecting 
him. 

15*  "iNb,  leaven;  the  word  occurs  only 
in  this  chapter.  Gesenius  compares  T'D,  to 


boil. 


In  Egyptian  ^ — , with  vari- 


ants pronounced  seri,  means  “seethe,” 
“ seething  pot.”  It  is  connected  with  sent, 
cheese,  or  buttermilk.  There  can  be  little 
doubt  of  the  connexion  with  the  Hebrew, 
and  the  Egyptian  probably  supplies  the  true 
root.  I'fOn,  leavened  dough,  does  not  occur 
in  the  same  sense  out  of,  the  Pentateuch, 
unless  it  be  in  Amos  iv.  5,  when  it  seems 
rather  to  mean  “spoil.”  The  Coptic  has 
^SiX'Xi  acid,  which,  corresponding  with  it 
exactly  in  form  and  nearly  in  sense,  implies 
an  Egyptian  root ; but  it  may  be  taken  from 
the  Arabic.  The  Egyptian  for  fermentation 
does  not  seem  to  be  connected  with  it. 


, stf ; which  is  represented  by  the 


Coptic  C^KTCiSee  Chabas  ‘ Mel.’ii.p.  219; 
though  the  radical  letters  might  be  brought 
under  the  common  law  of  transmutation 
between  aspirants  and  sibilants. 

22.  F|D,  basin,  or,  according  to  some, 
“ threshold,”  see  note  in  loc.  The  latter 
sense  is  somewhat  confirmed  by  the  Eg. 


P D ^ , sep,  a step,  or  threshold. 

Considerable  additions  may  be  made  to 
this  list,  which  will  probably  form  the  basis 
of  a separate  treatise.  Enough  has  been 
said  to  show  that  Moses  habitually  uses 
words  which  existed  in  Egyptian,  and  for  the 
most  part  cannot  be  shown  to  have  a true 
Semitic  etymology. 


Since  the  preceding  pages  were  finally  re- 
vised for  the  press  the  writer  has  received  the 
‘Journal  Asiatique’ for  March  and  April,  1870. 
It  contains  an  article  by  M.  Harkavy,  en- 
titled, “ Les  Mots  Egyptiens  de  la  Bible.”  It 
does  not  include  proper  names.  In  some 
important  points  the  writer  has  the  satisfac- 
tion of  finding  his  conclusions  supported  by 
this  Egyptologer,  who  appears  not  to  have 
seen  these  Essays,  which  were  sent  to  Paris 
towards  the  end  of  last  year. 

The  following  derivations  are  partly  new 
and  of  much  interest. 

Gen.  xli.  43.  M.  Harkavy  adopts  Ap-rech, 
chief  of  the  Rech,  or  men  of  learning ; a deri- 


492 


ESSAY  ON  EGYPTIAN  WORDS. 


vation  noticed  above,  p.  483.  He  defends  the 
transcription  of  p by  and  ch  by  and  cer- 
tainly shows  that  in  words  common  to  Hebrew 
and  Egyptian  they  are  sometimes  interchanged. 
He  gives  also  what  appears  to  be  the  true 
equivalent  of  D'JD,  see  above,  p.  491,  viz. 
Chenemms. 

Gen.  xli.  2,  Achu.  The  same  derivation 
as  that  given  above. 

xli.  8.  Chartummim,  magicians.  In  a 
note,  p.  109,  M.  Harkavy  observes:  “Un 
savant  distingue,  qui  a lu  notre  travail,  re- 
marque  qu’il  avait  pense  au  radical  tern  qui 
signitie  prononcer,  enoncer,  avec  la  particule 
cher.  L’initiale  cher  forme  en  effet  des  titres 
avec  d’autres  mots.”  The  reader  will  find 
this  derivation  stated  and  defended  in  the 
note  at  the  end  of  Exodus,  c.  vii.,  p.  279.  It 
was  mentioned  by  the  wi*iter  to  some  scholars 
both  in  England  and  Paris,  by  whom  it  was 
approved. 


XDID,  tena,  a sacred  basket.  The  deriva- 
tion has  been  given  in  note  on  Exod.  xvi. 

Exod.  vii.  II,  22.  Mr.  Harkavy  derives 
12 n*?  12*?  from  Rech-chet,  a magician,  or  man 
of  learning.  The  writer  prefers  the  ety- 
mology proposed,  p.  276. 

Gen.  xlix.  5,  milD,  rendered  habitation, 
probably  equivalent  to  Macher,  a granary. 

Gen.  xii.  et  pa«sim,  “ Pharaoh.”  The  deri- 
vation proposed  above  is  defended. 

Gen.  xli.  45.  Zaphnath  Paaneh.  M. 
Harkavy  gives  the  same  value  to  the  first 
syllable,  Zaph,  food,  and  to  the  word  Paaneh, 
life.  For  the  middle  syllable  he  proposes  net, 
saviour.  The  transcription  given  above  still 
appears  preferable  to  the  writer,  who  is  glad 
to  find  M.  H.  in  accord  with  him  in  regard 
to  the  more  important  terms,  food  and  life. 

The  derivations  of  Shesh  and  Pak,  fine 
linen,  have  been  already  noted. 


END  OF  PART  I. 


THE 


Holy  Bible 

ACCORDING  TO  THE  AUTHORIZED  VERSION  (A.D.  i6ii), 

WITH  AN  EXPLANATORY  AND  CRITICAL 

Cominxiitarjj 

AND 

% lUbismn  0f  ffje 

BY  BISHOPS  AND  OTPIER  CLERGY 

OF  THE  ANGLICAN  CHURCH. 


EDITED 


By  F.  C.  cook,  M.A.,  Canon  of  Exeter. 


VoL.  I.— Part  II. 

LE  VITICUS— DEUTERONOMY. 


NEW  YORK. 

CHAELES  SOEIBNEK  & CO.,  654  BEOADAVAY. 

1871. 


LEVITICUS 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 

I.  Title ^ 493 

II.  Authorship ib. 

III.  Contents 494 

I.  T EVITICUS,  that  is,  the  Levitical 
J ' Book  (LXX.  AeuiTtKOE,  Vulg.  Le- 
viticus)^ is  the  name  by  which  this  portion 
of  the  Law  of  Moses  has  always  been 
called  by  the  Hellenistic  Jews  and  the 
Christian  Church.  But  according  to  the 
text  of  the  Masorites,  it  does  not  appear 
certain  that  the  Book  was  originally 
named,  or  in  any  way  regarded  by  them, 
as  a whole.  It  would  rather  seem  that 
they  reckoned  it  simply  as  ten  out  of 
the  fifty-four  sections  into  which  the 
entire  Book  of  the  Mosaic  writings  is 
divided.  The  ten  Sections  are  as  fol- 
low : — 


Sect. 

24, 

Chap. 

i. — vi.  7. 

25, 

vi.  8 — viii. 

5) 

26, 

?> 

ix. — xi. 

}} 

27, 

xii.  xiii. 

j; 

28, 

xiv.  XV. 

jj 

29, 

7) 

xvi. — xviii. 

5> 

30, 

if 

xix.  XX. 

5> 

3L 

a 

xxi. — xxiv. 

?> 

32, 

a 

XXV.  xxvi.  2. 

J) 

33> 

i) 

xxvi.  3 — xxvii. 

Each 

Section,  in  accordance 

rabbinical  custom,  is  named  from  the 
word,  or  phrase,  with  which  it  com- 
mences. Section  24  is  called  Vayiki'a 
(Xip'!),  which  means,  “ and  he  (the 
Lord)  called.”  But  it  appears  that  the 
Kabbinical  Jews  in  the  time  of  S.  Je- 
rome used  the  Pentateuchal  division, 
and  gave  to  each  of  the  five  Books  the 
VoL.  1. 


PAGE 

IV.  The  Ritual  of  the  Sacrifices  . . 495 

V.  Historical  development  of  Sacri- 

50% 

name  of  its  first  section*.  The  modern 
Jews  apply  the  title  Vayikra  both  to  the 
whole  book  of  Leviticus,  and,  in  its  more 
strict  sense,  to  Sect.  24  of  the  Pentateuch. 

As  regards  its  subject  matter,  Leviticus 
is  closely  connected  with  Exodus  at  its 
commencement  and  with  Numbers  at  its 
conclusion.  The  first  link  of  connec- 
tion is  clearly  shewn  by  the  fact  that 
while  the  directions  for  the  Consecration 
of  the  priests  are  given  in  Exodus,  the 
Consecration  itself  is  narrated  in  Leviti- 
cus in  nearly  the  same  words,  changing 
the  tense  of  the  verbs.  See  prel.  note 
to  Ex.  xxix. 

The  Book  however  has  a certain  claim 
to  unity  from  so  large  a portion  of  it 
being  occupied  with  instructions  for  the 
service  of  the  Sanctuary.  It  is  true 
that  much  matter  of  the  same  kind 
is  found  in  Exodus  and  Numbers.  But 
Leviticus  differs  from  those  Books  in 
in  its  general  exclusion  of  historical  nar- 
rative. The  only  historical  portions  are 
the  accounts  of  the  Consecration  of  the 
priests,  with  the  deaths  of  Nadab  and 
Abihu  (ch.  viii. — x.),  and  of  the  punish- 
ment of  the  blasphemer  (xxiv.  10 — 23).  ' 

II.  As  regards  the  question  of  au- 
thorship, most,  even  of  those  who  hold 
a different  opinion  on  the  other  books 
of  the  Pentateuch,  ascribe  it  in  the 

^ Hieron.  ‘Prologus  Galeatus.’ 

I I 


494 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


main  to  Moses.  The  theories  which  are 
counter  to  its  MosaiS  origin  are  so  much 
at  variance  with  each  other — no  two  of 
them  being  in  anything  like  substantial 
agreement — that  it  does  not  seem  worth 
while  to  notice  them  in  this  place. 

Leviticus  has  no  pretension  to  system- 
atic arrangement  as  a whole,  nor  does 
it  appear  to  have  been  originally  written 
all  at  one  time.  Some  repetitions  occur 
in  it^;  and  in  many  instances,  certain 
particulars  are  separated  from  others 
with  which,  by  the  subject-matter,  they 
are  immediately  connected  ^ There  ap- 
pear to  be  in  Leviticus,  as  well  as  in 
the  other  Books  of  the  Pentateuch,  proe- 
Mosaic  fragments  incorporated  with  the 
more  recent  matter^.  There  are  also 
passages  which  may  probably  have  been 
written  by  Moses  on  previous  occasions 
and  inserted  in  the  places  they  now 
occupy  when  the  Pentateuch  was  put 
together.  It  is  by  no  means  unlikely 
that  there  are  insertions  of  a later 
date  which  were  written,  or  sanctioned, 
by  the  Prophets  and  holy  men  who,  after 
the  Captivity,  arranged  and  edited  the 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament^  The 
fragmentary  way  in  which  the  Law  has 
been  recorded,  regarded  in  connection 
with  the  perfect  harmony  of  its  spirit 
and  details,  may  tend  to  confirm  both 
the  unity  of  the  authorship  of  the  Books 
in  which  it  is  contained,  and  the  true 
inspiration  of  the  Lawgiver. 

III.  In  the  following  table,  the  con- 
tents of  the  Book  of  Leviticus  are  shewn 
in  the  order  in  which  they  occur. 


‘ For  examples,  compai'e  Lev.  xi.  39,  40  with 
xxii-  8 ; and  Lev.  xix.  9 with  xxiii.  22.  Put  on 
some  of  the  most  considerable  alleged  cases  of 
mere  repetition  in  the  Pentateuch,  see  notes  on 
ch.  XX.  xxiii. 

^ See  Prel.  notes  to  ch.  xii.  and  ch.  xv. ; 
note  on  xiii.  39;  also  xix.  5 — 8,  xxii.  17 — 25. 

^ See  Introd.  Note  to  Ex.  xx.  22;  notes 
on  Lev.  xxiii.  xxv. 

■*  We  seek  in  vain  for  any  clear  internal  evi- 
dence of  such  interpolations  in  Leviticus.  But 
the  probal)ility  of  their  existence  may  be  easily 
admitted,  taking  account  of  the  literary  habits  of 
])ast  ages,  before  the  sjurit  of  modern  criticism 
I'.ad  introduced  a curious  desire  to  appropriate 
every  sentence  to  its  author,  (hi  the  objections 
to  ^Iosaic  authorship  which  have  been  based  on 
])assagcs  relating  to  the  future  history  of  the 
nation,  see  Note  after  Chap,  xxvi,  and  cf.  notes 
on  P^x.  xxiii.  20,  31 . 


Laws  for  the  Altar 

La-vjs  addressed  to  the  people 
Burnt-offerings,  i.  Meat-offer- 
ings, ii.  Peace-offerings,  iii. 
Sin-offerings,  iv.  i — v.  13. 
T respass-offerings,  V.  1 4 — vi.  7 . 
La'ws  addressed  to  the  priests 
Burnt-offerings,  vi.  8 — 13. 
Meat-offerings,  vi.  14  — 23. 
Sin-offerings,vi.24 — 30.  Tres- 
pass-offerings,vii.i — 7.  Meat- 
offerings, Peace-offerings,  &c. 
8 — 21. 

Laws  addressed  tg  the  people 
Fat  and  blood  not  to  be  eaten, 
vii.  22 — 27.  The  priests’ por- 
tions of  the  Peace-offerings, 
vii.  28 — 38. 

The  Consecration  of  the  Priests 

(cf.  Ex.  xxix.  ) 

Aaron  and  his  sons  enter  upon 

their  office 

Nadab  and  Abihu  are  punished 
The  laws  of  clean  and  unclean 

animal  food  

Purification  after  child-birth  ... 

The  Leprosy  

Examination  of  suspected 
cases,  xiii.  i — 44.  Exclusion 
of  lepers  from  the  camp.  xiii. 
45,  46.  The  Leprosy  in 
clothing  and  leather,  xiii.  47 
— 59.  The  cleansing  and 
restoration  of  the  healed  leper, 
xiv.  I — 32.  The  Leprosy  in 
a house,  xiv.  33 — 53.  Con- 
clusion, xiv.  54 — 5.7. 
Purifications  on  account  of  se- 
cretions  

The  Day  of  Atonement 

The  slaughtering  of  animals  for 

food 

U nlawful  marriages 

Abominable  lusts 

Precepts  on  duties  

Precepts  on  duties,  for  the  most 
part  with  punishments  pre- 
scribed   

Precepts  on  holiness  for  the  priests 
Choice  of  victims  for  the  Altar, 
and  rules  for  eating  the  flesh 

of  the  Peace-offerings 

The  days  of  Holy  Convocation 
and  the  Festivals  in  their  con- 
nection with  agriculture 

The  Lamps  and  the  Shewbread 

for  the  Sanctuary 

The  blasphemer  punished,  with 
an  interpolation  on  retribution 
The  Sabbath  year,  and  the  Ju- 
bilee in  connection  with  the 

rights  of  the  poor 

Promises  and  Threatenings  for 

the  nation 

Vows 


i. — vii. 
i. — vi.  7. 


vi.  8 — vii.  21 


vii.  22 — 38. 


viii. 

ix, 

X.  1 — 20. 

xi. 

xii. 

xiii.  xiv. 


XV. 

xvi. 

xvii. 

xviii.  I — 18. 
xviii.  19 — 30. 
xix. 


XX. 

xxi.  xxii.  16. 


xxii.  17— 33. 


xxiii. 

xxiv.  I — 9. 
xxiv.  10 — 23. 


xxv. 

xxvi. 
xxvii. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


495 


* 


IV.  The  Ritual  of  the  Sacri- 
fices. 

The  instructions  respecting  the  offer- 
ings for  the  Altar  contained  in  Leviticus 
are  given,  like  most  of  the  other  por- 
tions of  the  Law,  in  a more  or  less  dis- 
joined and  occasional  way.  They  were 
recorded  with  a view  to  the  guidance  of 
those  who  were  practically  conversant 
with  the  service  of  the  Tabernacle.  They 
do  not  as  they  stand  furnish  a methodi- 
cal statement  for  the  information  of  those 
who  are  strangers  to  the  subject.  A 
compact  and  systematic  sketch  of  the 
ritual  of  the  Altar,  may  therefore  well 
form  part  of  an  Introduction  to  the  study 
of  this  Book. 

§ i.  In  regard  to  the  whole  sacrificial 
system  of  the  Hebrew  Law,  it  is  most 
necessary  that  we  should  keep  in  view 
that  it  was  intended  for  a people  already 
brought  into  covenant  with  the  living 
God,  and  that  every  sacrifice  was  as- 
sumed to  have  a vital  connexion  with 
the  spirit  of  the  worshipper.  A Hebrew 
Sacrifice,  like  a Christian  Sacrament,  pos- 
sessed the  inward  and  spiritual  grace, 
as  well  as  the  outward  and  visible  sign. 
The  mere  empty  form,  or  the  feeling  of 
an  opus  operatum,  was  as  alien  to  the 
mind  of  an  enlightened  Israelite  who 
brought  his  gift  to  the  Altar,  as  it  is  to 
the  well  instructed  Christian  who  comes 
to  the  Table  of  the  Lord.  This  fact  will 
be  found  not  obscurely  intimated  in  the 
words  of  the  Law  itself.  But  it  is  most 
clearly  expressed  by  the  sacred  writers 
in  later  ages,  when  it  became  necessary 
that  they  should  remind  their  backsliding 
countrymen  of  the  truth  b 

It  may  however  be  supposed  that 
to  those  who  came  to  the  Sanctuary 
in  sincerity  and  truth,  a sacrifice  may 
have  borne  a very  different  amount  of 
meaning,'  according  to  the  religious  con- 
ditions of  their  minds.  One  may  have 
come  in  devout  obedience  to  the  voice 
of  the  Law,  with  little  more  than  a vague 
sense  that  his  offering  in  some  way  ex- 
]3ressed  his  own  spiritual  wants,  and  that 
the  fact  that  he  was  permitted  to  offer  it, 
was  a sacramental  pledge  of  God’s  good 

^ Ps.  xl.  6;  1.  8 — 15;  Prov.  xxi.  3;  Is.  i. 
II — 15;  Jer.  vii.  21 — 23;  Hos.  vi.  6;  Mic.  vi. 
7,  8.  Cf.  I Sam.  xv.  22  ; Matt.  v.  23,  24. 


will  and  favour  towards  him.  But  to 
another,  with  clearer  spiritual  insight,  the 
lessons  conveyed  in  the  symbols  of  the 
Altar  must  have  all  converged  with  more 
or  less  distinctness  towards  the  Lamb 
slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  workU, 
Who  was  to  come  in  the  fulness  of  times 
that  He  might  fulfil  all  righteousness^, 
and  realize  in  the  eyes  of  men  the  true 
Sin-offering,  Burnt-offering,  and  Peace- 
offering; Who  has  now  been  made  sin 
lor  us,  though  He  knew  no  sin,  that  we 
might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God 
in  HinP,  Who  has  given  Himself  for  us 
an  offering  and  a sacrifice  to  God  for  a 
sweet-smelling  savour^.  Who  is  our  peace 
that  He  might  bring  us  nigh  by  His 
blood b our  very  Paschal  Lamb  which  has 
been  slain  for  us’^,  to  the  end  that  by  eat- 
ing His  flesh  and  drinking  His  blood  we 
might  have  eternal  life®. 

The  Classification  of  Offerings. 

§ ii.  The  general  name  for  what 
was  formally  given  up  to  the  service  of 
God  was  korbdn  (p“ip),  which  exactly 
answers  to  the  English  words,  offerhig 
and  oblation.  It  is  rendered  by  Sdlpoi/ 
(gift)  in  the  SeptuaginP.  Under  this 
name  were  included  what  was  paid  for 
the  maintenance  of  the  Priests  and  Le- 
vites  in  the  shape  of  first-fruits  and 
tithes'®,  whatever  was  contributed  for  the 
endowment  of  the  Sanctuary”,  and  what- 
ever offerings  were  brought  to  be  sacri- 
ficed on  the  Altar.  The  last,  which  alone 
belong  to  our  present  purpose,  may  be 
thus  classed: — 


Offerings  for  the  Altar. 


Animal. 

1 Burnt-offerings, 

2 Peace-offerings, 

3 Sin-offerings. 


Vegetable. 

1 Meat-  and  Drink-of- 

ferings for  the  Altar 
in  the  Court. 

2 Incense  and  Meat-of- 

ferings for  the  Holy 
Place  within  the  Ta- 
bernacle. 


Besides  the  three  ordinary  classes  of 
animal  sacrifices,  there  were  several 


2 Rev.  xiii.  8. 

^ 2 Cor.  V.  2 1. 

6 Eph.  ii.  13,  14. 

® Joh.  vi.  54. 

Lev.  ii.  12;  xxvii. 
Num.  vii.  3;  xxxi, 


^ INTatt.  iii.  15. 

® Eph.  V.  2. 

^ I Cor.  V.  7. 

^ Cf.  Mark  vii.  i r. 
30;  Num.  xviii.  12,26. 
50. 


I I 2 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


496 


offerings  which  were  peculiar  in  their 
nature,  such  as  the  Paschal  lamb\  the 
Scape  goat^,  and  the  Red  heiferl  There 
was  also  the  sort  of  Peace-offering  called 
C/iagiga/i,  connected  mainly  with  the 
Passover,  and  apparently  referred  to  in 
the  Law,  though  not  mentioned  by 
name^  the  Firstlings^,  and  the  Tithe 
animals®. 

The  offerings  for  the  Altar  were  (i) 
public  sacrifices,  offered  at  the  cost  and 
on  behalf  of  the  community  (such  as  the 
victims  offered  in  the  morning  and  even- 
ing service  of  the  Sanctuary  and  in  the 
public  festivals)^,  and  (2)  private  sacri- 
fices which  were  offered  either  by  express 
enactment  of  the  Law  on  particular  oc- 
casions, or  by  the  voluntary  devotion  of 
the  sacrificer.  It  will  be  seen  that  the 
first  three  chapters  of  Leviticus  relate 
entirely  to  private  voluntary  offerings®. 
But  it  may  be  observed  that  the  mode 
of  conducting  a sacrifice  of  any  given 
kind  was  nearly  the  same,  whether  it 
was  a public  or  a private  one.  The 
main  points  of  exception  were  that  in 
the  public  sacrifices  the  priests,  or  the 
Levites,  did  what  was  else  done  by  the 
person  who  brought  the  offering,  or  by 
those  who  were  employed  by  him ; 
and,  according  to  the  Mishna®,  that  the 
laying  of  the  hand  upon  the  head  of 
the  victim  was  required  in  the  public 
sacrifices  only  in  particular  cases,  which 
are  specified  in  the  Law'®. 

71ie  Afiimal  Sacrifices. 

§ iii.  The  external  distinction  be- 
tween the  three  classes  of  animal  sacri- 
fices may  be  thus  broadly  stated  : — the 
Burnt-oftering  was  wholly  burnt  upon 
the  Altar;  the  Sin-offering  was  in  part 
burnt  on  the  Altar,  and  in  part,  either 
given  to  the  priests  or  burnt  outside 
the  camp;  and  the  Peace-offering  was 
shared  between  the  Altar,  the  priests  and 
the  sacrificer.  This  formal  difference  is 
immediately  connected  with  the  distinc- 

^ Ex.  xii.  3.  2 Lev.  xvi.  10. 

^ Num.  xix.  -2. 

* .See  Nuni.  x.  10;  Deut.  xvi.  2. 

^ Ex.  xiii.  \7,  13.  6 Lev.  xxvii.  32. 

^ Ex.  xxix.  38—44;  Num.  xxviii.  xxix. 

® See  Lev.  i.  2 ; ii.  i,  &c. 

® Menach,  ix.  7. 

Lev.  iv.  15;  xvi.  21;  2 Chron.  xxix.  23. 
See  Outram,  i.  xv.  § 7. 


tive  meaning  of  each  kind  of  sacrifice. 
See  § xvi. 

The  names  by  which  the  animal  sa- 
crifices are  called  in  the  Hebrew  text 
are  as  follows  : — 

The  general  name  is  zehach  (nnr), 
that  is,  a slaughtered  animal.  In  the 
English  Bible  it  is  commonly  rendered 
sacrifice,  but  sometimes  offering.  It  is 
opposed  to  minchdh  (nn:D),  literally,  a 
gift",  which  denotes  a vegetable-offering, 
called  in  our  version  a Meat-offering. 

The  Burnt -offering  is  called  'oldh 
(n^V),  that  which  ascends,  or  ishsheh 
that  which  is  burnt;  it  is  also 
occasionally  called  kdileel  (igh'S),  that 
which  is  whole,  because  the  whole  vic- 
tim was  given  to  the  altar.  In  our  ver- 
sion, 'oldh  is  rendered  “burnt-offering,” 
or  “burnt  sacrifice,”  and  Jzdleel^  “whole 
burnt  sacrifice'®.” 

The  Peace-offering  is  called  shelem 
that  is  peace,  or  concord.  The 
Thank-offering,  a Peace- offering  made 
under  certain  conditions'®,  was  called 
tdddh  (min),  a thanksgiving. 

The  Sin-offering  was  called  chattdth 
(n^ion),  strictly  either  a sin,  or  punish- 
ment for  sin. 

The  Trespass-offering  which,  as  re- 
gards its  meaning,  was  a kind  of  Sin- 
offering  always  accompanied  by  a pecu- 
niary fine,  was  called  dshdm  i.e. 

a forfeit 

The  Selection  of  Animals  for  Sacrifice. 

§ iv.  Five  animals  are  named  in 
the  Law  as  suitable  for  sacrifice,  the  ox, 
the  sheep,  the  goat,  the  dove  and  the 
pigeon.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  these 
were  all  offered  by  Abraham  in  the  great 
sacrifice  of  the  Covenant.  The  divine 
command  was,  “Take  me  an  heifer  of 
three  years  old,  and  a she-goat  of  three 
years  old,  and  a ram  of  three  years  old, 
and  a turtledove  and  a young  pigeon'®.” 
These  animals  are  all  clean  according  to 

Ps.  xl.  6;  Jer.  xvii.  26;  Dan.  ix.  27.  See 
on  Lev.  ii.  i. 

Deut.  xxxiii.  10;  Ps.  li.  19.  The  words 
us:d  by  the  Septuagint  are  bXoKavTuixa,  bXoKOLv- 
TWTis  and  bXoKapirojixa  •,  and  by  the  Vulgate, 
hoi  Kaiistum. 

See  on  T>ev.  vii.  11,  12. 

See  on  Lev.  v.  14. 


15  Gen.  XV.  9. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


497 


the  division  into  clean  and  imclean  which 
was  adopted  in  the  Law\  but  which  had 
its  origin  in  remoter  ages  ^ They  are  also 
the  most  important  of  those  which  are 
used  for  food  and  are  of  the  greatest 
utility  to  man.  The  three  kinds  of  quad- 
rupeds were  domesticated  in  flocks  and 
herds ^ and  were  recognized  as  pro- 
perty, making  up  in  fact  a great  part  of 
the  wealth  of  the  Hebrews  before  they 
settled  in  the  Holy  Land.  It  would 
thus  appear  that  three  conditions  met 
in  the  sacrificial  quadrupeds;  (i)  they 
were  clean  according  to  the  Law ; (2) 
they  were  commonly  used  as  food  ; and, 
being  domesticated,  (3)  they  formed  a 
part  of  the  home  wealth  of  the  sacrificers. 
If  there  were  any  birds  which  were  do- 
mesticated by  the  Israelites  in  the  time 
of  Moses,  they  were  most  probably  the 
dove  and  the  pigeon,  for  dove-cots  and 
pigeon-houses  have  been  from  very  early 
times  common  appendages  to  the  houses 
of  the  Holy  Land  and  the  neighbouring 
countries  k But  even  if  it  could  be 
proved  that  the  doves  and  the  pigeons 
used  in  sacrifice  were  wild,  and  did  not 
therefore  fulfil  the  last-mentioned  con- 
dition of  the  sacrificial  quadrupeds,  it 
would  make  no  real  difficulty,  since  it 
appears  that,  in  the  regular  sacrifices, 
birds  were  accepted  only  from  the  poor 
who  possessed  no  other  clean  animals 
which  they  could  offer*.  It  is  not  in 
the  least  probable  that  the  domestic 
fowl  was  known  in  Western  Asia  till 
after  the  time  of  Solomon®. 

“ The  roebuck  and  the  hart”  (more pro- 
perly, the  gazelle  and  the  deer),  though 
they  were  clean  and  were  commonly 
used  for  food^,  were  not  offered  in 
sacrifice,  most  probably  because  they 

^ Lev.  xi.;  Deut.  xiv. 

^ Gen.  vii.  2.  ^ Lev.  i.  2. 

^ Josephus,  ‘Bell.  Jud.’  V.  4.  § 4.  See  Tris- 
tram, ‘Nat.  Blist.’  p.  212. 

® Lev.  V.  7.  See  note  on  Lev.  i.  14. 

® See  note  on  Neh.  v.  18.  Smith’s  ‘Diet.’ 
III.  1575.  Ducks  and  geese  appear  to  have 
abounded  in  ancient  Egypt,  but  the  Israelites 
could  hardly  have  had  them  in  considerable 
numbers  in  the  Wilderness.  That  the  ancient 
Egyptians  were  acquainted  with  the  common 
fowl  rests  on  no  earlier  testimony  than  Plutarch’s. 
See  Wilkinson,  ‘ Pop.  Account,’  &,c.  Vol.  i. 
p.  250. 

7 Deut.  xii.  15,  22,  xiv.  5,  XV.  22;  i Kings 
iv.  23.  Cf.  on  Lev.  xi.  7. 


were  not  domesticated  nor  regarded 
as  property:  the  camel  and  the  ass, 
though  they  were  domesticated,  were 
not  offered  because  they  were  unclean®. 
These  instances,  as  well  as  the  ex- 
clusion from  the  vegetable  offerings  of 
grapes,  figs,  pomegranates,  honey  and 
milk,  contradict  the  notion  of  B'ahr  and 
others,  that  the  materials  for  sacrifice 
were  chosen  mainly  because  they  were 
the  chief  natural  productions  of  the  land. 
The  view  of  Philo®,  which  has  been 
adopted  by  some  in  modern  times,  that 
the  animals  were  chosen  on  account  of 
their  mild  and  tractable  disposition,  is 
sufficiently  answered  by  referring  to  the 
habitual  tempers  of  the  bull,  the  goat 
and  the  ram,  which  are  so  plainly  re- 
cognized in  Scripture^®. 

Every  animal  offered  in  sacrifice  was 
to  be  perfect,  without  spot  or  blemish. 
It  was  to  have  neither  disease  nor  de- 
formity of  any  kind".  An  exception 
was  however  made  in  regard  to  a limb 
out  of  proportion  in  a victim  for  a Free- 
will offering,  which  was  an  inferior  sort 
of  Peace-offering^®.  A male  animal  was 
required  in  most  offerings^®. 

The  age  of  the  victims  was,  for  the 
most  part,  limited.  It  would  seem  to- 
have  been  a primitive  law  that  no  animal 
was  to  be  sacrificed  which  was  less  than 
a week  old".  The  four-footed  animals 
offered  by  Abraham  were  three  years 
old".  These  may  be  taken  in  a general 
way  as  the  two  limits  of  the  ages  of  the 
animals  offered  in  sacrifice.  The  case 
of  a victim  of  seven  years  old  in  Judg. 
vi.  25  must  be  regarded  as  exceptional, 
having  a peculiar  significance  of  its  own. 

The  ox  was  sacrificed  either  as  a calf 
('pjy  which  might  be  a year  old"’, 

® Amongst  the  Gentile  nations,  the  camel 
M^as  offered  in  sacrifice  by  the  Arabians,  the 
horse  by  the  Hindoos,  the  swine  by  the  Greeks, 
Romans  and  Egyptians,  the  goose  and  otlier 
domestic  birds  by  the  Egyptians. 

‘De  Victimis,’  cap.  I.  De  Maistre,  Heng- 
stenberg,  &c. 

See  Ps.  xxii.  12;  Jer.  xxxi.  18;  Jer.  4.  8; 
Dan.  viii.  3,  4,  5,  6,  7.  Cf.  also  Note  after 
Lev.  xi.  § II. 

Lev.  xxii.  18 — 25. 

See  Lev.  vii.  16,  17,  xxii.  23. 

See  on  Lev.  i.  3. 

Ex.  xxii.  30;  Lev.  xxii.  27. 

Gen.  XV.  9. 

Micah  vi.  6.  Cf.  on  Ex.  xxxii.  4;  Lev.  ix. 

2,  3,  8- 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


498 


or  as  a bull  (“i3  par)  from  one  to  three 
years  old*. 

In  like  manner,  the  sheep  was  offered 
either  as  a lamb  of  a year  old  or  under, 
or  as  a young  sheep  from  one  to  three 
years  old.  But  a single  name  (b’DD 
kebcs,  or  2^3  keseb^  different  forms  of 
the  same  word)  for  these  is  found  in  the 
Law.  The  age  in  the  case  of  the  lamb 
is  expressly  defined ^ Our  version  has 
lamb  in  some  places  where  sheep  would, 
according  to  common  usage,  be  more 
appropriated 

The  same  custom  was  most  likely 
followed  in  regard  to  the  age  of  the 
goat  But  there  appear  to  have  been 
two  breeds  of  goats,  one  shaggy  and 
the  other  smooth-haired,  distinguished 
in  sacrificial  use,  but  mistaken  in  our 
version  for  distinctions  of  aged 

The  Presentation  and  Slaughter  of  the 
Victims. 

§ v.  It  was  the  duty  of  the  man 
who  offered  a private  sacrifice  to  lead 
with  his  own  hands  the  victim  into  the 
court  of  the  Sanctuary,  and  to  “ offer  it 
before  the  Lord,”  that  is,  formally  to 
present  it  to  the  priest  in  front  of  the 
Tabernacled  It  is  said  that  a priest 
selected  for  the  service  first  carefully 
examined  the  animal  to  see  that  it  was 
without  spot  or  blemish.  The  sacrificer 
then  laid,  or  rather  pressed,  his  hand 
upon  its  head.  According  to  some  Jew- 
ish traditions,  both  hands  were  used, 
as  they  were  by  the  priest  on  the  head 
of  the  Scape  goatd  Nothing  is  said 
in  the  Law  of  the  imposition  of  hands 
being  accompanied  by  any  form  of 
prayer  or  confession.  The  confession 
made  by  the  High  priest  over  the  Scape 
goat’^  was  evidently  peculiar ; and  the 
confessions  spoken  of  in  connection  with 

* See  on  Lev.  ix.  3 ; Lev.  iv.  3,  viii.  2 ; xvi. 
3,  &c. 

^ Ex.  xii.  5,  xxix.  38;  Lev.  ix.  3,  xii.  6 (see 
note),  xxiii.  12,  18,  &c. 

^ Lev.  iii.  7,  iv.  32,  xiv.  10,  xxiii.  12,  &c. — The 
words  laml),  ewe,  and  sheep,  are  also  often  em- 
ployed to  translate  seh  which  would  be 

more  fairly  represented  by  one  of  the  flock.,  that 
is,  cither  sheep  or  goat.  See  Lev.  v.  7,  xii.  8, 
xxii.  23,  28,  xxvii.  26,  &c. 

* See  on  Lev.  iv.  23. 

® See  note  on  Lev.  i.  3. 

® Lev.  i.  4,  xvi.  21. 

^ Lev.  xvi.  21. 


the  Sin-offerings®  were  evidently  made 
before  the  sacrificial  ceremony  had  com- 
menced, and  had  nothing  immediately 
to  do  with  the  imposition  of  hands. 
But  according  to  the  Rabbinists  the 
sacrificer  always  uttered  a prayer  or 
confession  of  some  sort  while  his  hand 
rested  on  the  head  of  the  victim,  except 
in  the  case  of  Peace-offerings®.  There 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  an  im- 
position of  hands  in  the  sacrifices  of 
birds'®:  nor,  according  to  the  Mishna, 
was  there  any  in  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Paschal  lamb,  or  in  the  offering  of  any 
of  the  public  sacrifices,  except  the  Scape 
goat  and  the  Sin-offering  for  the  people". 

The  regular  place  for  slaughtering  the 
animals  for  Burnt-offerings,  Sin-offerings 
and  Trespass-offerings,  was  the  north 
side  of  the  Altar'®.  Tradition  tells  us 
that  before  the  sacrificer  laid  his  hand 
upon  the  head  of  the  victim,  it  was  bound 
by  a cord  to  one  of  the  rings  fixed  for 
the  purpose  on  the  north  side  of  the 
Altar'®,  and  that  at  the  very  instant  when 
the  words  of  the  prayer,  or  confession, 
were  ended,  the  fatal  stroke  was  given 'b 
The  Peace-offerings  and  the  Paschal 
lambs,  might,  it  would  seem,  be  slain  in 
any  part  of  the  court'®. 

If  we  take  the  text  of  Leviticus  in 
its  most  obvious  meaning  as  our  guide, 
the  person  who  brought  the  sacrifice  had 
to  slay  it'®.  But  some  Jewish  authorities 
state  that  this  was  the  duty  of  the  priest 
or  an  assistant 'h  The  Hebrew  idiom  is 
not  free  from  ambiguity'®.  It  is  how- 
ever most  likely  that  the  duty  devolved 
on  the  sacrificer,  but  that  he  could  em- 
ploy a deputy  who  might  be’  a priest  or 
not'®.  In  the  public  sacrifices,  and  on 
certain  peculiar  occasions  in  later  times, 
the  priests,  or  the  Levites,  were  appointed 

® See  on  Lev.  v.  5. 

^ Maimonides,  ‘ Corban,’  ill.  15.  Otho, 

‘ Rab.  Lex.’  p.  634.  Outram,  i.  c.  15. 

Otho,  p.  658. 

Lev.  iv.  15.  ‘ Menach,’  ix.  7. 

Lev.  i.  1 1 ; vi.  25  ; vii.  2.  On  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  court,  see  Note  after  Ex.  xxvi.  § vi. 

Mishna,  ‘Middoth,’  III.  5. 

Otho,  p.  634. 

Cf.  Lev.  i,  II  with  iii.  2.  Mishna,  ^Zebach,’ 

V.  6. 

See  Lev.  i.  5,  &c.  &c. 

Philo,  ‘ De  Victimis,’  cap.  5.  Otho, 
P- 

See  on  P3x.  xxxvii.  r. 

Cf.  2 Chron.  xxx.  17. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


499 


to  do  it‘.  The  mode  of  killing  ap- 
pears not  to  have  differed  from  that 
of  slaughtering  animals  for  food.  The 
throat  was  cut  while  a priest  or  assistant 
held  a bowl  under  the  neck  to  receive 
the  blood  ^ The  sacrificer,  or  his  assist- 
ant, then  flayed  the  victim  and  cut  it 
into  pieces  ^ probably  while  the  priest 
was  engaged  in  disposing  of  the  blood. 

Up  to  this  point  the  ritual  was  the 
same  for  all  sacrifices  of  quadrupeds, 
whether  they  were  destined  to  be  Burnt- 
offerings,  Peace-ofterings,  or  Sin-offer- 
ings, except  in  the  license  allowed  in 
the  case  of  Peace-offerings  as  to  the 
place  of  slaughter,  and,  according  to 
tradition,  in  the  prayer  accompanying 
the  imposition  of  hands.  But  from  this 
point  a very  important  divergence  takes 
place,  and  the  distinctive  mark  of  each 
kind  of  offering  comes  into  view.  The 
treatment  of  the  blood  was  the  same  in 
the  Burnt-offering,  the  Peace-offering,  and 
the  Trespass- offering,  but  it  was  pecu- 
liar in  the  Sin-offering:  the  burning  of 
certain  parts  on  the  Altar  was  the  same 
in  the  Sin-offering,  the  Trespass-offering, 
and  the  Peace-offering,  but  the  burning 
of  the  whole  was  peculiar  to  the  Burnt- 
offering  : the  sacrificial  meal  was  pecu- 
liar to  the  Peace-offering. 

The  Treatment  of  the  Blood. 

§ vi.  In  sacrificing  the  Burnt-offer- 
ings^  the  Peace-offerings^  and  the  Tres- 
pass-offerings®, we  read  that  the  priests 
were  to  “ bring  the  blood  and  sprinkle 
the  blood  round  about  upon  the  altar.” 
In  the  Sin-offerings,  the  priest  had  to 
take  some  of  the  blood  with  his  finger 
and  put  it  upon  the  horns  of  the  Altar 
of  Burnt-offering,  and  to  pour  out  what 
remained  at  the  bottom  of  the  Altar. 
This  was  all  that  was  required  for  the 
blood  of  the  Sin-offering  for  one  of  the 
common  people,  or  for  a ruler^  But  in 
the  Sin-offering  for  the  Congregation  and 
that  for  the  High-priest®,  in  addition  to 

^ Lev.  iv.  4.  xvi,  11,  15;  'i  Chron.  xxix.  24, 
34,  &c. 

^ L’Empereur,  notes  to  ‘ Middotb,’  cap.  iir. 
Carpzqv.  ‘ Mantissa  de  Sacrif.’  p.  712.  Philo, 

‘ De  Victimis,’  cap.  5.  See  on  Lev.  ix.  o,  xvii.  3. 

Lev.  i.  5,  6,  &c. 

4 Lev.  i.  5,  II.  5 Lev.  hi.  2,  8,  13. 

® Lev.  vii.  2.  On  the  relation  of  the  Trespass- 
offering to  the  Sin-offering,  see  on  Lev.  v.  14. 

7 Lev.  iv.  25,  30.  8 note  Lev.  iv.  3. 


these  two  processes,  the  High-priest  him- 
self had  to  bring  a portion  of  the  blood 
into  the  Sanctuary,  to  sprinkle  it  with 
his  finger  seven  times  before  the  vaiF, 
and  to  put  some  of  it  upon  the  horns  of 
the  Altar  of  incense'®. 

Now  there  are  here  to  be  distin- 
guished four  different  modes  of  dispos- 
ing of  the  blood.  In  regard  to  the  three 
of  these  which  belong  to  the  Sin-offering, 
our  version  exactly  represents  the  ori- 
ginal : — (i)  the  putting  the  blood  with  the 
finger  upon  the  horns  of  the  two  Altars, 
(2)  the  sprinkling  it  with  the  finger  before 
the  vail,  and  (3)  the  pouring  out  of  what 
remained  at  the  base  of  the  Altar  of 
Burnt-offering.  But  as  regards  the  blood 
of  the  other  offerings,  which  it  is  said 
the  priests  were  to  “ sprinkle  round  about 
upon  the  altar,”  our  translation  may  mis- 
lead. The  Hebrew  verb  {zdrak,  pnr)  is 
a quite  different  one  from  that  rendered 
sprinJzle  {Jiizzdh^  ntn),  in  reference  to  the 
blood  of  the  Sin-offering:  and  as  zdrak 
is  applied  to  the  whole  of  the  blood  of  the 
victim,  it  must  evidently  denote  a more 
copious  way  of  disposing  of  the  blood 
than  is  expressed  by  our  word  sprinkling. 
While  liizzdh  is  used  for  what  was  done 
with  the  finger,  or  a bunch  of  hyssop, 
zdrak  is  applied  to  an  action  performed 
with  the  bowl"  in  which  the  blood  of 
the  victim  was  received  as  it  flowed  from 
the  carcase.  The  verb  is  to  be  under- 
stood in  the  sense  of  casting  abroad.,  so 
as  to  make  the  liquid  cover  a consider- 
able surface.  The  two  Hebrew  words 
are  clearly  distinguished  in  the  Septua- 
gint  and  Vulgate.  They  render  zdrak 
by  Trpoo-xdiv  and  f under e;  and  liizzdh  by 
paivecv  and  aspergere.  But  almost  all 
modern  versions  confound  the  words. 

The  Mishna  tells  us  that  the  great 
Altar  of  the  Temple  was  furnished 
with  two  holes  at  its  south-west  corner 
through  which  the  blood  ran  into  a drain 
which  conveyed  it  to  the  Cedron.  There 
must  have  been  some  arrangement  of 
this  kind  for  taking  the  blood  away  from 
the  Altar  in  the  Wilderness.  We  are 
further  told  that  in  casting  the  blood 

See  note  Lev.  iv.  6. 

Lev.  iv.  5 — 7,  16 — 18. 

The  name  of  this  bowl  was  mizrak  (p"lT?0b  ’ 
which  is  immediately  formed  from  the  verb 
zdrak.  See  Ex.  xxvii.  3;  Num.  iv.  14,  vii.  13; 
Note  after  Lev.  xvii.,  &c. 


500 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


“ round  about  upon'  the  altar,”  it  was  the 
custom  to  throw  it  in  two  portions,  one 
at  the  north-eastern  corner  and  the  other 
at  the  south-western,  so  as  to  wet  all  the 
four  sides  \ In  accordance  with  this 
statement,  it  has  been  very  generally 
held'  that  it  was  intended  that  the 
blood  should  be  diffused  over  the  walls 
of  the  Altar;  and  this  seems  to  be  con- 
firmed by  what  is  said  of  the  blood  of 
the  bird  for  a burnt-offering — “the  blood 
thereof  shall  be  wrung  out  at  the  side  of 
the  altar — But  it  is  urged,  on  the  other 
hand^  that  it  is  improbable  that  the  blood 
should  have  been  suffered,  as  it  must 
thus  have  been,  to  run  down  upon  the 
bank  or  ledge  round  the  Altar,  on  which 
the  officiating  priests  stood.  It  has  been 
conjectured  that  it  was  cast  upon  the 
margin  of  the  top  of  the  Altar  in  such  a 
way  as  to  flow  round  the  space  occupied 
by  the  fire.  This  is  of  course  conceivable, 
if  a channel  was  provided  to  conduct 
the  blood  round  the  four  sides,  inclining 
towards  the  openings  at  the  south-western 
cornerk 

The  Biu'ning  on  the  Altar. 

§ vii.  AVhen  the  blood  was  disposed 
of,  the  skin  removed,  and  the  animal  cut 
into  pieces,  the  sacrificer,  or  his  assist- 
ant, washed  the  entrails  and  feet^  In 
the  case  of  a Burnt-offering,  all  the  pieces 
were  then  taken  to  the  Altar  and  salted 
in  accordance  with  the  command,  “with 
all  thine  offerings  thou  shalt  offer  saltk” 
It  is  said  that  the  salting  took  place  on 
the  slope  of  the  Altar ^ The  priest  next 
piled  the  pieces  on  the  Altar,  in  order, 
with  the  wood,  upon  the  fire  which  he  had 
])reviously  made  up*’.  The  expression 
“ in  order*"”  is  understood  by  the  Jewish 
writers  to  signify  that  the  pieces  were  to 
be  placed  in  the  pile,  so  as  to  stand  in 
the  same  relation  to  each  other  as  they 

^ ‘ Micldoth,’  III.  2.  Otho,  p.  636. 

^ Outram,  Carpzov.,  Bahr,  Xnobel,  Keil,  &c. 
\vith  the  general  voice  of  rabbinical  traditions. 
Otho,  p.  635  ; Outram,  I.  c.  xvi.  § 2. 

Lev  i.  15. 

By  Kurtz  and  Hofmann. 

This  may  have  some  countenance  from 
the  wonls  of  Philo  (‘de  \bct.’  c.  6),  and  of  the 
Vulgate,  Lev.  i.  1 1. 

*'  .See  note  on  l.ev.  i.  9, 

' Lev.  ii.  13;  ]'>.ek.  xliii.  24;  Mark  ix.  49. 

® Otho,  p.  637.  See  on  Lev.  i.  1 1 ; Ex.  xxvii.  5. 

•’  .See  note  Lev.  vi.  13, 

Lev.  i.  7,  S,  1 2,  vi.  12;  cf.  xxiv.  8. 


did  in  the  living  animal".  The  hind 
limbs  were  probably  put  at  the  base  of 
the  pile,  then  the  entrails  and  other  vis- 
cera with  the  fat,  then  the  fore  limbs, 
with  the  head  at  the  top. — It  should  here 
be  remarked  that  a peculiar  word  is  uni- 
formly applied  to  the  action  of  the  fire 
of  the  Altar,  one  which  means  rather  to 
send  up  in  smoke  than  to  consume.  See 
on  Lev.  i.  9. 

The  Fat  and  its  Accompaniments. 

§ viii.  The  parts  burned  upon  the 
Altar  of  the  Peace-offering,  the ' Sin- 
offering  and  the  Trespass-offering,  were 
the  same  in  each  case.  They  consisted 
mainly  of  the  internal  fat,  the  “sweet  fat,” 
or  suet*^  The  Hebrews  called  this  fat 
chelev  and  distinguished  it  from 

the  fat  which  is  diffused  in  the  flesh, 
which  was  called  mishmdn  or 

shdmeen  The  Law  strictly  for- 

bad that  the  chelev  should  ever  be 
eaten;  “It  shall  be  a perpetual  statute 
...that  ye  eat  neither  fat  {chelev)  nor 
blood  On  the  contrary,  it  was  allowed 
to  eat  the  other  fat*". — It  is  remarkable 
that  another  word,  peder  (na),  is  used 
to  denote  the  fat  of  the  Burnt-offering 
which  was  burned  along  with  the  flesh, 
not  exclusively  selected  for  the  Altar  like 
the  chelev  of  the  other  sacrifices*^. 

The  portions  burned  are  briefly  sum- 
med up  as  “ the  fat,  and  the  kidneys,  and 
the  caul  above  the  liver*";”  but  they  are 
generally  described  more  in  detail  in  this 
way*" — 

1.  “The  fat  that  covereth  the  in- 
wards;” that  is,  the  caul  or  great  omen- 
tum, a transiDarent  membrane  which  has 
upon  it  a net-work  of  fatty  tissue. 

2.  “The  fat  that  is  upon  the  in- 
wards,” the  small  lumps  of  suet  found 
upon  the  intestines  of  healthy  animals. 

3.  “ The  two  kidneys  with  the  fat 
that  is  on  them  which  is  by  the  flanks.” 

Maimon.  ap.  Outram,  I.  16. 

See  Richardson’s  ‘Diet.’  s.  Suet. 

Ex.  xxix.  13,  22  ; Lev.  iii.  4,  10,  15,  iv. 
9,  vii.  4,  &c. 

Num.  xiii.  20;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  31 ; Is.'x.  16,  xxx. 

Lev.  iii.  17.  See  Neh.  viii.  10. 

Lev.  i.  8,  12;  viii.  20.  On  the  meaning  of 
peder,  see  Gesenius,  ‘ Thes.’ 

I.ev.  ix.  10. 

Ex.  xxix.  13,  22;  Lev.  iii.  4,  10,  15,  iv.  9, 
vii.  4,  viii.  16,  &e. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


SOI 


4.  The  caul  above  the  liver.” 
There  is  a doubt  as  to  the  part  which 
is  here  designated.  The  Hebrew  word 
rendered  caul  is  yothereth  (mni'),  which 
appears  to  be  derived  from  a root  signify- 
ing to  abound  or  to  spread  over.  The  two 
interpretations  of  the  word  which  have 
found  most  favour  appear  to  have  taken 
their  rise  from  the  different  renderings 
of  the  Septuagint  and  the  Vulgate.  It  is 
translated  by  the  former,  o o eVl  tov 
r/Traro'i,  and,  in  other  places,  o XojSog  rov 
y-n-aTog.  It  has  hence  been  supposed  by 
many  critics^  to  mean  the  great  upper 
lobe  of  the  liver.  But  this  lobe  is  a part 
of  the  liver,  and  cannot  therefore  pro- 
perly be  said  to  be  “above  the  liv^er.” 
The  word  has  been  rendered  by  the 
Vulgate  reticulum  jecoiis^  a name  which 
answers  very  well  to  the  membrane  co- 
vering the  upper  part  of  the  liver,  some- 
times called  the  small  omentum.  This 
is  taken  to  be  what  is  here  meant  by  the 
greater  number  of  modern  critics  and 
translators' . A third  opinion,  of  less  au- 
thority, is  that  which  is  given  in  the  mar- 
gin of  our  Bible,  that  the  word  means  the 
midriff,  or  diaphragm,  the  broad  muscle 
which  forms  the  division  between  the 
abdomen  and  the  thorax.  On  the  whole, 
it  must  be  admitted  that  the  question  as 
to  what  yothereth  really  denotes  has  not 
been  satisfactorily  settled,  though  much 
learning  has  been  expended  on  it^ 

5.  When  the  offering  was  a sheep, 
the  fat  tail  which  characterizes  several 
breeds  of  sheep,  was  added ^ 

On  the  significance  of  burning  the 
fat,  see  on  Lev.  iii.  17. 

On  the  Priests'  Portions. 

§ ix.  The  parts  of  the  victims  which 
regularly  fell  to  the  priests  were  : — 

Of  the  Burnt-offerings,  only  the  hide^, 
the  whole  of  the  flesh  being  consigned 
to  the  Altar. 

Of  the  Peace-offerings,  the  breast  and 
the  right  shoulder  (or  leg),  which  might 
be  eaten  by  the  priests  and  their  families 

^ Philo,  Josephus,  Saadia,  Bochart,  Gesenius, 
Bahr,  Schott,  Ewald,  Kalisch. 

^ Luther,  the  English  Version,  Nic.  Fuller, 
Furst,  DeWette,  Knobel,  Bunsen,  Kurtz,  Keil, 
Zunz,  Herxheimer,  Luzzatto,  Wogue. 

2 See  Nic.  Fuller,  ‘ Misc.  Sacr.’  v.  14.  Bo- 
chart, ‘ Hieroz.’  11.  45.  Gesenius,  ‘ Thes.’  S2i,b 
voce.  Knobel  on  Lev.  iii.  4,  &c.  &c. 

^ See  on  Lev.  iii.  9.  ^ Lev.  vii.  8. 


in  any  unpolluted  place.  The  hide  ap- 
pears to  have  been  retained  by  the 
sacrificer*’. 

Of  the  Sin-offerings  and  the  Tres- 
pass-offerings, the  whole  of  the  flesh 
(except  the  fat  portions  burnt  on  the 
Altar),  and  probably  the  hide.  The  flesh 
could  only  be  eaten  within  the  precinct 
of  the  Tabernacle.  It  was  distinguished 
from  the  “holy”  flesh  of  the  Peace-offer- 
ings as  being  “most  holyh” 

As  regards  the  two  portions  of  the 
flesh  of  the  Peace-offerings  which  were 
assigned  to  be  “Aaron’s  and  his  sons’ 
by  a statute  for  ever  from:  the  children 
of  Israel  V’  and  which  probably,  from  the 
great  number  of  Peace-offerings  which 
were  offered,  furnished  them  with  their 
chief  supply  of  animal  food,  it  appears 
certain  that  one  was  what  we  call  the 
breast  or  brisket,  but  there  is  a doubt 
as  to  the  other.  The  Hebrew  word 
shok  (pity)  means  leg  rather  than 
shoulder.  In  rendering  it  shoulder  in  this 
connection,  our  translators  have  the 
authority  of  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  and  Onke- 
los.  But  wherever  the  word  occurs  in 
other  parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  with  a 
single  exception,  our  own  version,  (in 
agreement  with  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.) 
takes  it  for  the  leg  or  hip*’.  Josephus, 
in  speaking  of  the  priests’  portions,  men- 
tions the  leg^‘^.  But  the  regular  word  for 
shoulder  zeroa'  (VIIT)  is  used  in  Num.  vi. 
19  and  Deut.  xviii.  3.  The  leg  is  gene- 
rally regarded  as  the  choicer  joint  of  the 
two,  but  Sir  Gardiner  Wilkinson  says  that 
shoulder  was  preferred  by  the  ancient 
Egyptians".  Many  recent  critics  are  in- 
clined to  the  opinion  that  it  was  the  right 
leg  which  was  given  to  the  priests;  but 
the  question  is  not  satisfactorily  settled. 

Connected  with  the  priests’  breast 
and  shoulder  is  the  inquiry  as  to  the 
two  ceremonies  called  waving  and  heav- 

® Lev.  vii.  31,  32,  x.  14.  Note  on  vii.  8. 

7 Lev.  vi.  26,  vii.  6 ; Note  after  Ex.  xxvi. 

§ V.  Cf.  Ezek.  xlii.  13.  On  the  peculiar  holiness 
of  the  flesh,  see  on  Lev.  vi. 

^ Ex.  xxix.  28.  Cf.  2 Chron,  xxx.  22  — 24, 

XXXV.  7,  8. 

9 Deut.  xxviii.  35;  Juclg.  xv,  8;  Prov.  xxvi.  7; 
Cant.  V.  15;  Isa.  xlvii.  2.  The  exception  is 
1 Sam.  ix.  24.  The  Mishna  in  one  place  at 
least  seems  to  favour  the  same  view.  ‘ Cholin/ 
x.  4,  with  Bartenora’s  note 

KvrjiJt.r],  ‘Ant.’  III.  9,  § 2. 

Note  on  Herodot.  ii.  39. 


502 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


ing.  The  shoulder,  which  belonged  to 
the  officiating  priest,  was  heaved,  and 
the  breast,  which  was  for  the  common 
stock  of  the  priests  in  general,  was 
waved  before  the  Lord^  Each  process 
appears  to  have  been  a solemn  form  of 
dedicating  a thing  to  the  use  of  the 
Sanctuary.  The  term  strictly  rendered 
Heave-offering  (teruindh,  HDlin)  ap- 
pears to  be  used  in  as  wide  a sense  as 
ko7'bdn^  for  offerings  in  general.  It  is  so 
applied  to  all  the  gifts  for  the  construc- 
tion of  the  Tabernacled  That  rendered 
Wave-offering  {ienuphdh,  nss'ljn)  is  not 
so  broadly  applied,  but  it  is  used  to  de- 
note the  gold  and  bronze  that  were  con- 
tributed for  the  same  purpose^:  it  is 
also  applied  to  the  Levites  as  dedi- 
cated to  the  divine  serviced  From  the 
clearly  marked  distinction  between  the 
heave  shoulder  and  the  wave  breast,  it 
can  hardly  be  doubted  that  the  terms, 
in  their  proper  meaning,  referred  to  two 
distinct  forms  of  dedication.  The  verb 
from  which  tci'iimdh  is  derived,  signifies 
•to  lift  up,  that  from  which  iejiuphdh 
comes,  to  move  repeatedly  either  up  and 
down,  or  to  and  fro.  The  Rabbinists  say 
that  heaving  was  a moving  up  and  down, 
waving  a moving  to  and  frod  But,  as 
waving  appears  to  have  been  the  more 
solemn  process  of  the  two,  it  w^as  pro- 
bably, in  accordance  with  its  derivation®, 
a movement  several  times  repeated, 
while  heaving  was  simply  a lifting  up 
once. 

The  Meat-offer  mgs  and  the  Dj'ink-offeidngs. 

§ X.  On  the  Meat-offerings  (rather 
Vegetable-offerings)  in  general,  see  Lev. 
ii.  with  the  notes. 

On  the  Drink-offerings,  see  on  Ex. 
xxix.  40. 

Every  Burnt-offering  and  Peace-of- 
fering was  accompanied  by  a Meat-offer- 
ing and  a Drink-offering.  There  is  no 
mention  of  this  in  Leviticus.  The  quan- 
tities of  flour,  oil  and  wine  were  thus 

^ Kx.  xxix.  26,  27  ; Lev.  vii.  32 — 34. 

“ ICx.  XXV.  2.  See  also  Num.  v.  9 ; Deut. 
xii.  6,  &c. 

I'lx.  XXXV.  22,  xxxviii.  24,  29. 

* Nuin.  viii.  1 1 . 

® Carpzov.  ‘ App.  Crit.’  p.  709. 

^ The  Hebrew  verb  i»  applied  to  such  actions 
as  using  a saw,  or  other  tool,  Ex.  xx.  25  ; Josh, 
viii.  31  ; Isa.  x.  15,  xxx.  28,  &c.  For  instances 
of  waving,  see  Lev.  xxiii.  ii.  17. 


proportioned  to  the  importance  of  the 
victims^: — 


"With  a bullock  : 

Flour. 

3 of  an  I 
ephah.  j 


Oil. 

of  a hin. 


Wine. 

- of  a hin. 
a 


With  a ram  ; 

Flour. 

2 of  an 
Ti  ephah. 


Oil. 

- of  a hin. 
3 


Witte. 

- of  a hin. 
3 


With  a young  sheep  or  goat : 

Flour.  Oil. 


I of  an 
ephah. 


- of  a hin. 
4 


Wine. 

- of  a hin. 
4 


The  whole  of  the  Meat-offerings  and 
Drink-offerings,  with  the  exception  of 
what  was  burnt,  or  poured,  on  the  Altar, 
fell  to  the  lot  of  the  priests.  Lev.  ii.  3. 

The  Sin-offering  and  the  Trespass- 
offering were  sacrificed  without  either 
Meat-offering  or  Drink-offering. 


The  Public-offperings. 

§ xi.  On  the  daily  Burnt-offerings, 
see  Ex.  xxix.  38 — 42. 

On  the  offerings  for  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment and  the  Great  Festivals,  see  Lev. 
xvi.  xxiii.  and  Num.  xxviii.  xxix. 


V.  ■ Historical  Development  of 
Sacrifice. 

§ xii.  In  the  earliest  record  of  sacri- 
fice the  name  given  in  common  to  the 
animal  and  vegetable  offerings  is  min- 
chdh  {i.  e.  a gift),  which  the  Law  after- 
wards restricted  to  the  vegetable- offer- 
ings®. It  is  said  that  “Cain  brought  of 
the  fruit  of  the  ground  an  offering  {min- 
chdh)  unto  the  Lord.  And  Abel,  he 
also  brought  of  the  firstlings  of  his  flock 
and  of  the  fat  thereof.  And  the  Lord 
had  respect  unto  Abel  and  to  his  offer- 
ing {niinchdh)',  but  unto  Cain  and  his 
offering  {minehdh)  he  had  not  respect.” 
Cen.  iv.  3 — 5.  We  are  told  nothing, 
and  from  the  narrative  itself  we  can  infer 
nothing,  as  to  the  mode  in  which  the 
offerings  were  made,  except  that  the  fat® 
(ehe/ev)  appears  to  have  been  treated  as 
a distinct  part  of  the  offering  of  Abel. 

The  sacrifices  of  Noah  after  the  flood 
consisted  of  Burnt-offerings  of  clean 


^ Num.  XV.  5 sq.,  xxviii.  5 sq.;  Ex.  xxix. 
40.  On  the  measures  here  named,  see  Lev.  xix. 

^ See  § iii. 


® See  § viii. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


503 


beasts  and  birds  offered  upon  an  altar  *. 
The  historian  tells  us  on  this  occasion 
that  the  Lord  smelled  “ a sweet  savour,” 
using  for  the  first  time  the  phrase  which 
came  into  current  use  in  reference  to 
the  Burnt-offerings  and  whatever  por- 
tions of  the  other  sacrifices  were  offered 
on  the  altar  ^ 

The  Covenant  sacrifice  of  Abraham  ^ 
consisted  of  one  of  each  of  the  five  ani- 
mals which  the  Law  afterwards  recog- 
nized as  fit  for  sacrificed  This  is  the 
earliest  instance  of  an  offering  being  for- 
mally commanded  by  the  Lord  and  of 
its  matter  being  prescribed.  But  the  cut- 
ting in  twain  of  the  four-footed  victims 
appears  to  mark  it  as  a peculiar  rite  be- 
longing to  a personal  covenant®,  and  to 
distinguish  it  from  the  classes  of  sacri- 
fices ordained  by  the  Law. 

In  none  of  the  other  references  to 
sacrifice  in  the  life  of  Abraham  is  there 
an  indication  of  any  kind  of  offering 
except  the  Burnt-offering.  He  built  an 
altar  at  Shechem,  another  between  Beth- 
el and  Ai,  a third  at  Hebron  and  a 
fourth  at  Beersheba.  At  two  of  these  we 
are  told  that  he  “called  upon  the  name 
of  the  Lord,”  but  there  is  no  mention  of 
any  particular  act  of  sacrificed 

Among  the  different  aspects  under 
which  the  offering  up  of  Isaac  may  be 
viewed,  this  is  perhaps  the  one  which 
most  directly  connects  it  with  the  his- 
tory of  sacrifice.  Abraham  had  still  one 
great  lesson  to  learn.  He  did  not  clearly 
perceive  that  Jehovah  did  not  require 
his  gifts.  The  Law  had  not  yet  been 
given  which  would  have  suggested  this 
truth  to  him  by  the  single  victim  ap-. 
pointed  for  the  Burnt-offering  and  for 
the  Sin-offering,  and  by  the  sparing 
handful  of  the  Meat-offering^.  To  cor- 
rect and  enlighten  him,  the  Lord  tempted 
him  to  offer  up  as  a Burnt-offering,  his 
most  cherished  possession,  the  centre  of 
his  hopes.  The  offering,  had  it  been 
completed,  would  have  been  an  actual 

* Gen.  viii.  -20,  11. 

* Lev.  i.  9,  ii.  2,  9,  12,  iii.  5,  &c.  The  fat  por- 
tions of  the  Sin-offering  formed  no  exception, 
see  Lev.  iv.  31. 

^ Gen.  XV.  9 — 17. 

^ See  § iv. 

® See  on  Gen.  xv.  8.  Cf.  Jer.  xxxiv.  18,  19. 

* Gen.  xii.  7.  8,  xiii  4,  18,  xxvi.  25.  Cf. 

xxi.  33.  » 

Lev.  ii.  2,  &c. 


gift  to  Jehovah,  not  a ceremonial  act  of 
worship : it  would  have  been  not  an 
outward  and  visible  sign  of  an  inward 
and  spiritual  grace,  but  a stern  reality  in 
itself®.  Isaac  was  not,  as  regards  his 
father’s  purpose,  in  any  proper  sense  a 
symbol  or  representative.  Nor  is  there 
any  hint  that  would  justify  us  in  making 
the  voluntary  submission  of  Isaac  a sig- 
nificant part  of  the  transaction.  The 
act  of  the  patriarch  in  giving  up  his  own 
flesh  and  blood  was  an  analogue  rather 
than  a type  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Great 
High  Priest  who  gave  up  Llimself  as  a 
victim.  In  order  to  instruct  Abraham 
that  the  service  of  the  Altar  fulfilled  its 
purpose  in  being  the  expression  of  the 
spiritual  condition  of  the  worshipper,  the 
Lord  Himself  provided  a ram  which 
was  accepted  instead  of  the  beloved  son. 
He  had  already  made  the  offering  of 
himself  in  his  ready  faith  and  obedience; 
the  acceptable  means  for  expressing  this 
fact  was  appointed  in  the  “ ram  caught 
in  a thicket  by  his  horns.” 

Isaac,  as  his  father  had  done,  “built 
an  altar  and  called  upon  the  name  of 
the  Lord”  at  Beersheba®.  Jacob  built 
at  Shechem  an  altar  that  he  called 
El-elohe-Israel  {i.e.  the  God,  the  God  of 
Israel),  and  another  at  Bethel,  which  he 
called  El-Bethel  {i.e.  the  God  of  Bethel)'®. 

The  sacrifices  offered  by  Jacob  at 
Mizpeh  when  he  parted  with  Laban,  and 
at  Beersheba  Avhen  he  was  taking  his 
last  farewell  of  the  Land  of  Promise", 
appear  to  have  been  strictly  Peace- 
offerings. 

There  is  no  reference  to  the  offering 
of  sacrifice  during  the  sojourn  of  the 
Israelites  in  Egypt.  But  that  the  rite 
was  familiarly  known  to  them  in  con- 
nection with  the  worship  of  Jehovah, 
appears  from  Moses  alleging  as  a reason 
for  taking  them  out  of  Egypt,  that  they 
might  hold  a festival  and  offer  sacrifices 
unto  the  Lord’®. 

Jethro  offered  both  Burnt-offerings  and 
Peace-offerings  when  he  met  Moses  and 
the  Israelites.  This  seems  to  show  that 
sacrificial  worship  of  substantially  the 
same  kind  was  common  to  the  two  great 

8 Cf.  Micah  vi.  7.  ^ Gen.  xxvi.  25. 

Gen.  xxxiii.  20,  xxxv.  i,  7.  See  notes  in 

loc. 

Gen.  xxxi.  54,  xlvi.  i. 

Ex.  iii.  18,  V.  I,  3,  8,  17. 


i 


504 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


branches  of  the  Semitic  stock  \ — The 
sacrifices  of  Balaam  were  Burnt-offerings 
of  oxen  and  rams,  Num.  xxiii.  2,  3,  6,  15. 
— Those  of  Job  were  Burnt-offerings  ( Job 
i.  5,  xlii.  7,  8);  but  the  language  used 
respecting  them  is  distinguished  by  the 
mention  of  a particular  that  will  be  no- 
ticed presently  ^ 

§ xiii.  We  thus  see  that  if  we  take 
the  narrative  of  Scripture  for  our  guide, 
the  most  ancient  sacrifices  were  Burnt- 
offerings.  There  is  a reference  in  the 
very  earliest  instance  to  the  fat  of  the 
victim ; no  reference  whatever,  through- 
out the  patriarchal  age,  to  the  blood. 
The  Burnt-offering  must  have  had  the 
very  same  significance  in  the  case  of 
Noah’s  sacrifices,  when  the  Lord  is  said 
to  have  smelled  “a  sweet  savour,”  as  it 
had  under  the  Law.  The  Peace-offer- 
ing is  not  mentioned  till  a later  period 
of  patriarchal  history,  in  connection  with 
a more  advanced  development  of  social 
life.  The  order  in  which  the  kinds  of 
sacrifice  are  placed  by  Moses  in  the  first 
chapters  of  Leviticus  is  in  agreement 
with  this  historical  succession  as  it  is 
traced  in  the  Pentateuch^ 

It  would  seem  to  follow  that  the  radi- 
cal idea  of  sacrifice  is  to  be  sought  in 
the  Burnt-offering  rather  than  in  the 
Peace-offering,  or  in  the  Sin-offering. 
Assuming  that  the  animal  brought  to 
the  Altar  represented  the  person  of  him 
who  offered  it,  the  act  of  sacrifice  from 
the  very  first  figured  the  ascent  of  the 
reconciled  and  accepted  creature  to  Je- 
hovah. According  to  the  strict  meaning 
of  the  Plebrew,  as  shown  in  the  name 
by  which  the  Burnt-offering  was  com- 
monly called  ^ signifying  that  which  as- 
cends, as  well  as  in  the  verb  uniformly 
applied  to  the  act  of  burning  on  the 
Altar,  the  flesh  was  spoken  of  not  as 
destroyed  by  burning,  but  as  sent  up  in 
the  fire  like  incense  towards  heaven 
It  was  in  this  way  that  the  believer 
confessed  the  obligation  of  surrendering 
himself,  body,  soul  and  spirit,  to  the 
Lord  of  heaven  and  earth  who  had  been 
revealed  to  him.  The  truth  expressed 
then  in  the  whole  Burnt-offering  is  the 

^ Kx.  xviii.  12.  See  note  in  loc. 

* See  § xiv. 

3 See  on  Lev.  ii.  i.  ^ 'olakf  see  § iii. 

® See  on  Lev.  i.  9. 


unqualified  self-sacrifice  of  the  person. 
“The  keynote  of  all  the  sacrificial  sys- 
tems is  the  same ; self-abdication  and  a 
sense  of  dependence  on  God  are  the 
feelings  which  gifts  and  victims  strive  to 
express 

In  the  Peace-offerings  of  the  patri- 
archal age,  before  the  institution  of  a 
national  priesthood,  there  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that,  as  in  the  Peace-offerings 
of  the  Law,  certain  portions  of  the 
victim  were  burned  upon  the  altar,  and 
that  the  remainder  of  the  flesh  was  eaten 
by  the  offerer,  and  those  who  were  asso- 
ciated with  him  by  participation  in  the 
spirit  of  the  sacrifice.  The  method  of 
the  Peace-offering  in  its  great  features 
would  so  far  answer  to  the  earliest  re^- 
corded  heathen  sacrifices,  in  which  the 
thighs,  enveloped  in  the  caul  and  masses 
of  fat,  were  the  chief  portions  burnt  upon 
the  altar,  while  the  other  parts  of  the 
victim  furnished  materials  for  a feast  k 
It  may  however  be  doubted  whether  the 
fat  in  the  Homeric  sacrifices  had  any 
special  significance,  since  we  find  the  fat 
of  animals  employed  to  cover  the  body 
of  Patroclus  on  the  pyre  merely  in  order 
that  thefcorpse  might  be  consumed  more 
quickly  and  completely”.  The  whole 
Burnt-offering  does  not  appear  to  be 
distinctly  named  in  any  Greek  writer 
before  the  time  of  Xenophon”,  though  it 
may  probably  have  been  offered  in  much 
earlier  times. 

§ xiv.  In  the  scriptural  records  there 
is  no  trace  either  of  the  Sin-offering,  or 
of  any  special  treatment  of  the  blood  of 
victims,  before  the  time  of  Moses.  We 
cannot  however  imagine  a single  act  of 
sacrifice  to  have  been  performed  since 
the  first  transgression,  without  a con- 
sciousness of  sin  in  the  mind  of  the 
worshipper.  Earnest  devotion  to  a Holy 
God  in  a fallen  creature  must  necessa- 
rily include  a sense  of  sin  and  unworthi- 
ness. It  is  not  to  be  imagined  that 
Noah  made  his  offerings  at  the  foot 
of  Ararat,  without  the  sin  of  past  gene- 
rations being  present  to  his  mind,  ac- 

® Thomson,  ‘ Bampton  T^ectures,’  p.  40. 

7 Horn.  ‘11.’  I.  45H,  II.  421,  XI.  770;  /Esch. 
‘Prom.’  496;  Soph.  ‘Antig.’  xoio,  &c.  In  ‘II.’ 
I.  315  there  is  no  reference  to  a feast. 

« ‘ 11.’  XXIII.  168. 

See  ‘Anab.’  vii.  8.  § 4;  ‘Cyrop.’  VIII.  3. 
24.  • 


THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


505 


companied  by  awe  at  the  thought  that 
he  was  a brother  of  the  same  race,  with 
a consciousness  of  the  same  tendencies 
to  evil  in  his  own  heart.  In  the  account 
of  the  .sacrifices  of  Job,  the  idea  of 
atonement  is  expressly  connected  with 
the  Burnt-offerings  h But  the  feeling 
which  most  prominently  found  its  expres- 
sion in  the  Burnt-offerings  of  Noah,  must 
have  been  of  a different  kind.  The  sense 
of  present  deliverance,  of  thankfulness 
deeper  than  words,  of  complete  self- 
surrender to  the  solemn  bond  now  laid 
upon  him  in  the  Covenant,  must  rather 
have  been  figured  in  the  victims  which 
were  sent  up  in  the  flame  of  the  Altar  as 
a sweet  savour  to  Jehovah. 

There  is  certainly  no  countenance 
whatever  to  be  found  in  the  Scriptures 
for  the  notion  of  de  Maistre^  and  other 
writers  of  more  recent  date,  that  the  fire 
of  the  Altar  s^anbolized  retribution  for  sin. 

§ XV.  The  first  instance  of  the  blood 
of  a sacrifice  being  noticed  in  any  way 
occurs  in  the  account  of  the  institution 
of  the  Passover^  It  is  there  commanded 
that  the  blood  of  the  Paschal  lamb 
should  be  sprinkled  on  the  door-posts 
of  the  houses  of  the  Israelites,  as  a 
mark  that  the  destroyer  might  not  enter 
when  he  was  smiting  the  firstborn  of  the 
Egyptians.  No  further  hint  is  given  of 
its  sacrificial  meaning. 

The  next  notice  of  blood  is  in  con- 
nexion with  the  Burnt-offerings  and 
Peace-offerings  of  the  Covenant  of  Sinai 
Moses  having  built  an  altar  and  twelve 
pillars,  according  to  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel,  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain  “sent 
young  men  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
which  offered  burnt  offerings  and  sacri- 
ficed peace-offerings  of  oxen  unto  the 
Lord,”  and  “took  half  the  blood  and 
put  it  in  basons  ; and  half  of  the  blood 
he  sprinkled  (threw^)  on  the  altar.”  After 
reading  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  the 
people  giving  their  assent  to  it,  he  took 
the  blood  in  the  basons  and  “ sprinkled 
(threw)  it  on  them,  and  said.  Behold  the 
blood  of  the  covenant  which  the  Lord 

* Jobi.  5,  xlii.  7,  8.  Cf.  Lev.  i.  4;  see  also 
§ xvi.  ^ 

^ ‘ Eclaircissement  sur  les  sacrifices,’  p.  234. 

^ Ex.  xii.  7,  22,  23. 

^ Ex.  xxiv.  4 — 8.  See  notes  in  loc. 

® The  blood  was  not  sprinkled  but  cast  forth 
out  of  the  basons.  See  § vi. 


hath  made  with  you  concerning  all  these 
words.”  Cf  Heb.  ix.  19,  20,  xiii.  20.  On 
this  occasion  we  find  the  first  mention  of 
throiving  the  blood  upon  the  Altar  which 
became  the  established  mode  in  the 
Burnt-offerings,  Peace-offerings,  and  Tres- 
pass-offerings, but  not  in  the  Sin-offer- 
ings'’'. 

With  this  rite  should  be  compared  the 
use  of  the  blood  of  the  Ram  of  consecra- 
tion which  was  offered  in  the  Consecra- 
tion of  the  priests  after  the  Law  of  the 
offerings  had  been  given.  The  ram  was 
essentially  a Peace-offering,  though  it  was 
in  some  respects  peculiar.  The  greater 
part  of  its  blood  was  thrown  upon  the 
Altar,  but  a portion  of  it  was  taken  by 
Moses  to  be  put  on  the  persons  of  the 
priests  and  to  be  sprinkled  upon  their 
garments  k 

It  should  be  observed  that  the  treat- 
ment of  the  blood  in  these  two  ceremo- 
nies was  very  different  from  that  which 
was  practised  in  the  Sin-ofterings.  Here 
a portion  of  the  blood  was  applied  to 
the  persons  of  those  who  were  especially 
concerned  in  the  sacrifice,  while  the  re- 
mainder was  thrown  upon  the  Altar : in 
the  Sin-offering,  a portion  was  offered  to 
the  Lord  by  being  put  upon  the  horns 
of  the  Altar,  and  on  certain  occasions, 
by  being  sprinkled  within  the  Taber- 
nacle, while  the  rest  was  merely  poured 
away  at  the  base  of  the  Altar k 

We  are  left  in  no  doubt  as  to  the 
sacrificial  meaning  of  the  blood.  As 
the  material  vehicle  of  the  life  of  the 
victim,  it  was  the  symbol  of  the  life  of 
the  offerer.  In  contrast  with  the  flesh 
and  bones  it  expressed  in  a distinct 
manner  the  immaterial  principle  which 
survives  death.  This  is  distinctly  assign- 
ed as  the  reason  for  its  appointed  use 
m the  rites  of  atonement In  the  two 
cases  of  Consecration  (and  probably  in 
the  case  of  the  Paschal  lamb)  the  blood 
of  the  sacrifice  appears  to  have  stood 
for  the  collective  life  of  those  who  were 
to  be  consecrated.  Having  been  accept- 
ed by  Jehovah  in  the  presentation  of  the 
victim  before  the  Altar,  it  expressed,  in 
the  earlier  instance,  that  the  life  of  the 
chosen  nation,  and,  in  the  latter  in- 

® See  § vi. 

^ See  Lev.  viii.  23,  24,  30. 

® Lev.  iv.  6,  7,  17,  18,  25,  &c.  xvi.  18,  &C. 

^ See  Lev.  xvii.  11,  with  the  note. 


5o6  introduction  TO 


stance,  that  the  life  of  the  priests  in 
their  official  calling,  had  been  made 
holy ; and  now  in  the  drops  applied  to 
their  persons  it  symbolized  that  the  con- 
secrated life  was  given  back  to  them 
in  order  that  it  should  be  devoted  to  the 
service  of  the  Lord. 

It  is  evident  that  in  these  instances  the 
ideas  of  Consecration  and  Dedication  are 
signified,  rather  than  the  idea  of  Atone- 
ment. Had  the  Covenant  sacrifice  at 
Mount  Sinai  been  a solitary  instance,  it 
might  indeed  be  supposed  that,  the  Sin- 
offering  not  having  as  yet  been  instituted, 
atonement  was  ascribed  to  the  blood  of 
the  Burnt-offering,  as  it  appears  to  have 
been  in  the  sacrifices  of  Job.  But  in  the 
Consecration  of  the  priests  any  such  no- 
tion is  precluded.  In  this  ceremony  a Sin- 
offering  was  the  first  victim  offered,  and 
its  blood  was  passed  by  for  that  of  the 
Peace-offering h We  are  therefore  brought 
to  the  conclusion  that  “ the  blood  of  the 
covenant”  was,  both  in  form  and  signifi- 
cance, the  blood  of  the  Burnt-offering 
and  the  Peace-offering,  not  that  of  the 
Sin-offering  ^ 

§ xvi.  The  Sin-offering  is  to  be  re- 
garded as  a creation  of  the  Law,  It  was 
the  voice  of  the  Law  that  a^wakened  the 
distinct  consciousness  of  sin  in  the  in- 
dividual mindk  This  clearer  develop- 
ment of  the  nature  of  man’s  struggle 
upon  the  earth  required  to  be  embodied 
in  a new  form.  The  institution  of  the 
Sin-offering  appears  in  this  way  as  a 
necessary  consequence  of  the  giving  of 
the  Lavv. 

In  the  perfected  sacrificial  system,  the 
three  classes  of  offerings  are  to  be  re- 
garded as  representing  distinct  aspects 
of  divine  truth  connected  with  man’s  re- 
lation to  Jehovah.  But  it  is  important 
to  observe  that  in  no  sacrifice  was  the 
idea  of  the  Burnt-offering  left  out.  Of 
every  victim  which  was  offered  an  ap- 
pointed portion  was  sent  up  to  Jehovah 
in  the  flame  of  the  Altar : the  ashes  of 
“the  continual  Burnt-offering”  of  the 

‘ Lev.  viii.  14,  23. 

^ Hebr  ix.  iS — 22,  x.  29,  &c. 

2 The  only  otncr  instances  in  which  the  Law 
speaks  of  the  application  of  the  blood  of  animals 
to  the  person,  are  in  Lev.  xiv.  7,  14  ; where  see 
the  notes. 

* Korn.  iii.  20,  vii.  7.  See  ‘Note*  on  the  Ten 
Commandments  ’ after  Ex.  xx.  i — 17.  § v. 


morning  and  evening  service  were  never 
quenched  ^ The  central  idea  of  sacri- 
ficial worship  was  thus  kept  constantly 
on  view.  On  the  other  hand,  the  truth 
that  every  sacrifice,  for  the  Israelite  to 
whom  the  Law  had  been  revealed,  must 
be  based  upon  Atonement,  is  declared  in 
the  words  that  his  Burnt-offering  “shall 
be  accepted  for  him  to  make  atonement 
for  him^” 

The  natural  order  of  victims  in  the 
sacrificial  service  of  the  Law  was,  first 
the  Sin-offering,  then  the  Burnt-offering, 
and  last  the  Peace-offering  k This  an- 
swers to  the  spiritual  process  through 
which  the  worshipper  had  to  pass.  He 
had  transgressed  the  Law,  and  he  needed 
the  atonement  signified  by  the  Sin-of- 
fering : if  his  offering  had  been  made  in 
truth  and  sincerity,  he  could  then  offer 
himself  to  the  Lord  as  an  accepted  per- 
son, as  a sweet  savour,  in  the  Burnt- 
offering**;  and  in  virtue  of  this  accept- 
ance, he  could  enjoy  communion  with 
the  Lord  and  with  his  brethren  in  the 
Peace-offering.  But  when  the  occasion 
was  one  in  which  the  consideration  ot 
personal  holiness  was  subordinate  to  that 
of  the  consecration  of  the  nation,  as  was 
the  case  in  the  offerings  of  the  princes 
at  the  dedication  of  the  Altar,  and  in 
the  rite  for  reconsecrating  the  Nazarite 
who  had  been  ceremonially,  not  morally, 
defiled,  the  order  was  changed  and  the 
Burnt-offering  was  sacrificed  before  the 
Sin-offering 

The  main  additions  made  to  the 
ritual  of  sacrifice  by  the  Levitical  Law 
consisted  in  the  establishment  of  one 
national  Altar  the  ins.titution  of  the 
national  Priesthood*',  and  all  those  par- 
ticulars that  were  peculiar  to  the  Sin- 
offerings  and  the  Trespass-offerings,  ' 

While  therefore  the  essential  idea  of  all 
sacrifice  continued  to  be  the  same  which 
had  been  conveyed  in  the  Burnt-offer- 

® See  Exod.  xxix,  31 — 42.  The  importance 
of  the  fact  here  noticed  is  shown  in  the  expres- 
sions used  in  Lev.  iii.  5 (see  note),  iv.  35,  vi.  9, 
12,  &c. 

Lev.  i.  4. 

^ See  Lev.  viii.  14 — 22,  ix.  8 — 14,  15 — 22, 
xii.  8,  xiv,  19,  20. 

® See  Ps.  li.  19. 

® Niim.  vi.  I4,vii.i5 — 17,  &c.  Cf.  Ezek.xlv.  17. 

See  ‘Note  on  the  Sanctuary  as  a whole’  after 
Ex.  xl. 

" See  preliminary  note  to  Ex.  xxviii. 


TO  THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS^. 


ings  and  Peace-offerings  of  the  patri- 
archal ages,  the  Sin-offering  embodied 
the  expression  of  a distinct  idea  in  order 
to  meet  the  more  complicated  aspect  of 
human  nature,  which  had  been  revealed 
by  the  giving  of  the  Law  on  Mount 
Sinai.  The  fullest  and  most  intense 
setting  forth  of  the  relation  which  grace 
was  to  produce  between  the  Lord  and 
the  worshipper  was  still  reserved  for  the 
Burnt-offering.  But  as  the  knowledge 
of  personal  sin  had  been  more  clearly 
unveiled  in  the  Law,  the  believer  be- 
came conscious  that  sin  was  separating 
him  from  Jehovah,  and  that  it  must  be 
removed  before  he  could  attain  to  a 
state  of  acceptance  \ Sinner  as  he  felt 
himself  to  be,  the  Law  allowed  him  to 
bring  his  victim  to  the  door  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, to  present  it  before  the  Lord,  to 
slay  it,  and  to  cut  it  in  pieces.  So  far 
the  ceremony  was  his  own  act : so  far 
it  was  the  same  with  the  Sin-offering  as 
with  the  Burnt-offering  and  the  Peace- 
offering. But  now  came  the  necessity  of 
a mediator,  of  one  who  had  been  con- 
secrated to  perfect  the  work  for  him. 
The  priest  took  the  victiiff  thus  far  pre- 
pared entirely  out  of  the  hands  of  the 
worshipper.  This  was  done,  according 
to  the  Law,  with  the  Burnt-offering  as 
well  as  with  the  Sin-offering;  but  it  is 
evident  that  the  meaning  of  the  priest’s 
taking  part  in  the  ceremony  belonged 
with  more  peculiar  significance  to  the 
latter  ^ When  the  sacrifice  was  a Sin- 
offering,  the  first  duty  of  the  priest  was 
in  certain  prescribed  cases  to  sprinkle  a 
portion  of  the  blood  within  the  Taber- 
nacle, and  in  all  cases  to  put  some  of 
the  blood  upon  the  horns  of  one  of  the 
Altars.  It  has  been  conjectured  that, 
as  the  horns  were  the  highest  part  of 
the  Altar,  this  act  signified  a near  ap- 
proach to  the  Lord  of  heaven,  in  token 
that  the  offering  was  approved,  and 
that  acceptance  was  ready  for  the  of- 
ferer. He  then  had  to  place  in  the 
fire  of  the  Altar  the  fat  portions  of 
the  victim  which  were  acknowledged  as 
a “sweet  savour”  to  the  Lord^  The 
penitent  worshipper  had  now  recovered 
his  position  by  the  atonement  of  the 

^ See  ‘ Note  on  The  Ten  Commandments’ 
(Exod*  XX. ) § V. 

2 See  Lev.  iv.  24 — 26,  34,  35,  v.  6,  8 — 10; 
cf.vii.  29,  30,  also  note  on  vi.  25.  ^ Lev.  iv.  31. 


507 

Sin-offering,  as  one  who  might  claim 
acceptance ; but  the  full  expression  of 
self-dedication  as  a condition  was  still 
looked  for  at  his  hands  in  another  sa- 
crificial act,  in  offering  his  whole  Burnt- 
offering. 

With  the  exception  of  the  parts  which, 
in  all  the  animal  offerings,  were  assigned 
to  the  Altar,  the  whole  of  the  flesh  of  the 
Sin-offering  was  given  for  the  use  of  the 
priests  as  the  servants  of  the  Sanctuary. 
It  was  removed  from  all  ordinary  use  or 
contact,  it  could  be  eaten  by  the  priests 
only  within  the  holy  precinct,  it  was  pro- 
nounced “ most  holy,”  because  the  offer- 
ing the  life  which  had  dwelt  in  it  upon  the 
horns  of  the  Altar  had  specially  conse- 
crated it  to  the  purpose  of  atonementb 

But  an  Israelite  who  had  studied  the 
Divine  Law  must  have  perceived  a 
mystery  and  a contradiction  in  the  per- 
fectness and  freedom  from  guilt  of  the 
animal  which  he  brought  as  his  Sin- 
offering.  On  the  one  hand  he  must 
have  felt  that  an  offering  without  blemish 
was  the  only  one  which  could  be  fit  for 
the  Altar  of  J ehovah : on  the  other  hand, 
he  must  have  felt  that  it  could  not  fairly 
represent  himself,  in  his  actual  condi- 
tion, as  bringing  his  offering  expressly 
because  he  was  burdened  with  the  con- 
sciousness of  sin  and  imperfection®.  He 
must  also  have  learned  from  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Law,  in  prescribing  what 
part  of  the  ceremony  was  to  be  per- 
formed by  the  priest,  that  he  could  not 
be  his  own  atoner.  He  was  told  that  the 
priest  should  “make  atonement  for  him®.” 
In  these  particulars,  which  in  spite  of 
prophetic  teaching  must  have  been  diffi- 
cult and  obscure  to  him,  we  cap  now 
clearly  trace  the  forecast  shadows  of  the 
spotless  Saviour  who  was  to  come,  to 
stand  for  the  sinful  race  as  its  head,  to 
make  the  offering  of  Himself  as  both 
priest  and  victim,  to  perfect  the  work  of 
redemption  by  Himself,  and  so  to  enter 
into  the  presence  of  God  for  us  as  a 
sweet  savourb 

§ xvii.  It  was  not  merely  by  the  in- 
stitution of  another  kind  of  sacrifice  that 
the  Law  set  forth  its  new  development 
of  the  history  of  man’s  spiritual  struggle; 

See  on  Lev.  vi.  25.  Cf.  xvii.  11. 

5 Ps.  li.  17. 

® Lev.  iv.  20,  26,  V.  6,  vi.  7,  xii.  8,  &c.  &c. 

^ Heb.  X.  19,  20,  21. 


5o8  introduction  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


it  carried  out  the  same  lesson  still  m»re 
fully  by  an  addition  to  the  great  cere- 
monial observances  of  the  year.  The 
three  festivals  of  Unleavened  bread, 
Pentecost,  and  Tabernacles,  with  the 
Feast  of  trumpets  and  the  New  moons, 
may  have  been  based  upon  patriarchal 
usages,  whatever  additional  meaning 
they  may  have  received  from  Moses  \ 
But  the  Day  of  Atonement  took  its  rise 
in  the  working  out  of  the  Law  itself. 
Its  ceremonial  was  a showing  forth  in 
distinct  analytical  detail  of  the  truth 
which  was  compendiously  expressed  in 
the  single  rite  of  the  Sin-offering^ 

§ xviii.  A different  view  from  that 
here  given  of  the  fundamental  idea  of  sa- 
crifice, and  of  the  relation  in  which  the 
Sin-offering  stood  to  the  entire  sacrificial 
system,  has  been  very  generally  held.  It 
has  been  said  that  “ the  first  word  of  the 
original  man  was  probably  a prayer,  and 
the  first  action  of  fallen  man  a sacri- 
ficed” In  accordance  with  this  view  the 
key  to  the  idea  of  sacrifice  has  been  sup- 
posed to  be  given  in  the  passage  that 
sets  forth  the  sacrificial  significance  of 
the  blood  in  making  atonement — “I 
have  given  it  to  you  upon  the  altar  to 
make  an  atonement  for  your  souls d” 
Expiation  has  thus  been  regarded  as  the 
essential  meaning  of  sacrifice.  But,  as 
we  have  seen,  the  blood  seems  not  to 
have  been  recognized  in  the  patriarchal 
sacrifices;  it  held  but  a very  subordinate 
place  under  the  Law  in  the  Burnt-offer- 
ing and  the  Peace-offering,  no  place  at 
all  in  the  Meat-offering.  It  has  been 
said,  not  without  reason,  that  sacrifices 
“ might  have  been  offered  by  man  even 
before  the  fall  as  certainly  as  it  was  his 
duty  to'  devote  himself  to  God,  to  thank 
Him  for  His  benefits,  and  to  vow  to 
walk  in  His  waysd”  We  may  take  still 
higher  ground.  If  we  accept  the  ex- 
pression, “ the  Lamb  slain  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world””  as  actually  de- 
noting the  highest  truth  of  which  cere- 
monial sacrifice  is  the  symbol,  the  Son 

^ See  notes  on  T^ev.  xxiii. 

' See  notes  on  Lev.  xvi. 

^ Von  Lasaulx,  ‘Die  Siihnopferder Griechen 
nnd  Rdmer  und  ihr  verhiiltniss  zu  dein  einen  auf 
Golgotha,’  p.  I. 

Lev.  xvii.  1 1. 

I lengstenbcrg,  ‘The  Sacrifices  of  Holy 
Scripture,’  in  Clark’s  Theological  Library. 

Kev.  xiii.  8.  Cf.  i Let.  i.  j8 — 20. 


of  God  Himself  realized  the  meaning  of 
the  Burnt-offering  before  the  actual  de- 
velopment of  sin  in  the  world. 

Hengstenberg  appears  to  be  right  in 
objecting  to  the  line  which  has  been  taken 
by  de  Maistre^,  von  Lasaulx,  and  others, 
in  endeavouring  to  trace  in  the  records 
of  heathen  sacrifice  the  significance  of 
the  blood  of  victims  as  an  atonement 
for  sin.  Instances  may  indeed  be  easily 
found  of  blood  having  been  regarded  as 
a propitiation  to  a hostile  demon,  or  as 
a healing  charm;  but  we  seem  to  seek  in 
vain  for  an  instance  in  which  the  blood, 
as  the  natural  symbol  of  the  soul,  was 
offered  as  an  atoning  sacrifice”. 

§ xix.  Another  view,  widely  different 
from  the  one  that  has  just  been  men- 
tioned, has  been  revived  by  some  mo- 
dern biblical  critics”.  It  has  been  im- 
agined that  the  first  sacrifices  were  en- 
tirely eucharistic  and  consisted  wholly  of 
vegetable  substances.  This  was  the  no- 
tion of  Plato'”,  Porphyry",  and  other 
heathen  philosophers.  Many,  starting 
from  nearly  the  same  ground  of  thought, 
have  conceived  that  the  first  sacrifices 
were  Peace-  offerings  connected  with  social 
feasts,  such  as  are  described  in  Homer 
It  is  needless  to  point  out  that  these 
theories  are  directly  opposed  to  the  his- 
torical development  of  the  subject  in 
the  Pentateuch;  hardly  necessary  to  ob- 
serve that  the  Burnt-offering  and  the 
Sin-offering  could  never  have  originated 
in  any  mere  eucharistic  service,  unless 
we  are  to  regard  them  as  gross  corrup- 
tions of  the  original  institution^”. 

^ ‘ Eclaii'cissement,’  &c.  p.  232. 

® See  on  Lev.  xvii.  ir.  In  the  instance  of 
the  ancient  Persians,  on  which  de  JMaistre  (p.  260) 
and  others  have  strongly  rested,  in  which  the 
blood  seems  to  be  clearly  recognized  as  the 
symbol  of  the  soul,  we  are  told  that  the  victim 
Avas  cut  into  pieces,  the  flesh  being  distributed 
amongst  the  worshippers,  and  that  the  blood 
i^vxv)  was  given  up  to  God  as  the  only  part  he 
Avould  accept  (Strabo,  xv.  p.  732).  But,  though 
neither  altar  nor  fire  appears  to  have  been  used, 
the  ideas  here  expressed  are  surely  those  of  the 
Burnt-offering  and  the  Peace-offering  rather  than 
of  the  vSin-offering. 

^ Especially  by  Knobel. 

^0  ‘ De  Leggn’vi.  22.  ‘De  Abst’ II.  5,  27. 

See  1;  xiii. 

Plutarch  seems  to  have  perceived  this  diffi- 
culty. I le  supposed  that  the  first  offerings  were 
of  vegetables,  but  imagined  that  animal  sacrifices 
were  instituted  at  the  command  of  an  oracle. 
‘Sympos.’  VIII.  8,  3. 


THE  THIRD  BOOK  OF  MOSES, 


CALLED 

LEVITICUS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

I The  burnt  offerings.  3 Of  the  herd,  10  of  the 
flocks,  14  of  the  folds. 

AND  the  Lord  called  unto  Mo- 
ses,  and  spake  unto  him  out  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
saying, 


The  Offerings  for  the  Altar. 

Chap.  I— VII. 

Chap,  I.  1.  the  Lord']  In  the  Hebrew 
text  of  Leviticus,  J ehovah  is  the  name  by 
which  God  is  always  called,  except  when  the 
word  Elohim  is  used  with  a possessive  pro- 
noun, so  as  to  designate  Him  as  the  God  of 
the  chosen  people  (Lev.  ii.  13;  xi.  45;  xviii. 
21;  xix.  12,  14,  32,  &c.).  Neither  Adondi 
nor  Shaddai  occur  throughout  the  book.  (See 
on  Exod.  vi,  3.) 

the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation]  Rather, 
the  Tent  of  meeting.  See  on  Ex.  xl.  § II. 
When  Jehovah  was  about  to  give  His  peo- 
ple the  law  of  the  Ten  Commandments  (Exod. 
xix.  3)  He  called  to  Moses  from  the  top  of 
Mount  Sinai  in  thunders  and  lightnings  and 
a thick  cloud.  M^hen  He  was  now  about  to 
give  ^em  the  laws  by  which  their  formal 
acts  of  worship  were  to  be  regulated.  He 
called  to  Moses  out  of  the  Tabernacle  which 
had  just  been  constructed  at  the  foot  of  the 
mountain.  The  promise  which  He  had  made 
to  Moses  was  now  fulfilled : — “ And  there 
I will  meet  with  thee,  and  I will  commune 
with  thee  from  above  the  mercy  seat,  from 
between  the  cherubims,  which  are  upon  the 
ark  of  the  testimony,  of  all  things  which 
I will  give  thee  in  commandment  unto  the 
children  of  Israel”  (Exod.  xxv.  22). 

^ 2.  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel]  The 
directions  for  the  different  kinds  of  sacrifice 
contained  in  ch.  i.  2 — iii.  17,  are  addressed  to 
the  people,  and  contain  such  instructions  as 
were  required  for  persons  who  voluntarily 
offered  sacrifice  (see  Introd.  § ii.).  There 
are  other  directions  concerning  each  sort  of 
offering,  formally  addressed  to  the  priests  in 
ch.  vi.  8 — vii.  21.  It  is  important  to  observe 
that  these  first  instructions  are  addressed  ex- 
VOL.  I. 


2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them.  If  any  man 
of  you  bring  an  offering  unto  the 
Lord,  ye  shall  bring  your  offering  of 
the  cattle,  even  of  the  herd,  and  of 
the  flock. 

3 If  his  offering  be  a burnt  sacrifice 


pressly  to  the  individual  who  felt  the  need 
of  sacrifice  on  his  own  account.  They  were 
not  delivered  through  the  priests,  nor  had  the 
officiating  priest  any  choice  as  to  what  he 
was  to  do.  He  was  only  to  examine  the 
victim  to  see  that  it  was  perfect  (xxii.  17 — 24), 
and  to  perform  other  strictly  prescribed 
duties.  The  act  of  offering  was  to  be  volun- 
tary on  the  part  of  the  worshipper,  but  the 
mode  of  doing  it  was  in  every  point  defined 
by  the  Law.  The  presenting  of  the  victim  at 
the  entrance  of  the  Tabernacle  was  in  fact  a 
symbol  of  the  free  will  submitting  itself  to 
the  Law  of  the  Lord.  The  obligation  to  offer 
lay  beyond  the  sphere  of  the  mere  ceremonial 
law.  Such  acts  of  sacrifice  are  to  be  distin- 
guished from  the  public  offerings,  and  those 
ordained  for  individuals  on  special  occasions 
(see  on  iv.  2),  which  belonged  to  the  religious 
education  of  the  nation. 

offering]  Heb.  korbdn.  (See  Introd.  § ii.) 
ye  shall  bring  your  offering  of  the  cattle,  e'ven 
of  the  herd,  and  of  the  flock]  O ur  version  here 
follows  the  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  and  Luther. 
But  the  Hebrew  text  should  rather  be  ren- 
dered, If  any  man  of  you  bring  an  of- 
fering to  Jehovah,  from  the  beasts, 
from  the  herd  or  from  the  flock  ye 
shall  bring  your  offering.  The  purpose 
of  the  words  is  to  define  which  kinds  of 
beasts  are  to  be  offered.  (See  Introd.  § ii.) 
The  expression  answers  to  that  respecting 
birds  in  n).  14,  and  that  respecting  vegetable 
offerings  ch.  ii.  i. 

The  Burnt-offerings,  i.  3 — 17. 

The  Burnt-offering  from  the  Herd. 
i-  3—9- 

3.  burnt  sacrifice]  Heb.  "'oldh.  See  Introd. 

§ iii. 


K K 


510 


LEVITICUS.  I. 


[v.  4—9. 


^ Exod. 
29.  10. 


of  the  herd,  let  him  offer  a male  with- 
out blemish : he  shall  offer  it  of  his 
own  voluntary  will  at  the  door  of  the 
■tabernacle  of  the  congregation  before 
the  Lord. 

4 ® And  he  shall  put  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  the  burnt  offering;  and  it 
shall  be  accepted  for  him  to  make 
atonement  for  him. 

5 And  he  shall  kill  the  bullock 
before  the  Lord  : and  the  priests, 
Aaron’s  sons,  shall  bring  the  blood, 
and  sprinkle  the  blood  round  about 


upon  the  altar  that  is  by  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

6 And  he  shall  flay  the  burnt  of- 
fering, and  cut  it  into  his  pieces. 

7 And  the  sons  of  Aaron  the  priest 
shall  put  fire  upon  the  altar,  and  lay 
the  wood  in  order  upon  the  fire : 

8 And  the  priests,  Aaron’s  sons, 
shall  lay  the  parts,  the  head,  and  the 
fat,  in  order  upon  the  wood  that  is  on 
the  fire  which  is  upon  the  altar : 

9 But  his  inwards  and  his  legs 
shall  he  wash  in  water:  and  the 


a male  ^without  blemish~\  See  Introd.  § iv. 
Males  were  required  in  most  offerings,  as  the 
stronger  sex  which  takes  precedence  of  the 
other.  But  females  were  allowed  in  Peace- 
offerings  (Lev,  iii.  i,  6),  and  were  expressly- 
prescribed  in  the  Sin-offerings  of  the  common 
people.  (Lev.  iv.  28,  32,  v.  6.) 

of  his  own  'voluntary  Ty/V/]  The  English 
version  is  supported  by  Grotius  and  several 
of  the  older  critics.  But  most  interpreters, 
ancient  and  modern,  give  it  the  meaning,  for 
his  acceptance;  that  is,  that  he  may  be  accept- 
ed. The  latter  part  of  the  verse  might  be 
thus  translated:  at  the  entrance  of  the 
Tent  of  meeting  shall  he  offer  it-that 
he  may  be  accepted  before  Jehovah. 
(See  on  'v.  4.)  The  Hebrew  phrase  here  used 
is  rightly  translated  in  several  places  in  our 
Bible  (Exod.  xxviii.  38;  Lev.  xxii.  20,  21, 
xxiii.  II,  &c.),  but  in  others,  it  is  rendered  as 
it  is  here.  (Lev.  xix.  5,  xxii.  19,  29.) 

at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre~ 
gation']  Wherever  these  words  occur  they 
should  be  rendered,  at  the  entrance  of 
the  Tent  of  meeting.  See  preceding  note. 
The  place  denoted  is  that  part  of  the  court 
which  lay  in  front  of  the  Tabernacle,  in 
which  stood  the  brazen  Altar  and  the  laver, 
and  where  alone  sacrifices  could  be  offered. 
See  Note  on  Ex.  xxvi.  § VI. 

4.  Jlnd  he  shall  put  his  hand  upon  the  head 
of  the  burnt  offering']  The  ceremony  appears 
never  to  have  been  omitted  in  the  private 
sacrifices  of  quadrupeds  (see  on  'v.  10  and 
Introd.  § V.).  By  it  the  sacrificer  identified 
himself  witli  his  victim.  Introd.  § xvi. 

and  it  shall  be  accepted]  The  word  here 
used  belongs  to  the  same  root  as  that  in  'v.  3, 
to  which  it  evidently  answers. 

to  make  atonement  for  him]  This  phrase 
belongs  more  especially  to  the  Sin-offerings 
and  the  Trespass-offerings.  (Lev,  iv,  20,  26, 
.11,  35,  V.  16,  18,  vi.  7,  &c.)  It  is  not  used 
in  reference  to  the  Peace-offerings,  and  but 
rarely  in  reference  to  the  Burnt-offerings.  It 
should  be  noticed  that  it  is  here  introduced 


in  close  connection  with  the  imposition  of 
hands  by  the  worshipper,  not,  as  it  is  when 
it  refers  to  the  Sin-offering,  with  the  special 
functions  of  the  priest,  iv.  26,  35.  See  Introd. 
§§  xiv,  xvi. 

5.  And  he  shall  kill  the  bullock]  See 
Introd.  § V. 

the  bullock]  Strictly,  the  son  of  the  bull^  a 
common  Hebrew  periphrasis  for  a young  ox. 
(See  Introd.  § iv.)  In  like  manner  young 
pigeons  are  called  in  the  Hebrew  sons  of  the 
pigeon.  (Lev,  i.  14,  v.  7,  ii,  xii.  6,  &c.) 

''before  the  Lord]  i.e.  before  the  Taber- 
nacle. 

sprinkle  the  blood]  Rather,  throw  the 
blood.  See  Introd.  § vi. 

by  the  door  of  the  tabernacle]  at  the  en- 
trance of  the  Tent. 

6.  And  he  shall  fay]  The  sacrificer,  or 
his  assistant,  had  to  skin  and  cut  up  the  vic- 
tim. The  hide  was  the  perquisite  of  the 
officiating  priest.  (Lev.  vii.  8.) 

his  pieces]  That  is,  its  proper  pieces,  the 
parts  into  which  it  was  usual  for  a sacrificed 
animal  to  be  divided. 

7.  the  sons  of  Aaron]  i.e.  the  common 
priests. 

put  fre  upon  the  altar]  Knobel  observes 
that  tins  must  specifically  refer  to  the  first 
Burnt-offering  on  the  newly  constructed 
Altar.  The  rule  was  afterwards  to  be,  “ The 
fire  shall  ever  be  burning  upon  the  altar;  it 
shall  never  go  out,”  Lev.  vi.  13. 

8.  It  would  seem  that  the  parts  of  the 
victim  were  then  salted  by  the  priest  in  con- 
formity with  the  rule,  “ with  all  thine  offer- 
ings thou  shalt  offer  salt”  (Lev.  ii.  13;  Ezek. 
xliii.  24;  Mark  ix.  49),  and  placed  in  order 
with  the  wood  upon  the  altar.  See  Introd. 
§ vii. 

the  fat]  See  Introd.  § viii. 

9.  his  in^uards  and  his  legs  shall  he  <wash 
in  water]  The  parts  which  were  washed  ap- 
pear not  to  have  been  the  whole  of  the  vis- 


V.  10 12.] 


LEVITICUS.  I. 


511 


priest  shall  burn  all  on  the  altar,  to 
he  a burnt  sacrifice,  an  offering  made 
by  fire,  of  a sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord. 

10  ^ And  if  his  offering  he  of  the 
flocks,  namely^  of  the  sheep,  or  of  the 
goats,  for  a burnt  sacrifice;  he  shall 
bring  it  a male  without  blemish. 


1 1 And  he  shall  kill  it  on  the 
side  of  the  altar  northward  before  the 
Lord  : and  the  priests,  Aaron’s  sons, 
shall  sprinkle  his  blood  round  about 
upon  the  altar. 

12  And  he  shall  cut  it  into  his 
pieces,  with  his  head  and  his  fat : and 
the  priest  shall  lay  them  in  order  on 


cera,  with  the  whole  of  the  legs;  but  only  the 
stomach  and  bowels,  and  the  feet,  divided 
from  the  carcase  at  the  knee-joint.  The 
Septuagint  has  ra  eyKoiXia  Ka\  oi  nodes,  and 
the  Vulgate,  intestina  et  pedes.  With  these 
agree  Onkelos,  Philo,  Josephus,  and  most 
modern  authorities. 

the  priest  shall  burn]  The  verb  here  trans- 
lated hum  (^hikfir),  is  applied  exclusively 
to  the  burning  of  the  incense,  of  the  lights 
of  the  Tabernacle,  and  of  the  offerings  on 
the  Altar.  The  primary  meaning  of  its 
root  seems  to  be  to  exhale  odour  (Gesen., 
Fiirst).  It  is  in  some  places  rendered  in  the 
margin  of  our  Bible,  “to  cause  to  ascend” 
(Exod.  XXX.  8;  Lev.  xxiv.  a,  &c.).  The 
word  for  burning  in  a common  way  is  a 
quite  different  one  (sdraph),  and  this  is  ap- 
plied to  the  burning  of  those  parts  of  victims 
which  were  burned  without  the  camp  (Lev. 
iv.  12,  21;  Num.  xix.  5,  &c.).  The  import- 
ance of  the  distinction  is  great  in  its  bearing 
on  the  meaning  of  the  Burnt-offering  (see 
Introd.  § xiii.).  The  substance  of  the  victim 
was  regarded  not  as  something  to  be  con- 
sumed, but  as  an  offering  of  sweet-smelling 
savour  sent  up  in  the  flame  to  Jehovah.  The 
two  words  are  distinguished  in  the  LXX., 
the  Vulg.,  Geneva  Fr.,  De  Wette,  Herxh., 
and  other  versions.  Mr  Sharpe  renders  the 
sacrificial  word  “ to  burn  as  incense.” 

a burnt  sacrifice,  an  offering  made  hy  fire] 
There  is  no  tautology  in  the  original,  which 
might  be  rendered  an  offering  sent  upwards,  a 
sacrifice  made  hy  fire. 

a s'^Meet  sa'vour]  The  expression,  a snveet 
sauour  unto  Jehovah,  is  applied  to  offerings 
of  all  kinds  which  were  burnt  upon  the  altar, 
but  it  finds  its  fullest  application  in  the  whole 
Burnt-offering.  (Lev.  ii.  12,  hi.  5,  16,  iv. 
31;  Num.  XV.  7,  10,  &c.)  It  may  be  re- 
garded as  belonging  more  especially  to  the 
Burnt-offerings,  as  the  phrase,  to  make  atone- 
ment, belongs  more  especially,  but  not  ex- 
clusively, to  the  Sin-offerings.  See  on  v.  4. 

The  Burnt-offering  from  the  Flock. 
i.  10—13. 

10.  of  the  flocks]  The  directions  for  the 
sheep  or  the  goat  are  more  briefly  given  than 
those  for  the  bullock.  There  is  no  mention 
made  of  the  presentation  of  the  victim  in  the 
court  of  the  Sanctuary  (2;.  3),  of  the  imposi- 


tion of  hands,  or  of  the  flaying.  The  place 
of  slaughter  is  however  more  clearly  defined 
(v.  ii).  But  there  is  no  good  reason  to 
doubt  that  the  victims  were  all  treated  in  the 
'bame  manner  in  these  respects. — The  LXX. 
add  the  words,  koX  encdijo-ei  r^v 

KfchaXrji/  avTov.  The  Burnt-offering  of  the 
sheep  must  have  been  that  with  which  the 
people  were  most  familiar  in  the  daily  morn- 
ing and  evening  service.  Ex.  xxix.  38 — 42. 

of  the  goats]  It  would  seem  that  sheep 
were  preferred  for  sacrifice  when  they  could 
be  obtained,  except  in  some  special  Sin-offer- 
ings in  which  goats  were  required,  such  as 
that  of  the  ruler  and  the  high-priest,  and  the 
Sin-oflering  with  the  Scape-goat  of  the  Day 
of  atonement  (Lev.  iv.  23,  ix.  3,  xvi.  5). 
Maimonides  says  that  the  public  Burnt-offer- 
ings could  be  only  of  bullocks  or  sheep,  not 
of  goats  (‘  Gorban,’  i.  15).;  and  Theodoret 
probably  preserves  a genuine  Jewish  tradition 
when  he  says  that  it  was  the  duty  of  him 
who  had  a lamb  for  the  Passover  to  slaughter 
it,  but  that  if  he  had  not  a lamb  he  might 
slay  a kid.  (‘  Quaest.  in  Exod.’  24.) 

11.  northward  before  the  Lord]  That  is, 
on  the  north  side  of  the  altar.  This  was  the 
appointed  place  for  killing  the  Burnt-offerings, 
the  Sin-offerings,  and  the  Trespass-offerings. 
(Lev.  iv.  24,  29,  33,  vii.  2.)  Nothing  is  said 
in  the  Pentateuch  regarding  the  place  where 
the  Peace-offerings  were  to^be  slain,  but  the 
Mishna  tells  us  that  they  might  be  slain  in 
any  part  of  the  court.  (See  on  iii.  2.) — There 
has  been  a strange  divergence  of  opinion  re- 
garding the  reason  of  this  rule.  Some  sup- 
pose that  it  was  because  the  north  is  the 
region  of  sunless  gloom  (Tholuck)  ; others, 
that  it  was  in  accordance  with  a primitive 
notion,  that  God’s  dwelling-place  was  in  the 
north,  traces  of  which  are  supposed  to  exist 
in  the  position  of  the  table  of  shew-bread 
(the  bread  of  the  presence)  (Exod.  xxvi.  35); 
and  in  several  passages  of  Scripture  (Ps. 
xlviii.  2;  Is.  xiv.  13;  Ezek.  i.  4);  also  in  the 
Hindoo  Puranas  and  the  apocryphal  book 
of  Enoch  (see  Ewald,  Alterthumer,  p.  48). 
But  it  m.ay  have  been  an  arrangement  of 
mere  practical  convenience.  On  the  west  side 
of  the  Altar  stood  the  laver;  on  the  east  side 
was  the  place  of  ashes  (see  on  v.  16),  and  the 
south  side,  where  appears  to  have  been  the 
slope  by  which  the  priests  went  up  to  the 

K K 2 


4 


512 


LEVITICUS.  I.  11. 


Lv.  13— I. 


B Or, 

pmck  off 
the  head 
ivith  the 
nail. 


the  wood  that  is  on  the  fire  which  is 
upon  the  altar: 

13  But  he  shall  wash  the  inwards 
and  the  legs  with  water:  and  the 
priest  shall  bring  it  all,  and  burn  it 
upon  the  altar:  it  is  a burnt  sacrifice, 
an  offering  made  by  fire,  of  a sweet 
savour  unto  the  Lord. 

14  ^ And  if  the  burnt  sacrifice  for 
his  offering  to  the  Lord  he  of  fowls, 
then  he  shall  bring  his  offering  of 
turtledoves,  or  of  young  pigeons. 

15  And  the  priest  shall  bring  ij; 
unto  the  altar,  and  I' wring  off'  his 
head,  and  burn  it  on  the  altar;  and 
the  blood  thereof  shall  be  wrung  out 
at  the  side  of  the  altar : 

16  And  he  shall  pluck  away  his 


crop  with  “ his  feathers,  and  cast  it  n Or, 
beside  the  altar  on  the  east  part,  by  ^Ihereff 
the  place  of  the  ashes : 

17  And  he  shall  cleave  it  with  the 
wings  thereof,  but  shall  not  divide  it 
asunder:  and  the  priest  shall  burn  it 
upon  the  altar,  upon  the  wood  that  is 
upon  the  fire : it  is  a burnt  sacrifice, 
an  offering  made  by  fire,  of  a sv/eet 
savour  unto  the  Lord. 

CHAPTER  11. 

I The  meat  offering  of  flour  zvitk  oil  and  in- 
cense, 4 either  baken  in  the  oven,  5 or  on  a 
plate,  7 or  in  a fryhigpan,  iz.  or  of  the  first- 
fruits  in  the  ear.  1 3 The  salt  of  the  meat 
offering. 

And  when  any  will  olTer  a meat 
^ offering  unto  the  Lord,  his  of- 


Altar  (Joseph.  ‘Bell.  Jud.’  v.  5.  § 6),  must 
have  been  left  clear  for  thoroughfare.  The 
north  side  must,  therefore,  have  been  the 
most  convenient  for  slaughtering  the  victims. 
(Rosenmiiller,  Knobel,  Kurtz,  Keil.)  See 
Note  after  Ex.  xxvi.  § VI, 

The  Burnt-offering  of  the  Do-ve  or  the  Pigeon. 

i.  14—17- 

14.  of  turtledoajes,  or  of  young  pigeons']  The 
offering  of  a bird  was  permitted  to  one  who 
was  too  poor  to  offer  a quadruped.  (Cf. 
V.  7 — II,  xii.  8.)  But  in  certain  rites  of 
purification  birds  were  appointed  for  all,  what- 
ever might  be  their  circumstances.  See  xv. 
14,  29;  Num.  vi.  10.  It  is  to  be  noticed 
that  there  is  a limitation  of  the  age  of  the 
pigeons,  but  none  in  regard  to  the  doves. 
This  may,  perhaps,  be  accounted  for  from 
the  natural  habits  of  the  birds.  It  would 
seem  that  the  species  which  are  most  likely 
to  have  been  the  sacrificial  dove  and  pigeon 
are  the  common  turtle,  Turtur  auritus,  and  the 
blue-rock  pigeon,  sometimes  called  the  Egyp- 
tian rock-pigeon,  Columba  Schimperi,  which 
is  always  called  the  pigeon  by  the  Arabs.  The 
latter  bears  a considerable  resemblance  to  our 
stock-dove,  and  is  considerably  larger  than 
the  turtle.  Now  the  turtles  come  in  vast 
flocks  (Cant.  ii.  ii,  12;  Jer.  viii.  7),  with 
great  regularity,  in  the  early  part  of  April, 
and  for  a portion  of  the  year  the  full-grown 
birds  can  be  easily  taken  by  nets  or  other 
contrivances;  but  as  the  season  advances  they 
wholly  disappear.  'I'he  pigeons,  on  the  con- 
trary, do  not  leave  the  country.  They  have 
three  or  four  broods  in  the  year,  and,  in 
common  with  the  doves  and  other  pigeons, 
they  hatch  two  eggs  at  a time,  and  no  more. 
The  adult  birds  are  very  wild  and  rapid  of 
flight,  and  it  is  almost  impossible  to  obtain 


them  without  fire-arms.  But  their  nests,  with 
young  ones  in  them,  may  be  easily  found  at 
any  season  of  the^  year.  (Tristram,  ‘ Land 
of  Israel,’  pp.  446,  509;  ‘Nat.  Hist,  of  the 
Bible,’  p.  213.)  Hence  it  would  appear,  that 
when  turtledoves  could  not  be  obtained  nest- 
ling pigeons  were  accepted  as  a substitute. 

15.  And  the  priest  shall  bring]  The 
mode  of  sacrificing  the  bird  was  simple.  The 
marginal  rendering  agrees  with  the  Mishna 
(‘  Zebach,’  vi.  5).  In  the  Sin-offering  of 
birds  the  blood  was  sprinkled  on  the  side  of 
the  Altar.  See  Lev.  v.  9. 

16.  his  crop  'vuith  his  feathers]  Our  ver- 
sion here  follows  the  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  and 
Luther,  and  agrees  with  some  of  the  modern 
Jewish  versions.  But  the  weight  of  authority 
is  in  favour  of  the  marginal  rendering  (Onke- 
los,  the  Syriac,  Gesenius,  De  Wette,  Fiirst, 
Knobel,  &c.).  It  is  most  probable  that  the 
feathers  were  burnt  with  the  body,  and  that 
the  wings,  mentioned  in  nj.  17,  were  not 
mutilated. 

the  place  of  the  ashes]  It  is  said  that  the 
ashes  were  daily  removed  from  the  Altar  (ex- 
cept on  certain  holy  days)  and  thrown  into 
a heap  on  its  eastern  side.  (Mishna,  ‘Tamid,’ 
II.  2,  with  the  notes.)  It  would  appear  that 
when  the  heap  became  inconveniently  large, 
they  were  removed  in  vessels  appropriated  to 
the  purpose  (see  Exod.  xxvii.  3)  to  a spot  with- 
out the  camp,  designated  as  the  place  “where 
the  ashes  are  poured  out.”  (Lev.  iv.  12,  vi.  1 1.) 

17.  a burnt  sacrifice.,  &c.]  See  on  0^.  9. 

The  MEA.T-OFFERINGS. 

Chap.  1 1.  1.  a meat  offering]  The  two 
Hebrew  words  thus  rendered  are  the  same 
which  in  t;.  4 are  better  translated  an  oblation 
of  a meat-ofifering  (korbdn  minchdh).  The 


V.  2,  3.J 


LEVITICUS.  II. 


513 


fering  shall  be  of  fine  flour;  and  he 
shall  pour  oil  upon  it,  and  put  frank- 
incense thereon : 

2 And  he  shall  bring  it  to  Aaron’s 
sons  the  priests*:  and  he  shall  take 
thereout  his  handful  of  the  flour 
thereof,  and  of  the  oil  thereof,  with 
all  the  frankincense  thereof;  and  the 


priest  shall  burn  the  memorial  of  it 
upon  the  altar,  to  he  an  offering  made 
by  fire,  of  a sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord  : 

3 And  "the  remnant  of  the  meat  of-  " KccIu 
fering  shall  be  Aaron’s  and  his  sons’ : 
it  is  a thing  most  holy  of  the  offer- 
ings of  the  Lord  made  by  fire. 


latter  word  (minchab)  signifies  literally  a gift; 
and  it  appears  to  have  been  applied  specially 
to  what  was  given  by  an  inferior  to  a superior 
(Gen.  xxxii,  18 — 20,  xliii.  ii;  Jiidg.  iii.  15; 
I S.  X.  27).  It  was  sometimes  used  for  any 
sort  of  offering  to  the  Lord,  in  the  same 
sense  as  korbhi  (Gen.  iv,  3,  4;  i S,  ii.  17; 
Isa.  i.  13,  &c.).  But  in  the  technical  language 
of  the  Law,  Minchah  regularly  denoted  the 
vegetable  offerings  as  distinguished  from  the 
animal  offerings  (see  Introd.  § iii.).  Luther 
rendered  it  food-offering  (Speis-opfer)^  and  our 
translators  followed  him,  applying  the  word 
meat,  according  to  old  usage,  as  a general 
term  for  food.  Vegetable-offering  or  Meal-of- 
fering would  be  a more  convenient  rendering. 

It  may  seem  strange  that  the  Minchah  is 
here  introduced  between  the  Burnt-offering 
and  the  Peace-offering.  The  order  in  which 
the  kinds  of  offering  are  named  agrees  with 
their  development  in  order  of  time.  The 
Burnt-offering  and  the  Minchah  answer  to  the 
first  two  offerings  on  record  (Gen.  iv.  3,  4; 
Amos  V.  22).  It  may  be  added  that  they  ap- 
pear to  be  cognate  in  the  simplicity  of  their 
meaning.  (See  Introd.  § xii.) 

It  has  been  supposed  that  the  Minchah  was 
never  offered  but  when  it  accompanied  an  ani- 
mal sacrifice  (Bilhr,  Kurtz,  Bonar).  But  the 
mode  in  which  it  is  spoken  of  in  this  verse,  in 
‘v.  2,  vi.  14,  Num.  V.  15,  and  elsewhere,  would 
seem  to  leave  but  little  doubt  that  it  was, 
on  occasions,  offered  as  a distinct  sacrifice. 
The  Drink-offering  (which  is  mentioned  no- 
where in  Leviticus,  except  in  chap,  xxiii.),  on 
the  other  hand,  appears  never  to  have  been 
offered  by  itself.  The  laws  of  the  Drink- 
offering  and  the  Minchah,  when  offered  as 
accompaniments  of  the  Burnt-offering  and 
the  Peace-offering,  are  given  Num.  xv.  i — 12. 

Salt  (y.  13)  and  oil  (see  Note  at  the  end  of 
the  chap.)  were  ingredients  in  every  Minchah, 
but  leaven  and  honey  were  wholly  excluded 
from  them  (<1;.  n). 

Three  kinds  of  Minchah  are  here  mention- 
ed; (i)  fine  flour  with  frankincense,  w.  i — 3; 

(2)  cakes  and  wafers  of  fine  flour,  ^'^v.  4 — 8 ; 

(3)  parched  grains  of  the  first  gathered  corn, 
with  frankincense,  w.  14 — 16.  Of  each  of 
them  a small  portion  was  burnt  on  the  Altar 
“for  a memorial,”  and  the  remainder  was 
given  to  the  priests.  The  offerings  of  flour 
belonged  to  the  priests  at  large,  but  those  of 


cakes  and  wafers  to  the  officiating  priests, 
vii.  9,  10.— Instructions  to  the  priests  regard- 
ing the  Minchahs  are  given  vi.  14 — 23. 

The  Offering  of  Fine  flour^  i — 3. 

1.  fine  four]  That  is,  finely  bolted  flour 
of  wheat.  See  Ex.  xxix.  2;  LXX.  o-eixidaXis’-, 
Vulg.  simila.  It  was  probably  always  present- 
ed in  a bowl.  The  Minchahs  of  the  princes 
at  the  dedication  of  the  Tabernacle  were  pre- 
sented in  bowls  of  silver,  Num.  vii.  13. 

oib]  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

frankincense~\  See  on  Ex.  xxx.  34. 

2.  This  verse  might  rather  be  rendered, 
“ And  he  shall  bring  it  to  Aaron’s  sons,  the 
priests;  and  the  (officiating)  priest  shall 
take  from  it  a handful  of  its  flour 
and  its  oil  with  all  its  frankincense, 
and  this  shall  he  hum  as  its  memo- 
rial upon  the  Altar,”  &c. 

memorial]  The  English  word  literally  an- 
swers to  the  Hebrew  (azkarah')^  which  was 
the  regular  name  not  only  for  the  portion  of 
the  Minchah  which  was  burnt  on  the  Altar 
9,  16,  v.  12,  vi.  15 ; Num.  v.  26),  but  for 
the  frankincense  which  was  laid  upon  the 
Shewbread  (Lev.  xxiv.  7).  The  LXX.  call  it 
TO  fjLvrjfjLoa-vuov,  the  word  which  is  applied  to 
the  prayers  and  alms  of  Cornelius,  Acts  x.  4. 
This  application  of  the  Greek  word  seems 
well  to  illustrate  the  meaning  of  the  a%karah. 
Cf.  on  Ex.  xxx.  8. 

3.  a thing  most  holy]  Literally,  a holy  of 
holies.  As  there  was  a distinction  between 
the  places  dedicated  to  the  divine  service  into 
holy  and  most  holy  (Ex.  xxvi.  33),  so  was 
there  a similar  distinction  in  what  was  offered 
to  Jehovah.  All  offerings  were  holy.,  includ- 
ing the  portions  of  the  Peace-offerings  which 
were  eaten  by  the  laity;  but  that  was  most 
holy  of  which  every  part  was  devoted  either 
to  the  Altar,  or  to  the  use  of  the  priests.  Such 
were  the  Minchahs  (y.  10,  vi.  16,  x.  12), 
the  Shewbread  (Lev.  xxiv.  9),  the  incense 
(Ex.  xxx.  36),  and  the  flesh  of  the  Sin-  and 
Trespass-offerings  (Lev.  vi.  17,  18,  vii.  i,  6, 
X.  17,  xiv.  13;  Num.  xviii.  9,  to).  Every 
son  of  Aaron,  even  he  who  had  a bodily 
defect  and  could  not  perform,  any  priestly 
office,  was  permitted  “to  eat  the  bread  of 
his  God,  both  of  the  most  holy  and  of  the 
holy,”  Lev.  xxi.  22.  The  most  holy  sacrificial 


LEVITICUS.  IL 


[v.  4— II. 


5H 

4 ^ And  if  thou  bring  an  oblation 
of  a meat  offering  baken  in  the  oven, 
it  shall  be  unleavened  cakes  of  fine 
flour  mingled  with  oil,  or  unleavened 
wafers  anointed  with  oil. 

5 ^1  And  if  thy  oblation  be  a meat 
I!  Or,  on  a ofiei'lng  bakeu  ” in  a pan,  it  shall  be  of 
'irlfiice!'  flour  unleavened,  mingled  with 

oil. 

6 Thou  shalt  part  it  in  pieces,  and 
pour  oil  thereon  : it  is  a meat  offering. 

7 ^ And  if  thy  oblation  be  a meat 
offering  baken  in  the  fryingpan,  it  shall 
be  made  of  fine  flour  with  oil. 

8 And  thou  shalt  bring  the  meat 


offering  that  is  made  of  these  things 
unto  the  Lord  : and  when  it  is  pre- 
sented unto  the  priest,  he  shall  bring 
it  unto  the  altar. 

9 And  the  priest  shall  take  from 

the  meat  offering  '^'a  memorial  thereof,  ^ver.  2, 
and  shall  burn  it  upon  the  altar : it  is 
^an  offering  made  by  fire,  of  a sweet  <r  Exod. 
savour  unto  the  Lord.  ^9- 18. 

10  And  that  which  is  left  of  the 
meat  oftering  shall  be  Aaron’s  and  his 
sons’ : it  is  a thing  most  holy  of  the 
oft'erings  of  the  Lord  made  by  fire. 

1 1 No  meat  offering,  which  ye  shall 
bring  unto  the  Lord,  shall  be  made 


food  was  eaten  in  “the  holy  place,”  that  is 
the  precinct  of  the  Tabernacle,  probably  in 
the  priests’  lodgings.  See  Note  after  Ex.  xxvi. 
§ V. ; but  the  priests’  portion  of  the  Peace- 
offerings  might  be  eaten  by  the  priests  and 
their  families  in  any  “ clean  place”  (x.  12 — 14). 
It  should  however  be  observed  that  the  term 
most  holy  is  not  always  used  strictly  in  accord- 
ance with  this  distinction.  See  on  Ex.  xl.  10: 
cf.  also  Ex.  xxix.  37,  and  Lev.  xxvii.  28. 

The  offerings  of  Cakes  and  Wafers. 

4 — 10. 

The  four  kinds  of  bread  and  the  three 
cooking  utensils  which  are  mentioned  in  this 
section  were  probably  such  as  were  in  com- 
mon use  in  the  daily  life  of  the  Israelites;  and 
there  appears  no  reason  to  doubt  that  they  were 
such  as  are  still  used  in  the  East. — There  is  no 
indication  of  any  difference  in  the  significance 
of  the  different  offerings.  The  variety  was  most 
likely  pemiitted  to  suit  the  circumstances  of 
the  worshippers.  The  fine  flour  and  oil,  with 
its  frankincense  fv.  i),  seems  to  have  been  the 
most  costly  of  the  Minchahs,  and  the  most 
liberal  in  quantity:  cf.  Num.  vii.  13.  The 
cakes  and  wafers  mentioned  in  -v.  4 would 
require  that  the  offerer  should  at  least  possess 
an  oven.  The  “pan”  and  the  “frying  pan” 
{n'-v.  5,  7)  may  have  been  the  common  cooking 
implements  of  the  poorest  of  the  people. 

4.  o'ven'\  This  was  most  likely  a port- 
able vessel  of  earthenware.  It  was  liable 
to  be  broken  (see  xi.  35).  Its  shape  may 
have  bet'n  like  the  oven  represented  in  Wil- 
kinson (Vol.  I,  p.  176,  fig.  209,  ^ truncated 
cone  about  3 ft.  6 in.  high,  and  i ft.  6 in. 
diameter.  Similar  jars  are  now  used  for 
the  same  purpose  by  the  Arabs.  After  the 
vessel  has  btrn  thoroughly  heated  by  a fire 
lighted  in  the  inside,  the  cakes  are  placed 
within  it,  and  the  top  is  covered  up  until  they 
are  sufficiently  baked.  Meantime  the  outside 
of  the  vessel  is  turned  to  account.  Dough 


rolled  out  very  thin  is  spread  over  it,  and  a 
sort  of  wafer  is  produced  considerably  thinner 
than  a Scotch  oat-cake.  Harmer,  ‘ Observa- 
tions,’ Vol.  I.  p.  476.  Such  wafers  are  a 
common  accompaniment  of  an  Arab  meal. 
Tristram,  ‘ Land  of  Israel,’  p.  262.  Both 
cakes  and  wafers  are  mentioned  Ex.  xxix.  2. 
The  cakes,  from  the  apparent  derivation  of 
their  Hebrew  name,  are  supposed  to  have 
been  pricked  like  our  biscuits.  The  word 
aptly  rendered  (wafer  signifies  something 
spread  out. 

5.  a pan']  Rather,  as  in  the  margin,  a 
fiat  plate.  It  was  probably  of  earthenware, 
like  the  oven.  In  later  times  it  was  some- 
times of  iron  (Ezek.  iv.  3).  The  Bedouins 
use  such  a plate  of  earthenware,  which  they 
call  tajen.^  a name  that  seems  to  be  identical 
with  TTiyavov.!  the  word  here  used  by  the 
LXX.  Robinson,  ‘Bib.  Res.’  i.  p.  485: 
Harmer,  ‘ Observations,’  i.  p.  477. 

6.  part  it  in  pieces]  The  Hebrew  word 
for  part  signifies  to  break,  not  to  cut.  The 
Bedouins  are  in  the  habit  of  breaking  up  their 
cakes  when  warm  and  mixing  the  fragments 
with  butter  when  that  luxury  can  be  obtained. 
Robinson,  ii.  p.  118. 

7.  fryingpan]  Rather,  pan.  The  word, 
according  to  the  best  authorities  (Maimo- 
nides,  Gesenius,  Knobel,  Fiirst,  &c.),  signi- 
fies a vessel  deeper  than  a fryingpan,  and 
its  derivation  seems  to  shovv^  that  it  was  com- 
monly used  for  boiling.  Jewish  tradition  as- 
signs a lid  to  it  (Mishna,  ‘ Menach.’  v.  8). 
It  may  have  been  a pan  or  pot  used  either  for 
baking  or  for  boiling.  It  should  however  be 
observed  that  the  word  baken  in  this  verse  and 
w.  5 rests  on  no  authority,  but  is  supplied  by 
our  translators.  It  is  possible  that  the  cakes 
here  spoken  of  wej'e  boiled  in  oil.  It  can 
hardly  be  doubted  that  the  LXX.  and  the 
Vulgate  are  wrong  in  translating  the  word 
ecr^apa  and  craticula. 


V.  12  — 15.] 


LEVITICUS.  II. 


5^5 


with  leaven : for  ye  shall  burn  no 
leaven,  nor  any  honey,  in  any  offer- 
ing of  the  Lord  made  by  fire. 

12  ^ As  for  the  oblation  of  the  first- 
fruits,  ye  shall  offer  them  unto  the 

liw.  Lord  : but  they  shall  not  ^ be  burnt 
on  the  altar  for  a sweet  savour. 

13  And  every  oblation  of  thy  meat 
offering  ^shalt  thou  season  with  salt; 
neither  shalt  thou  suffer  the  salt  of 


the  covenant  of  thy  God  to  be  lacking 
from  thy  meat  offering : with  all  thine 
offerings  thou  shalt  offer  salt. 

14  And  if  thou  offer  a meat  offer 
ing  of  thy  firstfruits  unto  the  Lord, 
thou  shalt  offer  for  the  meat  offering 
of  thy  firstfruits  green  ears  of  corn 
dried  by  the  fire,  even  corn  beaten  out 
of  full  ears. 

15  And  thou  shalt  put  oil  upon  it. 


11,  12.  As  for  the  oblation  of  the  firstfruits^ 
Rather,  As  an  oblation  of  firstfruits. 
The  words  refer  to  the  leaven  and  honey 
mentioned  in  nj.  11  which  might  be  offered 
amongst  the  firstfruits  and  tithes  (Dent.  xxvi. 
a,  12;  cf.  a Chro.  xxxi.  5):  leaven  was  also  a 
regular  constituent  in  the  bread  of  the  Thank- 
offering  (vii.  13)  and  in  the  Pentecostal  loaves 
(xxiii.  17).  The  exclusion  of  honey  from  the 
offerings  of  the  Altar  appears  to  have  had 
the  same  meaning  as  the  exclusion  of  leaven. 
Vfe  know  that  honey  was  used  in  ancient 
times  to  produce  fermentation  in  the  pre- 
paration of  vinegar  (Plin.  ‘ Hist.  Nat.’  xi.  15, 
XXL  48);  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that 
the  same  use  of  it  was  made  by  the  He- 
brews (Buxtorf,  ‘ Lex.  Talm.’  p.  500).  The 
leaven  commonly  used  was,  as  it  still  is  in 
many  countries,  a small  piece  of  fermented 
dough.  Fermentation  of  all  kinds  seems  to 
furnish  an  apt  symbol  of  the  working  of  cor- 
ruption in  the  human  heart.  See  Schottgen, 

‘ Hor.  Heb.’  p.  597.  This  was  perceived  by 
the  Romans:  Aul.  Gell.  ‘ Noct.  Att.’  x.  15; 
Plut.  ‘ Quaest.  Rom.’  c.  109.  Compare  the 
language  of  S.  Paul,  i Cor.  v.  6—8. 

13.  ^ith  all  thine  offerings  thou  shalt  offer 
salt~\  Not  only  every  Minchah,  but  every  ani- 
mal offering  was  to  be  accompanied  by  salt. 
Considering  the  emphatic  form  of  this  com- 
mand, and  the  importance  subsequently  as- 
cribed to  it  (Ezek.  xliii.  24;  Mark  ix.  49,  50), 
it  is  remarkable  that  this  appears  to  be  the 
only  reference  to  salt  in  the  ceremonial  Law. 
pn  Ex.  XXX.  35  (where  some  suppose  that  salt 
is  mentioned)  see  note.  The  significance  of 
it,  as  a sacrificial  symbol,  is  set  forth  in  the  ex- 
pression “ the  salt  of  the  covenant  of  thy  God” 
(cf.  Num.  xviii.  19;  2 Chro.  xiii.  5).  It  was 
the  one  symbol  which  was  never  absent  from 
the  Altar  of  Burnt-offering,  showing  the  im- 
perishableness of  the  love  of  Jehovah  for  His 
people.  In  its  unalterable  nature,  it  is  the 
contrary  ot  leaven.  The  Arabs  are  said  to 
letain  in  common  use  the  expression,  “a  co- 
venant of  salt,”^  and  the  respect  they  pay  to 
bread  and  salt  in  their  rites  of  hospitality  is 
well  known.  Cf.  Ezraiv.  14.  In  heathen  sacri- 
fip‘S  its  use  seems  to  have  been  all  but  universal. 

I Lny  says,  after  praising  its  virtues  in  food  and 


medicine,  maxirne  tamen  in  sacris  intelUgitur 
auctoritas^  quando  nulla  conficiuntur  sihe  mola 
salsa.  ‘ H.  N.’  xxxi.  41.  The  mola  salsa 
was  meal  mixed  with  salt,  which  was  either 
sprinkled  on  the  head  of  a victim  about  to  be 
slain  (Cicero,  ‘ de  Div.’  11.  16;  Virg.  ‘Ed.’ 
VIII.  82;  Hor.  II.  Sat.  iii.  200;  Festus  s. 
mola-  Val.  Max.  ii.  5,  § 5 ; Pseudo-Didymus 
in  Horn.  ‘ II.’  i.  449) ; or  offered  in  place  of  a 
more  costly  offering  (Hor.  iii.  Od.  xxiii.  20). 
Cf.  Lev.  V.  II. 

The  Minchah  of  Firstfruits. 

14 — 16. 

The  place  of  these  instructions  may  suggest 
that  they  were  added  to  the  chapter  as  a sup- 
plement.— There  is  certainly  no  sufficient 
ground  to  suppose,  with  the  rabbinists  and 
rnodern  Jewish  authorities,  that  this  Minchah 
differed  from  the  others  in  being  a national 
offering,  identical  with  the  offering  of  the 
Wave-sheaf  prescribed  xxiii.  10:  it  seems  to 
be  the  same  kind  of  offering  as  is  mentioned 
Num.  xviii.  12,  13. 

14.  green  ears  of  corn']  Rather,  “fresh 
ears  of  com;”  that  is,  corn  just  ripe,  freshly 
gathered.  Parched  corn,  such  as  is  here 
spoken  of,  is  a common  article  of  food  in 
Syria  and  Egypt,  and  was  very  generally  eaten 
in  ancient  times.  Cf.  xxiii.  14;  Josh.  v.  n- 
I S.  xvii.  17,  XXV.  18;  2 S.  xvii.  28,  &c.  ’ 

beaten  out]  Not  rubbed  out  by  the  hands, 
as  described  in  Luke  vi.  i,  but  bruised  or 
crushed  so  as  to  form  groats. 

The  meaning  of  the  Minchahs  appears  to  be 
much  more  simple  than  that  of  the  animal 
sacrifices.  This  is  indicated  by  the  simplicity 
of  the  only  name  by  which  they  are  desig- 
nated (see  on  i).  The  Minchah,  as  a sacri- 
fice, was  something  surrendered  to  God, 
which  was  of  the  greatest  value  to  man  an 
a means  of  living.  It  might  thus  seem  to  be 
merely  eucharistic.  But  it  should  not  be  over- 
looked that  the  grain  had  been  modified,  and 
made  useful,  by  man’s  own  labour.  Hence  it 
has  been  supposed  that  the  Minchah  expressed 
a confession  that  all  our  good  works  are 
wrought  in  God  and  are  due  to  Him.— On 
the  Great  Minchah  of  the  Shewbread,  see  Ex. 
xxy.  30. — On  the  Drink-offerings,  see  on  Ex. 
xxix.  40;  Lev.  xxiii.  18. 


LEVITICUS.  11.  III. 


[v.  1 6 2. 


516 


and  lay  frankincense  thereon : it  is  a 
meat  offering. 

16  And  the  priest  shall  burn  the 
memorial  of  it^part  of  the  beaten  corn 


thereof,  and  part  of  the  oil  thereof, 
with  all  the  frankincense  thereof : it 
is  an  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the 
Lord. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  11.  i. 


On  the  symbolical  use  of  Oil. 

There  were  three  principal  uses  of  oil  fa- 
miliar to  the  Hebrews,  (i)  It  was  employed 
to  anoint  the  surface  of  the  body  in  order  to 
mollify  the  skin,  to  heal  injuries,  and  to 
strengthen  the  muscles  (Ps.  civ.  15,  cix.  18, 
cxli.  5;  Isa.  i.  6;  Mic.  vi.  15;  Luke  x.  34; 
Mark  vi.  13;  Jam.  v.  14,  &c.):  (2)  it  was 
largely  used  as  an  ingredient  of  food  (Num. 
xi.  8;  I K.  xvii.  12;  i Chro.  xii.  40;  Ezek. 
xvi.  13,  19;  Hos.  ii.  5,  &c.);  and  (3)  it  was 
commonly  burned  in  lamps  (Ex.  xxv.  6; 
Matt.  xxv.  3,  &c.). — In  each  of  these  uses 
it  may  be  taken  as  a fit  symbol  of  divine 
grace.  It  might  figure  it  as  conferring  on  each 
believer  the  strength  and  faculties  required  to 
carry  on  his  work  (i  Cor.  xii.  4);  as  sup- 
porting and  renewing  him  day  by  day  with 
fresh  supplies  of  life  (i  Cor.  iii.  16,  Tit.  hi. 
5) ; and  as  giving  light,  comfort,  and  guidance 
into  all  truth  (Job  xxxii.  8;  John  xiv.  16, 
XV.  26). 

There  was  what  closely  answered  to  each 
of  the  ordinary  uses  of  oil  in  the  different 
modes  in  which  it  was  employed  in  the  Sanc- 
tuary. It  was  used  for  anointing  the  priests 
and  the  holy  things,  it  served  as  food  in  the 


Minchahs,  and  it  was  what  kept  alive  the 
lights  in  “the  pure  candlestick,”  “the  lamp 
of  God”  (i  S.  iii.  3)  in  the  holy  place.  In 
the  first  of  these  applications  in  the  Sanctuary, 
oil  served  no  practical  purpose;  it  was  simply 
typical,  and  it  is  in  this  connection  that  it 
bears  its  highest  significance.  As  if  to  keep 
this  significance  in  view,  the  mode  in  which  it 
was  added  to  the  Minchah  seems  to  be  spoken 
of  as  an  anointing  (see  w.  i,  15,  16).  In  the 
language  of  both  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ments, the  figurative  references  to  oil  most 
frequently  turn  upon  this  meaning.  See  Isa. 
Ixi.  i;  2 Cor.  i.  21;  I Joh.  ii.  20,  27;  Heb. 
i.  9,  &c.  Its  most  perfect  application  is  found 
in  the  words  Messiah  and  Christ  as  the 
names  of  Him  whose  anointing  was  the  gift 
of  the  Spirit  without  measure,  Joh.  iii.  34. 
On  the  anointing  of  the  holy  things,  see  on 
viii.  II. — On  the  holy  anointing  oil,  see  Ex. 
XXX.  22—33. 

The  offering  of  oil  on  the  Altar  involved 
an  acknowledgment  on  the  part  of  the  wor- 
shipper that  his  spiritual  gifts  were  from 
Jehovah  and  belonged  to  Him.  It  was  in 
this  that  it  became  specially  connected  with 
the  Minchah.  See  the  preceding  note. 


CHAPTER  III. 


I The  peace  offering  of  the  herd,  6 of  the  flock, 
7 either  a lamb,  12  or  a goat. 


K 


of  peace  offering,  if  he  offer  it 
of  the  herd;  whether  it  be  a male 


or  female,  he  shall  offer  it  without 
blemish  before  the  Lord. 

2 And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  his  offering,  and  kill  it  at 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation : and  Aaron’s  sons  the  priests 


The  Peace-offerings. 

The  Peace-offering  from  the  Herd. 

1—5- 

Chap.  III.  1.  The  Peace-offering  (like 
the  Burnt-oflering,  i.  3,  and  the  Minchah,  ii. 
i)  is  here  spoken  of  as  if  it  was  familiarly 
known  before  the  giving  of  the  Law.  See 
Introd.  § xii.  I'he  Sin-offering  and  the  Tres- 
pass-offering are  introduced  in  a different 
manner  (iv.  i,  v.  i,  &c.).  It  would  also  seem 
that  the  alternative  of  a male  or  a female  was 
in  accordance  with  old  usage.  There  is  no 
specified  limitation  in  respect  to  age,  such  as 
there  is  in  the  cases  of  the  Hiirnt-offering  and 
the  Sin-offering.  The  point  of  this  first  in- 
junction is  that  the  animal  should  be  “with- 
out blemish.” 


peace  offering^  This  rendering  of  the  He- 
brew is  in  accordance  with  the  ancient  ver- 
sions and  seems  preferable  to  “thank-offering,” 
which  occurs  in  several  places  in  the  margin 
of  our  Bible,  and  has  been  used  by  Luther 
and  many  modern  translators.  Thank-offer- 
ing appears  to  be  the  right  name  for  a subor- 
dinate class  of  Peace-ofterings.  See  on  vii.  12. 

2.  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gre'.rntion']  at  the  entrance  of  the  Tent 
of  meeting.  See  on  i.  3.  We  are  not  told 
on  which  side  of  the  Altar,  as  we  are  in  re- 
ference to  Burnt-offerings  and  Sin-offerings 
(i.  II,  iv.  24,  29,  vii.  2).  As  a matter  of 
convenience,  it  is  likely  that  all  victims  were 
usually  slaughtered  in  one  place : but,  as  the 
Peace-offerings  were  sometimes  very  numerous, 


V.  3— 13-] 


LEVITICUS.  III. 


5^7 


‘I  Fj<od. 
29.  22. 

II  Or,  suet. 


«Or, 
midriff 
over  the 
liver,  and 
over  the 
kidneys. 


shall  sprinkle  the  blood  upon  the  altar 
round  about. 

3 And  he  shall  offer  of  the  sacrihce 
of  the  peace  offering  an  offering  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord;  "^the  "fat  that 
covereth  the  inwards,  and  all  the  fat 
that  is  upon  the  inwards, 

4 And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the  fat 
that  is  on  them,  which  is  by  the  flanks, 
and  the  " caul  above  the  liver,  with  the 
kidneys,  it  shall  he  take  away. 

5 And  Aaron’s  sons  shall  burn  it  on 
the  altar  upon  the  burnt  sacrifice, 
which  is  upon  the  wood  that  is  on  the 
fire : it  is  an  offering  made  by  fire,  of 
a sweet  savour  unto  the  Lord. 

6 ^ And  if  his  offering  for  a sacri- 
fice of  peace  offering  unto  the  Lord 
be  of  the  flock;  male  or  female,  he 
shall  offer  it  without  blemish. 

7 If  he  offer  a lamb  for  his  offer- 
ing, then  shall  he  offer  it  before  the 
Lord. 

8 And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  his  offering,  and  kill  it 


before  the  tabernacle  of  the  cono;re- 
gation : and  Aaron’s  sons  shall  sprinkle 
the  blood  thereof  round  about  upon 
the  altar. 

9 And  he  shall  offer  of  the  sacrifice 
of  the  peace  offering  an  offering  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord  ; the  fat  there- 
of, and  the  whole  rump,  it  shall  he 
take  off  hard  by  the  backbone ; and 
the  fat  that  covereth  the  inwards,  and 
all  the  fat  that  is  upon  the  inwards, 

10  And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
fat  that  is  upon  them,  which  is  by  the 
flanks,  and  the  caul  above  the  liver, 
with  the  kidneys,  it  shall  he  take 
away. 

1 1 And  the  priest  shall  burn  it  upon 
the  altar:  it  is  the  food  of  the  offer- 
ing made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

12  ^ And  if  his  offering  he,  a goat, 
then  he  shall  offer  it  before  the  Lord. 

13  And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  it,  and  kill  it  before  the 
tabernacle  of  the  cono-re2:ation : and 
the  sons  of  Aaron  shall  sprinkle  the 


a licence  was  probably  permitted  in  respect 
of  them  when  occasion  required  it.  See 
on  i.  Ti. 

shall  sprinkle]  Rather,  shall  throw.  See 
Introd.  § vi. 

3,  4.  On  the  parts  of  the  Peace-offerings, 
the  Sin-offerings  and  the  Trespass-offerings 
which  were  put  on  the  Altar,  see  Introd.  § viii. 

5.  upon  the  burnt  sacrifice]  This  is  the 
right  rendering,  and  it  appears  to  mean,  upon 
the  ashes  of  the  continual  Burnt-offering  (Ex. 
xxix.  38),  in  accordance  with  Lev.  vi.  12, 
“and  the  priest  shall  burn  wood  on  it  {i-e. 
the  Altar)  every  morning,  and  lay  the  burnt- 
offering  in  order  upon  it ; and  he  shall  burn 
thereon  the  fat  of  the  peace-offerings.”  But 
the  same  phrase  is  rendered  “according  to  the 
offerings  made  by  fire,”  &c.  in  iv.  35,  v.  tz, 
giving  a different  sense  to  the  preposition. 
Knobel  and  some  other  modern  interpreters 
adopt  the  latter  interpretation. 

The  Peace-offering  from  the  Flock. 

6—15. 

7.  a lamb]  a sheep.  The  word  signifies 
a full-grown  sheep,  in  its  prime.  The  same 
Hebrew  word  is  frequently  rendered  sheep  in 
our  version.  Gen.  xxx.  32;  Lev.  i.  10,  vii.  23. 
See  on  ns.  i ; Introd.  § iv. 

8.  See  notes  on  i.  4,  5. 


9.  the  nvhole  rump]  It  should  be  rendered 
the  whole  fat  tail.  The  substantive 
{aleydlo)  has  this  meaning  in  Arabic.  It  oc- 
curs nowhere  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  except  in 
this  connection.  (Ex.  xxix.  22;  Lev.  vii.  3, 
viii.  25,  ix.  19.)  The  ancient  translators  in 
general,  and  Josephus,  have  taken  the  word 
to  denote  the  tail,  but  the  LXX.  in  this  place 
and  two  others  have  rendered  it  by  da-t^A, 
the  loin.  There  is  no  doubt  that  what  is 
meant  is  the  tail  of  the  kind  of  sheep  well 
known  in  the  East,  and  in  Africa,  called  by 
naturalists  Offis  laticaudata.  (Robinson,  ‘ Bib. 
Res.’  I.  p.  477.  Tristram,  ‘Nat.  Hist.’  p. 
143.)  Mr  Fellowes  describes  the  tail  as  “an 
apron  of  rich  marrowy  fat  extending  to  the 
width  of  the  hind-quarters  and  often  trailing 
on  the  ground.”  (‘  Asia  Minor,’  p.  10.)  Dr 
Russell  says  that  the  tails  often  weigh  i ^lbs. 
and  even  as  much  as  5olbs.  when  they  have 
been  increased  by  artificial  fattening  (‘  Nat. 
Hist,  of  Aleppo,’  ii.  p.  147).  It  appears 
that  a custom  has  existed  from  early  times  of 
attaching  the  heavy  tail  to  a small  truck  to 
save  the  animal  from  the  pain  occasioned  by 
its  trailing  on  the  ground  (Herodot.  iii.  113. 
Mishna,  ‘ de  Sabb.’  v.  4.)  The  whole  tail 
was  to  be  taken  off  “ hard  by  the  backbone,” 
where  the  pad  of  fat  commences. 

11.  burn  it]  See  on  i.  9. 

the  food  of  the  offering.,  &c.]  See  on  ni.  16. 


i 


LEVITICUS.  III.  IV. 


[v.  14—2. 


blood  thereof  upon  the  altar  round 
about. 

14  And  he  shall  olFer  thereof  his 
offering,  even  an  offering  made  by  fire 
unto  the  Lord  ; the  fat  that  covereth 
the  inwards,  and  all  the  fat  that  is 
upon  the  inwards, 

15  And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
fat  that  is  upon  them,  which  is  by  the 
flanks,  and  the  caul  above  the  liver, 
with  the  kidneys,  it  shall  he  take 
away. 

16  And  the  priest  shall  burn  them 
upon  the  altar:  it  is  the  food  of  the 
offering  made  by  fire  for  a sweet 
savour:  ^all  the  fat  is  the  Lord’s. 


17  It  shall  be  a perpetual  statute 
for  your  generations  throughout  all 
your  dwellings,  that  ye  eat  neither  fat 
nor  ^ blood. 

CHAPTER  IV. 


Gen.  9.  4. 
chap.  7. 26. 
&.  17.  14. 


r The  sm  offc7'ing  of  ignorance,  for  the  priest, 
13  for  the  congregation,  22  for  the  ruler, 
2 7 for  any  of  the  people. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
f\_  saying, 

2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israe.1, 
saying.  If  a soul  shall  sin  through 
ignorance  against  any  of  the  command- 
ments of  the  Lord  concerning  things 
which  ought  not  to  be  done,  and  shall 
do  against  any  of  them : 


12,  When  the  alternative  is  permitted,  the 
sheep  always  takes  precedence  of  the  goat. 
See  on  i.  10.  Birds  were  not  accepted  as 
Peace-offerings,  most  probably  because  they 
were,  by  themselves,  insufficient  to  make  up 
a sacrificial  meal. 

16.  it  is  the  food  of  the  offering  made  by  fire 
for  a s~joeet  saajour : all  the  fat  is  the  LoRffs^ 
This  might  rather  be  rendered,  as  food  of 
an  offering  made  by  fire  for  a sweet 
savour,  shall  all  the  fat  be  for  Jeho- 
vah. So  de  Wette,  Zunz,  Herxh.,  &c.  In 
this  expression,  our  bodily  taste  and  smell 
furnish  figures  of  the  satisfaction  with  which 
the  Lord  accepts  the  appointed  symbols  of 
the  true  worship  of  the  heart.  All  that  was 
sent  up  in  the  hre  of  the  Altar,  including  the 
parts  of  the  Sin-offering  (iv.  31),  as  well  as 
the  Burnt-offering  (i.  9,  &c.),  was  accepted 
for  “a  sweet  savour:”  but  the  word  food 
may  here  have  a peculiar  fitness  in  its  appli- 
cation to  the  Peace-offering,  which  served 
for  food  also  to  the  priests  and  the  offerer, 
and  so  symbolized  communion  between  the 
Lord,  LI  is  ministers,  and  His  worshippers. 
I'he  omission  of  the  word  food  in  connection 
with  the  Burnt-offering  in  ch.  i.  is  at  least 
worthy  of  remark.  Cf.  xxi.  6,  17,  ai,  22, 
xxii.  II  ; Num.  xxviii.  2,  &c. 

17.  a perpetual  statute,  &c.]  This  is  re- 
peated witli  increased  emphasis  as  regards  the 
fat,  vii.  23—25. 

fat']  i.  e.  the  suet  and  the  marrowy  fat  of  the 
tail.  See  Introd.  § viii.  The  significance  of  of- 
fering fat  to  Jehovah  appears  to  consist  in  the 
fact  that  its  proper  development  in  the  animal 
is,  in  general,  a mark  of  perfection.  This  is 
immediately  connected  with  what  seems  to  be 
its  purpose  in  the  body.  “Its  remarkable 
absorption  in  certain  cases  of  disease  and  of 
deficiency  of  proper  food,  seems  to  point  it 
out  as  a source  of  nutriment  of  which  the 


animal  economy  may  avail  itself  on  emer- 
gency ; and  accordingly  in  cases  of  emaciation 
or  atrophy  it  is  the  first  substance  which  dis- 
appears.” Todd’s  ‘Cyclopedia  of  Physiology,’ 
Vol.  I.  p.  232. 

blood]  See  on  xvii.  ii. 

throughout . . .your  d-ivellings]  The  meaning  is 
that  the  suet  is  neither  to  be  eaten  in  sacrificial 
meals  in  the  Sanctuary,  nor  in  ordinary  meals 
in  private  houses. 

On  the  classification  of  Peace-offerings,  on 
the  Meat-offerings  and  Drink-offerings  which 
accompanied  them,  and  on  the  portions  awarded 
to  the  priests,  see  vii.  ii — 21;  Num.  xv.  2 — 
II.  On  the  Chagigah,  a sort  of  social  feast 
allied  to  the  Peace-offering,  which  forms  the 
subject  of  a treatise  of  the  Mishna,  and  is 
supposed  to  be  alluded  to  Deut.  xiv.  26,  xvi. 
2;  2 Chro.  XXX.  22,  24;  John  xviii.  28,  see 
notes  in  loc.  and  Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’  11.  p.  717. 

The  Sin-offerings. 

iv.  I— V.  13. 

Chap.  IV.  1,  2.  y'lnd  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying.  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel] 
This  formula  answers  to  that  which  intro- 
duces the  three  previous  chapters  as  a whole 
(i.  I,  2).  It  is  the  commencement  6f  a dis- 
tinct section  of  the  Law.  See  following  note. 

2.  If  a soul  shall  sin]  The  Sin-offering 
was  a new  thing,  instituted  by  the  Law. 
^See  Introd.  §xvi.)  The  older  kinds  of  sacri- 
fice (see  iii.  i)  when  ofiered  by  individuals 
were  purely  voluntary : no  special  occasions 
were  prescribed  when  they  were  to  be  offered. 
Hence  the  form,  “ If  any  man  of  you  bring,” 
&c.,  i.  2,  cf.  ii.  I,  iii.  i.  But  it  was  plainly 
commanded  that  he  who  was  conscious  that 
he  had  committed  a sin  should  bring  his  Sin- 
offering.  Lach  of  these  offerings  and  of  the 
Trespass-offerings  is  accordingly  introduced 


V.  3—8.] 


LEVITICUS.  IV. 


3 If  the  priest  that  is  anointed  do 
sin  according  to  the  sin  of  the  people ; 
then  let  him  bring  for  his  sin,  which 
he  hath  sinned,  a young  bullock  with- 
out blemish  unto  the  Lord  for  a sin 
oft'ering. 

4 And  he  shall  bring  the  bullock 
unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  before  the  Lord  ; and 
shall  lay  his  hand  upon  the  bullock’s 
head,  and  kill  the  bullock  before  the 
Lord. 

5 And  the  priest  that  is  anointed 

shall  take  of  the  bullock’s  blood,  and 
bring  it  to  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation ; * 


6 And  the  priest  shall  dip  his  finger 
imthe  blood,  and  sprinkle  of  the  blood 
seven  times  before  the  Lord,  before 
the  vail  of  the  sanctuary.  * 

7 And  the  priest  shall  put  some  of 
the  blood  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar 
of  sweet  incense  before  the  Lord, 
which  IS  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation ; and  shall  pour  all  the  blood  “ s 
of  the  bullock  at  the  bottom  of  the 

altar  of  the  burnt  offering,  wh'ch  is 
at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  cf  the 
congregation. 

8 And  he  shall  take  off  from  it  all 
the  fat  of  the  bullock  for  the  sin  offer- 
ing ; the  fat  that  covereth  the  inwards, 


by  a definition  of  the  circumstance  which  ren- 
ders the  sacrifice  necessary.  The  antecedent 
condition  for  Sin-offerings  in  general  is  here 
stated;  for  particular  cases,  see  iv.  3,  13,  22, 
27,  V.  I— 15. 

sin  through  ignorance]  Sin  through  er- 
ror; that  is,  through  straying  from  the  right 
way.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

The  Sin-offering  for  the  High-priest,  3 — 12. 

3.  the  priest  that  is  anointed]  The  High- 
priest  was  thus  called  because  he  alone  of  the 
priests  was  anointed  on  the  head  in  consecra- 
tion. Ex.  xxix.  7 ; Lev.  viii.  12,  xxi.  10. 
On  the  anointing  of  the  other  priests  see  note 
on  viii.  13.  The  High-priest  is  generally  called 
in  Leviticus  the  Anointed  priest  (iv.  5,  16,  vi. 
22,  xvi.  32).  He  is  called  the  High-priest 
(strictly  the  great  priest)  Lev.  xxi.  10 ; Num. 
XXXV.  25,  28  ; Josh.  XX.  6;  and  in  later  times, 
the  Chief-priest  (2  K.  xxv.  18;  2 Chro.  xix. 

ii). 

The  gradation  of  the  Sin-offerings  is  re- 
markable. It  was  not  like  the  choice  offered 
to  meet  cases  of  poverty,  v.  7 — ^13,  xii.  8,  &c. 
It  might  seem  that  the  distinction  addressed 
itself  more  pointedly  to  each  individual  accord- 
ing to  his  rank  and  consequent  responsibility. 
That  there  is  nothing  akin  to  it  in  the  Trespass- 
offering seems  to  have  arisen  from  the  latter 
having  had  a less  direct  relation  to  the  consci- 
ence, and  a closer  connection  with  the  amount 
of  harni  that  had  been  done  by  the  offence  for 
which  atonement  was  sought.  See  on  v.  14. 

according  to  the  sin  of  the  people\  Rather, 
to  bring  guilt  on  the  people.  These 
words  have  been  supposed  to  limit  the  occa- 
sion of  this  Sin-offering  to  the  offences  of  the 
High-priest  in  his  official  capacity  (Lev.  x. 
17  ; Mai.  ii.  7,  8)  as  the  head  of  the  nation 
(Knobel,  Keil,  Herxh.).  But  on  the  other 
hand  it  has  been  fairly  urged  that  the  whole 
nation  is  concerned  in  every  transgression  of 
its  representative. 


4.  See  on  i.  3,  4. 

5.  The  presentation  of  the  victim,  the 
imposition  of  hands  and  the  slaughtering  of 
all  the  Sin-offerings  were  the  same  as  in  the 
other  sacrifices  (see  Introd.  § v.).  The  dif- 
ference lay  in  the  treatment  of  the  blood. 
In  the  inferior  Sin-offerings  the  officiating 
priest  smeared  some  of  the  blood  on  the 
horns  of  the  Altar  of  Burnt-offering  {yhj.  25, 
30,  34),  while  in  this  offering  for  the  High- 
priest,  and  in  that  for  the  nation,  the  High- 
priest  himself  sprinkled  the  blood  seven  times 
within  the  Tabernacle  and  smeared  it  on  the 
horns  of  the  Altar  of  incense  (gv^.  6,  7,  17, 
18).  Compare  the  sprinklings  on  the  Day 
of  Atonement,  xvi.  14,  19.  The  different 
modes  of  sprinkling  appear  to  have  marked 
successive  degrees  of  consecration  in  advanc- 
ing from  the  Altar  of  Burnt-offering  to  the 
presence  of  Jehovah  within  the  vail. 

6.  before  the 'uail  of  the  sanctuary]  This  is 
generally  understood  to  mean  the  floor  of  the 
holy  place  in  front  of  the  vail  (Onk.,  Luther, 
Knobel,  Keil,  and  others).  It  is,  however, 
objected  that  the  priests  in  this  case  would 
tread  on  the  blood  (Kurtz,  Kalisch,  &c.) ; 
and  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  may  rather  coun- 
tenance the  notion  that  the  sprinkling  was  on 
the  vail  itself  (^ara  to  KaTanerao-fxa — contra 
‘veluni).  But  the  quantity  sprinkled  with  the 
finger  must  have  been  very  small,  and  the 
area  it  would  occupy  of  the  floor  might  have 
been  easily  left  untrodden. 

7.  pour  all  the  blood]  The  Hebrew  word 
for  pour  (shdpbak)  is  not  like  that  in  i.  5,  &c. 
See  Introd.  § vi.  The  meaning  is,  that  all 
the  blood  that  was  left  after  the  sprinkling 
and  the  smearing  should  be  disposed  of  in  such 
a manner  as  to  suit  the  decorum  of  divine 
service.  It  had  no  sacrificial  significance. 

at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion] See  on  i.  3. 

8.  the  fat]  See  Introd.  § viii. 


LEVITICUS.  IV. 


[v.  9—17. 


320 


and  all  the  fat  that  /h  upon  the  in- 
wards, 

9 And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the  fat 
that  IS  upon  them,  which  is  by  the 
flanks,  and  the  caul  above  the  liver, 
with  the  kidneys,  it  shall  he  take 
away, 

10  As  it  was  taken  off  from  the 
bullock  of  the  sacrifice  of  peace  offer- 
ings : and  the  priest  shall  burn  them 
upon  the  altar  of  the  burnt  offering. 

Exod.  1 1 And  tfie  skin  of  the  bullock,  and 
Numb.  19.  all  his  flesh,  with  his  head,  and  with  his 
and  his  inwards,  and  'his  dung, 

12  Even  the  whole  bullock  shall  he 
I Heb.  carry  forth  ^ without  the  camp  unto  a 

to  Withotit  , , , , , ^ J 

thecariip.  Clean  place,  where  the  ashes  are  poured 
‘Heb.  13.  <^burn  him  on  the  wood  with 

^ where  the  ashes  are  poured  out 
Po2iring  shall  he  be  burnt. 

ashes.  1 3 ^1  And  if  the  whole  congregation 


of  Israel  sin  through  ignorance,  "^and  '^^hap. 
the  thing  be  hid  from  the  eyes  of  the 
assembly,  and  they  have  done  some- 
what against  any  of  the  command- 
ments of  the  Lord  concerning  things 
which  should  not  be  done,  and  are 
guilty ; 

14  When  the  sin,  which  they  have 
sinned  against  it,  is  known,  then  the 
congregation  shall  ofter  a young  bul- 
lock for  the  sin,  and  bring  him  before 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

15  And  the  elders  of  the  congre- 
gation shall  lay  their  hands  upon  the 
head  of  the  bullock  before  the  Lord  : 
and^the  bullock  shall  be  killed  before 
the  Lord. 

16  And  the  priest  that  is  anointed 
shall  bring  of*the  bullock’s  blood  to 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation ; 

17  And  the  priest  shall  dip  his 


10.  shall  burn]  See  on  i.  9. 

12.  Even  the  vohole  bullock  shall  he  carry 
forth]  The  Hebrew  verb  strictly  signifies 
shall  cause  to  go  forth.  Or,  according  to  a 
common  Heb.  idiom  (see  on  Ex.  xxxvii.  i — 5), 
it  might  be  rendered,  the  vohole  bullock  shall  be 
carried  forth  (cf.  Lev.  xvi.  27).  Our  verb 
carry.,  in  the  active  voice,  was  however  rightly 
used  by  our  translators  in  this  connection,  ac- 
cording to  the  old  usage.  Thus  Nebuchad- 
nezzar “ carried  away  all  Jerusalem,  and  all 
the  princes,  and  all  the  mighty  men  of  valour, 
ten  thousand  captives,”  2 K.  xxiv.  14;  and 
Jacob  “carried  away  all  his  cattle”  from 
Padan-aram,  Gen.  xxxi.  18.  See  also  2 K. 
xvii.  6,  xviii.  ii,  xxv.  ii;  2 Chro.  xxxvi.  6; 
Jer.  xxxix.  7,  &c.  The  word  was  so  used 
very  frequently  by  the  writers  of  the  last 
century.  A recent  critic,  overlooking  these 
simple  facts,  has  imagined  that  the  words 
mean  that  the  High-priest  himself  had  to  carry 
the  whole  bullock  a distance  which  is  estimat- 
ed at  three-quarters  of  a mile,  and  has  drawn 
an  argument  from  his  own  mistake  to  prove 
the  statement  fictitious. — There  is  a solemn 
reference  to  the  burning  of  the  flesh  of  the 
Sin-offering  without  the  camp,  Heb.  xiii. 

II— 13. 

a clean  place.,  qjohere  the  ashes  are  poured  out] 
'J'he  spot  outside  the  camp  to  which  the  ashes 
were  conveyed  from  the  side  of  the  Altar  (i.  1 6). 
It  was  a place  free  from  impurities,  not  like 
those  referred  to  xiv.40, 45.  The  flesh,  though 
it  was  burned  in  an  ordinary  way,  and  not 
sent  up  in  the  fire  of  the  Altar  (see  on  i.  9), 
was  not  to  be  confounded  with  carrion,  but 
was  associated  with  the  remains  of  the  sacri- 


fices.—The  priests  could  not  eat  the  flesh  of 
this  victim  or  of  that  offered  for  the  sin  of 
the  congregation,  as  they  ate  that  of  other  Sin- 
offerings,  because  they  were  in  these  cases  in 
the  position  of  offerers.  The  same  rule  was 
observed  in  regard  to  the  Meat-offering  of  the 
priests,  vi.  23.  It  was  only  of  the  Peace- 
offering that  the  offerer  himself  could  partake. 
See  on  x.  17,  18,  xvi.  27;  Heb.  xiii.  ii. 

The  Sin-offering  for  the  Congregation. 

13—21. 

13.  congregation... assembly]  Each  of  the 
Hebrew  words  signifies  the  people  in  a col- 
lected body.  It  does  not  appear  that  there  is 
any  difference  between  them  in  the  connection 
in  which  they  are  here  used.  Cf.  Num.  xv. 
24,  26. 

sin  through  ignorance]  See  Note  at  the  end 
of  the  chapter. 

14.  When  the  sin... is  knovon]  Such  a case 
seems  to  have  been  that  related  i S.  xiv.  31 
—35- 

15.  In  this  case  the  imposition  of  hands  is 
performed  by  the  elders  in  behalf  of  the  nation. 
But  in  other  respects  the  rites  were  performed 
by  the  High-priest  in  the  same  manner  as  in 
the  Sin-offering  for  himself.  According  to 
the  Mishna  this  and  the  Scape-goat  were  the 
only  pubfic  acts  of  sacrifice  in  which  there 
was  the  imposition  of  hands  (‘  Menach,’  ix.  7), 
while  it  was  observed  in  all  private  sacrifices. 
See  on  i.  4.  If  this  is  correct,  there  was  no 
such  observance  in  the  continual  Burnt-offer- 
ing nor  in  the  Festival  offerings. 

16.  the  priest  that  is  anointed]  See  on  *1;.  3. 

17.  See  V.  6. 


V.  18—27.] 


LEVITICUS.  iV. 


521 


finger  m some  of  the  blood,  and  sprinkle 
it  seven  times  before  the  Lord,  even 
before  the  vail. 

18  And  he  shall  put  some  of  the 
blood  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar 
which  is  before  the  Lord,  that  is  in 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
and  shall  pour  out  all  the  blood  at  the 
bottom  of  the  altar  of  the  burnt  of- 
fering, which  is  at  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

19  And  he  shall  take  all  his  fat 
from  him,  and  burn  it  upon  the  altar. 

20  And  he  shall  do  with  the  bul- 
lock as  he  did  with  the  bullock  for  a 
sin  offering,  so  shall  he  do  with  this : 
and  the  priest  shall  make  an  atone- 
ment for  them,  and  it  shall  be  for- 
given them. 

21  And  he  shall  cany  forth  the 
bullock  without  the  camp,  and  burn 
him  as  he  burned  the  first  bullock ; it 
is  a sin  offering  for  the  congregation. 

22  ^ When  a ruler  hath  sinned, 
and  done  somewhat  through  ignorance 
against  any  of  the  commandments  of 


the  Lord  his  God  concerning  things 
which  should  not  be  done,  and  is 
guilty; 

23  Or  if  his  sin,  wherein  he  hath 
sinned,  come  to  his  knowledge;  he 
shall  bring  his  offering,  a kid  of  the 
goats,  a male  without  blemish : 

24  And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  the  goat,  and  kill  it  in  the 
place  where  they  kill  the  burnt  ofl'ering 
before  the  Lord  : it  is  a sin  offering. 

25  And  the  priest  shall  take  of  the 
blood  of  the  sin  offering  with  his 
finger,  and  put  it  upon  the  horns  of 
the  altar  of  burnt  offering,  and  shall 
pour  out  his  blood  at  the  bottom  of 
the  altar  of  burnt  offerino-. 

O 

26  And  he  shall  burn  all  his  fat 
upon  the  altar,  as  the  fat  of  the  sacri- 
fice of  peace  offerings : and  the  priest 
shall  make  an  atonement  for  him  as 
concerning  his  sin,  and  it  shall  be  for- 
given him. 

27  ^ And  if  ^any  one  of  the  Tom-  ^ , 

mon  people  sin  through  ignorance,  ^ Heb. 
while  he  doeth  somewhat  against  any 


18.  the  altar... in  the  tabernacle']  i.e.  the 
Altar  of  incense  (cf.  ‘t’.  7). 

20.  the  bullock  for  a sin-offering]  “The 
bullock  for  the  sin-olfering,”  i.e.  for  his  own 
sin-offering,  v.  3. 

21.  See  on  v.  12. 

The  Sin-offering  for  the  Ruler. 

22 — 26. 

22.  ruler]  The  Hebrew  word  denoted 
either  the  head  of  a tribe  (Num.  i.  4 — 16),  or 
the  head  of  a division  of  a tribe  (see  Num. 
xxxiv.  18;  cf.  Josh.  xxii.  30).  It  is  variously- 
rendered  in  our  Bible  by (Gen.  xvii.  20,' 
xxiii.  6;  Num.  i.  16,  44,  vii.  2,  3,  10,  16,  &c.), 
by  ruler  (Ex.  xvi.  22,  xxii.  28,  &c.),  by  cap- 
tain (Num.  ii.  3,  5,  7,  &c.),  by  chief  (Num. 
iii.  24,  30,  32 ; 2 Chro.  v.  2,  &c.),  hy  governor 
(2  Chro.  i.  2). 

through  ignorance]  See  on  n.'.  2. 

23.  Or  if  his  sin]  Rather,  And  if  his 
sin. 

come  to  his  kno^vledge]  i.  e.  when  he  has  be- 
come conscious  of  his  sin. 

a kid  of  the  goats]  Strictly,  a shaggy  buck 
of  the  goats,  that  is,  a shaggy  h e-go  at.  Our 
version  seems  to  stand  almost  alone  in  ren- 
dering the  Heb.  sdeer  by  kid.  The  word 
literally  means  a rough  shaggy  goat,  in  dis- 
tinction from  a smooth-haired  he-goat,  "‘attud., 


Gen.  xxxi.  10,  12;  Num.  vii.  17,  23,  83, 
&c.  Sa'eer  occurs  Lev.  ix.  3,  xvi.  5,  xxiii. 
19;  Num.  vii.  16,  &c.  It  is  rendered  densil., 
Lev.  xvii.  7,  2 Chro.  xi.  15  ; satjr^  Isa.  xiii.  21, 
xxxiv.  14;  rough  goat.,  Dan.  viii.  21;  ard  is 
applied  to  Esau,  Gen.  xxvii.  ii.  Bochart  sup- 
posed sa'eer  and  'attud  to  represent  varieties 
of  breed,  and  this  seems  most  probable,  see 
‘2’.  28 ; but  Knobel  supposes  the  first  to  denote 
an  old  goat  with  a beard,  and  the  latter  a 
younger  one.  The  sa'eer  was  the  regular  Sin- 
offering  at  the  yearly  Festivals,  Lev.  xvi.  9,  15, 
xxiii. 19;  Num.xxviii.15,  22, 3o,xxix.5,i6,  &c., 
and  at  the  consecration  of  the  priests,  Lev.  ix. 
3,  15,  X.  16,  while  the  'attud  appears  to  have 
been  generally  offered  for ’the  other  sacrifices, 
Ps.  1.  9,  13,  Ixvi.  15;  Isa.  1.  II,  xxxiv.  6; 
&c.  Ezek.  xxxix.  18,  &c. 

24.  <vjhere  they  kill  the  burnt-offering]  On 
the  north  side  of  the  Altar.  See  on  i.  ii. 

25.  the  horns  of  the  altar  of  burnt-offering] 
See  on  -t;.  5. 

The  Sin-offering  for  one  of  the  People. 

27.  any  one  of  the  common  people]  Lite- 
rally, any  one  of  the  people  of  the  land.  These 
words  are  so  rendered  Lev.  xx.  2,  4;  2 K.  xi. 
18,  19,  xvi.  15.  It  was  the  ordinary  designa- 
tion of  the  people,  as  distinguished  from  the 
priests  and  the  rulers. 


LEVITICUS.  IV.  [v.  28-35. 


of  the  commandments  of  the  Lor.d 
concerning  things  which  ought  not  to 
be  done,  and  be  guilty ; 

'28  Or  if  his  sin,  which  he  hath 
sinned,  come  to  his  knowledge : then 
he  shall  bring  his  offering,  a kid  of  the 
goats,  a female  without  blemish,  for 
his  sin  which  he  hath  sinned. 

29  And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  the  sin  offering,  and  slay 
the  sin  offering  in  the  place  of  the 
burnt  offering. 

30  And  the  priest  shall  take  of  the 
blood  thereof  with  his  finger,  and  put 
it  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar  of  burnt 
offering,  and  shall  pour  out  all  the 
blood  thereof  at  the  bottom  of  the 
altar. 

^chap.  3.  31  And  ^he  shall  take  away  all  the 

fat  thereof,  as  the  fat  is  taken  away 
from  off  the  sacrifice  of  peace  offer- 
ings ; and  the  priest  shall  burn  it  upon 
./Exod.29.  the  altar  for  a^sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord  ; and  the  priest  shall  make  an 


atonement  for  him,  and  it  shall  be  for- 
given him. 

32  And  if  he  bring  a lamb  for  a 
sin  offering,  he  shall  bring  it  a female 
without  blemish. 

33  And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  the  sin  offering,  and  slay 
it  for  a sin  offering  in  the  place  where 
they  kill  the  burnt  offering. 

34  And  the  priest  shall  take  of  the 
blood  of  the  sin  offerino-  with  his  finp-er, 
and  put  it  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar 
of  burnt  offering,  and  shall  pour  out 
all  the  blood  thereof  at  the  bottom  of 
the  altar: 

35  And  he  shall  take  away  all  the 
fat  thereof,  as  the  fat  of  the  lamb  is 
taken  away  from  the  sacrifice  of  the 
peace  offerings;  and  the  priest  shall 
burn  them  upon  the  altar,  according 
to  the  offerings  made  by  fire  unto  the 
Lord  : and  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  his  sin  that  he  hath  com- 
mitted, and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him. 


28.  Or  if  his  shi]  And  if  his  sin. 

a kid  of  the  goats']  A shaggy  she-goat. 
The  word  is  the  feminine  of  ‘v.  23. 

31.  for  a s^jueet  savour]  See  on  i.  9. 

32.  a lamb]  Rather,  a sheep;  one  be- 
tween one  and  three  years  old.  See  on  iii.  7. 
Introd.  §iv.  Three  points  are  to  be  observed 
in  regard  to  the  victims  for  Sin-offerings. — The 
common  people  had  to  offer  a female,  as  the 
less  valuable  animal ; they  might  present  either 
a sheep  or  a goat  to  suit  their  convenience, 


while  the  rulers  had  always  to  offer  a male- 
goat  ; and  the  goat  was  preferred  to  the  sheep, 
unlike  the  victim  for  a Peace-offering  or  a 
Burnt-offering. 

35.  according  to  the  offerings  made  by  fire] 
Rather,  upon  the  offerings  made  by  fire.  See 
on  iii.  5. 

It  should  be  observed,  that  the  Sin-offerings 
were  not  accompanied  by  Meat-offerings  or 
Drink-offerings.  See  Num.  xv,  3 — 11. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  iv.  2. 


Ox  SIXXIXG  ’THKOUGII  IGXORAXCE. 

This  verse  defines  the  kind  of  sin  for  which 
Sin-offerings  were  accepted.  In  the  abridged 
rules  f.ir  c>in-offerings  in  Numbers  xv.  this 
kind  of  sin  is  contrasted  with  that  which  cut 
off  the  perpetrator  from  among  his  people  (cf. 
V.  2z  with  V.  30).  'Phe  two  classes  are  dis- 
tinguislied  in  the  language  of  our  Bible  as 
sin  through  ignorance  and  presiunp! uous  sin. 
The  distinction  is  clearly  recognized  Ps.  xix. 
12,  13  and  ileb.  x.  26,  27.  It  seems  evident 
that  the  classification  thus  indicated  refers 
immediately  to  the  relation  of  the  conscience 
to  God,  not  to  outward  penalties,  nor,  imme- 
diately, to  outward  actions.  'I'he  presump- 
tuous sinner,  literally  he  who  sinned  “with 


a high  hand,”  might  or  might  not  have 
committed  such  a crime  as  to  incur  punish- 
ment from  the  civil  law : it  was  enough 
that  he  had  with  deliberate  purpose,  rebelled 
against  God  (see  Prov.  ii,  13—15),  and  ipso 
facto  was  “cut  off  from  among  his  people” 
and  alienated  from  the  divine  covenant  (see 
on  Ex.  xxxi.  14;  Lev.  vii.  20;  cf.  Matt.  xii. 
31;  I Joh.  V.  16).  But  the  other  kind  of 
sin,  that  f()r  which  the  Sin-offering  was  ap- 
pointed, WHS  of  a more  complicated  nature. 
It  appears  to  have  included  the  entire  range  of 
“sins,  negligences  and  ignorances”  for  which 
we  are  accustomed  to  ask  forgiveness.  It  is 
what  the  Psalmist  spoke  of,  “Who  can  un- 
derstand his  errors?  Cleanse  thou  me  from 
secret  faults.”  When  he  examined  his  heart, 


V.  I— 3-] 


LEVITICUS.  V. 


523 


he  found  his  offences  multiply  to  such  extent 
that  he  felt  them  to  be  beyond  calculation, 
and  so  prayed  to  be  cleansed  from  those  which 
were  concealed  not  only  from  others,  but 
from  himself.  It  was  not  the  outward  form 
of  the  offence  which  determined  the  class  to 
which  it  belonged.  It  might  have  been  merely 
an  indulgence  of  sinful  thought.  Or,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  might  have  been  a gross  offence 
in  its  external  aspect  (see  v.  i,  4,  vi.  2,  3,  5); 
but  if  it  was  not  clearly  premeditated  as  a sin, 
if  the  offender  now  felt  himself  amenable  to 
Jehovah  and  recognized  the  Covenant,  be- 
coming thereby  the  more  conscious  of  his  sin, 
he  might  bring  the  symbol  of  his  repentance 
to  the  Altar,  and  the  priest  was  to  make 
atonement  for  him. 

If  we  accept  this  view,  the  designation  of 
“sin  through  ignorance”  cannot  be  the  right 
one.  The  Hebrew  word  rendered  in  our  ver- 
sion “ignorance”  comes  from  a root  which 
signifies  to  err  or  go  astray  (see  Ps.  cxix.  67) 
(3JC^,  shagag).  The  substantive  is  rendered 
error,  Eccles.  v.  6,  x.  5,  and  used  with  a pre- 
position, as  an  adverb,  unawares,  Num.  xxxv. 
II,  15  ; Josh.  XX.  3,  9 ; it  seems  strictly  to  de- 
note inadvertence.  It  is  true  that  the  writer  of 
the  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews  has  dypo^fia  in  the 
same  sense  (Heb.  ix.  7).  But  dyvornia  and 
dyvoia  are  used  in  Hellenistic  Greek  not 


merely  to  denote  sins  of  ignorance  but  as 
general  words  for  ofl'ences.  (LXX.  Gen.  xxvi. 
10;  2 Chro.  xxviii.  15;  Lev.  xxii.  14.  See 
Schl.  ‘Lex.  in  LXX.’  Schweighseuser,  ‘Lex. 
Polyb.’)  The  rendering,  through  inadnjertence^ 
would  substantially  agree  with  most  of  the 
versions  ancient  and  modern.  The  LXX. 
have  aKova-Lcos'  the  old  Italic  has  imprudenter. 
Our  translators  followed  the  Vulgate  and 
Onkelos. 

It  should  however  be  observed  that  Sin- 
offerings  were  required  not  only  when  the 
conscience  accused  the  offender  of  having 
yielded  to  temptation,  but  sometimes  for  what 
were  breaches  of  the  Law  committed  strictly 
in  ignorance  (v.  17,  iv.  14,  23,  28),  and 
sometimes  on  account  of  ceremonial  pollu- 
tion. They  are  thus  to  be  regarded  as  protests 
against  everything  which  is  opposed  to  the 
holiness  and  purity  of  the  divine  Law.  They 
were,  in  short,  to  be  offered  by  the  worshipper 
as  a relief  to  the  conscience  whenever  he  felt 
the  need  of  atonement. 

The  notion  of  Ebrard  (on  Heb.  'v.  i — 10), 
and  others,  that  the  priest  had  to  decide 
whether  each  particular  case  which  came  be- 
fore him  was  one  for  which  a Sin-offering  was 
available,  seems  to  be  quite  hostile  to  the  idea 
of  the  Mosaic  ritual  and  to  what  we  know  of 
the  functions  of  the  priesthood. 


CHAPTER  V. 

I He  that  sinneth  in  concealing  his  knowledge, 
2 in  totiching  an  unclean  thmg,  4 or  in 
making  an  oath.  6 His  trespass  offering,  of 
the  fiock,  7 of foivls,  i\  or  of  flour.  14  The 
trespass  .offering  in  saci'ilege,  17  and  in  sins 
of  ig7iorance. 

AND  if  a soul  sin,  and  hear  the 
T~\.  voice  of  swearing,  and  is  a wit- 
ness, whether  he  hath  seen  or  known 
of  it;  if  he  do  not  utter  A,  then  he 
shall  bear  his  iniquity. 


2 Or  if  a soul  touch  any  unclean 
thing,  whether  it  be  a carcase  of  an 
unclean  beast,  or  a carcase  of  unclean 
cattle,  or  the  carcase  of  unclean  creep- 
ing things,  and  if  it  be  hidden  from  him  j 
he  also  shall  be  unclean,  and  guilty. 

3 Or  if  he  touch  the  uncleanness 
of  man,  whatsoever  uncleanness  it  he 
that  a man  shall  be  defiled  withal,  and 
it  be  hid  from  him ; when  he  knoweth 
of  it.,  then  he  shall  be  guilty. 


Chap.  V.  i — 13]  The  subject  of  the  Sin- 
offering  is  continued  in  this  chapter  to  -u.  14. 
See  on  no-v.  6,*  7.  Special  occasions  are  men- 
tioned on  which  Sin-offerings  are  to  be  made 
with  a particular  confession  of  the  offence  for 
which  atonement  is  sought  {pv.  5).  These 
Sin-offerings  are  thus  brought  into  a class 
clearly  distinguished  by  this  additional  form 
from  those  prescribed  in  the  preceding  chap- 
ter. 

1.  hear  the  voice  of  svuearing^  Rather, 
“ hear  the  voice  of  adjuration.”  The  case 
appears  to  be  that  of  one  who  has  been  put 
upon  his  oath  as  a witness  by  a magistrate 
and  fails  to  utter  all  he  has  seen  and  heard 
(cf.  Prov.  xxix.  24;  Numb.  v.  21 ; Matt.  xxvi. 


63).  The  fabrication  of  what  is  false  in  giving 
evidence  is  not  here  mentioned  (see  Deut.  xix. 
16—19). 

2,  3.  Cases  of  ceremonial  uncleanness. — 
If  a person  took  immediate  notice  of  his  pol- 
lution from  either  of  these  sources,  simple 
forms  of  purification  were  provided  for  him. 
Lev.  xi._  24,  25,  28,  39,  40,  XV.  5,  8,  21; 
Num.  xix.  II,  22.  But  if  the  thing  was 
“hid  from  him,”  either  through  forgetfulness 
or  indifference,  so  that  purification  had  been 
neglected,  a Sin-offering  was  required.  There 
had  of  course  in  such  a case  been  a guilty 
negligence.  But  on  the  essential  connection 
between  impurity  and  the  Sin-offering,  see 
Note  after  ch.  xv. 


524 


LEVITICUS.  V. 


[v.  4—13- 


4 Or  if  a soul  swear,  pronouncing 
with  his  lips  to  do  evil,  or  to  do  good, 
whatsoever  it  be  that  a man  shall  pro- 
nounce with  an  oath,  and  it  be  hid 
from  him ; when  he  knoweth  of  it^ 
then  he  shall  be  guilty  in  one  of  these. 

5 And  it  shall  be,  when  he  shall  be 
guilty  in  one  of  these  things^  that  he 
shall  confess  that  he  hath  sinned  in 
that  thing: 

6 And  he  shall  bring  his  trespass 
offering  unto  the  Lord  for  his  sin 
which  he  hath  sinned,  a female  from 
the  flock,  a lamb  or  a kid  of  the  goats, 
for  a sin  offering  j and  the  priest  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  him  concern- 
ing his  sin. 

t Heb.  n And  if  ^ he  be  not  able  to  bring 

a lamb,  then  he  shall  bring  for  his 
7kel!ffi-  trespass,  which  he  hath  committed, 
ciency  of  a turtledoves,  ot  two  young  pigeons, 

unto  the  Lord  ; one  for  a sin  offering, 
and  the  other  for  a burnt  offering. 

8  And  he  shall  bring  them  unto  the 
priest,  who  shall  offer  that  which  is 
-2  chap.  I.  for  the  sin  offering  first,  and  "wring 
off  his  head  from  his  neck,  but  shall 
not  divide  it  asunder: 


4.  The  case  of  rash  or  forgotten  oaths. — 

pronouncing  Rather  idly  speaking  (Ps. 

cvi.  3L-  The  reference  is  to  an  oath  to  do 
something  littered  in  recklessness  or  passion 
and  forgotten  as  soon  as  uttered. 

5.  The  confession  of  the  particular  offence 
here  spoken  of  appears  to  be  no  part  of  the 
sacrificial  ceremony.  Cf.  Num.  v.  6,  7.  It 
is  not  therefore  to  be  confounded  with  the 
general  prayer  or  confession  which,  according 
to  Jewish  tradition,  accompanied  the  imposition 
of' hands  on  the  head  of  the  victim.  See  In- 
trod.  § V. 

6.  his  trespass-offering]  Rather,  as  kis 
forfeit,  that  is,  whatever  is  due  for  his 
ollence.  In  its  old  wsQfforfeit  seems  to  have 
answered  exactly  to  the  Heb.  asbani^  meaning 
cither  an  offence,  or  the  penalty  for  an  offence. 
Sec  the  quotations  in  Richardson’s  I^fct.  1 he 
word  asbam  is  generally  translated  Trespass- 
offering, and  that  rendering  might  have  con- 
veyed the  sense  here  had  not  the  term  Trespass- 
offering become  the  current  designation  for  a 
distinct  kind  of  Sin-offering  mentioned  in  the 
next  section  (see  on  ni.  14). 

a Iamb  or  a kid  of  the  goats]  a sheep 
(iv.  32)  or  a shaggy  shc-goat  (iv.  23). 


9 And  he  shall  sprinkle  of  the  blood 
of  the  sin  offering  upon  the  side  of 
the  altar;  and  the  rest  of  the  blood 
shall  be  wrung  out  at  the  bottom  of 
the  altar : it  is  a sin  offering. 

10  And  he  shall  offer  the  second 
for  a burnt  offering,  according  to  the 

” manner : and  the  priest  shall  make  " Or, 

r 1 • r 1 • • 1 ' 1 ordinance. 

an  atonement  for  him  for  his  sin  which 
he  hath  sinned,  and  it  shall  be  forgiven 
him. 

11  But  if  he  be  not  able  to  bring 
two  turtledoves,  or  two  young  pigeons, 
then  he  that  sinned  shall  bring  for  his 
offering  the  tenth  part  of  an  ephah  of 
fine  flour  for  a sin  offering ; he  shall 
put  no  oil  upon  it,  neither  shall  he 
put  any  frankincense  thereon:  for  it 
is  a sin  offering. 

12  Then  shall  he  bring  it  to  the 
priest,  and  the  priest  shall  take  his 
handful  of  it,  ^ even  a memorial  thereof,  ^ chap.  2. 
and  burn  it  on  the  altar,  ^according  to  ?'chap.  4. 
the  offerings  made  by  fire  unto  the  35- 
Lord  : it  is  a sin  offering. 

13  And  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  him  as  touching  his  sin 
that  he  hath  sinned  in  one  of  these, 


7—10.  See  i.  14— t 6,  xii.  8.  In  the  larger 
offerings  of  the  ox  and  the  sheep,  tfie  fat  which 
was  burnt  upon  the  Altar  represented,  like  the 
Burnt-offering,  the  dedication  of  the  wor- 
shipper ; in  this  case,  the  same  meaning  was 
conveyed  by  one  of  the  birds  being  treated  as 
a distinct  Burnt-offering  (See  Introd.  § xvi.). 
According  to  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  iii.  9.  § 3)  and 
the  Mishna  (‘Zebach,’  vi.  4)  the  body  of  the 
bird  for  the  Sin-offering  was  eaten  by  the 
priests,  like  the  flesh  of  the  larger  Sin-offerings. 

7.  a lamb]  one  of  the  flock,  either  a 
sheep  or  a goat.  See  Introd.  § iv. 

for  bis  trespass^  c^vhich  he  hath  committed^] 
as  his  forfeit  for  the  sin  he  hath 
committed. 

11.  tenth  part  of  an  ephah]  i.e.  “the  tenth 
deal probably  less  than  half  a gallon.  See 
on  xix.  36.  This  Sin-offering  of  meal  was 
distinguished  from  the  ordinary  Minchah  by 
the  absence  of  oil  and  frankincense.  Gf.  the 
absence  of  the  Meat-  and  Drink-offerings  in 
the  animal  Sin-offenngs. 

12.  according  to  the  offerings  made  by  fire] 
Rather,  upon"  the  Burnt-offerings.  See 
on  Lev.  iii.  5. 


V.  14—2.] 


LEVITICUS.  V.  VI. 


52 


and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him : and  the 
remnant  shall  be  the  priest’s,  as  a meat 
offering. 

14  ^1  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

15  If  a soul  commit  a trespass,  and 
sin  through  ignorance,  in  the  holy 
things  of  the  Lord  ; then  he  shall 
bring  for  his  trespass  unto  the  Lord 
a ram  without  blemish  out  of  the 
flocks,  with  thy  estimation  by  shekels 
of  silver,  after  the  shekel  of  the  sanc- 
tuary, for  a trespass  offering : 

16  And  he  shall  make  amends  for 
the  harm  that  he  hath  done  in  the 
holy  thing,  and  shall  add  the  fifth  part 
thereto,  and  give  it  unto  the  priest : 
and  the  priest  shall  make  an  atone- 
ment for  him  with  the  ram  of  the 
trespass  offering,  and  it  shall  be  for- 
given him. 

17  ^ And  if  a “^soul  sin,  and  com- 
mit any  of  these  things  which  are  for- 


bidden to  be  done  by  the  command- 
ments of  the  Lord  \ though  he  wist 
it  not,  yet  is  he  guilty,  and  shall  bear 
his  iniquity. 

18  And  he  shall  brino-  a ram  with- 

O 

out  blemish  out  of  the  flock,  with  thy 
estimation,  for  a trespass  offering,  unto 
the  priest : and  the  priest  shall  make 
an  atonement  for  him  concerning  his 
ignorance  wherein  he  erred  and  wist 
it  not,  and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him. 

19  It /r  a trespass  offering : he  hath 
certainly  trespassed  against  the  Lord. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

I The  trespass  offering  for  sins  done  wittingly. 
8 The  law  of  the  burnt  offerings  1 4 and  of 
the  meat  offering.  19  The  offering  at  the 
consecration  of  a priest.  24  The  law  of  the 
sin  offering. 

AN D the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 If  a soul  sin,  and  commit  a 
trespass  against  the  Lord,  and  lie 


The  Trespass-offerings. 

V.  14. — vi.  7. 

14.  The  Trespass-oiferings  as  they  are 
described  in  this  section  and  in  vii.  i — 7,  are 
clearly  distinguished  from  the  ordinary  Sin- 
ofterings  in  these  particulars: — 

(1)  They  were  offered  on  account  of  of- 
fences which  involved  an  injury  to  some  per- 
son (it  might  be  the  Lord  Himself)  in  respect 
to  property.  See  no.  16,  vi.  4,  5. 

(2)  They  were  always  accompanied  by  a 
pecuniary  fine  equal  to  the  value  of  the  injury 
done,  with  the  addition  of  one-fifth.  It  has 
hence  been  proposed  that  they  should  be 
called  “Fine-offerings.”  Cf.  Num.  v.  5 — 8. 

(3)  The  treatment  of  the  blood  was  more 
simple.  It  was  disposed  of  in  the  same  way 
as  the  blood  of  the  Burnt-offerings  and  the 
Peace-offerings,  none  of  it  being  put  on  the 
horns  of  the  Altar. 

(4)  The  victim  was  a ram,  instead  of  a 
female  sheep  or  goat. 

(5)  There  was  no  such  graduation  of  offer- 
ings to  suit  the  rank  or  circumstances  of  the 
worshipper  as  is  set  forth  iv.  3 — 35,  v.  7 — 13, 
xii.  8,  xiv.  21, 

It  appears  from  the  treatment  of  the  blood 
that  the  Trespass-offering  had  less  intimate 
connection  with  the  conscience  than  the  Sin- 
offering  ; and,  from  the  absence  of  any  gra- 
duation to  suit  the  circumstances  of  the 
sacrificer,  that  it  was  regarded  with  a strict 
reference  to  the  material  injury  inflicted.  See 
on  iv.  3. 

VoL.  I. 


15.  commit  a trespass']  Rather,  perpe- 
trate a wrong.  The  word  {pidal)  is  differ- 
ent from  that  rendered  trespass  elsewhere  in 
these  chapters  {ashani). 

through  ignorance]  through  inadver- 
tence. See  Note  on  iv.  2. 

in  the  holy  things  of  the  Lord]  The  refer- 
ence is  to  a failure  in  the  payment  of  first- 
fruits,  tithes  or  fees  of  any  kind  connected 
with  the  public  service  of  religion  by  which 
the  Sanctuary  suffered  loss;  cf.  Num.  v.  6 — 8. 

shekel  of  the  sanctuary]  See  on  Exod. 
xxxviii.  24. 

17,  18.  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the 
Law  of  the  Trespass-offering  was  first  laid 
down  in  regard  to  frauds  on  the  Sanctuary. 
It  is  here  expanded  so  as  to  include  all  wrongs 
which  could  be  compensated  for  by  money. 
On  the  form  of  the  law  cf.  iv.  2,  13,  27. 

17.  these  things]  It  should  be  “the  things.” 

though  he  ovist  it  not]  Ignorance  of  the 

Law,  or  even  of  the  consequences  of  the  act 
at  the  time  it  was  committed,  was  not  to 
excuse  him  from  the  obligation  to  offer  the 
sacrifice. 

18.  his  ignorance]  his  inadvertence. 

Chap.  VI.  i.  In  the  Hebrew  Bible  w. 
1 — 7 form  part  of  Ch.  v.  It  is  evident  that 
they  ought  to  do  so.  See  on  2;.  7.  Our  trans- 
lators unfortunately  adopted  the  division  of 
the  LXX.  Cf.  on  vii.  i. 

2.  commit  a trespass  against  the  Lord] 
perpetrate  a wrong  against  Jehovah. 

L L 


LEVITICUS.  VI. 


[v.  3—10. 


526 


unto  his  neighboui  in  that  whiph 
vvas  delivered  hin?  to  keep,  or  "in 
fellowship,  or  in  a thing  taken 
^way  by  violence,  or  hath  deceived 
his  neighbour; 

3 Or  have  found  that  which  was 
lost,  and  lieth  concerning  it,  and 

« Numb.  « sweareth  filsely ; in  any  of  all  these 
■ that  a man  doeth,  sinning  therein  : 

4 Then  it  shall  be,  because  he 
hath  sinned,  and  is  guilty,  that  he 
shall  restore  that  which  he  took  vio- 
lently away,  or  the  thing  which  he 
hath  deceitfully  gotten,  or  that  which 
was  delivered  him  to  keep,  or  the  lost 
thing  which  he  found, 

5 Or  all  that  about  which  he  hath 
f>  chap.  5.  sworn  falsely ; he  shall  even  ^ restore 

it  in  the  principal,  and  shall  add  the 
\he'day  ^/th  part  more  thereto,  and  give  it 
0/ his  be-  yj-jto  him  to  whom  it  appertaineth, 
guilty.  II  in  the  day  or  his  trespass  orrenng. 
in  tile  day  6 Aiid  lie  shall  bring  his  trespass 
offering  unto  the  Lord,  a ram  with- 


out blemish  out  of  the  flock,  with  s* 
thy  estimation,  for  a trespass  offering, 
unto  the  priest : 

7 And  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  him  before  the  Lord  : 
and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him  for  any 
thing  of  all  that  he  hath  done  in  tres- 
passing therein. 

8 And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

9 Command  Aaron  and  his  sons, 
saying.  This  is  the  law  of  the  burnt 
offering : It  is  the  burnt  offering, 

" because  of  the  burning  upon  the 
altar  all  night  unto  the  morning,  and  ifig. 
the  fire  of  the  altar  shall  be  burning 

in  it. 

10  And  the  priest  shall  put  on  his 
linen  garment,  and  his  linen  breeches 
shall  he  put  upon  his  flesh,  and  take 
up  the  ashes  which  the  fire  hath 
consumed  with  the  burnt  offering  on 
the  altar,  and  he  shall  put  them  be- 
side the  altar. 


See  on  V.  i^.  The  law  expressed  in  its  most 
compendious  way  in  v.  17  is  here  carried 
out  into  detail.  The  distinct  heading,  “And 
the  Lord  spake”  (--v.  1),  may  suggest  that  it 
was  written  down  somewhat  later  by  way 
of  explanation,  or  comment  on  v.  17,  and 
inserted  in  its  right  place  when  the  book  of 
Leviticus  was  put  together.  The  connection 
into  which  the  offences  named  are  here  brought, 
placed  the  mulct  which  the  civil  law  would 
have  exacted  (see  Exod.  xxii.  7—15,  &c.) 
in  direct  relation  with  sacrificial  devotion  to 
Jehovah. 

5.  in  the  day  of  his  trespass  offering]^  The 
re.stitution  was  thus  to  be  associated  with  the 
religious  act  by  which  the  offender  testified 
his  penitence. 

7.  'Fhis  is  the  proper  conclusion  of  ch.  v. 
See  on  v.  i. 

'I'he  confusion  which  prevailed  amongst 
the  older  critics  regarding  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  'Trespass-offering  and  the  ordinary 
Sin-offering  was  without  doubt  connected 
with  the  false  division  of  the  chapters  in  the 
LXX.  and  other  versions.  It  was  imagined 
that  ch.  V.  I — I.;  (which  relates  to  the  Sin- 
offering)  related  to  the  Trespass-offering. 
Neither  Jewish  traditions,  nor  the  rendering 
of  the  old  versions,  throw  much  light  on  the 
subject.  Josephus  (‘  Ant.’  ni.  9.  § 3),  and 
l^hilo  (‘ de  V'ict.’  xi.)  conceive  that  the  Sin- 
offering  was  offered  for  open  transgressions, 
the  'Trespass-offering  for  what  \\'as  known 


only  to  the  conscience  of  the  offender:  this 
view  has  been  adopted  by  Reland  and  others. 
Many  have  supposed,  with  some  countenance 
from  the  LXX.,  that  the  distinction  was  based 
upon  that  between  sins  of  omission  and  sins 
of  commission  (Grotius,  Michaelis,  &c.).  For 
the  best  views  of  the  old  state  of  the  contro- 
versy, see  Carpzov.  “ App.  Grit.”  p.  707,  Biihr, 
‘ Symbolik,’  ii.  p.  400. 

Instructions  on  the  Offerings  for 
THE  Priests,  vi.  8 — vii.  21. 

9.  Command  Aaron  and  his  sons^  The 
Directions  on  sacrifices  in  previous  chapters 
were  intended  for  the  guidance  and  instruc- 
tion of  those  who  brought  their  gifts  to  the 
Altar  (see  i.  2,  iv.  2) ; those  which  follow 
were  for  the  guidance  of  the  priests  who 
officiated  at  the  Altar, 

On  the  Burnt-oJJ'ering  and  the  Meat-offering. 

8—18. 

9.  It  is  the  burnt  offering.,  because  of  the 
burning  upon  the  altar.,  &c.]  Rather,  “This, 
the  Burnt-offering,  shall  he  upon  the 
fire  on  the  Altar  all  night  unto  the  morn- 
ing.” This  refers  to  the  continual  Burnt-offer- 
ing which  represented  its  class.  See  Exod. 
xxix.  38  — 46,  with  the  notes.  Introd.  § xvi. 

10.  linen  garment.,  &:c.]  See  Ex.  xxviii. 
41 — 43- 

nvhich  the  fire  hath  consumed  ^vith  the  burnt- 


V.  II 22.] 


lp:viticus.  vi. 


527 


11  And  he  shall  put  ofF  his  gar- 
ments, and  put  on  other  garments, 
and  cany  forth  the  ashes  without  the 
camp  unto  a clean  place. 

12  And  the  fire  upon  the  altar 
shall  be  burning  in  it ; it  shall  not  be 
put  out : and  the  priest  shall  burn 
wood  on  it  every  morning,  and  lay 
the  burnt  offering  in  order  upon  it ; 
and  he  shall  burn  thereon  the  fat  of 
the  peace  offerings. 

13  The  hre  shall  ever  be  burning 
upon  the  altar ; it  shall  never  go  out. 

'I' chap.  2.  14  ^ ^And  this  is  the  law  of  the 

Nhimb.  15.  meat  offering : the  sons  of  Aaron  shall 
offer  it  before  the  Lord,  before  the 
altar. 

15  And  he  shall  take  of  it  his 
handful,  of  the  flour  of  the  meat 
offering,  and  of  the  oil  thereof,  and 
all  the  frankincense  which  is  upon 
the  meat  offering,  and  shall  burn  it 
upon  the  altar  for  a sv/eet  savour, 

'■  chap.  2.  even  the  memorial  of  it,  unto  the 
Lord. 

16  And  the  remainder  thereof  shall 
Aaron  and  his  sons  eat : with  un- 
leavened bread  shall  it  be  eaten  in  the 
holy  place ; in  the  court  of  the  taber- 


nacle of  the  congregation  they  shall 
eat  it. 

17  It  shall  not  be  baken  with 
leaven.  I have  given  it  unto  them 
for  their  portion  of  my  offerings 
made  by  fire ; it  is  most  holy,  as  is 
the  sin  offering,  and  as  the  trespass 
offering. 

18  All  the  males  among  the  chil- 
dren of  Aaron  shall  eat  of  it.  It 
shall  be  a statute  for  ever  in  your 
generations  concerning  the  offerings. 

of  the  Lord  made  by  fire  : every  one-Z'Exod.  29 
that  toLicheth  them  shall  be  holy. 

19  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

20  This  is  the  offering  of  Aaron 
and  of  his  sons,  which  they  shall  offer 
unto  the  Lord  in  the  day  when  he 
is  anointed ; the  tenth  part  of  an 

^ ephah  of  fine  flour  for  a meat  offer- .^^E.xod.  if, 
ing  perpetual,  half  of  it  in  the  morn- 
ing,  and  half  thereof  at  night. 

21  In  a pan  it  shall  be  made  with 
oil ; and  when  it  is  baken,  thou  shalt 
bring  it  in : a?id  the  baken  pieces  of 
the  meat  offering  shalt  thou  offer  for 
a sweet  savour  unto  the  Lord. 

22  And  the  priest  of  his  sons  that 


offering']  Rather,  to  which  the  fire  hath 
consumed  the  Burnt-offering. 

beside  the  altar]  See  on  i.  16. 

11.  clean  place]  See  iv.  12. 

12.  burn  thereon  the  fat]  The  verb  is 
different  from  that  applied  to  the  burning  of 
the  wood.  See  i.  9. 

13.  The  fire  shall  ever  be  burning]  This 
was  a symbol  of  the  never-ceasing  worship 
which  Jehovah  required  of  His  people.  It 
was  essentially  connected  with  their  acts  of 
sacrifice,  and  was  therefore  clearly  distin- 
guished from  the  sacred  fire  of  Vesta,  that  of 
the  Persians,  and  of  other  heathen  peoples 
with  which  it  has  often  been  compared. 

14 — 18.  These  directions  might  relate  to 
Minchahs  in  general.  See  ii.  i — 10.  But 
some  would  refer  them  more  especially  to  the 
daily  Minchahs  mentioned  Ex.  xxix.  40,  41. 

15.  Cf.  ii.  2. 

16.  voith  unleavened  bread  it  shall  be  eaten] 
This  should  be,  it  shall  be  eaten  unlea- 
vened. 

in  the  holy  place]  See  Note  after  Ex.  xxvi. 

§ V. 

18.  All  the  males]  See  xxi.  22. 


The  High-Priest's  Minch  ah.  19 — 23. 

20.  in  the  day  avhen  he  is  anointed]  See  on 
iv.  3.  As  this  must  refer  to  a rite  in  the 
consecration  of  the  High-priest,  Aaron’s  sons 
here  spoken  of  (as  in  v.  22)  must  be  the 
succession  of  High-priests  who  succeeded 
him.  See  on  Ex.  xxviii.  4.  The  day  of 
this  offering  was  probably  the  eighth  day  of 
the  ceremony  of  consecration  (viii.  35,  ix.  i), 
when  the  High-priest  appears  to  have  entered 
upon  the  duties  of  his  office. 

a yneat  offering  perpetual]  Jewish  tradition 
is  in  favour  of  these  words  implying  that  this 
Minchah  was  offered  by  the  High-priest  as  a 
daily  rite  from  the  time  of  his  conseci'ation 
(Philo,  ‘ de  Viet.’  15 ; Jos.  ‘ Ant.’  ill.  10.  § 7, 
Ecclus.  xlv.  14;  Saadia,  Mishna,  ‘ Menach,  ’ 
IV.  5,  xi.  3).  This  view  is  defended  on  pro- 
bable grounds  by  Delitzsch  (on  Heb.  vii.  27), 
Kurtz  and  others.  But  some  understand 
the  word  perpetual  to  refer  to  the  obseiwance 
of  the  law  at  every  time  of  consecration,  and 
suppose  the  ceremony  to  have  been  performed 
but  once  by  eacli  High-priest.  Knobel,  Kiel, 
Kalisch. 

21.  In  a pan]  Rather,  Upon  a flat  plate. 
See  on  ii.  -. 


L L 2 


528 

is  anointed  in  his  stead  shall  offer  it: 
it  is  a statute  for  ever  unto  the  Lord  ; 
it  shall  be  wholly  burnt. 

23  For  every  meat  offering  for  the 
priest  shall  be  wholly  burnt:  it  shall 
not  be  eaten. 

24  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Mose^,  saying, 

25  Speak  unto  Aaron  and  to  his 
sons,  saying.  This  is  the  law  of  the 
sin  offering:  In  the  place  where  the 
burnt  offerinp;  is  killed  shall  the  sin 
offering  be  killed  before  the  Lord  : it 
is  most  holy. 

26  The  priest  that  offereth  it  for  sin 
shall  eat  it : in  the  holy  place  shall  it 
be  eaten,  in  the  court  of  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation. 

27  Whatsoever  shall  touch  the  flesh 
thereof  shall  be  holy : and  when  there 
is  sprinkled  of  the  blood  thereof  upon 
any  garment,  thou  shalt  v/ash  that 


[v.  23—1. 

'whereon  it  was  sprinkled  in  the  holy 
place. 

28  But  the  earthen  vessel  where- 
in it  is  sodden  ^ shall  be  broken : and  ^ chap, 
if  it  be  sodden  in  a brasen  pot,  it 
shall  be  both  scoured,  and  rinsed  in 
water. 

29  All  the  males  among  the  priests 
shall  eat  thereof:  it  is  most  holy. 

30  ^ And  no  sin  offering,  whereof  * Heb. 
any  of  the  blood  is  brought  into  the  “ 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation  to  re- 
concile withal  in  the  holy  place^  shall 

be  eaten : it  shall  be  burnt  in  the  fire. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

I The  law  of  the  trespass  offering,  1 1 and  of 
the  peace  offerings,  it,  whether  it  be  for  a 
thanksgiving,  16  or  a vow,  or  a freewill 
offering.  22  The  fat,  26  and  the  blood,  are 
forbidden.  28  The  priests'  portion  in  the 
peace  offerings. 

Likewise  this  is  the  law  of  the 
trespass  offering : it  is  most  holy. 


LEVITICUS.  VI.  VII. 


22.  it  shall  be  av holly  burnt]  Literally, 
it  shall  ascend  in  fire  as  a ^whole  Burnt-offering. 
The  noun  is  kdleel.  See  Introd.  § iii. 

23.  it  shall  not  be  eaten]  Cf.  ‘z?.  30.  No 
sacrificer  could  eat  of  his  own  offering  except 
in  the  case  of  the  Peace-offerings.  See  on  iv.  1 2. 

On  the  Sin-Offering.  24 — 30. 

25.  Where  the  burnt  offering  is  killed]  See 
on  i.  II. 

it  is  most  holy]  On  this  phrase  see  ii.  3. 
Much  has  been  written  on  the  grounds  of  the 
peculiar  sanctity  of  the  flesh  of  the  Sin-offer- 
ing, as  set  forth  in  oj-v.  26 — 30.  The  key  to 
the  subject  must,  it  would  seem,  be  found  in 
those  words  of  Moses  to  the  priests,  in  which 
he  tells  them  that  God  required  them  to  eat 
the  flesh,  in  order  that  they  might  “ bear  the 
iniquity  of  the  congregation,  to  make  atone- 
ment for  them  before  the  Lord”  (Lev.  x.  17). 
The  flesh  of  the  victim,  which  represented 
the  sinner  for  whom  atonement  was  now 
made,  was  to  be  solemnly,  and  most  exclu- 
sively, appropriated  by  those  who  were 
appointed  to  mediate  between  the  sinner  and 
the  Lord.  The  far-reaching  symbolism  of 
the  act  met  its  perfect  fulfilment  in  the  One 
Mediator  who  took  our  nature  upon  Himself 
and  was  essentially  “ victima  sacerdotii  sui, 
et  sacerdos  suae  victimas”  (S.  Paulinus).  For 
a fuller  treatment  of  the  subject,  see  Thom- 
son, ‘ Hampton  Lectures,’  Lect.  in.;  Heng- 
stenberg,  ‘Sacrifices  of  ffoly  Scripture,’  p. 
379;  Kurt/,  ‘Sacrificial  Worship,’  .p.  239; 
Hiihr,  ‘Symbolik,’  Vol.  i.  p.  386. 


28.  the  earthen  noesseT]  Unglazed  pottery 
would  absorb  some  of  the  juices  of  the  meat; 
cf.  xi.  33,  35,  where  the  case  is  of  a vessel 
polluted,  not,  as  here,  of  one  made  holy.  In 
neither  case  could  the  vessel  be  put  to  any 
other  purpose. 

30.  This  refers  to  the  Sin-offering  for  the 
High-priest  and  the  Congregation  (iv.  5 — 7, 
16 — 18)  and  the  Sin-offering  of  the  Day  of 
Atonement  (xvi.  27).  The  priests  were  of 
course  participants  in  all  these  as  sacrificers. 
The  law  mentioned  in  the  note  on  nj.  23 
would  therefore  apply  here.  Cf.  Heb.  xiii.  ii. 

to  reconcile  nvithal]  The  same  word  is 
generally  rendered  “ to  make  atonement 
for.” 

the  holy  place]  This  denotes  here  the  outer 
apartment  of  the  Mishkan.  See  Ex.  xxvi.  33; 
note  on  Lev.  x.  18. 

Instructions  for  the  Priests  continued. 
vii.  I — 21. 

Chap.  VII.  1— 10.  In  the  LXX.  these 
verses  are  part  of  Chap.  vi.  This  is  evidently 
the  better  arrangement.  Our  Bible  follows 
the  Hebrew  here,  and  the  LXX.  in  the  com- 
mencement of  Chap.  vi.  (see  on  vi.  i),  in  both 
cases  for  the  worse. 

On  the  Trespass-offering,  i — 7. 

1.  Likeojoisc]  Rather,  And,  as  in  no.  ii. 
The  law  of  the  Trespass-offering  is  here 
placed  as  co-ordinate  with  that  of  the  Sin- 
offering  (vi.  25 — 30)  and  that  of  the  Peace- 
offerings  (vii.  II — 21). 

it  is  most  holy]  Cf.  no.  7,  and  see  on  vi.  25. 


V.  2 14- 


LEVITICUS.  VII. 


529 


2 In  the  place  where  they  kill  the 
burnt  offering  shall  they  kill  the  tres- 
pass offering:  and  the  blood  thereof 
shall  he  sprinkle  round  about  upon 
the  altar. 

3 And  he  shall  offer  of  it  all  the 
fat  thereof;  the  rump,  and  the  fat 
that  covereth  the  inwards, 

4 And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
fat  that  is  on  them,  which  is  by  the 
flanks,  and  the  caul  that  is  above 
the  liver,  with  the  kidneys,  it  shall  he 
take  away: 

5 And  the  priest  shall  burn  them 
upon  the  altar  for  an  offering  made 
by  Are  unto  the  Lord  : it  is  a tres- 
pass offering. 

6 Every  male  among  the  priests 
shall  eat  thereof:  it  shall  be  eaten  in 
the  holy  place : it  is  most  holy. 

7 As  the  sin  offering  L,  so  is  the 
trespass  offering:  there  is  one  law  for 
them:  the  priest  that  maketh  atone- 
ment therewith  shall  have  it. 

8 And  the  priest  that  offereth  any 
man’s  burnt  offering,  eve?i  the  priest 


shall  have  to  himself  the  skin  of  the 
burnt  offering  which  he  hath  offered. 

9 And  all  the  meat  offering  that 
is  baken  in  the  oven,  and  all  that 

is  dressed  in  the  frvinp-pan,  and  " in  " , 

1 1111  1 > 1 r thefint 

the  pan,  shall  be  the  priest  s that  or-  plate,  or, 
fereth  it. 

10  And  every  meat  offering,  min- 
gled with  oil,  and  dry,  shall  all  the 
sons  of  Aaron  have,  one  as  much  as 
another. 

11  And  this  is  the  law  of  the  sa- 
crifice of  peace  offerings,  which  he 
shall  offer  unto  the  Lord. 

12  If  he  offer  it  for  a thanksgiv- 
ing, then  he  shall  offer  with  the 
sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  unleavened 
cakes  mingled  with  oil,  and  unlea- 
vened wafers  anointed  with  oil,  and 
cakes  mingled  with  oil,  of  fine  flour, 
fried. 

13  Besides  the  cakes,  he  shall  offer 
for  his  offering  leavened  bread  with 
the  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  of  his 
peace  offerings. 

14  And  of  it  he  shall  offer  one  out 


2 — 7.  See  on  v.  14.  In  % “sprinkle” 
should  rather  be  cast.  Introd.  § vi.  There 
is  no  mention  here  of  the  placing  the  hands  on 
the  head  of  the  victim,  but  it  is  not  likely  (as 
Knobel  and  others  have  conjectured)  that  that 
rite  was  omitted.  A^^e  may  infer  that  such 
a point  of  difference  between  this  and  the  Sin- 
offering,  had  it  existed,  would  have  been  ex- 
pressly mentioned. — Cf.  on  i.  10.  It  is  worthy 
of  remark  that  all  the  details  regarding  the 
parts  put  on  the  Altar  are  repeated  for  each 
kind  of  sacrifice,  because  the  matter  was  one 
of  paramount  importance.  See  Introd.  § xvi. 

On  the  Burnt-offer'mg  and  the  Meat-offering. 

8 — 10. 


2)  belonged  to  the  priests.  But  the  remains  of 
those  that  were  baked  or  fried  (see  on  ii.  4, 
5,  7)  belonged  to  the  officiating  priest,  those 
of  the  others  to  the  priests  in  general. 

On  the  Peace-offerings . 

II — 21. 

11.  On  the  mode  of  offering  the  victim, 
see  iii.  i — 17.  On  the  omission  of  the  place 
of  slaughter,  as  compared  with  vi.  25,  vii.  2, 
see  on  iii.  2. — What  is  here  added,  relates  to 
the  accompanying  Minchah,  the  classification 
of  Peace-offerings  into  (i)  Thank-offerings, 
(2)  Vow-offerings  and  (3)  Voluntary-offer- 
ings, and  the  conditions  to  be  observed  by 
the  worshipper  in  eating  the  flesh.  The  por- 
tions for  the  priests  ai'e  mentioned  in  a dis- 
tinct section,  'vnj.  28 — 36.  Cf.  with  this  sec- 
tion xxii.  17 — 25. 

12.  for  a thanks gi'ving'l  That  is,  a Thank- 
offering  for  mercies  received.  On  the  three 
kinds  of  Minchah  which  formed  parts  of  the 
offering,  see  ii.  4 — ii,  viii.  26. 

13.  for  his  offering\  The  leavened  bread 
was  a distinct  offering,  not  a part  of  the  sacri- 
fice for  the  Altar  as  the  Minchahs  were,  of 
which  the  azkdrdh  was  burned.  See  ii.  2, 
9,  II. 


8.  the  skin  of  the  burnt-offering~\  It  is  most 
likely  that  the  skins  of  the  Sin-offering  and  the 
Trespass-offering  also  fell  to  the  lot  of  the 
officiating  priest.  The  point  is  probably 
noticed  in  regard  to  the  Burnt-offering  alone, 
because  all  the  rest  of  the  victim  was  con- 
signed to  the  Altar.  In  accordance  with  this 
view  the  Mishna  says  that  the  skins  of  the  most 
holy  victims  were  all  given  to  the  priests,  those 
of  the  less  holy  (i.  e.  the  Peace-offerings)  were 
retained  by  the  sacrificer.  (‘  Zebach,’  xii.  3). 

9,  10.  All  that  was  left  of  every  sort  of 
Minchah  after  the  offering  of  the  azkdrdh  (ii. 


530 


LEVITICUS.  VII. 


[v.  15—24. 


of  the  whole  oblation  for  an  heave 
offering  unto  the  Lord,  and  it  shall 
be  the  priest’s  that  sprinkleth  the 
blood  of  the  peace  offerings. 

15  And  the  flesh  of  the  sacrifice 
of  his  peace  offerings  for  thanksgiving 
shall  be  eaten  the  same  day  that  it  is 
offered;  he  shall  not  leave  any  of  it 
until  the  morning. 

16  But  if  the  sacrifice  of  his  of- 
fering be  a vow,  or  a voluntary  offer- 
dug,  it  shall  be  eaten  the  same  day 
that  he  offereth  his  sacrifice : and  on 
the  morrow  also  the  remainder  of  it 
shall  be  eaten : 

17  But  the  remainder  of  the  flesh 
of  the  sacrifice  on  the  third  day  shall 
be  burnt  with  fire. 

18  And  if  any  of  the  flesh  of  the 
sacrifice  of  his  peace  offerings  be 
eaten  at  all  on  the  third  day,  it  shall 
not  be  accepted,  neither  shall  it  be 
imputed  unto  him  that  offereth  it : it 
shall  be  an  abomination,  and  the 
soul  that  eateth  of  it  shall  bear  his 
iniquity. 


14.  out  of  the  <whole  oblation\  Rather, 
out  of  each  offering.  That  is,  one  loaf 
or  cake  out  of  each  kind  of  Meat-offering 
was  to  be  a heave-offering  (Introd.  § ix)  for 
the  officiating  priest.  According  to  Jewish 
tradition,  there  were  to  be  ten  cakes  of  each 
kind  of  bread  in  every  Thank-offering.  The 
other  cakes  were  returned  to  the  sacrificer. 
In  other  Meat-offerings  what  was  not  put 
upon  the  Altar  belonged  to  the  priests.  See 
•v'v.  9,  10,  ii.  3,  10. 

sprinkletli^  casteth  forth. 

16.  The  Vow-offering  appears  to  have 
been  a Peace-offering  vowed  upon  a certain 
condition;  the  Voluntary-offering,  one  offered 
as  the  simple  tribute  of  a devout  heart  rejoic- 
ing in  peace  with  God  and  man  offered  on 
no  external  occasion  (cf.xxii.  17—  25).  Heng- 
stenberg  would  identify  the  latter  with  the 
'Phank-offering,  and  thus  make  but  two  classes 
of  Peace-offerings.  But  this  seems  to  be  at 
variance  with  the  distinction  laid  down  in 
'V'v.  15,  16.  That  distinction  marks  these 
two  kinds  as  inferior  to,  as  well  as  distinct 
from,  the  Thank-offering,  which  in  xix.  5 — 8 
is  called  the  Peace-offering  par  excelletice. 

18,  19.  It  was  proper  that  the  sacrificial 
meat  should  not  be  polluted  by  any  approach 
to  putrefaction.  But  Theodoret  and  many 
later  commentators  have  supposed  that  the 
rule  in  regard  to  the  Peace-offerings  was  in 


19  And  the  flesh  that  toucheth 
any  unclean  thing  shall  not  be  eaten ; 
it  shall  be  burnt  with  fire : and  as  for 
the  flesh,  all  that  be  clean  shall  eat 
thereof. 

20  But  the  soul  that  eateth  of  the 
flesh  of  the  sacrifice  of  peace  offer- 
ings, that  pertain  unto  the  Lord, 

having  his  uncleanness  upon  him,  ^ chap.  rs. 
even  that  soul  shall  be  cut  oft'  from 
his  people. 

21  Moreover  the  soul  that  shall 
touch  any  unclean  things  as  the  un- 
cleanness of  man,  or  a?iy  unclean  beast, 
or  any  abominable  unclean  things  and 
eat  of  the  flesh  of  the  sacrifice  of  peace 
oft'erings,  which  pertain  unto  the  Lord, 
even  that  soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  his 
people. 

22  *^1  And  the  Lor.d  spake  unto 
Adoses,  saying, 

23  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, saying,  ^Ye  shall  eac  no  manner  ^chap.  3. 
of  fat,  of  ox,  or  of  sheep,  or  of  goat. 

24  And  the  fat  of  the  ^ beast  that 
dieth  of  itself,  and  the  fat  of  that 


part,  at  least,  intended  to  exclude  the  ope- 
ration of  a mean-spirited  economy.  This 
m.ay  have  furnished  the  ground  for  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  Thank-offerings  and  the 
others.  The  most  liberal  distribution  of  the 
meat  of  the  offering,  particularly  amongst 
the  poor  who  were  invited  to  partake,  would 
plainly  be  becoming  when  ■ the  sacrifice  was 
intended  especially  to  express  gratitude  for 
mercies  received.  (Philo,  Abarbanel,  &c.) 

21.  unclean  bea5t\  That  is,  carrion  of  any 
kind.  To  touch  an  ass  or  a camel  when 
alive  would  not  have  communicated  pollu- 
tion. See  Note  after  ch.  xi. 

shall  be  cut  of]  See  on  Ex.  xxxi.  14.  It 
is  here  used  as  a stronger  expression  than 
“shall  bear  his  iniquity”  (pu.  18),  which  is 
equivalent  to,  shall  incur  guilt. 

Instructions  for  the  People,  22 — 38. 

On  the  fat  and  the  bloody  22 — 27. 

23.  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel]  This 
is  emphatically  addressed  to  the  people.  The 
same  command  is  succinctly  given  in  iii.  17. 
Cf.  xvii.  10.  The  subject  may  be  introduced 
here  as  an  especial  caution  for  those  who  par- 
took of  the  Peace-oflerings.  They  were  not 
to  eat  in  their  own  meal  what  belonged  to  the 
Altar  of  Jehovah,  nor  what  was  the  perquisite 
of  the  priests.  See  ‘v'v.  33 — 36. 

fat]  Heb.  chele-v^  suet.  Introd.  § viii. 

24.  Cf.  xvii.  15,  xxii.  8. 


V.  25—37-] 


LEVITICUS,  vir. 


531 


which  is  torn  with  beasts,  may  be  used 
in  any  other  use : but  ye  shall  in  no 
wise  eat  of  it. 

25  For  whosoever  eateth  the  fat  of 
the  beast,  of  which  men  offer  an  offer- 
ing made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord,  even 
the  soul  that  eateth  it  shall  be  cut  off 
from  his  people. 

Gen. 9.4.  26  '^Moreover  ye  shall  eat  no  man- 

r blood,  whether  it  be  of  fowl  or 

of  beast,  in  any  of  your  dwellings. 

27  Whatsoever  soul  it  be  that  eat- 
eth any  manner  of  blood,  even  that 
soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  his  people. 

28  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

29  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, saying.  He  that  offereth  the  sacri- 
fice of  his  peace  offerings  unto  the 
Lord  shall  bring  his  oblation  unto  the 
Lord  of  the  sacrifice  of  his  peace 
oft'erings. 

30  His  own  hands  shall  bring  the 
offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by  fire, 
the  fat  with  the  breast,  it  shall  he  bring, 

rfE-xod.  that  ^the  breast  may  be  waved  for  a 
wave  offering  before  the  Lord. 

31  And  the  priest  shall  burn  the  fat 
upon  the  altar : but  the  breast  shall  be 
Aaron’s  and  his  sons’. 


32  And  the  right  shoulder  shall  ye 
give  unto  the  priest  for  an  heave 
offering  of  the  sacrifices  of  your  peace 
offerings. 

33  He  among  the  sons  of  Aaron, 
that  offereth  the  blood  of  the  peace 
offerings,  and  the  fat,  shall  have  the 
right  shoulder  for  his  part. 

34  For  the  wave  breast  and  the 
heave  shoulder  have  I taken  of  the 
children  of  Israel  from  off  the  sacri- 
fices of  their  peace  offerings,  and  hav^ 
given  them  unto  Aaron  the  priest  and 
unto  his  sons  by  a statute  for  ever 
from  among  the  children  of  Israel. 

35  ^ This  is  the  portion  of  the  an- 
ointing of  Aaron,  and  of  the  anointing 
of  his  sons,  out  of  the  offerings  of  the 
Lord  made  by  fire,  in  the  day  when 
he  presented  them  to  minister  unto 
the  Lord  in  the  priest’s  office ; 

36  Which  the  Lord  commanded 
to  be  given  them  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  in  the  day  that  he  anointed 
them,  b_y  a statute  for  ever  throughout 
their  generations. 

37  This  is  the  law  of  the  burnt 
offering,  of  the  meat  offering,  and  of 
the  sin  offering,  and  of  the  trespass 
offering,  and  of  the  consecrations,  and 


25.  This  restriction  included  not  merely 
the  sacrificial  fat  of  the  animals  which  were 
actually  brought  to  the  Altar,  but  that  of  all 
animals  of  the  same  kinds  which  were  slain 
for  food,  which  were  all  to  be  offered  before 
the  Lord  in  the  court.  See  xvii.  6.  But  it 
probably  did  not  include  the  fat  of  animals 
which  were  eaten  but  not  sacrificed,  such  as  the 
roebuck  and  the  hart.  See  on  xi.  7. 

26.  no  manner  of  bloody  The  prohibition  of 
blood  was  more  absolute  and  inclusive  than 
that  of  fat  for  obvious  reasons.  See  on  Lev. 
xvii.  10. 

On  the  Priests’’  portions  of  the  Peace-offering. 

28—34. 

29,  30.  He  who  brought  a Peace-offering 
was,  with  his  own  hands,  to  present  the  parts 
destined  for  the  Altar  and  for  the  priests.  In 
the  Sin-offering  the  priest  appears  to  have 
taken  a more  active  part:  iv.  25,  26.  Introd.  xvi. 

30.  a <iva^e-offering~\  See  Introd.  § ix. 

32.  the  right  shoulder']  See  Introd.  § ix. 

The  shoulder  which  was  heaved,  was  for  the 
officiating  priest;  the  breast  which  was  waved, 
for  the  priests  in  general  and  their  families; 


•v.  31.  Cf.  X.  14,  15.  In  Deut.  xviii.  3, 
the  shoulder,  the  two  cheeks,  and  the  maw 
are  mentioned  as  the  due  of  the  priest,  but 
not  the  breast.  The  Mishna  (‘  Cholin,’  x.  i) 
explains  this  apparent  discrepancy  by  referring 
the  law  in  Deuteronomy  to  animals  slaughtered 
for  food  in  the  court  (Lev.  xvii.  3,  4),  that  in 
Leviticus  to  the  sacrifices  of  the  Altar. 

Conclusion  of  the  Lanv  of  the  Offerings, 
35—38. 

35,  36.  Whether  this  passage  refers  only 
to  the  wave-breast  and  the  heave-shoulder 
(Knobel,  Keil),  or  to  all  that  belonged  to  the 
priests  of  the  sacrifices,  is  not  very  important. 
The  latter  is  the  more  probable.  Cf.  Num. 
xviii.  8 — 10. 

35.  the  portion  of  the  anointing]  Rather, 
the  appointed  share.  So  Syriac,  Saadia, 
and  most  modern  critics.  Our  version  follows 
the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Onk.  So  also  in  Num. 
xviii.  8. 

37,  38.  This  is  the  formal  conclusion  of 
the  whole  section,  i — vii. 

37.  of  the  consecrations]  That  is,  of  the 


532 


LEVITICUS.  VII.  VIII. 


[v.  38-5. 


of  the  sacrifice  of  the  peace  offer- 
ings ; 

38  Which  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses  in  mount  Sinai,  in  the  day  that 
he  commanded  the  children  of  Israel 
to  offer  their  oblations  unto  the  Lord, 
in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


I Moses  consecrateih  Aai'ou  and  his  sons.  14 
Their  sin  off'ering.  1 8 Their  burnt  offering. 
■22  The  ram  of  consecrations.  31  The  place 
mid  time  of  their  consecration. 


K 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying. 


2 ^Take  Aaron  and  his  sons  with-^Exod. 
him,  and  the  garments,  and  '^the  an-fExodiy>. 
ointing  oil,  and  a bullock  for  the  sin 
offering,  and  two  rams,  and  a basket 

of  unleavened  bread ; 

3 And  gather  thou  all  the  congre- 
gation together  unto  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

4 And  Moses  did  as  the  Lord 
commanded  him  ; and  the  assembly 
was  gathered  together  unto  the  door 
of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion. 

^ And  Moses  said  unto  the  cono-re- 

-j  t) 


sacrifices  which  were  to  be  offered  in  the  Con- 
secration of  the  priests.  See  Ex.  xxix. 

38.  rjoilderness  of  Sinaf\  Cf.  Ex.  xix.  i, 
Num.  i.  I sq.,  xxvi.  63,  64. 

THE  SERVICE  OF  THE  SANCTUARY 

INAUGURATED.  Ch.  Hii.  ix.  x. 

• This  is  the  only  historical  portion  of  the 
Book  of  Leviticus,  with  the  exception  of  the 
short  narrative  of  the  execution  of  the  blas- 
phemer, xxiv.  10 — 23.  The  commandment  to 
appoint  Aaron  and  his  sons  to  the  priesthood, 
with  directions  for  the  preparation  of  the  offi- 
cial dresses  and  for  the  mode  of  consecration, 
had  been  given  in  connection  with  the  instruc- 
tions respecting  the  construction  and  arrange- 
ment of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  furniture, 
Ex.  xxviii.  I — 43,  xxix.  i — 37,  xl.  9 — 16.  But 
the  ceremonial  could  not  be  properly  carried 
out  until  the  Law  of  the  Offerings  had  been 
laid  down,  as  it  was  necessary  that  each  kind 
of  sacrifice  to  be  offered  on  the  occasion  should 
be  duly  defined. 

The  Con.secration  of  the  Priests  and 
OF  THE  Sanctuary  and  Altar. 
viii.  I — ^36. 

2.  a bullock. ..t^vo  rams  ...a  basket\  The 
definite  article  should  be  placed  before  each  of 
these  words.  The  bullock  -the  two  rams 
— the  basket  of  unleavened  bread  are  thus 
specifically  mentioned  in  the  Hebrew  text 
as  the  offerings  for  which  directions  are 
given  in  ICx.  xxix.  i — 3.  This  shews  the  co- 
herence of  this  part  of  I.eviticus  with  the 
latter  part  of  Exodus.  The  basket  of  unlea- 
vened bread  used  on  this  occasion  appears, 
from  T.  26  and  Ex.  xxix.  2,  3,  23,  to  have 
contained  three  sorts  of  bread  ; cakes  or  loaves 
of  the  ordinal*)'  unleavened  bread ; cakes  of 
oiled  bread,  rather,  oil  bread,  which  appears 
to  have  been  kneadixl  with  oil  (see  Ex.  xxix. 
2,  and  note  on  Lev.  ii.  4);  and  oiled  wafers 
(see  on  ii.  4,  6).  Rabbinical  tradidon  says 
there  were  six  cakes  of  each  sort. 

3.  gather  thou  all  the  congr.gat'on  together 


unto  the  door  of  the  ta^>ernacle  of  the  congre-e;a- 
tion]  gather  all  the  assembly  together 
towards  the  entrance  of  the  Tent  of 
meeting  [see  Note  on  Ex.  xl.§II].  The  word 
here  rendered  congregation  is  the  same  which  is 
rendered  assembly  in  ‘l».  4.  See  on  iv,  13.  Keil 
and  others  suppose  that  “all  the  congregation” 
means  the  nation  represented  by  its  elders.  But 
it  appears  that  the  whole  body  of  the  people 
were  summoned  on  this  occasion,  though  the 
elders  may  probably  have  occupied  the  first 
places.  The  elders  are  specially  called  together 
in  an  unequivocal  manner  to  receive  directions 
to  provide  the  first  sacrifices  for  the  nation  to 
be  offered  by  the  newly  consecrated  priests 
(ix.  i),  and  the  body  of  the  people  afterwards 
assemble  as  they  do  here  (ix.  5). — The  spot 
designated  was  the  portion  of  the  court  in  front 
of  the  Tabernacle  (see  on  i.  3).  Towards 
this  space  the  people  were  commanded  to  as- 
semble to  witness  the  great  national  ceremony 
of  the  Consecration  of  the  priesthood,  the 
solemn  setting  apart  of  one  of  their  families, 
the  members  of  which  were  henceforth  to  stand 
as  mediators  between  them  and  Jehovah  in 
carrying  out  the  precepts  of  the  ceremonial 
law.  Those  who  could  do  so,  may  have  come 
into  the  court,  and  a great  number  of  others 
may  have  occupied  the  heights  which  over- 
looked the  enclosure  of  the  court.  As  the 
series  of  ceremonies  was  repeated  every  day 
during  a week  (t».  33),  it  is  natural  to  sup- 
pose that  some  of  the  people  attended  on  one 
day  and  some  on  another. 

This  is  one  of  the  passages  which  have  pre- 
sented a difficulty  to  the  mind  of  a living 
writer,  who  strangely  imagines  that  the  cere- 
mony was  “ to  be  performed  inside  the  Taber- 
nacle itself,  and  could  only,  therefore,  be  seen 
by  those  standing  at  the  door.”  See  on  -t;.  33. 
The  number  who  could  be  thus  favoured  at 
one  time  he  calculates  at  not  more  than  nine ! 
On  such  ground  he  rejects  the  narrative  as  a 
fiction. 

4.  unto  the  door.^  &c.]  towards  the  en- 
trance. See  the  preceding  note. 


r 


V.  6—13.] 


LEVITICUS.  VIII. 


533 


<^Exod.29.  gation,  ‘^This  is  the  thing  which  the 
^ Lord  commanded  to  be  done. 

6 And  Moses  brought  Aaron  and 
his  sons,  and  washed  them  with  water. 

7 And  he  put  upon  him  the  coat, 
and  girded  him  with  the  girdle,  and 
clothed  him  with  the  robe,  and  put 
the  ephod  upon  him,  and  he  girded 
him  with  the  curious  girdle  of  the 

‘ ephod,  and  bound  it  unto  him  there- 
with. 

8 And  he  put  the  breastplate  upon 
rfExod.  him:  also  he  ^put  in  the  breastplate 

3°'  the  Urim  and  the  Thummim. 

9 And  he  put  the  mitre  upon  his 
head ; also  upon  the  mitre,  even  upon 
his  forefront,  did  he  put  the  golden 


plate,  the  holy  crown;  as  the  Lord 
‘^commanded  Moses.  '^Exod.23. 

10  And  Moses  took  the  anointing 
oil,  and  anointed  the  tabernacle  and  all 
that  was  therein,  and  sanctified  them. 

11  And  he  sprinkled  thereof  upon 
the  altar  seven  times,  and  anointed 
the  altar  and  all  his  vessels,  both  the 
laver  and  his  foot,  to  sanctify  them. 

12  And  he  poured  of  the  anointing 

oil  upon  Aaron’s  head,  and  anointed  PsaiA33. 
him,  to  sanctify  him. 

13  And  Moses  brought  Aaron’s 
sons,  and  put  coats  upon  them,  and 
girded  them  with  girdles,  and 
bonnets  upon  them ; as  the  Lord  ' 
commanded  Moses. 


5-  This  is  the  thing  qvhich  the  Lord  com- 
manded to  be  doned]  This  refers  to  Ex,  xxviii. 
I — 43,  xxix.  I — 37,  xl.  9 — 16. 

The  Cleansing.^  In-vesting  and  Anointing. 

6—13. 

6,.  cashed  them  with  <ivater~\  Moses  caused 
them  to  bathe  entirely  (cf.  xvi.  4),  not  merely 
to  wash  their  hands  and  feet,  as  they  were 
to  do  in  their  daily  ministrations.  See  Ex. 
XXX.  19,  This  bathing,  which  the  High- 
priest  had  also  to  go  through  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement,  was  symbolical  of  the  spiritual 
cleansing  required  of  all  (2  Cor.  vii.  i),  but 
especially  of  those  who  had  to  draw  near  to 
God  to  make  reconciliation  for  the  sins  of  the 
people  (Heb.  vii.  26;  Matt.  iii.  15)- 

7 — 9.  On  the  parts  of  the  High-priest’s 
dress,  with  the  breastplate  and  the  Urim  and 
the  Thummim,  see  notes  on  Exod.  xxviii. 

9.  the  holy  crown\  The  golden  plate  of 
the  mitre  was  so  called  as  the  distinctive  badge 
of  the  bligh-priest’s  consecration.  Seexxi.  12. 

10 — 12.]  Moses  first  anointed  with  the 
holy  oil  the  Tabernacle  {mishkdn^  not  ohel.,  see 
Note  on  Ex.  xxvi.  § 1.)  and  all  that  was  therein, 
that  is,  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  the  Table  of 
Shewbread,  the  Candlestick  and  the  Golden 
Altar,  with  all  the  articles  that  belonged  to 
them;  he  then  sprinkled  the  Altar  of  Burnt- 
offering  with  the  oil  seven  times  and  anointed 
it,  with  all  its  utensils,  and  the  Laver  with  its 
foot ; last  of  all,  he  poured  some  of  the  oil  on 
the  head  of  Aaron,  and  conferred  on  him 
“ the  crown  of  the  anointing  oil  of  his  God,” 
Lev.  xxi.  12.  The  oil  is  spoken  of  as  running 
down  upon  Aaron’s  beard  and  his  garments 
to  their  skirts  in  Ps.  cxxxiii.  2. 

10.  On  the  holy  anointing  oil,  see  Ex. 
XXX,  23—25. 


11.  sprinkled. . .the  altar  semen  thnes~\  The 
Altar  of  Burnt -offering  was  distinguished 
by  this  sevenfold  sprinkling  with  the  holy  oil. 
Cf.  xvi.  14,  19.  The  number  of  the  Covenant 
was  thus  brought  into  connection  with  those 
acts  of  sacrifice  by  which  the  Covenant  between 
Jehovah  and  the  worshipper  was  formally  re- 
newed and  confirmed. 

On  the  symbolical  use  of  oil,  see  Note  after 
Chap.  ii.  As  investing  the  priest  with  official 
garments  was  a recognition  before  men  of  the 
, official  position  of  the  person  (see  on  Ex. 
xxviii.  3),  the  anointing  him  with  oil  was  an 
acknowledgment  that  all  fitness  for  his  office, 
all  the  powers  with  which  he  would  rightly 
fulfil  its  duties,  must  come  from  the  Lord. 

In  the  anointing  of  the  Sanctuary  with  its 
contents  and'  of  the  Altar  with  its  utensils  the 
same  idea  evidently  held  its  place.  -As  Aaron 
was  sanctified  by  the  act,  so  were  they  sancti- 
fied (‘t'-z;.  10,  II,  12).  The  pouring  the  oil  on 
the  head  of  Aaron  stands  in  the  narrative  as 
the  culmination  of  the  ceremony  of  anointing. 
All  the  holy  things  had  been  made  after  the 
heavenly  patterns  shewed  to  Moses  in  the 
mount  (Ex.  xxv.  40,  Heb.  ix.  23),  and  each 
of  them  was  intended  by  divine  wisdom  to 
convey  a spiritual  meaning  to  the  mind  of 
man.  They  were  means  of  grace  to  the  de- 
vout worshipper.  7'he  oil  poured  upon  them 
was  a recognition  of  this  fact,  and  at  the  same 
time  it  m.ade  them  holy  and  set  them  apart 
from  all  profane  and  ordinary  uses.  On  kin- 
dred grounds,  though  to  express  another  idea, 
the  Altar  was  to  be  sanctified  also  by  blood. 
See  on  m.  15. — With  the  anointing  of  the  holy 
things  of  the  Sanctuary  may  be  compared  the 
anointing  of  memorial  stones.  Gen.  xxviii.  18, 

XXXV.  14. 

13.  Aaron’’ s sons']  These  were  the  com- 
mon priests.  On  the  articles  of  dress,  see 
Ex.  xxviii.  40.  Nothing  is  here,  or  in  Ex.  xxix. 


534 


LEVITICUS.  VIII. 


[v.  14,  15. 


^ Exod. 


14.  ^And  he  brought  the  bullock 
for  the  sin*  offering:  and  Aaron  and 
his  sons  laid  their  hands  upon  the 
head  of  the  bullock  for  the  sin  offer- 
ing. 

1 5 And  he  slew  zV;  and  Moses  took 


the  blood,  and  put  it  upon  the  horns 
of  the  altar  round  about  with  his 
finger,  and  purified  the  altar,  and 
poured  the  blood  at  the  bottom  of  the 
altar,  and  sanctified  it,  to  make  recon- 
ciliation upon  it. 


7 — 9,  said  of  the  anointing  of  the  common 
priests,  though  it  is  expressly  commanded, 
Ex.  xxviii.  41,  xl.  15,  and  is  evidently  implied 
as  a fact.  Lev.  vii.  36,  x.  7,  Num.  iii.  3. 
The  simplest  and  best  mode  of  explaining 
this  appears  to  be  to  regard  as  the  only 
anointing  of  the  common  priests  the  process 
described  in  ‘v.  30,  where  it  is  said  that  Moses, 
at  a later  period  of  the  ceremony  of  Consecra- 
tion, sprinkled  them,  as  well  as  Aaron  him- 
self, with  the  holy  oil  mixed  with  the  blood  of 
the  Peace-olfering.  Many  however  would 
make  a distinction  between  sprinkling  with 
oil  and  anointing,  and  are  inclined  to  follow 
the  Jewish  traditions,  according  to  which  the 
common  priests  were  anointed  immediately 
after  their  investiture,  but  the  oil,  instead  of 
being  poured  upon  the  head  as  in  the  case  of 
the  High-priest,  was  only  smeared  on  the  fore- 
head with  the  finger.  Keil,  Wordsworth, 
Selden,  ‘ de  Succ.  in  Pontif.’  ii.  9;  Reland, 

‘ Ant.’  ii.  5,  7 ; Carpzov.  ‘ App,  Grit.’  p.  67. 
Some  have  held  that  the  distinction  lay  in  the 
fact  that  while  each  succeeding  High-priest 
was  anointed,  the  common  priests  were  re- 
garded as  anointed  once  for  all  on  this  occa- 
sion in  the  persons  of  the  immediate  sons  of 
Aaron.  Outram,  i.  v.  7. — It  is  evidently  as- 
sumed that  the  High-priest  had  a distinct 
anointing  belonging  peculiarly  to  his  office  in 
his  common  designation  in  Leviticus  (see  on 
Lev.  iv.  3J.  But  it  would  seem  that  the 
anointing  of  the  common  priests  consisted 
in  some  rite  common  to  them  and  the  High- 
priest  (Lx.  xl.  15),  and  this  can  answer  only 
to  the  sprinkling  mentioned  in  ’v.  30.  The 
same  view  seems  to  accord  with  a comparison 
of  the  expression  regarding  the  High-priest, 
“ the  crown  of  the  anointing  oil  of  his  God  is 
upon  him,”  Lev.  xxi.  12,  with  that  regarding 
the  common  priests,  “the  anointing  oil  of  the 
Lord  is  upon  you,”  Lev.  x.  7. 

The  Sacrifices  of  Consecration. 

14—36. 

Moses  as  the  mediator  of  the  Covenant  of 
the  Law  (Gal.  iii.  19,  Heb.  viii,  6)  was  called 
to  perform  the  priestly  functions,  in  conse- 
crating those  on  whom  henceforth  those  func- 
tions were  to  devolve,  and  in  inaugurating 
the  legal  order  of  sacrifices.  In  the  same  ca- 
pacity he  had  performed  the  daily  service  of 
the  Sanctuary  from  the  day  of  the  setting  up 
of  the  'Labcrnacle  and  the  Altar.  See  on  Lx. 
xl.  23.  The  Sin-offering  was  now  offered  for 


the  first  time.  The  succession  in  which  the 
sacrifices  followed  each  other  on  this  occa- 
sion, first  the  Sin-offering,  then  the  Burnt- 
offering,  and  lastly  the  Peace-offering,  has 
its  ground  in  the  meaning  of  each  sacrifice, 
and  became  the  established  custom  in  later 
ages.  See  Introd.  § xvi.  But  there  are  several 
points  in  which  the  mode  of  sacrificing  the 
Sin-offering  and  the  Peace-offering  here  de- 
scribed differed  from  the  ordinary  instruc- 
tions of  the  Law.  These  differences  were  evi- 
dently designed  to  adapt  the  sacrifices  to  their 
special  object  as  parts  in  the  rite  of  Conse- 
cration. 

14 —  17.  Cf.  the  directions  for  the  regular 
Sin-offering  of  the  High-priest,  iv.  3 — 12. 

15.  And  he  slenv  ii]  If  we  take  this  to 
refer  to  Moses  he  took  on  himself  one  of 
the  duties  generally  performed  by  the  sacri- 
ficer,  though  Aaron  and  his  sons  had  pressed 
their  hands  upon  the  head  of  the  victim.  (See 
Introd.  § V.,  cf.  on  19.) 

15 —  17.  This  Sin-offering  was  sacrificed 
in  the  usual  manner  as  regards  the  blood  and 
the  fat.  See  iv.  25,  30,  34.  But  what  was 
peculiar  in  it  was  that  the  flesh  was  not  eaten, 
and  though  none  of  the  blood  was  sprinkled 
in  the  Tabernacle,  or  put  on  the  horns  of  the 
Altar  of  incense,  as  in  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Sin-offerings  for  the  High-priest  and  the  nation, 
the  flesh  was  yet  carried  outside  the  camp  to 
be  consumed,  v.  17.  This  burning  does  not 
therefore  fall  under  the  rule  that  “ the  bodies 
of  those  beasts  whose  blood  is  brought  into 
the  Sanctuary  by  the  High-priest  for  sin  are 
burned  without  the  camp,”  Heb.  xiii.  ii  ; 
cf.  Lev.  X.  18.  The  ground  of  this  distinction 
may  be  seen  in  the  note  on  iv.  12.  The  flesh 
of  the  Sin-oftering  could  not  be  eaten  by  any 
but  a legally  consecrated  priest  (on  vi.  25). 
Moses  therefore  could  not  eat  of  it  himself, 
though  he  was,  for  the  occasion,  performing 
the  duties  of  a priest.  Those  whom  he  was 
consecrating  could  not  eat  it,  not  only  because 
they  were  not  yet  duly  installed,  but  because 
the  sacrifice  was  offered  on  their  behalf,  and 
the  body  of  the  victim  stood  to  them  in  the 
same  relation  as  that  of  the  regular  Sin- 
offering  afterwards  stood  to  the  High-priest. 

15.  purified  the  altar  ...sanctified  it.,  to  make 
reconciiiation  upon  it]  Atonement  was  thus 
made  fhr  the  Altar  itself  as  well  as  for  the 
priests.  'Phe  Altar  had  been  sanctified  by  the 


V.  iC — 24.] 


LEVITICUS.  VIII. 


535 


16  And  he  took  all  the  fat  that  was 
upon  the  inwards,  and  the  caul  above 
the  liver,  and  the  two  kidneys,  and 
their  fat,  and  Moses  burned  it  upon 
the  altar. 

17  But  the  bullock,  and  his  hide, 
his  flesh,  and  his  dung,  he  burnt  with 
fire  without  the  camp;  as  the  Lord 

h Exod.  29.  commanded  Moses. 

18  ^ And  he  brought  the  ram  for 
the  burnt  offering : and  Aaron  and  his 
sons  laid  their  hands  upon  the  head 
of  the  ram. 

19  And  he  killed  it\  and  Moses 
sprinkled  the  blood  upon  the  altar 
round  about. 

20  And  he  cut  the  ram  into  pieces ; 
and  Moses  burnt  the  head,  and  the 
pieces,  and  the  fat. 

21  And  he  washed  the  inwards  and 
the  legs  in  water;  and  Moses  burnt 


the  whole  ram  upon  the  altar : it  was 
a burnt  sacrifice  for  a sweet  savour, 
and  an  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the 
Lord  ; as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

22  ^ And  ^’he  brought  the  other  ^Exod.  2> 
ram,  the  ram  of  consecration : and 
Aaron  and  his  sons  laid  their  hands 

upon  the  head  of  the  ram. 

23  And  he  slew  zV;  and  Moses  took 
of  the  blood  of  it,  and  put  it  upon  the 
tip  of  Aaron’s  right  ear,  and  upon  the 
thumb  of  his  right  hand,  and  upon 
the  great  toe  of  his  right  foot. 

24  And  he  brought  Aaron’s  sons, 
and  Moses  put  of  the  blood  upon  the 
tip  of  their  right 'ear,  and  upon  the 
thumbs  of  their  right  hands,  and  up- 
on the  great  toes  of  their  right  feet : 
and  Moses  sprinkled  the  blood  upon 
the  altar  round  about. 


anointing  oil  {y.  it)  like  the  priests  who 
were  to  officiate  at  it ; it  was  now,  like  them, 
sanctified  by  blood.  The  anointing  with  oil 
consecrated  it  for  its  special  purpose  in  the 
service  of  Jehovah,  but  it  was  now  anointed 
with  blood  as  an  acknowledgment  of  the 
alienation  of  all  nature,  in  itself,  from  God, 
and  the  need  of  a reconciliation  to  Him  of  all 
things  by  blood.  Col.  i.  20  ; Heb.  ix.  21,  22. 
See  on  Ex.  xxviii.  and  on  Lev.  xvii.  ii. 

16.  See  Introd.  § viii. 

17.  burnt  ^ith  fire  ^vithout  the  camp\  See 
on  iv.  12. 

18 — 21.  Atonement  having  . been  made, 
Aaron  and  his  sons  were  now  permitted,  by 
the  laying  on  of  their  hands,  to  make  them- 
selves one  (see  Introd.  §xiii.)  with  the  victim, 
which  was  to  be  sent  up  to  Jehovah  as  “a 
burnt  sacrifice  for  a sweet  savour,  an  offering 
made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord.”  There  was  no 
peculiarity  in  the  m.ode  of  offering  this  sacri- 
fice. All  was  done  strictly  according  to  the 
ritual  (i,  3 — 9),  except  that  Moses  performed 
the  duties  of  the  priest. 

19.  And  he  killed  it\  And  it  was  slain. 
See  Introd.  § v.  So  in  23. 

sprinkled^  &c.]  Rather,  east  upon  the 
Altar.  See  Introd.  § vi. 

21.  legs']  See  on  i.  9. 

burnt]  See  on  i.  9. 

22  the  ram  of  consecration]  The  sacri- 
fice of  this  ram  was  by  far  the  most  peculiar 
part  of  the  whole  ceremony.  There  was 
something  marked  in  the  fact  of  the  victim 
being  a ram.  An  ordinary  Peace-offering 


might  be  either  male  or  female,  from  the  herd 
or  from  the  flock,  iii.  i,  6.  But  a ram  was 
enjoined  in  this  case,  as  it  was  also  in  the 
Peace-offerings  for  the  nation,  ix.  4,  cp.  -u.  8 ; 
for  the  princes  of  the  tribes,  Num.  vii.  17,  and 
for  the  Nazarite,  Num.  vi.  14,  17.  It  is  here 
called  “the  other  ram,”  as  being  the  second  of 
the  two  rams  mentioned  in  t;.  2.  The  words 
rightly  translated  the  “ram  of  consecration” 
may  be  literally  rendered  the  ram  of  the  fillings^ 
and  the  name  has  been  supposed  to  have  refer- 
ence to  the  ceremony  in  which  Moses  fills 
the  hands  of  the  priests;  see  ‘i;.  27.  Luther 
calls  it  the  ram  of  the  fill-offering  {Fiillopfer'). 
But  the  LXX.  has  d Kpws  rrjs  reAeicdcreo)?,  the 
old  Italic,  aries  perfectionis ^ and  St  Augustin, 
sacrificium  consummationis.  The  renderings  of 
the  Targums,  the  Syriac,  and  Saadia  all  mean 
“the  ram  of  completion.”  The  offering  was  in 
the  highest  sense  the  sacrifice  of  completion  or 
fulfilling^  as  being  the  central  point  of  the  con- 
secrating rite.  The  final  perfection  of  the 
creature  is  Consecration  to  the  Lord.  With 
the  TeXeLocxTLs  of  the  LXX.  in  this  connection 
may  be  compared  the  use  which  the  writer  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  makes  of  the 
derivatives  of  riXos-  ii.  10,  v.  9,  vii.  28,  x.  14, 
xii.  23. 

23,  24.  Before  casting  forth  the  blood 
round  the  Altar  in  the  usual  manner,  Moses 
took  a portion  of  the  blood  and  put  some  of 
it  on  the  right  extremities  of  each  of  the 
priests.  This,  being  performed  with  the 
blood  of  the  Peace-offering,  has  been  sup- 
posed to  figure  the  readiness  of  the  priest 
who  is  at  peace  with  Jehovah  to  hear  with 
the  ear  and  obey  the  divine  word,  to  perform 


536 


LEVITICUS.  VIII. 


[V.  25—32. 


25  And  he  took  the  fat,  and  the 
rump,  and  all  the  fat  that  was  upon 
the  inwards,  and  the  caul  above  the 
liver,  and  the  two  kidneys,  and  their 
fat,  and  the  right  shoulder: 

26  And  out  of  the  basket  of  un- 
leavened bread,  that  was  before  the 
Lord,  he  took  one  unleavened  cake, 
and  a cake  of  oiled  bread,  and  one 
wafer,  and  put  the?n  on  the  fat,  and 
upon  the  right  shoulder : 

Exod.^  27  And  he  put  all  ^^upon  Aaron’s 
^ ■ hands,  and  upon  his  sons’  hands,  and 
waved  for  a wave  offering  before 
the  Lord. 

28  And  Moses  took  them  from  off 
their  hands,  and  burnt  them  on  the 
altar  upon  the  burnt  offering:  they 
were  consecrations  for  a sweet  savour  : 
it  is  an  offering  made  by  hre  unto 
the  Lord. 

29  And  Moses  took  the  breast,  and 
v/aved  it  for  a wave  offering  before 


the  Lord  : for  of  the  ram  of  con- 
secration it  was  Moses’  ^part ; as  the  ^ Exod.  29. 
Lord  commanded  Moses. 

30  And  Moses  took  of  the  anoint- 
ing oil,  and  of  the  blood  which  was 
upon  the  altar,  and  sprinkled  it  upon 
Aaron,  and  upon  his  garments,  and 
upon  his  sons,  and  upon  his  sons’ 
garments  with  him;  and  sanctified 
Aaron,  and  his  garments,  and  his 
sons,  and  his  sons’  garments  with 
him. 

31  ^ And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron 
and  to  his  sons.  Boil  the  flesh  at  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation: and  there  =''^eat  it  with  the  Exod. 
bread  that  is  in  the  basket  of  con- 
secrations,  as  I commanded,  saying, 

Aaron  and  his  sons  shall  eat  it. 

32  And  that  which  remaineth  of 
the  flesh  and  of  the  bread  shall  ye 
burn  with  fire. 

33  And  ye  shall  not  go  out  of  the 


with  the  hand  the  sacred  duties  of  his  office, 
and  to  walk  with  the  feet  in  the  way  of  holi- 
ness. Had  the  ceremony  been,  as  some  have 
supposed,  a symbolical  cleansing  of  the  natural 
powers  of  the  priest,  it  seems  more  likely 
that  it  would  have  been  performed  with  the 
blood  of  the  Sin-offering  than  with  that 
of  the  Peace-offering.  (See  Introd.  § xv.).  In 
the  case  of  the  cured  Leper  the  same  parts 
were  touched  with  the  blood  of  the  Trespass- 
offering. See  Lev.  xiv.  14 — 17. 

25 — 28.  In  the  rite  of  filling  the  hands 
of  the  priests,  Moses  took  the  portions  of 
the  victim  w’hich  usually  belonged  to  the 
Altar,  with  the  right  shoulder  (or  leg;  see 
Introd.  § ix.),  placed  upon  them  one  cake  of 
each  of  the  three  kinds  of  unleavened  bread 
contained  in  the  basket  (see  on  ‘v.  2),  and  then 
put  the  whole  first  upon  the  hands  of  Aaron 
and  in  succession  upon  the  hands  of  his  sons, 
in  each  case,  according  to  Jewish  tradition, 
putting  his  own  hands  under  the  hands  of  the 
jiriest,  moving  them  backwards  and  forw'ards, 
so  as  to  wave  the  mass  to  and  fro.  See  In- 
trod. § ix.  He  then  offered  them  on  the 
Altar  as  a Burnt-offering. 

In  this  remarkable  ceremony  the  gifts  of  the 
people  appear  to  have  been  made  over  to  the 
priests,  as  if  in  trust,  for  the  senice  of  the 
Altar.  'Pile  articles  were  presented  to  Jeho- 
vah and  solemnly  waved  in  the  hands  of  the 
l)ric*sts,  but  not  by  their  own  act  and  deed. 
'I'he  mediator  of  the  Law,  wlio  \vas  expressly 


commissioned  on  this  occasion,  w^as  the  agent 
in  the  process. 

25.  the  rump\  TI18  fat-ta.il.  See  on 
iii.  9. 

26.  unlea’vened  cake^  liCC.]  See  on  ‘v.  2. 

29.  The  heave-shoulder  w^as  the  ordinary 
perquisite  of  the  officiating  priest  (Introd. 
§ ix.),  but  the  wvave-breast  appears  to  have 
been  awarded  to  Moses  as  the  servant  of 
Jehovah  now  especially  appointed  for  the 
priestly  service. 

30.  In  the  instructions  for  the  ceremony 
of  Consecration  in  Exod.  xxix.  the  sprinkling 
with  the  mingled  blood  and  oil  is  mentioned 
immediately  after  the  casting  forth  of  the 
blood  of  the  Peace-offering  upon  the  Altar, 
See  Exod.  xxix.  21.  But  in  its  practical  order 
the  ceremony  of  Consecration  was  concluded 
with  this  ceremony.  Whether  it  was  the 
only  anointing  performed  on  the  common 
priests  or  not,  see  on  t*.  13.  The  sprinkling 
was  on  their  garments  as  well  as  their  persons, 
because  it  belonged  to  them  in  reference  to 
the  office  with  which  they  had  been  fonnally 
invested  by  putting  on  the  garments,  (See 
on  Exod.  xxviii.  3.)  The  union  of  the  two 
symbols  of  the  atoning  blood  and  the  inspiring 
unction  appears  to  be  a lit  conclusion  of  the 
entire  rite. 

31.  32.  The  prohibitions  that  none  but 
the  priests  must  eat  of  the  flesh  (Exod.  xxix. 
33),  and  that  none  but  unleavened  bread  should 


V.  33—6-] 


LEVITICUS.  VIIL  IX. 


537 


« Exod. 
29-  35- 


door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation in  seven  days,  until  the  days 
of  your  consecration  be  at  an  end : 
for  "seven  days  shall  he  consecrate 
you. 

34  As  he  hath  done  this  day,  so 
the  Lord  hath  commanded  to  do,  to 
make  an  atonement  for  you. 

35  Therefore  shall  ye  abide  at  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation day  and  night  seven  days,  and 
keep  the  charge  of  the  Lord,  that  ye 
die  not : for  so  I am  commanded. 

36  So  Aaron  and  his  sons  did  all 
things  which  the  Lord  commanded 
by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

CHAPTER  IX. 

I The  first  offerings  ofi  Aaron,  for  himselfi  and 
the  people.  8 The  sin  offering,  12  and  the 
Inirnt  offering  for  himself.  1 5 The  offerings 
for  the  people.  ?3  lldoses  and  Aaron  bless  the 
people.  24  Fire  comet h from  the  Loi'd,  ttpon 
the  altar. 

AND  it  came  to  pass  on  the  eighth 
XX  day,  that  Moses  called  Aaron 
and  his  sons,  and  the  elders  of  Israel ; 


2 And  he  said  unto  Aaron,  ^Take^Exod. 
thee  a young  calf  for  a sin  offering, 

and  a ram  for  a burnt  offering,  with- 
out blemish,  and  offer  them  before  the 
Lord. 

3 And  unto  the  children  of  Israel 
thou  shalt  speak,  saying.  Take  ye  a 
kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin  offering; 
and  a calf  and  a lamb,  both  of  the  first 
year,  without  blemish,  for  a burnt 
offering ; 

4 Also  a bullock  and  a ram  for 
peace  offerings,  to  sacrifice  before  the 
Lord  ; and  a meat  offering  mingled 
with  oil : for  to  day  the  Lord  will 
appear  unto  you. 

5 ^ And  they  brought  that  which 
Moses  commanded  before  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation  ; and  all  the 
congregation  drew  near  and  stood  be- 
fore the  Lord. 

6 And  Moses  said.  This  is  the  thing 
which  the  Lord  commanded  that  ye 
should  do : and  the  glory  of  the  Lord 
shall  appear  unto  you. 


be  eaten  with  it,  distinguished  this  from  an 
ordinary  sacrificial  meal  on  the  flesh  of  a 
Peace-offering,  of  which  any  invited  guest 
might  partake,  and  in  which  ordinary  leaven- 
ed bread  might  be  eaten.  See  vii.  13. 

33 — 36.  The  rites  of  Consecration  were 
to  last  a whole  week,  and  thus,  like  the  longer 
of  the  annual  festivals,  were  connected  in  an 
emphatic  manner  with  the  sabbatical  number 
of  the  Covenant.  During  this  period  the 
priests  were  not  to  leave  the  holy  precinct  for 
the  sake  of  any  worldly  business,  and  the  whole 
series  of  ceremonies,  including  the  sacrifice 
of  the  Ram  of  Consecration,  was  to  be  gone 
through  on  each  day.  Cf.  Ex.  xxix.  35,  36,  37. 

33.  ye  shall  not  go  out  of  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle']  Rather,  ye  shall  not  g.o  away 
from  the  entrance  of  the  Tent.  With 
this  agree  Cranmer,  the  Geneva  Bible,  &c. 
The  meaning  is  evidently  that  they  were  not 
to  go  out  of  the  court,  as  is  more  clearly  ex- 
pressed in  2).  35.  The  authorized  version  ap- 
pears to  have  misled  a recent  writer  (to  vrhom 
reference  has  already  been  made)  into  the 
notion  that  the  consecration  was  “ performed 
inside  the  Tabernacle  itself.”  See  on  -v.  3. 

shall  he  consecrate  you,  &c.]  Rather,  shall 
ye  he  consecrated.  So  Vulg,,  Syriac,  Sa- 
adia,  &c.  On  the  original  idiom,  see  on  Ex. 
xxxvii.  I.  Cf.  00.  19.  On  the  word  consecrate, 
see  on  00.  %%. 


35.  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle]  See  on 

that  ye  die  not]  See  on  Exod.  xxviii.  35. 
Chap.  IX. 

The  Priests  enter  upon  their  Office. 
ix.  I — 24. 

1 — 6.  on  the  eighth  day]  That  is,  on  the 
first  day  after  the  week  of  Consecration. 

2.  a young  calf]  Literally,  a calf  the  son 
of  a bull.  See  on  i.  5.  The  meaning  is  not 
“a  young  calf,”  but  a hull  calf  which  might 
have  been  what  we  should  call  a yearling  ox. 

3.  a kid  of  the  goats]  a shaggy  he- 
goat.  See  on  iv.  23. 

both  of  the  first  year]  Literally,  sons  of  a 
year.  See  on  xii.  6.  This  is  the  only  in- 
stance in  which  the  age  of  a calfis  prescribed. 
The  age  of  sheep  and  goats  for  sacrifice  is 
very  commonly  stated..  Exod.  xxix.  38  ; Lev. 
xii.  6;  Num.  xxviii.  3,  9,  n,  &c.  Introd.  § 
iv.  The  clear  distinction  between  the  words 
fgel^calf  and  par  — ox,  may  sufficiently  ac- 
count for  this  difference  in  usage. 

4.  mingled  ovith  oil]  Rather,  with  oil 
poured  over  it.  The  offering  was  of  the 
sort  described  ii.  i,  consisting  of  fine  hour 
with  oil  and  frankincense. 

6.  the  glory  of  the  Lord]  Cf.  Exod.  xvi.  7. 
See  no.  23. 


538 


LEVITICUS.  IX. 


[v.  7—15. 


y 


7 And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron,  Go 
unto  the  altar,  and  offer  thy  sin  offer- 
ing, and  thy  burnt  offering,  and  make 
an  atonement  for  thyself,  and  for  the 
people : and  offer  the  offering  of  the 
people,  and  make  an  atonement  for 
them;  as  the  Lord  commanded. 

8 ^ Aaron  therefore  went  unto  the 
altar,  and  slew  the  calf  of  the  sin  of- 
fering, which  was  for  himself. 

9 And  the  sons  of  Aaron  brought 
the  blood  unto  him : and  he  dipped 
his  finger  in  the  blood,  and  put  it  upon 
the  horns  of  the  altar,  and  poured 
out  the  blood  at  the  bottom  of  the 
altar : 

10  But  the  fat,  and  the  kidneys, 
and  the  caul  above  the  liver  of  the  sin 


offering,  he  burnt  upon  the  altar;  as 
the  Lord  commanded  Moses. 

1 1 And  the  flesh  and  the  hide  he 
burnt  with  fire  without  the  camp. 

12  And  he  slew  the  burnt  offering ; 
and  Aaron’s  sons  presented  unto  him 
the  blood,  which  he  sprinkled  round 
about  upon  the  altar. 

13  And  they  presented  the  burnt 
offering  unto  him,  with  the  pieces 
thereof,  and  the  head : and  he  burnt 
them  upon  the  altar. 

14  And  he  did  wash  the  inv/ards 
and  the  legs,  and  burnt  them  upon  the 
burnt  offering  on  the  altar. 

15  And  he  brought  the  people’s 
offering,  and  took  the  goat,  which  was 
the  sin  offering  for  the  people,  and 


Aaron  offers  sacrifice  for  himself. 

7—14. 

Moses  now  commands  Aaron  first  to  offer 
the  sacrifices  for  himself  and  then  those  for  the 
people.  It  is  to  be  remarked  that  Aaron  offers 
no  Peace-offering  for  himself.  The  Sin-offer- 
ing and  the  Burnt-offering  have  a more  strict 
connexion  with  the  person  of  the  sacrifice!' : 
the  Peace-offering,  with  its  sacrificial  feast, 
connects  him  as  a reconciled  believer  v/ith  his 
brethren  as  well  as  wirh  Jehovah.  It  appears 
therefore  to  have  been  enough  that  he  should 
participate  in  the  Peace-offerings  of  the  Con- 
secration, viii.  31,  and  in  the  two  Peace-offer- 
ings about  to  be  sacrificed  for  the  people. 

Aaron's  Sin-offering  being  a calf  was  of 
inferior  dignity  to  the  Sin-offering  of  the  Con- 
secration ceremony,  which  was  a bullock  (viii. 
14),  and  to  that  which  the  High-priest  was 
commanded  on  subsequent  occasions  to  offer 
for  his  own  sins  (iv,  3).  This  offering  was 
probably  regarded  not  so  much  as  a .sacrifice 
for  his  own  actual  sins  as  a typical  acknow- 
ledgment of  his  sinful  nature  and  of  his  future 
duty  to  offer  for  his  own  sins  and  those  of  the 
people.  Heb.  v.  3,  vii.  27,  That  this  offer- 
ing and  the  Burnt-offering  had  some  such 
broad  and  official  signification  as  this,  seems 
to  be  shewn  in  the  words  of  Moses  in  v.  7, 
“offer  thy  Sin-offering,  and  thy  Burnt-offer- 
ing, and  make  an  atonement  for  thyself  and 
for  the  people:  and  offer  the  offering  for  the 
people,  and  make  an  atonement  for  them.” 
'J'he  Septuagint  has  “make  an  atonement  for 
thyself  and  thy  house,”  (Trfpl  acavTov  kcu  tov 
oi.Kov  (ToC),  but  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 
text  is  plainly  in  accordance  with  our  own 
version.  It  was  a striking  acknowledgment 
of  the  true  character  of  the  Levitical  Priest- 
hood, that  the  very  first  official  act  of  the 
anointed  priest  should  be  to  offer  a sacrifice 


for  his  own  sinful  nature.  “The  law  maketh 
men  High-priests  which  have  infirmity ; but 
the  word  of  the  oath,  which  was  since  the  law, 
maketh  the  Son,  who  is  consecrated  (in  the 
margin,  perfected.,  see  on  viii.  22)  for  ever- 
more.” Heb.  vii.  28. 

9.  Aaron  did  not  take  the  blood  into  the 
Tabernacle  according  to  the  ordinary  Law  of 
the  Sin-offerings  for  the  High-priest  and  for 
the  people  (iy.  5,  6,  7,  16,  17,  18),  but  he  put 
some  of  it  upon  the  horns  of  the  brazen  Altar, . 
as  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  other  Sin-offerings 
(iv.  25,  30,  34),  and  as  Moses  had  done  in  the 
Sin-offering  of  the  Consecration  ceremony, 
viii.  15,  The  probable  reason  of  this  was 
that  he  had  not  yet  been  formally  introduced 
as  the  High-priest  into  the  Holy  Place  of  the 
Tabernacle.  See  on  23. 

brought  the  b!ood~\  They  most  likely  held 
the  basons  in  which  the  blood  was  received  as 
it  ran  from  the  victim,  and  then  handed  them 
to  their  father.  Introd,  § v. 

11.  See  iv.  ii,  12. 

12 — 14.  In  offering  his  Burnt-sacrifice, 
Aaron  and  his  sons  took  the  same  respective 
parts  as  they  had  done  in  the  Sin-offering,  ob- 
serving the  Law  in  all  particulars,  i.  3 — 9. 

12.  sprinklecV^  rather  cast,  Introd.  § vi. 

13.  <zuith  the  pieces  thereof  ~\  Rather,  piece 
by  piece,  literally,  according  to  its  pieces. 

No  Meat-offering  is  said  to  have  been 
offered  with  Aaron’s  own  Burnt-offering. 
The  xMeat-offering  may  however  have  been 
made  as  a thing  of  course  without  being  men- 
tioned, or  possibly  the  law  of  Num.  xv.  3,  4, 
may  not  yet  have  been  in  full  force. 

Aaron  offers  the  sacrifices  for  the  People. 

23. 

In  this  first  complete  series  of  offerings 
made  by  the  High-priest,  the  sacrifices  take 


LEVITICUS.  IX. 


539 


V.  1 6 — 24.] 

slew  it,  and  offered  it  for  sin,  as  the 
first. 

1 6 And  he  brought  the  burnt  offering, 
" Or,  and  offered  it  according  to  the  "manner. 
ordinance.  bi'ought  the  meat  offer- 

t Heb.  ing,  and  ^ took  an  handful  thereof,  and 
handout  burnt  it  upon  the  altar,  ^beside  the 
fExod.29.  burnt  sacrifice  of  the  morning. 

3^-  18  He  slev/  also  the  bullock  and 

the  ram  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  offer- 
ings, which  was  for  the  people : and 
Aaron’s  sons  presented  unto  him  the 
blood,  which  he  sprinkled  upon  the 
altar  round  about, 

19  And  the  fat  of  the  bullock  and 
of  the  ram,  the  rump,  and  that  which 
covereth  the  inwards^  and  the  kidneys, 
and  the  caul  above  the  liver: 

20  And  they  put  the  fat  upon  the 
breasts,  and  he  burnt  the  fat  upon  the 
altar : 


21  And  the  breasts  and  the  right 
shoulder  Aaron  waved  for  a wave 
offering  before  the  Lord  ; as  Moses 
commanded. 

22  And  Aaron  lifted  up  his  hand 
toward  the  people,  and  blessed  them, 
and  came  down  from  offering  of  the 
sin  offering,  and  the  burnt  offering, 
and  peace  offerings. 

23  And  Moses  and  Aaron  went 
into  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion, and  came  out,  and  blessed  the 
people : and  the  glory  of  the  Lord 
appeared  unto  all  the  people. 

24  And  ^ there  came  a fire  out 

. from  before  the  Lord,  and  consumed  38^^^ 
upon  the  altar  the  burnt  offering  and 
the  fat : which  when  all  the  people 
saw,  they  shouted,  and  fell  on  their 
faces. 


their  appointed  order;  first,  the  Sin-Offer- 
ing to  make  atonement,  the  Burnt-offering, 
to  signify  the  surrender  of  the  body,  soul 
and  spirit  to  Jehovah  in  heaven  ; and  lastly 
the  Peace-offering,  to  show  forth  the  com- 
munion vouchsafed  to  those  who  are  justified 
and  sanctified.  Introd.  § xvi. 

15.  the  sin  offering  for  the  people~\  In  the 
regular  Sin-offering  for  the  people  the  High- 
priest  offered  also  for  his  own  sins  as  the  head 
of  the  nation,  and  hence  he  was  not  allowed 
to  eat  of  the  flesh,  which  was  burned  without 
the  camp  (iv.  21).  But  on  this  occasion,  as 
the  priests  had  already  offered  a Sin-offering 
for  themselves,  the  sacrifice  was  exclusively  for 
the  people,  and  the  ordinary  law  should  have 
taken  effect,  that  they  should  eat  the  appointed 
portions  of  the  victim  (vi.  26).  In  conse- 
quence of  their  failing  to  do  this,  they  were 
rebuked  by  Moses.  (See  x.  16 — 18.) 

as  the  first\  That  is,  as  his  own  Sin-offering. 

16.  according  to  the  manner~\  Rather  as 
in  the  margin.  He  offered  the  Burnt-offering 
of  the  yearling  calf  and  lamb,  observing  the 
Law  in  ch.  i. 

17.  the  meat-offering\  See  ii.  i , 2 ; vi.  1 4 — 1 6. 

burnt  sacrifice  of  the  7norning\  See  Ex. 

xxix.  39;  also.  Lev.  iii.  5. 

18.  sprinkled\  cast,  Introd.  § vi. 

20.  the  breasts']  i.e.  the  briskets  of  the 
bullock  and  the  ram,  vii.  30  ; Introd.  § ix. 

21.  right  shoulder]  On  the  ceremony  of 
waving,  see  Introd.  § ix. 

Nothing  is  said  of  the  Meat-offering.  See 
on  2).  13. 


22.  Aaron  having  completed  the  offerings, 
before  he  came  down  from  the  stage  sur- 
rounding the  Altar  on  which  the  priests  used 
to  stand  to  officiate  (see  on  Exod.  xxvii.  8), 
turns  toward  the  people,  and  blesses  them ; 
probably  using  the  form  which  became  the 
established  one  for  the  priests  (Num.  vi. 
24 — 26),  and  which  is  still  maintained  in  the 
synagogues  (Stanley,  Jewish  Churchy  il.  p. 
4^9)- 

Aaron  is  inducted  into  the  Tabernacle, 
ix.  23—24.  4 

23.  Aaron,  having  now  gone  through  the 
cycle  of  priestly  duties  connected  with  the 
Brazen  Altar,  accompanies  Moses  into  the 
Tent  of  Meeting.  It  was  reasonable  that 
Moses,  as  the  divinely  appointed  leader  of  the 
nation,  should  induct  Aaron  into  the  Taber- 
nacle. 

blessed  the  people]  This  joint  blessing  of  the 
mediator  of  the  Law  and  the  High-priest  was 
the  solemn  conclusion  of  the  Consecration  and 
Inauguration.  (Cf.  Solomon’s  blessing  the 
people,  2 Chron.  vi.  3 — 12.)  According  to  one 
tradition  the  form  used  by  Moses  and  Aaron 
resembled  Ps.  xc.  17.  But  another  form  is 
given  in  the  Targum  of  Palestine,  “ May 
your  offerings  be  accepted,  and  may  the  Lord 
dwell  among  you  and  forgive  you  your  sins.” 

23 — 24.  the  glory  of  the  Lord  appeared... 
there  came  a fire  out  from  before  the  Lord] 
Cf.  Exod.  xvi.  10,  xl.  34  ; Num  xiv.  10,  xvi. 
19,  XX.  6;  2 Chron.  vii.  i,  &c.  St  Augus- 
tine characteristically  says,  “ Quid  dixerit, 
a Domino.,  quasri  potest,  utrum  quia  nutu 
et  voluntate  Domini  factum  est,  an  ab  eo  loco 
ignis  exiit  ubi  erat  area  testimonii.  Non 


540 


LEVITICUS.  X. 


[v.  I,  2. 


CHAPTER  X. 

1 Nadab  and  Abihii,  for  offering  of  strange 
fre,  ai'e  burnt  by  fire.  6 AaroH  and  his 
sons  are  forbidden  to  mourn  for  them.  8 
I'he  p'iests  are  forbidden  mine  when  they  are 
to  go  into  the  tabernacle.  I2  The  law  of 
eating  the  holy  things.  i6  Aaron's  excuse 
for  transgressing  thereof 


AND  "Nadab  and  Abihu,  the  sons«Num.  3. 
of  Aaron,  took  either  of  them  & 26.  61. 
his  censer,  and  put  fire  therein,  and 
put  incense  thereon,  and  offered  strange 


hre  before  the  Lord,  which  h 


com- 


manded them  not. 

2 And  there  went  out  fire  from  the 


enim  in  loco  aliquo  ita  est  Uominiis,  quasi 
alibi  non  sit.”  ‘ Quaest.  in  Lev.’  xxx. 

24.  The  very  ancient  Jewish  tradition  has 
been  widely  adopted  that  the  sacred  fire  of  the 
Altar  originated  in  this  divine  act,  and  that  it 
was  afterwards  preserved  on  the  Altar  of  the 
Tabernacle  until  the  dedication  of  the  Temple, 
when  fire  again  “came  down  from  heaven,  and 
consumed  the  burnt-offering  and  the  sacrifices; 
and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  filled  the  house”' 
(2  Chron.  vii.  i).  Some  Jewish  authorities 
allow  that  this  sacred  fire  became  extinct 
when  the  Babylonians  sacked  Jerusalem-;  but 
others  say  that  it  was  miraculously  kept  alive 
during  the  captivity  and  restored  to  its  use 
on  the  Altar  of  the  second  Temple  by  Nehe- 
rniah.  2 Macc.  i.  19 — 22.  See  Fagius /;/ /or.; 
Bochart,  ‘ Hieroz.’  11.  35.^ — But  according  to 
the  sacred  narrative  the  Altar- fire  had  been 
lighted  in  a natural  way  before  this  occasion. 
It  had  burned  the  morning  and  evening  sacri- 
fices (Exod.  xl.  29)  and  the  sacrifices  of  Con- 
secration (Lev.  viii.  16,  21,  28);  and  Aaron 
had  previously  employed  it  on  this  day  for  the 
offerings  for  himself  and  the  people  (ojoj.  10, 
13,  14,  17,  20).  It  is  evident  that  the  fire  of 
the  morning  sacrifice  was  burning  at  the  time 
when  the  special  sacrifices  for  the  occasion 
were  olfered  (see  v.  17).  It  would  therefore 
seem  that  the  fire  w'hich  “came  out  from 
Ixrfore  the  Lord”  manifested  itself,  according 
to  the  words  of  'v.  24,  not  in  kindling  the  fuel 
on  the  Altar,  but  in  the  sudden  consuming 
of  the  victim.  For  the  like  testimony  to  the 
acccjjtance  of  a sacrifice,  see  Judg.  vi.  21, 
xiii.  19,  20;  I K.  xviii.  38;  i Chron.  xxi. 
26,  and  probably  Gen.  iv.  4.  The  phrase  to 
turn  a sacrfce  to  ashes,  became  equivalent  to 
accepting  it  (Ps.  xx.  3,  see  margin).  The  fire 
of  tlie  Altar  was  maintained  in  accordance 
with  Lev.  vi.  13, 

ClIAl>.  X. 

'File  events  recorded  in  this  chapter  must 
have  occurred  immediately  after  the  offering 
of  the  sacrifices  of  inauguration,  on  the  even- 
ing of  llie  same  day.  See  t,’.  19. 

Nadab  and  Ahibu  are  stricken : the  priests  are 
forbidden  to  mourn  for  them. 

X.  1—7. 

1.  Nadab  and  Abihii]  'Idle  two  elder  sons 
of  Aaron  (Exod.  vi.  23,  Num.  iii.  2),  who 
were  amongst  those  invited  to  accompany 
Moses  when  he  was  going  uj)  Mount  Sinai, 


but  who  were  “to  worship  afar  off,”  and  not 
“ come  near  the  Lord.”  Exod.  xxiv.  1,2. 

censer~\  See  on  Exod.  xxv.  38. 

strange  fre~\  The  particular  offence  which 
was  perpetrated  by  Nadab  and  Abihu  has  been 
a subject  of  much  discussion.  The  greater 
number  of  commentators,  Jewish  as  well  as 
Christian,  have  supposed  that  the  “strange 
fire”  was  common  fire,  not  taken  from  the 
holy  fire  of  the  Altar.  See  on  ix.  24.  But  it 
should  be  observed  that  no  law  is  found  in 
the  Pentateuch  to  forbid  the  burning  of  in- 
cense by  iTieans  of  ordinary  fire:  it  is  only 
for  a single  occasion  in  the  year  that  the 
High-priest  is  commanded  to  fill  his  censer 
with  coals  from  the  Altar,  Lev.  xvi.  12. 
Some  suppose  that  the  offence  lay  in  break- 
ing the  commandment  of  Exod.  xxx.  9,  and 
burning  “strange  incense,”  that  is  incense  not 
prepared  according  to  the  instructions  given 
in  Exod.  xxx.  34 — 38.  Others  have  suggested 
that  they  offered  incense  at  an  unauthorized 
time,  that  is,  not  at  either  of  the  hours  of  the 
daily  service:  and  this  is  favoured  by  the  order 
of  the  narrative.  Many  have  connected  their 
sin  with  the  prohibition  of  the  use  of  wine 
and  strong  drink  to  those  engaged  in  the 
service  of  the  Sanctuary  (see  9,  10),  and 
have  supposed  that  they  performed  their 
sacred  office  in  a state  of  intoxication  [Tar- 
gum  of  Palestine,  de  Lyra,  Patrick,  Rosen- 
muller,  Herxheimer,  Wordsworth].  But 
the  outward  point  of  their  offence  is  evi- 
dently expressed  in  the  term  “strange  fire.” 
'Fhis  may  very  probably  mean  that  the  in- 
cense was  lighted  at  an  unauthorized  time. 
And  we  may  reasonably  unite  with  this  the 
supposition  that  they  were  intoxicated,  as  well 
as  the  conjecture  of  Knobel’s,  that  they  made 
their  offering  of  incense  an  accompaniment  to 
the  exultation  of  the  people  on  the  manifesta- 
tion of  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  ix.  24.  As 
they  perished  not  within  the  Tabernacle,  but 
in  front  of  it,  it  seems  likely  that  they  may 
have  been  making  an  ostentatious  and  irreve- 
rent display  of  their  ministration  to  accom- 
pany the  shouts  of  the  people,  on  their  way 
towards  the  Tabernacle.  'Fhe  offence  for 
which  they  were  immediately  visited  with 
outward  punishment  was  thus  a flagrant  out- 
rage on  the  solemn  order  of  the  divine  service, 
while  the  cause  of  their  offence  may  have  been 
their  guilty  excess. 

before  the  Loan']  These  words  might  denote 
the  whole  space  between  the  Ark  of  the  Cove- 


V.  3— 6.J 


LEVITICUS.  X. 


541 


Lord,  and  devoured  them,  and  they 
died  before  the  Lord. 

3 Then  Moses  said  unto  Aaron, 
This  is  it  that  the  Lord  spake,  saying, 
I will  be  sanctified  in  them  that  come 
nigh  me,  and  before  all  the  people  I 
will  be  glorified.  And  Aaron  held 
his  peace. 

4 And  Moses  called  Mishael  and 


Elzaphan,  the  sons  of  Uzzicl  the  uncle 
of  Aaron,  and  said  unto  them.  Come 
near,  carry  your  brethren  from  before 
the  sanctuary  out  of  the  camp. 

5 So  they  went  near,  and  carried 
them  in  their  coats  out  of  the  camp; 
as  Moses  had  said. 

6 And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron,  and 
unto  Eleazar  and  unto  Ithamar,  his 


nant  and  the  Brazen  Altar,  both  that  within 
the  Tabernacle  and  that  without  it.  Cf.  i.  5. 
The  death  of  Nadab  and  Abihu  occurred  out- 
side the  Tabernacle  “before  the  Sanctuary,” 

4.  See  the  preceding  note. 

2.  Jire  from  the  Lord]  “The  fire  which 
had  just  before  sanctified  the  ministry  of 
Aaron  as  well  pleasing  to  God,  now  brought 
to  destruction  his  two  eldest  sons  because  they 
did  not  sanctify  Jehovah  in  their  hearts,  but 
dared  to  perform  a self-willed  act  of  worship ; 
just  as  the  same  Gospel  is  to  one  a savour 
of  life  unto  life,  and  to  another  a savour  of 
death  unto  death.”  2 Cor.  ii.  16.  (Keil.) 
On  the  patristic  applications  of  the  sin  of 
Nadab  and  Abihu,  see  especially  Irenaeus. 

‘ Adv.  Her.’  iv.  43.  Cyprian,  ‘de  Unit. 
Ecc.’  XVIII.  Thcod.  ‘ Qucest.  in  Lev.’  ix. 
Hesych.  in  loc.  &c. 

3.  Moses  now  declares  to  Aaron  the  mean- 
ing of  this  visitation,  and  the  father  “holds 
his  peace,”  not  daring  to  gainsay  the  righteous 
judgment  of  Jehovah.  Cf.  Psalm  xxxix.  9. 
His  silence  on  this  occasion  may  be  compared 
with  his  reasonable  and  natural  expostulation 
with  Moses  when  his  suiviving  sons  are  re- 
buked for  not  having  eaten  the  flesh  of  the 
Sin-oftering.  n).  19. 

I ^ill  be  sanctified  in  them  that  come  nigh 
me^  and  before  all  the  people  I qjuill  be  glor'fed] 
The  priests  are  often  designated  as  those  who 
draw  near  to  the  Lord  (Exod.  xix.  22  ; Num. 
xvi.  5 ; Ezek.  xlii.  I3  ; xliii.  19).  If  the  verbs 
ill  this  passage  are  rendered  as  reflexive  rather 
than  as  passive  it  makes  the  connection  with 
what  had  just  happened  more  strict; — I will 
sanctify  myself  in  tliem  that  come 
near  to  me  (i.e.  the  priests),  and  I will 
glorify  myself  before  all  the  people. 
[So  de  Wette,  Luzzato,  Keil,  &c.]  The 
Hebrew  forms  here  used  (like  the  kindred 
ones  in  many  other  languages  ancient  and 
modern)  were  originally  reflexive,  but  came 
to  be  as  commonly  emiployed  in  a passive 
sense.  The  words  used  by  Moses  on  this 
occasion  are  not  found  elsewhere  in  the  Penta- 
teuch ; it  has  been  supposed  that  they  had  been 
previously  spoken  to  Moses,  but  that  he  had 
not  committed  them  to  writing.  [St  Augustin, 
‘C^asst.  in  Lev.’  31.]  But  the  sense  is  im- 
plied in  such  passages  as  Exod.  xix.  22,  xxviii. 
ai,  xxix.  I,  44. 

VoL.  I. 


4.  Mishael  and  Elzaphan,  the  first  cousins 
of  Aaron  (Exod.  vi.  22),  are  selected  by  Moses 
to  convey  the  bodies  of  Nadab  and  Abihu  out 
of  the  camp,  and,  as  we  may  presume,  to  bury 
them,  probably  because  they  were  the  nearest 
relations  who  were  not  priests.  It  has  been 
conjectured  by  Blunt  that  they  were  the  m.en 
who  could  not  keep  the  Passover  when  it  v/as 
observed  on  the  14th  of  Nisan  at  the  beginning 
of  the  second  year  after  the  Exodus,  because 
they  were  “defiled  by  the  dead  body  of  a 
man,”  and  on  whose  account  “ the  little  Pass- 
over,”  to  be  observed  on  the  14th  of  the  second 
month,  Zif,  was  first  instituted.  Num.  ix.  6. 
Blunt’s  ‘Undesigned  Coincidences,’  i.  14. 

brethren]  i.e.  near  relations,  as  in  Gen.  xiii. 
8,  xiv.  16,  xxix.  12,  15,  &c. 

from  before  the  sanctuary]  See  on  2;.  i. 

5.  coats]  The  long  white  tunics,  which 
were  the  most  characteristic  part  of  the  priest’s 
dress.  See  on  Exod.  xxviii.  40,  41.  Life  had 
been  extinguished  as  if  by  a flash  of  lightning, 
but  neither  the  bodies  nor  the  dresses  were 
destroyed. 

6.  7.  Aaron  and  his  two  surviving  sons  are 
forbidden  to  show  the  accustomed  signs  of 
mourning,  or  to  leave  the  Court  of  the  Taber- 
nacle in  order  to  attend  the  funeral,  because, 
from  their  office,  they  were  especially  con- 
cerned as  consecrated  priests  in  outwardly 
maintaining  the  honour  of  Jehovah.  They 
were  to  bear  visible  testimony  to  the  righte- 
ousness of  the  punishment  of  Nadab  and 
Abihu,  lest  they  themselves  should  incur  guilt 
by  seeming  personally  to  participate  in  the 
sin  which  had  been  committed.  The  claims 
of  natural  relationship  were  superseded  by 
this  consideration.  The  people,  on  the  other 
hand,  as  not  formally  standing  so  near  to 
Jehovah,  were  permitted  to  “bewail  the 
burning  which  the  Lord  had  kindled,”  as  an 
acknowledgment  that  the  nation  had  a share 
in  the  sin  of  its  priests,  (i  Cor.  xii.  26.)  It 
should  be  observed  that  the  ground  of  the 
priests  being  forbidden  to  mourn  on  this 
particular  occasion,  appears  not  to  be  merely 
the  same  as  that  on  which  the  general  law 
was  based  prohibiting  the  High-priest  from 
mourning  even  for  his  nearest  relation,  which 
was  evidently  designed  to  keep  him  entirely 
out  of  the  way  of  defilement.  See  Lev.  xxi. 
10,  II. 


M M 


542 


LEVITICUS.  X. 


[v.  7—12. 


sons,  Uncover  not  your  heads,  neither 
rend  your  clothes ; lest  ye  die,  and 
lest  wrath  come  upon  all  the  people : 
but  let  your  brethren,  the  whole  house 
of  Israel,  bewail  the  burning  which 
the  Lord  hath  kindled. 

7 And  ye  shall  not  go  out  from 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, lest  ye  die : for  the  anoint- 
ing oil  of  the  Lord  is  upon  you. 
And  they  did  according  to  the  word 
of  Moses. 

8 f And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Aaron,  saying, 

9 Do  not  drink  wine  nor  strong 


drink,  thou,  nor  thy  sons  with  thee, 
when  ye  go  into  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  lest  ye  die : it  shall  be  a 
statute  for  ever  throughout  your  gene- 
rations : 

10  And  that  ye  may  put  difference 
between  holy  and  unholy,  and  between 
unclean  and  clean  j 

1 1 And  that  ye  may  teach  the 
children  of  Israel  all  the  statutes  which 
the  Lord  hath  spoken  unto  them  by 
the  hand  of  Moses. 

12^  And  Moses  spake  unto  Aaron, 
and  unto  Eleazar  and  unto  Ithamar, 
his  sons  that  were  left.  Take  the  meat 


6.  Unco'ver  not  your  heads\  Our  version 
follows  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate.  The  word 
rendered  “ uncover”  signifies,  to  set  free — to  let 
go  loose.  It  was  a custom  to  cut  off  or  pluck 
out  the  hair  as  a sign  of  grief  (Ezra  ix.  3 ; Job 
i.  20 ; Is.  XV.  ; Jer.  xli.  5,  xlviii.  37),  and 
it  has  been  supposed  that  this  mode  of  un- 
covering the  head  is  what  is  here  meant.  But  it 
was  also  a custom  to  let  the  hair  grow  long  and 
fall  loosely  over  the  head  and  face  (xiii.  45 ; 
2 Sam.  XV.  30,  xix.  4) ; and  this  is  most  likely 
what  is  expressed  by  the  Hebrew  word  in  this 
connection.  The  weight  of  authority  is  on  this 
side.  The  substance  of  the  command  would 
thus  be  that  they  should  not  let  the  hair  go 
dishevelled.  It  is  so  rendered  by  Saadia  and 
others. — Rending  the  clothes  in  front  so  as  to 
lay  open  the  breast  was  one  of  the  commonest 
manifestations  of  grief.  Gen.  xxxvii.  29,  xliv. 
13;  2S.i.  ii;  Job  i.  20  ; Joel  ii.  13,  &c.  &c. 
The  garments  as  well  as  the  persons  of  the 
priests  were  consecrated ; this  appears  to  be 
the  reason  of  the  prohibition  of  these  ordinary 
signs  of  mourning.  Cf.  Lev.  xxi.  10. 

lest  ye  die~\  See  on  Exod.  xxviii.  3 5. 

7.  out  from  the  door']  away  from  the 
entrance.  See  on  i.  3 and  viii.  33. 

the  anointing  oil... is  upon  you]  See  viii.  30. 
The  holy  oil,  “the  oil  of  gladness,”  Ps.  xlv.  7, 
Heb.  i.  9,  as  the  symbol  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
the  Spirit  of  Life  and  immortality  and  joy, 
was  the  sign  of  the  priests  being  brought  near 
to  Jehovah.  See  Note  after  ch.  ii.  It  was 
therefore  in  its  meaning  connected  both  with 
the  ground  of  the  general  law  which  forbad 
the  High-priest  ever  to  put  on  signs  of  mourn- 
ing on  account  of  death  (xxi.  10 — 12),  and 
with  the  more  special  reason  for  the  prohibi- 
tion on  this  occasion. 

The  priests  are  forbidden  to  drink  nvine,  (when 
officiating,  x.  8 — ii. 

9 — 11.  This  restraint  is  to  be  understood 
as  relating  to  the  entire  cycle  of  priestly  func- 


tions. When  the  priest  was  on  duty  he  was 
to  abstain  from  wine  and  strong  drink,  lest  he 
should  commit  excess  and  so  become  dis- 
qualified for  carrying  out  the  precepts  of  the 
ceremonial  Law. 

9.  strong  drink]  Heh.  shekdr,  LXX..  aiKc pa 
(Luke  i.  15).  The  Hebrew  word  is  used  as 
a general  name  for  intoxicating  drinks,  in- 
cluding wine,  Num.  xxviii.  7.  But  it  is  more 
frequently  employed  as  it  is  here,  to  denote 
strong  drinks  of  any  kind  (the  <vina  ficticia  of 
Pliny)  except  wine  made  from  the  grape.  St 
Jerome  says  that  the  Hebrews  applied  the 
name  shekdr  to  any  drink  prepared  from 
wheat,  barley  (like  the  beer  of  the  Egyptians, 
Herod.  11.  77  ; Diod.  i.  20),  millet,  the  juice 
of  apples,  or  dates.  Hieron.  in  Is.  xxviii.  7 ; 
Pliny,  ‘ H.  N.’  xiv.  19. 

lest  ye  die]  See  -u.  6. 

10.  The  Hebrew  word  rendered  “holy” 
(fiodeslS)  has  no  etymological  relation  to  that 
rendered  “unholy”  (chol).  The  first  denotes 
what  is  consecrated  to  the  service  of  the 
Sanctuary,  the  latter , all  which  is  not  so  con- 
secrated and  should  therefore  be  called  com- 
mon rather  than  “unholy.” 

unclean]  That  is,  what  occasions  defilement 
by  being  touched  or  eaten.  All  else  is  reckoned 
as  clean.  Cf.  Acts  x.  14. 

11.  That  is,  “that  you  may,  by  your 
example  in  your  ministrations,  preserve  the 
minds  of  the  Israelites  from  confusion  in 
regard  to  the  distinctions  made  by  the  divine 
Law.” 

"The  priests''  share  'in  the  Meat-offerings  and 
Peace-  offerings . 12—15. 

12 — 15.  Moses  now  reminds  the  priests 
of  the  laws  regarding  the  portions  of  the 
offerings  which  were  awarded  to  them  (vi.  16 
18,  26,  29,  &c.),  probably  in  the  way  of 
warning  in  connection  with  what  had  just 
happened.  This  connection  is  the  more  plain, 
if  we  suppose  that  Nadab  and  Abihu  had 


LEVITICUS.  X. 


543 


V.  13—18.] 

offering  that  remaineth  of  the  offerings 
of  the  Lord  made  by  fire,  and  eat  it 
without  leaven  beside  the  altar : for  it 
is  most  holy: 

13  And  ye  shall  eat  it  in  the  holy 
place,  because  it  is  thy  due,  and  thy 
sons’  due,  of  the  sacrifices  of  the 
Lord  made  by  fire : for  so  I am  com- 
manded. 

/'Exoci.  14.  And  “^the  wave  breast  and  heave 
shoulder  shall  ye  eat  in  a clean  place ; 
thou,  and  thy  sons,  and  thy  daughters 
with  thee : for  they  be  thy  due,  and 
thy  sons’  due,  which  are  given  out  of 
the  sacrifices  of  peace  offerings  of  the 
children  of  Israel. 

15  The  heave  shoulder  and  th-e 
wave  breast  shall  they  bring  with  the 
offerings  made  by  fire  of  the  fat,  to 


wave  it  for  a v/ave  offering  before  the 
Lord  ; and  it  shall  be  thine,  and  thy 
sons’  with  thee,  by  a statute  for  ever; 
as  the  Lord  hath  commanded. 

16  And  Moses  diligently  sought 
the  goat  of  the  sin  offering,  and,  be- 
hold, it  was  burnt : and  he  was  angry 
with  Eleazar  and  Ithamar,  the  sons  of 
Aaron  which  were  left  alive^  saying, 

17  Wherefore  have  ye  not  eaten 
the  sin  offering  in  the  holy  place,  seeing 
it  is  most  holy,  and  God  hath  given  it 
you  to  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  con- 
gregation, to  make  atonement  for  them 
before  the  Lord? 

18  Behold,  the  blood  of  it  was  not 

brought  in  within  the  \\o\y  place:  ye 
should  indeed  have  eaten  it  in  the  holy  ^ 
place ^ “^as  I commanded.  26^ 


indulged  to  excess  in  the  Drink-offerings  (see 
on  'v.  i).  The  argument  would  thus  be,  that 
as  such  meals  were  appointed  in  honour  of 
Jehovah  Himself,  they  ought  to  be  conducted 
with  due  reverence  and  discretion. 

12.  the  meat-offering  that  remameth~\  See 
ii.  3. 

beside  the  altar']  What  is  called  “the  holy 
place”  in  u.  13:  it  should  be  rather,  a lioly 
place,  any  part ‘of  the  holy  precinct,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  a merely  “clean  place”  (gu. 
14),  either  v/ithin  or  without  the  court  of  the 
Tabernacle.  Cf.  on  17. 

most  holy]  See  on  ii.  3 . 

14.  ^a’ve  breast  and  hea've  shoulder]  Introd. 

§ ix. 

thy  sons  and  thy  daughters]  The  priests’ 
portions  of  the  Peace-offerings  were  holy^  but 
not  most  holy^  and  any  member  of  their 
femilies,  either  male  or  female,  might  partake 
of  them. 

15.  ^vanje  offering]  Introd.  § ix. 

The  Priests  rebuked  on  account  of  the  flesh  of 
the  Sin-offering.  16 — 20. 

The  Law  had  expressly  commanded  that 
the  flesh  of  those  Sin-offerings  the  blood  of 
which  was  not  carried  into  the  Sanctuary 
should  belong  to  the  priests,  and  that  it  should 
be  eaten  by  them  alone  in  a holy  place.  See  on 
ii.  3.  The  Sin-offerings  of  which  the  blood 
was  carried  into  the  Sanctuary  were  those  for 
the  High-priest  and  for  the  people,  iv.  5,  16. 
But  on  this  occasion,  though  the  Sin-offering 
which  had  been  offered  by  Aaron  was  for  the 
people  (ix.  15),  its  blood  was  not  carried  into 
the  Tabernacle.  See  ix.  9,  x.  18.  The  priests 
might  therefore  have  too  readily  supposed  that 
their  eating  the  flesh,  or  burning  it,  was  a 


matter  of  indifference.  A doubt  was  in  some 
way  raised  in  the  mind  of  Moses  as  to  the 
fact,  and  he  “ diligently  sought  the  goat  of  the 
Sin-offering,  and,  behold,  it  was  burnt.”  In 
his  rebuke  he  tells  them  that  the  flesh  of  the 
Sin-offering  is  given  to  the  priests  “to  bear 
the  iniquity  of  the  congregation  to  make 
atonement  for  them  before  the  Lord.”  The 
appropriation  of  the  flesh  by  the  priests  is  thus 
made  an  essential  part  of  the  act  of  atonement. 
See  on  vi.  25. 

16.  the  goat  of  the  sin  offering]  See  ix.  15. 

it  nvas  burnt]  It  was  consumed  by  fire  in 

an  ordinary  way,  not  in  the  fire  of  the  Altar. 
See  on  i.  9. 

Eleazar  and  Ithamar]  Aaron  is  not  men- 
tioned, perhaps  because  it  was  the  appointed 
duty  of  his  sons  to  see  to  the  sacrificial  meals. 
But  in  his  apology  he  appears  to  acknowledge 
that  he  participated  in  the  offence, 

17.  in  the  holy  place]  i.e.  within  the  holy 
precinct.  See  on  2;,  12. 

to  hear  the  iniquity]  See  on  Exod.  xxviii. 
38;  Lev.  vi.*25. 

18.  the  holy  place]  “The  holy  place f as 
it  is  called  in  our  version,  within  the  Taber- 
nacle (see  Exod.  xxvi.  33,  xxviii.  29,  &c,) 
into  which  the  blood  was  carried,  is  regularly 
called  in  Hebrew,  simply,  the  Holy  (as  the  in- 
nermost chamber  is  called  the  Holy  of  Holies), 
the  adjective  being  used  substantively ; while 
the  precinct  in  which  the  flesh  of  the  Sin-offer- 
ing was  eaten  is  generally  called  in  full  the  Holy 
Place,  the  substantive  being  expressed.  But  in 
this  verse,  in  the  second  sentence,  the  usual 
Hebrew  name  of  the  former  is  given  to  the 
latter,  to  give  point  to  the  sense. — In  a trans- 
lation the  ambiguity,  which  is  awkward  in 
many  places,  woukl  be  avoided  by  uniformly 

MM2 


544 


LEVITICUS.  X.  XL  [v.  19-1. 


19  And  Aaron  said  unto  Moses, 
Behold,  this  day  have  they  offered 
their  sin  offering  and  their  burnt  offer- 
ing before  the  Lord  ; and  such  things 
have  befallen  me : and  if  I had  eaten 
the  sin  offering  to  day,  should  it  have 
been  accepted  in  the  sight  of  the 
Lord  ? 


20  And  when  Moses  heard  that^  he 
was  content. 


CHAPTER  XL 

1 What  beasts  may^  4 and  what  may  not  be 
eaten.  9 What  fishes.  1 3 What  fowls,  ag 
The  crefiing  things  zohich  are  2inclean. 

And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
^ and  to  Aaron,  saying  unto  them, 


calling  one  tlie  Holy  precinct,  and  the 
other  the  Holy  place. 

19.  Aaron’s  apology  appears  to  amount  to 
this; — “Behold  this  very  day,  in  which  we 
have  done  our  part  in  sacrificing  Sin-offerings 
and  Burnt-offerings  to  the  Lord,  this  great 
calamity  has  befallen  me.  Could  it  have  been 
well-pleasing  to  the  Lord  if  those  who  have 
been  so  humbled  as  I and  my  sons  have  been 
by  the  sin  of  our  relations  and  the  divine  judg- 
ment, had  feasted  on  the  most  holy  flesh 
of  the  Sin-offering  ?”  He  and  his  sons  would 
seem  to  have  been  bowed  down  by  a sense  of 
self-humiliation  and  awe  suggested  by  the 
fearful  example  which  they  had  witnessed  and 
by  grief  at  the  loss  of  their  kindred.  This 
working  of  natural  feeling  seems  to  be  suffi- 
cient to  account  for  their  abstinence  and  for 
Aaron’s  words. — There  is  another  view  of 
the  subject  which  may  just  be  noticed.  It 
has  been  conceived  that  Moses  suspected 
that  the  priests  had  shrunk  from  eating  the 
flesh  of  the  Sin-offering  as  something  awful 
containing  the  nature  of  a curse ; that  they 
might  have  been  swayed  by  a superstitious 
notion  derived  from  Egypt  that  the  Sin-offering 
was  a sort  of  Typhonic  sacrifice  (Ewald, 
Kurtz,  &c.).  But  any  such  theory  as  this  is 
OjUite  gratuitous.  Moses  simply  charges  the 
priests  with  an  obvious  transgression  of  the 
Law. 

It  has  been  said  that  Aaron  might  have 
alleged  in  vindication  of  himself  the  Law  that 
the  carcase  of  the  people’s  Sin-offering  should 
be  burned  without  the  camp  (Lev.  iv.  21); 
and  an  argument  lias  been  based  on  this,  that 
the  narrative  is  inconsistent  \j’ith  the  earlier 
chapters  of  Leviticus,  and  must  have  been 
written  by  a different  author  (Knobel).  But  it 
has  been  shown  that  this  offering  was  sacrificed 
in  a peculiar  relation,  in  behalf  of  the  people, 
apart  from  the  priest  (on  ix.  15),  and  the  flesh 
was  therefore  under  the  same  conditions  as 
that  ot  the  ordinary  Sin-offering  (see  vi.  26). 
Aaron  was  not  blamed  for  burning  the  flesh 
of  his  own  Sin-offering  of  the  calf  (see  ix.  2), 
because,  being  offered  on  his  behalf,  it  fell 
under  the  Law  of  Lev.  iv.  21.  On  the  holiness 
of  the  flesh  of  the  Sin-offering,  see  on  vi.  25. 

20.  he  axeas  content]  Moses  admitted 
Aaron’s  plea,  but  it  is  not  stated  whether  he 
was  conscious  that  he  had  himself  spoken 
hastily  and  now  conceded  the  point  at  issue 


(as  we  find  him  doing  on  another  occasion, 
in  reference  to  the  settlement  of  the  two  tribes 
and  a half,  Num.  xxxii.  6),  allowing  that  the 
priests  had  done  what  was  in  itself  right,  as 
S.  Augustin,  the  later  Targums,  Kurtz,  and 
others,  interpret  the  passage ; or  whether  he 
yielded  out  of  sympathy  with  Aaron’s  natural 
feelings.  The  latter  alternative  is  perhaps  the 
more  probable  one. 

Chap.  XL 

Glean  and  Unclean  Animal  Food. 

1—47- 

Preliminary  Note. 

This  chapter  contains  directions  to  regu- 
late the  animal  food  of  the  Israelites,  and  to 
keep  them  from  defilement  by  contact  with 
any  sort  of  dead  flesh  which  they  were  not 
permitted  to  eat.  The  instructions  appear  to 
have  been  given  in  the  way  which  was  most 
convenient,  and  most  generally  intelligible,  at 
the  time.  Some  animals  are  prohiWted  in 
easily  defined  classes ; while  others,  with 
which  the  people  were  probably  familiar  as 
articles  of  food  that  had  been  eaten  by  them- 
selves or  were  eaten  by  their  neighbours,  are 
forbidden  in  detail.  The  same  rules  are  given 
with  no  important  variations  of  meaning  in 
Dent.  xiv. 

Of  quadrupeds,  those  only  might  be  eaten 
which  completely  divide  the  hoof  and  chew 
the  cud,  ojoj.  3 — 8. 

Of  fish,  all  those  might  be  eaten  which  have 
both  scales  and  fins,  but  no  others,  9 — 12. 

Of  birds,  nineteen  are  prohibited  by  name 
which  appear  to  comprise  types  of  all  sorts  of 
birds  of  prey,  along  with  the  bat,  which  was 
classed  as  a bird,  ajax.  13 — 19.  — From  the 
words  of  Deut.  xiv.  ii,  20  we  may  infer  that 
all  birds  which  do  not  belong  to  the  kinds 
here  mentioned  were  to  be  regarded  as  clean. 

Of  flying  insects,  those  only  which  are 
furnished  with  two  long  legs  for  leaping,  like 
the  grasshopper,  were  permitted  to  be  eaten. 
OJO.'.  20 23. 

Of  creeping  things,  or  vermin  (see  on 
ax.  20),  including  .small  quadrupeds,  such  as 
rats  and  mice,  with  reptiles,  worms,  mollusks 
and  crawling  insects,  none  might  be  eaten,  axax. 
29 — 38,  aiax.  41 — 44.  The  kinds  of  these  are 
enumerated  in  ax.  42,  and  eight  of  them  are 
distinguished  by  name  in  axax.  29,  30. 

No  flesh  could  be  lawfully  eaten  by  an 


'T-  2—5-] 


LEVITICUS.  XI. 


545 


2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
"Deut.  14.  saying,  "These  are  the  beasts  which 
Acts  10.  ye  shall  eat  among  all  the  beasts  that 

are  on  the  earth. 

3 Whatsoever  parteth  the  hoof,  and 
is  clovenfooted,  and  cheweth  the  cud, 
among  the  beasts,  that  shall  ye  eat. 

4 Nevertheless  these  shall  ye  not 


eat  of  them  that  chew  the  cud,  or  of 
them  that  divide  the  hoof:  as  the 
camel,  because  he  cheweth  the  cud, 
but  divideth  not  the  hoof;  he  Is  un- 
clean unto  you. 

5 And  the  coney,  because  he  chew- 
eth the  cud,  but  divideth  not  the  hoof; 
he  IS  unclean  unto  you. 


Israelite,  or  even  touched  without  defilement, 
unless  it  was  that  of  a clean  animal  which 
had  been  properly  slaughtered  {yTi.  8,  ii,  24, 
25,  27,  28,  31,  39,  40).  On  slaughtering,  see 
xvii.  3—7,  13,  i4._  ^ 

It  was  unconditionally  forbidden  to  taste 
the  flesh  of  any  unclean  animal  {y^v.  8,  13, 
41,  42,  47)  ; but  if  anyone  ate  of  the  flesh  of 
a clean  animal  which  had  not  been  properly 
slaughtered,  he  was  to  purify  himself.  See  on 
39,  40. 

It  may  be  observed  that  the  words  of  the 
Law  are  not  so  strong  regarding  the  unclean 
quadrupeds  as  they  are  regarding  the  unclean 
fish,  birds  and  creeping  things.  The  flesh  of 
the  former  is  simply  declared  to  be  unclean 
(yu.  4 — 8,  26 — 28),  that  is,  unfit  for  the  food 
of  the  people  of  Jehovah  (see  on  x.  10) ; but 
the  flesh  of  the  others  is  pronounced  to  be 
not  only  unclean  but  “ an  abomination,” 
something  to  be  cast  away  (ynj.  10,  it,  12, 
13,  20,  23,  41,  42,  43)-  See  on  vnj.  41—43- 
It  is  not  however  clear  that  the  different  ex- 
pressions mark  any  practical  difference. 

[On  the  grounds  of  this  law,  see  Note  at 
the  end  of  the  Chapter.] 

Chap.  XI.  1.  This  is  one  of  the  places 
in  Leviticus  in  which  Jehovah  speaks  to  Moses 
and  Aaron  conjointly.  Others  are  xiii.  i,  xv. 
I.  The  High-priest,  in  regard  to  the  legal 
purifications,  is  treated  as  coordinate  with 
the  legislator. 

The  Clean  and  Unclean  Quadrupeds.  2 — 8. 

2.  These  are  the  beasts.,  This  should 

rather  be  “These  are  the  animals  which 
ye  may  eat  out  of  all  the  beasts;”  that  is, 
out  of  the  larger  creatures,  the  quadrupeds, 
as  distinguished  from  birds  and  reptiles.  See 
Gen.  i.  24. 

3.  parteth  the  hoof.,  and  is  clovenfooted\ 
Rather,  is  clovenfooted  and  completely 
separates  the  hoofs. 

4.  dinjideth  not  the  hoof~\  The  toes  of  the 
camel  are  divided  above,  but  they  are  united 
below  in  a sort  of  cushion  or  pad  resting  upon 
the  hard  bottom  of  the  foot,  which  is  “like 
the  sole  of  a shoe.”  Bell  ‘ On  the  Hand,’  p.  94. 
The  Moslems  eat  the  flesh  of  the  camel,  and 
it  is  the  most  esteemed  of  the  animals  which 
they  offer  in  sacrifice,  the  others  being  the 
cow,  the  goat,  and  the  sheep  (Lane's  ‘ Modern 
Egyptians,’  i.  p.  134;  ‘ Hedaya,’  iv.  p.  81; 


‘ Koran,’  Sura  xxii.).  The  flesh  and  milk 
were  eaten  by  the  ancient  Arabians,  as  we 
learn  from  St  Jerome  (‘  Adv.  Jov.’  ii.  7). 
The  flesh  is  however  said  not  to  be  whole- 
some (Tennent’s  ‘ Ceylon,’  i.  p.  76). 

5.  the  co7iey\  In  Hebrew,  shdphdn,  i.e.  the 
hider.  Bruce  appears  to  have  been  right  in 
his  conjecture  that  this  is  the  animal  called  by 
the  Southern  Arabs  thofun  (the  same  word  as. 
shaphdn').,  and  by  the  Arabs  in  Syria  and  Pales- 
tine, q.ueber.  Naturalists  call  it  Hyrax  Syriacus.. 
It  is  “about  the  size  of  a well-grown  rabbit, 
with  short  ears,  round  head,  long  plantigrade 
foot,  no  tail,  and  nails  instead  of  claws.  With 
its  weak  teeth  and  short  incisors,  there  seem 
few  animals  so  entirely  without  the  means  for 
self-defence.  But  ‘ the  stony  rocks  are  a 
refuge  for  the  coneys’  (Prov.  xxx.  26,  Ps.  civ. 
18),  and  tolerably  secure  they  are  in  such 
rocks  as  these  (near  Ain  Feshkhah  on  the 
shore  of  the  Dead  Sea).  No  animal  ever  gave 
us  so  much  trouble  to  secure.”  Tristram, 

‘ Land  of  Israel,’  p.  250.  It  is  said  to  be  more 
common  in  the  Sinaitic  Peninsula  than  in  the 
Holy  Land.  The  animal  seems  to  bear  some 
resemblance  to  the  guinea-pig  or  the  marmot, 
and  in  its  general  appearance  and  habits  it 
might  easily  be  taken  for  a rodent.  But  Cuvier 
discovered  that  it  is,  in  its  anatomy,  a true 
pachyderm,  allied  to  the  rhinoceros  and  the 
tapir,  inferior  to  them  as  it  is  in  size.  Its 
physiology  is  peculiarly  interesting.  See 
‘ Penny  Cyclo.’  and  the  Duke  of  Argyll’s 
‘ Reign  of  Law,’  p.  264  ; with  Rodiger  in 
Gesenius’  ‘Thes.’  p.  1467.  The  LXX.  ren- 
der shaphdn  by  ^^oLpoypvXXios,  a porcupine. 
Luther,  following  Jewish  authorities,  took  it 
for  a rabbit,  and  the  English  translators  took 
the  same  line  in  translating  it  by  coney,  the 
ordinary  old  English  name  for  a rabbit ; but 
it  is  very  doubtful  whether  the  rabbit  was 
known  in  South-Western  Asia  in  ancient 
times. — Bochart  supposed  the  name  to  denote 
the  jerboa,  an  animal  that  abounds  in  the  Holy 
Land,  but  which  docs  not  suit  the  Scripture 
notices  of  the  shaphdn,  as  it  lives  in  the  sand 
and  not  in  the  rocks.  See  on  ^v.  29. 

he  chevjeth  the  cudl]  Not  one  of  the  animals 
which  have  been  taken  for  the  shdphdn  (nor 
the  hare  mentioned  in  the  next’  verse)  chews 
the  cud  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  words. 
They  have  not  the  peculiar  stomach  of  the 
true  ruminants,  which  is  essential  to  the  act 


546 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


^ 2 Mac. 

i8. 


[v.  6 — 8. 


6 And  the  hare,  because  he  cheweth 
the  cud,  but  divideth  not  the  hoofj  he 
is  unclean  unto  you. 

7 And  ^the  swine,  though  he  divide 
the  hoof,  and  be  clovenfooted,  yet  he 


cheweth  not  the  cud;  he  is  unclean 
to  you. 

8  Of  their  flesh  shall  ye  not  eat, 
and  their  carcase  shall  ye  not  touch ; 
they  are  unclean  to  you. 


of  rumination.  But  the  Hyrax  has  the  same 
habit  as  the  hare,  the  rabbit,  the  guinea-pig, 
and  some  other  rodents,  of  moving  its  jaws 
when  it  is  at  rest  as  if  it  was  masticating. 
Mr  Tristram  says,  “It  is  quite  sufficient  to 
watch  the  creature  working  and  moving  its 
jaws,  as  it  sits  in  a chink  of  the  rocks,  to 
understand  how  anyone  writing  as  an  ordi- 
nary observer,  and  not  as  a comparative 
anatomist,  would  naturally  thus  speak  of  it ; 
and  this  apart  from  the  question  whether  the 
Hebrew  word  signifies  anything  more  than 
re-chew.”  ‘Land  of  Israel,’ -p.  251.  The 
Hebrew  phrase,  according  to  its  etymology, 
certainly  does  refer  rather  to  the  act  of  cough- 
ing up  the  half-m.asticated  food  than  to  that  of 
moving  the  jaws.  But  by  a process  common 
enough  in  all  languages,  its  meaning  became 
expanded,  and  the  rodents  and  pachyderms, 
which  have  the  habit  of  grinding  with  their 
laws,  were  familiarly  spoken  of  as  ruminating 
animals,  as  the  bat  was  reckoned  amongst 
birds  because  it  flies  (see  nj.  19),  and  as  we 
might  speak  of  whales  and  their  congeners  as 
fish,  when  there  is  no  occasion  for  scientific 
accuracy.  It  was  not  the  object  of  the  legis- 
lator to  give  a scientific  classification  of  ani- 
mals nor  formally  to  ground  the  law  upon 
the  facts  of  mastication  and  dividing  the  hoof. 
He  had  merely  to  furnish  the  people  with  a 
ready  index  by  which  they  could  recognise 
certain  animals  the  flesh  of  which,  for  some 
reason,  was  not  to  be  eaten.  See  Note  at 
the  end  of  this  Chapter.  It  was  enough 
for  his  purpose,  in  laying  down  a practical 
rule  for  the  people,  that  the  Hyrax  and  the 
hare  with  other  animals  allied  to  them  were 
commonly  known  to  move  their  jaws  in  the 
same  manner  as  the  ox,  the  sheep  and  the 
camel.  The  limits  of  the  prohibition  could 
in  no  way  have  been  rendered  more  easily  in- 
telligible. See  Prel.  Note.  It  may  also  be 
observed  that  these  creatures  were  excluded 
from  the  clean  animals  by  the  rule  subse- 
(jiicntly  given  in  ‘t'.  27,  as  being  comprised 
within  “ whatsoever  goeth  upon  his  paws.” 
'I'liey  are  mentioned  here  only  by  way  of 
illustration  to  enforce  the  .caution  that  no 
beast  should  be  regarded  as  clean  which  does 
not  completely  divide  the  hoof  as  well  as 
chew  the  cud.  The  flesh  of  the  Hyrax  is  said 
to  be  eaten  by  the  Arabs  of  Mount  Sinai,  but 
not  by  the  Moslems  in  general. 

6.  the  hare]  Sec  the  preceding  note. 
There  is  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  identity 
of  the  animal : the  name  {ciniebeth')  is  the 
same  in  Arabic  and  other  cognate  languages. 


The  Moslems  have  the  express  permission  of 
their  prophet  to  eat  the  flesh  of  the  hare 
(‘Hedaya,’  iv.  p.  75  ; Lane,  1.  135);  and  the 
Arabs  avail  themselves  of  it,  but  according  to 
Dr  Russell  (Vol.  i.  p.  158),  not  the  Turks  of 
Aleppo.  The  Parsees  are  said  to  abstain  from 
it.  Forbes,  ‘Orient.  Mem.’  ii.  p.  138.  Ac- 
cording to  Csesar,  its  flesh  was  not  eaten  by 
the  ancient  Britons  (‘de  Bell.  Gal.’  v.  12). 

7.  the  s^'ine^  though  he  di’vide  the  hoof^  and 
be  clo^enfootedT]  Rather,  “the  swine,  though 
it  is  clovenfooted  and  completely 
separates  the  hoofs.”  See  on  2;.  3.  Of 
all  the  quadrupeds  of  Vhich  the  Law  forbids 
the  flesh  to  be  eaten,  the  pig  seems  to  have 
been  regarded  as  the  most  unclean.  Is.  Ixv.  4, 
Ixvi.  3,  17  ; 2 Macc.  vi.  18,  19.  Several  other 
nations  have  agreed  with  the  Hebrews  in  this 
respect.  Though  pigs  were  sacrificed  by  the 
ancient  Egyptians  at  the  yearly  festival  of  the 
Moon  and  Bacchus,  and  their  flesh  on  that 
occasion  was  eaten  by  the  people,  they  were 
regarded  at  all  other  times  with  the  utmost 
aversion,  and  swineherds  were  banished  from 
society : the  priests  appear  never  to  have 
eaten  of  their  flesh,  nor  even  to  have  taken 
part  in  sacrificing  it.  Herodot.  Ii.  47,  48  ; 
.Elian,  ‘Hist.  Anim.’  x.  16;  Joseph.  ‘ Cont. 
Ap.’  II.  14.  The  Brahmin  is  degraded  im- 
mediately who  intentionally  tastes  swine's 
flesh.  ‘ Menu,’  v.  19.  The  ancient  Arabians 
held  the  animal  in  no  better  esteem.  Solinus, 
XXXIII.  4;  Hieron.  ‘ Adv.  Jov.’  ii.  7.  Swine's 
flesh  is  singled  out  from  the  forbidden  flesh 
of  other  animals  by  the  Koran  and  named  in 
several  places  along  with  “the  flesh  of  that 
which  dies  of  itself,  and  blood.”  Suras  ii., 
V.,  VI.,  XVI,  &c.  And  according  to  the 
Moslem  laws,  the  flesh  of  men  and  that  of 
swine  are  the  only  kinds  of  flesh  which  can- 
not be  rendered  pure  by  zabbah^  that  is,  by 
cutting  the  throat  according  to  a prescribed 
form.  . ‘Hedaya,’  iv.  pp.  62 — 75.  See  note 
after  ch.  xvii.  The  dirty  habits  and  uncouth 
form  of  the  creature  may  have  no  doubt 
tended  to  bring  it  into  disrepute.  There  is 
a curious  passage  to  this  ofiect,  too  long  for 
quotation,  in  Lactantius,  ‘ Institut.’  iv.  17. 
But  a very  general  notion  has  prevailed  that 
its  flesh  is  unwholesome,  especially  in  warm 
climates.  According  to  a Jewish  proverb,  it 
promotes  leprosy.  Manetho  speaks  to  the 
same  purpose  (ap.  Aidian,  ‘H.  A.’  x.  16;  cf. 
Tacitus,  ‘ Hist.’  v.  4),  and  there  seems  good 
reason  to  believe  that  it  has  under  certain 
circumstances  a tendency  to  produce  diseases 
of  the  skin.  Michaelis,  ‘ Laws  of  Moses,’ 


LEVITICUS.  XI. 


547 


V.  9— 1 3-] 

9 ^ These  shall  ye  eat  of  all  that 
are  in  the  waters:  whatsoever  hath 
fins  and  scales  in  the  waters,  in  the 
seas,  and  in  the  rivers,  them  shall 
ye  eat. 

10  And  all  that  have  not  fins  and 
scales  in  the  seas,  and  in  the  rivers,  of 
all  that  move  in  the  waters,  and  of 
any  living  thing  which  is  in  the  waters, 
they  shall  he  an  abomination  unto  you  : 


1 1 They  shall  be  even  an  abomi- 
nation unto  you ; ye  shall  not  eat  of 
their  flesh,  but  ye  shall  have  their 
carcases  in  abomination. 

12  Whatsoever  hath  no  fins  nor 
scales  in  the  waters,  that  shall  be  an 
abomination  unto  you. 

13  ^ And  these  are  they  which  ye 
shall  have  in  abomination  among  the 
fowls ; they  shall  not  be  eaten,  they 


III.  p.  230.  Lord  Clyde  forbad  the  use  of 
swine’s  flesh  in  the  Indian  army  on  sanitary 
grounds.  Tennent’s  ‘Ceylon,’  i.  p.  76.  Sir 
Gardiner  Wilkinson  says,  “the  reason  of  the 
meat  not  being  eaten  (by  the  Egyptians)  was 
its  iinwholesomeness,  on  which  account  it 
was  forbidden  to  the  Jews  and  Moslems;  and 
the  prejudice  naturally  extended  from  the 
animal  to  those  who  kept  it,  as  at  present  in 
India  and  other  parts  of  the  East,  where 
a Hindoo  (that  is,  one  of  l:Hgh  caste)  or  a 
Moslem  is,  like  an  ancient  Egyptian,  defiled 
by  the  touch  of  a pig,  and  looks  with  horror 
on  those  who  tend  it  and  eat  its  flesh.”  Note 
on  ‘Herodotus,’  ii.  47.  See  also  Lane,  ‘Mod. 
Egypt.’  I.  p.  134.  Much  curious  learning  has 
been  expended  on  the  causes  of  the  disesteerti 
in  which  the  pig  has  been  held  amongst  Eastern 
nations,  by  Spencer,  ‘De  Leg.  Heb.’  i.  7,  § 4, 
and  by  Bochart,  ‘Hieroz.’  ii.  57. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  the  law  regarding 
quadrupeds  is  given  in  a positive  form  in 
Deut.  xiv.  3,  4,  5,  “Thou  shalt  not  eat  any 
abominable  thing.  These  are  the  beasts 
which  ye  shall  eat:  the  ox,  the  sheep,  and 
the  goat,”  &c.  Then  follow  seven  names 
which  appear  to  belong  to  the  roebuck,  the 
gazelle  and  four  other  kinds  of  antelope, 
with  the  wild  sheep.  (See  notes  in  loc.) 
These  most  likely  constituted  the  game  with 
which  the  Israelites  were  familiar  in  the 
Wilderness  and  on  the  borders  of  the  Holy 
Land.  Cf.  Lev.  xvii.  13. 

The  Clean  and  Unclean  Fish^  9 — 12. 

(Deut.  xiv.  9,  10.) 

9.  The  rule  here  is  simple  and  compre- 
hensive. Any  fish,  either  from  salt  water  or 
fresh,  might  be  eaten  if  it  had  both  scales  and 
fins,  but  no  other  creature  that  lives  in  the 
waters.  Shellfish  of  all  kinds,  whether  mol- 
lusks  or  crustaceans,  and  cetaceous  animals, 
were  therefore  prohibited,  as  well  as  fish  which 
appear  to  have  no  scales,  like  the  eel. 

Fish  were  generally  forbidden  to  the  Egyp- 
tian priests,  but  were  largely  eaten  by  the  rest 
of  the  people.  Wilkinson,  i.  p.  322 ; Porphyry, 
‘De  Abstin.’  iv.  7.  The  eel  was  held  sacred  in 
several  parts  of  Egypt,  and  was  not  eaten. 
Sir  Gardiner  Wilkinson  supposes  that  “the 
reason  of  its  sanctity,  like  that  of  the  Oxyrhyn- 


chus,  was  owing  to  its  being  unwholesome; 
and  the  best  way  of  preventing  its  bdng  eaten 
was  to  assign  it  a place  among  the  sacred 
animals  of  the  country,”  ii.  192.  This  theory 
however  is  not  easily  reconciled  with  the  con- 
secration of  such  animals  as  the  ox  and  the 
sheep;  or  of  the  fish  called  Lepidotus^  which 
had  large  scales  and  must  have  been  a whole- 
some fish,  whether  it  was  allied  to  the  salmon, 
the  carp,  or  the  perch.  See  ‘ Herod.’  ii.  72 ; 
Wilkinson’s  ‘ Ancient  Egypt.’  ii.  p.  192.  The 
modern  Egyptians  consider  all  fish  without 
scales  to  be  unwholesome.  Lane,  i.  p.  135. 
The  Moslem  law,  like  the  Hebrew,  forbids  the 
eating  of  shellfish,  mollusks  of  all  kinds,  and, 
according  to  the  best  authorities,  of  seals  and 
other  marine  beasts.  “ No  animal  that  lives  in 
water  is  lawful  except  fish.”  ‘ Hedaya,’  iv. 
75.  It  is  said  that  Numa  Pompilius  made  a 
law  that  no  scaleless  fish  should  be  offered  in 
sacrifice,  though,  if  we  are  to  trust  the  tradi- 
tion in  the  form  in  which  it  has  reached  us, 
not  in  consequence  of  their  being  looked  upon 
as  impure.  Plin.  ‘ H.  N.’,  xxxii.  10.  Festus 
refers  to  a similar  law  (s.  v.  pollucere')^  and 
states  that  any  fish  having  scales  might  be 
sacrificed  except  the  Scarus. 

There  is  probably  a reference  to  the  dis- 
tinction between  clean  and  unclean  fishes  in 
Matt.  xiii.  48.  See  Trench  ‘on  the  Parables,’ 
p.  137.  The  scaleless  fish  which  most  abounds 
in  the  Sea  of  Galilee  is  the  Silurus;  of  those 
which  have  scales,  some  of  the  most  abun- 
dant are  the  chub,  the  barbel  and  the  bream. 
Robinson,  ‘ Physical  Geography  of  the  Holy 
Land,’  p.  182;  Tristram,  ‘ Land  of  Israel,’  pp. 
426,  42B,  435,  575- 

The  Unclean  Birds ^ 13 — 19. 

No  general  rule  is  given  for  the  distinction 
between  clean  and  unclean  birds,  but  there  is 
merely  a list  of  twenty  which  are  prohibited, 
nothing  being  said  of  those  which  might  be 
eaten.  See  Prel.  Note.  It  will  be  seen  that, 
as  far  as  they  can  be  identified,  the  birds  here 
mentioned  are  such  as  live  upon  animal  food. 
The  Mishna  (‘  Cholin,’  iii.  6)  lays  it  down  as 
a rule  that  every  bird  is  unclean  which  strikes 
its  talons  into  its  prey ; and  quotes  one  autho- 
rity which  puts  into  the  same  class  every 
bird  which  divides  its  toes  equally  in  climb- 


548 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


[v.  14—16. 


are  an  abomination : the  eagle,  and 
the  ossifrage,  and  the  ospray, 

14  And  the  vulture,  and  the  kite 
after  his  kind ; 


1 5 Every  raven  after  his  kind ; 

16  And  the  owl,  and  the  night 
hawk,  and  the  cuckow,  and  the  hawk 
after  his  kind, 


ing,  like  the  parrot  and  woodpecker.  The 
distinction  between  birds  in  the  Moslem  law 
appears  similarly  to  hinge  upon  their  food. 

‘ Hedayaf  iv.  74.  According  to  Porphyry, 
the  Egyptian  priests  also  followed  the  same 
rule.  ‘ De  Abstin.’  iv.  7.  The  list  of  species 
here  given  is  evidently  not  intended  to  be  an 
exhaustive  one.  It  is  likely  that  the  birds 
which  are  distinguished  by  name  were  those 
which  the  Israelites  might  have  been  tempted 
to  eat,  either  from  their  being  easy  to  obtain, 
or  from  the  example  of  other  nations,  and 
which  served  as  types  of  the  entire  range  of 
prohibited  kinds. — In  the  notes  which  follow, 
the  Hebrew  names  are,  in  general,  follow- 
ed by  the  names  in  the  Septuagint  and  the 
V ulgate. 

13.  the  eagle'\  ties  her  ; deros  ; aqiiila. 
Rather,  the  great  vulture.  It  has  been 
generally  taken  for  the  golden  eagle,  which  is 
commonly  called  the  king  of  birds.  But  Mr 
Tristram  seems  to  prove  that  the  bird  which 
is  meant  is  the  Gritfon  Vulture,  Viiltur  fulnjus^ 
called  by  the  Arabs,  N'ur.  “The  identity  of 
the  Hebrew  and  Arabic  terms  can  scarcely 
be  questioned.  However  degrading  the  sub- 
stitution of  the  ignoble  vulture  for  the  royal 
eagle  may  at  first  sight  appear  in  many  pas- 
sages, it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
griffon  is  in  all  its  movements  and  charac- 
teristics a majestic  and  royal  bird,  the  largest 
and  most  powerful  which  is  seen  on  the  wing 
in  Palestine,  and  far  surpassing  the  eagle  in 
size  and  power.”  Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’  and  ‘ Land 
of  Israel,’  p.  447.  In  Micah  i.  16,  baldness 
is  ascribed  to  the  yiesher^  which  certainly  does 
not  belong  to  the  eagle,  but  is  appropriate  to 
the  griffon  vulture.  The  Egyptians  are  known 
to  have  ranked  the  vulture  as  the  first  amongst 
birds.  I'he  nesher  is  mentioned  2 S.  i.  23; 
Ps.  ciii.  5 ; Prov.  xxiii.  5,  &c. 

the  ossifrage^  and  the  ospray]  The  latter  of 
these  English  words  is  but  a corruption  of  the 
former,  though  they  are  used  to  distinguish 
different  birds.  The  flebrew  words  are  peres 
and  'ozneeydh.  The  first,  peres^  is  exactly 
rendered  in  its  etymological  sense  by  ossifrage^ 
i.c.  the  bone-breaker,  and  the  bird  known  as 
the  ossifrage  is  probably  the  one  here  denoted. 
Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’  s.  v.  It  is  sometimes  called 
the  larnergeyer,  and  by  naturalists,  Gypaetus 
harhatus^  the  bearded  vulture.  It  is  the  rival 
of  the  griffon  in  strength  and  size,  but  is  a 
much  rarer  bird.  'J'he  other,  'ozneeydh^  may 
be  eith'T  the  ospray,  or  sea-eagle  {Pandion  Ha- 
liaetus)^  in  accordance  with  the  rendering  of 
the  Septuagint,  riAiateror ; or  the  short-toed 


eagle,  Circaetus  gallicus^  which  feeds  upon 
reptiles.  Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’ 

14.  the  'vulture]  dddh  • mil'vus. 

Rather,  the  kite.  The  English  vei'sion  has 
followed  the  Septuagint,  but  the  Vulgate  ap- 
pears to  be  more  correct.  The  Arabic  name 
for  a kite  is  dayah^  the  same  as  this  Hebrew 
word.  The  species  denoted  is  probably  the 
black  kite,  Mihms  ater^  the  gregarious  habits 
of  which  agree  with  the  mode  in  which  the 
ddydh  is  mentioned  Isaiah  xxxiv.  15.  Tristram, 
‘ Land  of  Israel,’  p.  204. 

the  kite]  ayah;  tVriv ; •vultur.  The  Sep- 
tuagint and  our  version  are  here  probably  more 
correct  than  the  Vulgate.  See  on  •v.  18.  The 
red  kite,  Milzms  regalis^  which  is  remark- 
able for  its  piercing  sight,  to  which  reference 
is  made  where  fhe  same  bird  is  named  in  Job 
xxviii.  7,  is  supposed  to  be  the  bird  here 
meant.  Tristram  in  Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’  The 
words  “after  his  kind,”  might  include  all 
allied  species. 

15.  Every  raven  after  his  kin  I]  The  names 
of  the  raven  and  the  birds  allied  to  it,  in  many 
languages,  appear  to  be  formed  by  onoma- 
topoeia, from  the  cry  of  the  birds.  Heb.  "'oreb ; 
Kopa^]  corvus ; Germ,  rabe;  English,  raven^ 
crovo^  rook.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
whole  family  of  corvidas  are  here  designated. 
The  raven,  the  rook,  the  crow  and  the  jack- 
daw are  very  abundant  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Jerusalem.  ‘Land  of  Israel,’  p.  184.  The 
raven  and  the  crow  are  forbidden  to  be  eaten 
by  the  Moslem  law,  but  not  rooks  which  feed 
on  grain.  ‘ Hedaya,’  Vol.  iv.  p.  74. 

16.  the  ovyf]  bath  hayd'andh;  arpovObs, 
struthio.  Most  probably,  the  ostrich.  The 
Hebrew  name  appears  to  mean  “the  daughter 
of  greediness”  (Gesenius),  but  others  explain 
it  as  “ the  daughter  of  wailing”  (Fiirst).  It 
is  rendered  ostrich  in  the  margin  in  Job  xxx. 
29,  Is.  xxxiv.  13,  xliii.  20,  in  agreement  with 
the  Septuagint,  the  Vulgate,  the  Targums,  the 
Syriac,  and  Saadia.  Though  the  name  is 
formally  feminine,  it  is  to  be  taken  to  denote 
the  species,  and  not  necessarily,  as  some  have 
imagined,  the  hen-bird.  The  flesh  of  the 
ostrich  is  eaten  by  some  of  the  Arabs,  but  not 
by  all.  An  African  people  called  Strutho- 
phagi  (ostrich-eaters),  are  mentioned  by  Strabo 
and  other  writers  (Knobel).  Our  translators 
appear  to  have  been  misled  in  rendering  the 
word  in  the  text  by  the  notion  that  ya'‘andh 
means  shouting.,  which  they  thought  applied 
best  to  the  owl.  Neither  Luther,  Cranmer, 
nor  the  Geneva  translators  fell  into  the  same 
mistake. 


V.  17,  i8.] 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


549 


17  And  the  little  owl,  and  the  cor-  18  And  the  swan,  and  the  pelican, 
morant,  and  the  great  owl,  and  the  gier  eagle. 


night  ha<^)k'\  tachnas  (literally,  the  violent 
one);  y\av^  \ noctua.  Rather,  the  owl.  Some 
high  authorities,  rejecting  the  ancient  versions, 
suppose  the  male  ostrich  to  be  intended,  on 
the  ground  of  the  Arabs  calling  him  by  a 
name  having  the  same  meaning,  and  take  bath 
haya'anah  exclusively  for  the  female  bird 
(Bochart,  Gesenius).  But  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  the  Hebrews  gave  radically  different 
names  to  the  male  and  female  of  the  same 
species,  except  in  the  case  of  domesticated  or 
familiarly  known  animals,  like  our  own  bull 
and  cow,  horse  and  mare,  ram  and  ewe.  By 
some  tachmas  has  been  taken  for  the  cuckoo, 
from  its  well-known  violence  towards  the  eggs 
and  the  young  of  other  birds  (Knobel,  Keil), 
and  by  some  Jewish  authors  for  the  swallow 
(Saadia,  Targ.  Pal.).  But  it  appears  reason- 
able on  the  whole  to  follow  the  ancient  ver- 
sions, and  to  understand  the  word  as  denoting 
some  species  of  owl,  of  ferocious  habits, 
such  as  the  Strix  orientalis  of  Hasselquist.  See 
Hasselquist,  ‘Travels,’  p.  196. 

the  cucko^'\  shachaph]  Xdpoi ; /arus.  Proba- 
bly, the  gull.  There  seems  to  be  nothing 
to  favour  the  claims  of  the  cuckoo.  The 
Greek  name  denotes  a gull,  and  it  is  likely 
that  some  sea-bird  is  meant.  See  Lewysohn, 

‘ Die  Zoologie  des  Talmuds,’  § 223.  The  He- 
brew word  is  found  nowhere  else  but  in  Deut. 
xiv.  15.  Bochart  and  Gesenius  are  inclined  to 
identify  shachaph  with  the  of  Aristotle, 

the  storm  petrel.  It  may  perhaps  be  “the 
light  and  elegant  Andouini’s  gull”  {Larus 
Andouni)^  which  abounds  on  the  shores  of 
Syria  (Tristram,  ‘ Land  of  Israel,’  p.  102,  &c.), 
and  is  certainly  a more  likely  bird  to  be  the 
object  of  a prohibition  than  the  storm  petrel, 
which  is  so  seldom  seen  on  land. 

the  hawk  after  his  kind~\  neets  - Upa^\  ac- 
cipiter.  There  is  no  reason  to  question  that 
the  whole  family  of  hawks  is  here  intended. 

17.  the  little  owl~\  kos ; vvKTiKopa^]  bubo. 
Mr  Tristram  has  no  hesitation  in  identifying 
this  with  the  small  owl,  Athene  meridionalis 
“which  stands  out  on  the  coins  of  old  Athens, 
the  emblem  of  Minerva,  dignified,  yet  occa- 
sionally grotesque,  in  its  motions;  with  all 
the  gravity,  yet  without  the  heaviness,  of  the 
owls  of  our  own  woods  and  towers;  and  it 
is  the  only  kind  universally  distributed  and 
everywhere  common  and  familiar  in  Syria, 
Greece,  and  the  Levant.”  ‘ Land  of  Israel,’ 
p.  68.  It  is  “the  owl  of  the  desert”  men- 
tioned in  Ps.  cii.  6. 

the  cormorant']  shdldk  (/.  e.  the  diver) ; Kara- 
pciKTYjs]  mergulus.  The  name  occurs  only  here 
and  in  Deut.  xiv.  17.  The  KarappnKTrjs  is 
mentioned  by  Aristotle  (‘Hist.  Anim.’  ix.  13, 


&c.),  and  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  gannet 
(Su/a  bass  ana].  But  it  is  doubted  whether 
the  gannet  is  to  be  found  in  or  near  Syria. 
It  is  as  likely  to  have  been  the  common 
cormorant  {Phalacrocorax  car  bo]  ^ which  is 
often  seen  in  Syria,  and  occasionally  visits  the 
Sea  of  Galilee. 

the  great  owl]  yanshuph]  Deut.  xiv.  16; 
Is.  xxxiv.  II.  Our  version  is  most  likely 
right.  The  bird  was  probably  the  horned 
owl  {Bubo  maximus],  well  known  in  Egypt 
(Wilkinson,  i.  249).  According  to  the  LXX,, 
as  its  text  stands  (see  the  next  note),  the 
Vulg.,  and  Onkelos,  the  yanshuph  was  the 
ibis,  the  sacred  bird  of  the  Egyptians,  Ibis 
religiosa.,  which,  although  it  is  not  found  in 
Palestine,  must  have  been  familiar  to  the  He- 
brews in  the  wilderness.  But  the  habits  of 
the  ibis  do  not  agree  with  the  reference  to  the 
yanshuph  in  Is.  xxxiv.  ii.  The  best  Jewish 
authorities  agree  with  our  version  (Lewysohn, 

§ 188).  The  etymology  of  the  name  may 
connect  it  either  with  the  twilight  (Bochart), 
or  with  the  act  of  puffing  out  the  breath 
(Knobel).  Either  meaning  would  accord  with 
the  habits  of  the  great  owl. 

18.  the  swan]  iinshemeth.  Our  version 
follows  the  authority  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
according  to  the  present  order  of  the  texts. 
(kukz/o?,  cygnus.]  But  a more  probable  ren- 
dering is  the  ibis. — By  comparing  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  the  Vulgate,  Onkelos,  and  the  He- 
brew text  here  and  in  Deut.  xiv.  16,  17,  and 
the  various  readings  of  the  LXX.,  it  becomes 
evident  that  the  order  of  the  names  has  been 
disturbed  in  the  versions.  There  is  a similar 
disturbance,  though  not  such  a complicated 
one,  in  verses  5 and  6.  It  appears  highly, 
probable  that  the  word  intended  by  the  LXX. , 
to  answer  to  tmshenieth  is  ifhs  (as  it  stands 
in  Deut.  xiv.  16),  and  that  the  right  bird  is 
the  Ibis  religiosa  mentioned  in  the  preceding 
note.  It  is  an  unclean  feeder,  by  no  means 
good  for  food.  It  is  difficult  to  suppose  that 
the  swan  could  have  been  reckoned  amongst 
unclean  birds:  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  were 
most  likely  wrong  in  introducing  it  anywhare 
into  this  list. — The  name  tinshemeth  belongs 
to  another  unclean  animal,  most  likely  the 
chameleon.  See  on  'v.  30. 

the  pelican]  kddth;  TreXe/cav;  onocratalus ; 
Deut.  xiv.  17  ; Ps.  cii.  6;  Is.  xxxiv.  ii;  Zeph. 
ii.  14.  In  the  latter  two  places  our  version 
has  cormorant  in  the  text,  but  pelican  in  the 
margin.  Two  species  of  pelican  are  known 
in  the  Levant,  Pelkanus  onocratalus  and 
P.  crispus.  There  is  reason  to  suppose  that 
pelicans  were  formerly  by  far  more  numerous 
than  they  are  at  present,  though  they  are 


550 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


[V.  19,  20. 


19  And  the  stork,  the  heron  after  20  All  fowls  that  creep,  going  upon 
her  kind,  and  the  lapwing,  and  the  all  four,  shall  he  an  abomination  unto* 
bat.  you. 


frequently  seen  now  on  the  upper  Jordan. 
See  ‘ The  Rob  Roy  on  the  Jordan,’  p.  a 8 6. 

the  gier  eagle~\  racham.  The  bird  here 
mentioned  is  most  likely  tlie  Egyptian 
vulture  (^Neophron  percnopterus)^  called  rac- 
ham by  the  modern  Arabs.  It  is  a bird  of 
unprepossessing  appearance  and  disgusting 
habits,  but  fostered  by  the  Egyptians  as  a 
useful  scavenger.  Hasselquist  has  a lively  de- 
scription of  its  appearance  and  habits,  p.  195. 
It  is  doubtful,  according  to  the  present  state 
of  the  text,  by  what  word  the  LXX.  intended 
to  render  racham.  All  the  best  authorities 
appear  to  identify  it  with  the  Egyptian  vul- 
ture. 

19.  the  stork~\  chaseedah’  epcoSioy;  herodius  • 
Job  xxxix.  13  (see  the  margin);  Zech.  v.  9. 
The  Hebrew  name  appears  to  be  derived 
from  a root  which  signifies  affection,  and  this 
answers  to  the  well-known  character  of  the 
stork  in  respect  to  its  love  of  its  offspring. 
The  common  white  stork  {Ciconia  alba')  is  not 
so  abundant  in  the  Holy  Land  and  the  East  as 
the  black  stork  (^Ciconia  nigra). — Tristram, 
‘Land  of  Israel,’  pp.  438,  539;  ‘Nat.  Hist.’ 
p.  ^44:  but  it  M'as  well-known  in  Egypt 
(Wilk.  I.  p.  25). — The  word  used  by  the  Sep- 
tuagint  denotes,  and  has  most  likely  furnished 
with  its  name,  the  common  heron.  See  Du- 
cange,  sub  herodius.  The  heron  was  a bird  of 
omen  with  the  ancient  Greeks  (‘  Iliad,’  x. 
274).  As  it  is  said  to  be  very  fond  of  its 
young  and  abounds  in  Palestine  (Tristram, 
pp.  456,  587)  as  well  as  Egypt,  it  might  per- 
haps answer  as  well  as  the  stork  to  the  mean- 
ing of  chaseedah;  and  if  we  accept  it  we 
should  be  able  to  account  for  the  Septuagint 
not  using  the  familiar  word  for  the  stork, 
ne'kapyos-  But  as  regards  the  scope  of  the 
prohibition,  to  whichever  of  the  birds  in 
question  the  name  strictly  belongs,  the  two 
allied  species  would  most  likely  here  be  in- 
cluded under  it. 

the  heron)  andphdh;  gapahpLos;  charadrius. 
Rather,  the  great  plover.  Our  version 
and  the  earlier  English  translators  have  follow- 
ed a weak  rabbinical  authority  in  rendering 
dndphah  by  heron.  See  Lewysohn,  § 2CO. 
Luther,  following  -other  Jewish  authorities, 
has  translated  it  by  jay.  The  derivation  of 
the  Hebrew  name  is  doubtful  (.see  Fiirst). 
The  word  of  the  Septuagint  denotes  some 
bird  of  which  the  name  was  a proverb  for 
greediness  amongst  the  Greeks  (see  Liddell  and 
Scott).  It  is  identified  on  pretty  safe  ground 
with  the  great  or  thick-kneed  plover  (Cha- 
radrius cedicnemus)^  a bird  widely  diffused  in 
Europe,  Asia,  and  North  Africa,  and  well 
known  to  the  ancient  Egyptians  (Wilkinson, 


I,  p.  251).  It  lives  on  coarse  food  such  as 
slugs,  worms,  frogs  and  toads.  The  Charadrius 
had  magical  qualities  ascribed  to  it  by  the 
Egyptians.  Heliodorus,  ‘Aiithiop.’  Lib.  in. 

the  lapvjing)  dukiphath ; erro-^ ; upupa. 
Rather  the  hoopoe.  Our  translators  have 
followed  the  older  English  versions  with  no 
good  authority.  The  Hebrew  name  cannot 
be  satisfactorily  explained  (Fiirst).  There 
appears  to  be  no  reason  for  preferring  any 
rendering  to  that  of  the  Septuagint,  the  hoopoe 
(Upupa  epops).  Its  peculiar  cry  or  whoop  is 
expressed  m its  name  in  most  languages.  It 
lives  upon  insects,  and  it  is  often  found  in 
Syria.  Its  flesh  is  said  to  be  very  good. 
But  the  bird  has  been  generally  regarded 
with  superstitious  feelings  from  early  times, 
especially  by  the  Egyptians.  Ailian,  ‘ H.  A.’ 
X.  16.  Aristoph.  ‘ Av.’  94.  Mr  Tristram 
says,  “ The  Arabs  have  a superstitious  reve- 
rence for  this  bird,  which  they  believe  to  pos- 
sess marvellous  medicinal  qualities,  and  they 
call  it  ‘the  doctor.’  Its  head  is  an  indis- 
pensable ingredient  in  all  charms  and  in  the 
practice  of  witchcraft.”  The  Bedouins  are 
said  to  believe  that  it  is  inhabited  by  the  spirits 
of  the  departed.  ‘ Penny  Cyclo.’  Art.  Upuptdce. 
Rabbinical  authorities  take  the  dukiphath  for 
some  kind  of  grouse.  Lewysohn,  § 267. 
But  it  is  highly  improbable  that  any  bird 
allied  to  the  grouse  should  have  been  deemed 
unclean. 

the  bat)  'hatalleph ; uvKrep'is ; njespertilio. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  the  baf  is  the  animal 
here  intended  (see  Fiirst).  Luther  and  Cran- 
mer  with  some  of  the  rabbinists  have  however 
preferred  the  swallow.  The  word  "‘hatalleph 
signifies  a creature  which  flies  in  the  dark. 
It  is  mentioned  along  with  the  mole  as  sym- 
bolical of  darkness,  Isaiah  ii.  20.  It  is  reckoned 
in  this  place  amongst  birds  in  accordance  with 
popular  notions,  as  the  coney  and  the  hare  are 
placed  amongst  ruminants.  See  on  2;.  5. 

Creeping  things.,  20 — 23. 

The  word  rendered  creeping  things  (sheretz) 
is  applied  to  insects  (2.’^’.  20 — 23),  reptiles, 
and  small  land  animals  of  different  kinds  (see 
2;.  29).  In  a general  way,  it  may  be  regarded 
as  coextensive  with  our  word  ^vermin.  It  is 
derived  from  a verb  which  signifies  not  only  to 
cre'ep,  but  to  teem,  or  bring  forth  abundantly 
(Gen,  i.  21,  viii.  17  ; Exod.  viii.  3 ; Ps.  cv.  30), 
and  so  easily  came  to  denote  creatures  which 
are  apt  to  abound,  to  the  annoyance  of  man- 
kind. 

20.  All  fonvls  that  creep,  going  upon  all 
four)  This  should  rather  be,  “All  creep- 
ing things  which  have  wings,  going 


V.  2 1 — 23.] 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


551 


21  Yet  these  may  ye  eat  of  every 
flying  creeping  thing  that  goeth  upon 
all  four,  which  have  legs  above  their 
feet,  to  leap  with'al  upon  the  earth ; 

22  Even  these  of  them  ye  may  eat ; 
the  locust  after  his  kind,  and  the  bald 


locust  after  his  kind,  and  the  beetle 
after  his  kind,  and  the  grasshopper 
after  his  kind. 

23  But  all  other  flying  creeping 
things,  which  have  four  feet,  shall  he 
an  abomination  unto  you. 


upon  all  four.”  It  has  been  considered  that 
the  words  refer  to  the  bat,  spoken  of  in  the 
preceding  verse,  and  not  to  insects  which  have 
more  than  four  legs  (Gesenius).  But  it  is  not 
certain  that  the  Hebrew  expression,  “going 
upon  all  four,”  is  to  be  taken  in  its  literal 
sense.  It  may  be  a general  expression  for 
walking  upon  feet  with  the  body  in  a hori- 
zontal position  (so  far  like  a quadruped),  as 
distinguished  from  flying,  leaping  or  crawling. 
The  Jewish  writers  appear  thus  to  have  under- 
stood the  phrase  here  and  in  *1;.  23 : they  con- 
sidered that  it  refers  to  such  creatures  as  the 
fly  and  the  wasp  (see  Targum  of  Palestine, 
and  R.  Levi  quoted  by  Drusius). 

21.  legs  abon^s  their  feet^  to  leap  withal 
upon  the  earth']  There  are  three  families  of 
orthopterous  insects  furnished  with  a pair  of 
long  legs  for  leaping,  distinguished  by  the 
name  Saltatoria.  The  common  cricket,  the 
common  grasshopper,  and  the  migratory 

, locust,  may  be  taken  as  types  of  these  three 
families.  Several  species  of  these  creatures 
are  eaten  in  the  East  at  this  day.  They  are 
formally  permitted  to  be  used  as  food  by 
the  Moslem  law,  ‘ Hedaya,’  iv.  p.  75.  They 
are  dressed  in  different  ways.  For  the  most 
part,  they  are  thrown  alive  into  boiling  water 
with  salt  in  it,  and  the  heads,  wings,  and  legs  are 
pulled  off.  The  bodies  are  then  either  roasted 
on  hot  plates,  baked  in  ovens,  stewed,  or  fried 
in  butter,  for  immediate  use,  or  dried  and 
smoked  to  be  kept  in  store.  They  are  eaten 
either  with  salt  or  with  spice  and  vinegar. 
The  inhabitants  of  Senegal  grind  them,  when 
dried,  to  powder,  and  mix  them  with  flour  to 
make  cakes  of  the  mixture.  According  to 
Hasselquist  the  Arabs  of  Mecca  treat  them  in 
the  same  manner,  p.  23a.  They  are  eaten  by 
some  of  the  Bedouin  tribes,  but  not  by  all 
(Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  Vol.  ii,  p.  204).  In  East- 
ern Arabia,  according  to  Mr  Palgrave,  a large 
reddish-brown  locust  is  esteemed  as  a pecu- 
liar delicacy  (Vol.  ii.  p.  138).  In  some  of  the 
Arabian  markets  locusts  are  sold  in  a dried 
state  either  by  measure,  or  by  number,  strung 
upon  threads.  Pliny  speaks  of  a nation  of 
Ethiopians  who  used  to  live  entirely  upon 
them  (‘ H.  N.’  vi.  35.  See  also  Arist. 

‘ H.  A.  V.’  30;  Aristoph.  ‘ Acharn.’  1116; 
Solinus,  XXX.  8).  The  field-cricket  and  the 
cicada  are  eaten  by  the  native  peoples  of  West- 
ern America  (Lord,  ‘ At  home  in  the  Wilder- 
ness,’ p.  250). 

22.  the  locust]  arbeh ; ^povgos]  bruchus: 


more  frequently  and  more  correctly  rendered 
in  the  LXX.  d/cpiy : the  (Bpovgos  was  a wing- 
less insect.  Theophrastus,  Fragm.  14.  4.  ^r- 
beh  appears  to  be  the  name  of  one  species  of 
the  migratory  locusts,  which  are  those  best 
known  in  the  East  as  the  most  destructive  and 
the  most  generally  eaten  by  the  Arabs.  There 
are  three  distinct  species,  called  by  naturalists 
QLdipoda  mlgratoria^  Acrydium peregrinum^  and 
Acrydium  lineola.  The  arbeh  is  the  one  com- 
monly mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament.  See 
Ex.  X.  4 ; Job  xxxix.  20  ; Ps.  Ixxyiii.  46,  cv. 
34  ; Joel  i.  4,  &c.  &c. 

bald  locust]  soPam-  arraKr]]  attacus.  It  is 
not  mentioned  elsewhere.  The  Hebrew  name 
seems  to  be  identical  with  the  Egyptian  name 
for  the  locust  (Brugsch).  There  is  no  evi- 
dence to  identify  it  with  any  known  species. 
Our  version  has  called  it  “the  bald  locust,” 
in  accordance  with  a mere  rabbinical  fancy. 
(See  Drusius  in  loc.)  It  may  have  been  one 
of  the  two  migratory  species  mentioned  above. 

the  beetle]  chargol ; 6(f)iopaxT]9 ; ophioma- 
chus.  Neither  is  this  mentioned  elsewhere  in 
the  Old  Testament.  There  seems  to  be  no 
authority  for  calling  it  “the  beetle.”  It  must 
certainly  be  some  species  of  the  Saltatoria. 
No  one  of  them  appears  to  have  been  noticed 
which,  from  its  enmity  to  the  serpent,  could  have 
any  claim  to  the  name  given  in  the  Septua- 
g'nf.  The  Mishna  mentions  the  chargoh 
says  that  its  eggs  were  worn  in  the  ears  of 
women  as  a sort  of  charm.  ‘ De  Sabb.’  vi.  10. 

the  grasshopper]  chdgdb ; arpis',  locusta. 
This  is  mentioned  Num.  xiii.  33  ; 2 Ghron.  vii. 
13  ; Eccles.  xii.  5 ; Is.  xl.  22.  That  this  was 
one  of  the  destructive  locusts,  is  evident  from 
2 Ghron.  vii.  13;  and  that  it  is  one  of  the 
smaller  ones,  is  probable  from  Num.  xiii.  33  ; 
Ecc.  xii.  5. 

In  the  uncertainty  of  identifying  these  four 
creatures,  it  has  been  suggested  that  some  of 
the  names  may  belong  to  locusts  in  an  imper- 
fect state  of  development ; but  this  can  hardly 
meet  the  case,  since  the  larva  of  any  insect 
would  necessarily  be  unclean  according  to  -v. 
42.  Most  versions  in  modern  languages,  in- 
cluding the  older  English  versions,  have  taken 
a safer  course  than  our  translators,  by  retain- 
ing the  Hebrew  names.  The  Geneva  Bible 
wisely  adds  in  the  margin,  “These  were  cer- 
tain kinds  of  grasshoppers  which  are  not  now 
properly  known.”  ' 

23.  four  feet]  See  on  t;.  20. 

In  the  law  given  in  Dent.  xiv.  19,  flying 


52 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


[v.  24—30. 


24  And  for  these  ye  shall  be  un- 
clean : whosoever  toucheth  the  carcase 
of  them  shall  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

25  And  whosoever  beareth  ought 
of  the  carcase  of  them  shall  wash  his 
clothes,  and  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

26  The  carcases  of  every  beast 
which  divideth  the  hoof,  and  is  not 
clovenfooted,  nor  cheweth  the  cud, 
are  unclean  unto  you  ; every  one  that 
.toucheth  them  shall  be  unclean. 

27  And  whatsoever  goeth  upon  his 
paws,  among  all  manner  of  beasts  that 


go  on  all  four,  those  are  unclean  unto 
you : whoso  toucheth  their  carcase 
shall  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

28  And  he  that  beareth  the  carcase 
of  them  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  be 
unclean  until  the  even ; they  are  un- 
clean unto  you. 

29  ^ These  also  shall  be  unclean 
unto  you  among  the  creeping  things 
that  creep  upon  the  earth  ; the  weasel, 
and  the  mouse,  and  the  tortoise  after 
his  kind, 

30  And  the  ferret,  and  the  chame- 


insects  are  prohibited  without  qualification. 
Locusts  are  not  mentioned  as  an  exception, 
but  they  must  have  been  so  understood.  That 
they  were'  actually  eaten  by  the  Jews,  we 
know  from  the  case  of  St  John  the  Baptist. 
This  is  of  itself  sufficient  to  confute  the  in- 
ference of  Knobel,  that  the  permission  to  eat 
locusts  was  withdrawn  when  Deuteronomy 
was  written. 

Contact  ^itb  the  carcases  of  unclean  animals. 

24 — 28. 

The  law  is  here  laid  down  regarding  con- 
tact with  the  dead  bodies,  (i)  of  unclean 
insects ; (2)  of  quadrupeds  unclean  because 
they  do  not  ruminate  and  divide  the  hoof; 
and  (3)  of  quadrupeds  unclean  because  they 
walk  on  their  toes.  See  on  27.  Whoever 
merely  touched  a carcase  of  either  of  these 
creatures  was  to  be  unclean  until  the  evening 
of  the  day,  but  whoever  carried  one,  was, 
besides  this,  to  wash  his  clothes.  If  the  due 
purification  was  omitted  at  the  time,  through 
negligence  or  forgetfulness,  a Sin-oftering  was 
required.  See  on  v.  2. 

26.  e'very  one  that  toucheth  theni]  i.e.  not 
the  living  animals,  but  their  carcases. 

27.  goeth  upon  his  pa’U!s~\  Like  the  dog, 
cat,  and  all  beasts  of  prey.  I'hese  are  included 
in  the  preceding  class  of  those  which  do  not 
ruminate  and  divide  the  hoof,  but  they  appear 
to  be  mentioned  for  emphasis. 

Unclean  Creeping  things.^  and  the  Pollution  of 
domestic  Utensils.  29 — 43. 

29.  These  also  shall  be  unclean^  &c.]  “The 
creej)ing  things”  (see  on  'vv.  20 — 23)  which 
are  here  named  are  most  likely  those  which 
were  occasionally  eaten. 

the  -jseasef  choled ; yaXrj  ] mustela ; so  the 
I'argums.  'J'he  word  choled  occurs  nowhere 
else  in  the  ().  T.  According  to  its  etymology, 
it  would  denote  an  animal  that  glides,  or  slips 
away.  'i'here  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Mishna  uses  it  for  a weasel,  or  some  such 
animal,  when  it  speaks  of  a creature  which 
catches  birds  by  the  head  or  poll  (‘ Cholin,’ 
III.  4.  Sec  also  ‘Taharoth,’  iv.  2;  Buxt. 


‘Lex.  Tab’  756;  Lewysohn,  § 135).  These 
authorities  are  strong  in  favour  of  the  weasel. 
But  Mr  Tristram  is  inclined  to  follow  Bo- 
chart  in  taking  choled  for  the  same  as  the 
Arabic  khlunt  or  khald.,  which  denotes  the 
mole.  ‘Land  of  Israel,’  p.  186.  The  regular 
Hebrew  name  for  the  mole  appears  to  be 
chephar..  Is.  ii.  20. 

the  mouse'\  akbdr;  ixvs’i  mus.  i S.  vi.  4 ; Is. 
Ixvi.  17.  The  word  is  said  to  mean  a ^coaster 
of  fields.  It  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  jerboa 
or  “jumping  mouse”  {Dipus  jEgyptius)  that 
abounds  in  Egypt  and  Syria,  which  is  some- 
times eaten  and  is  very  destructive  to  grain. 
Bochart,  Gesenius,  Knobel;  see  Hasselquist, ’ 
p.  186.  But  Mr  Tristram  with  great  pro- 
bability conjectures  that  ’’akbdr  may  be  the 
equivalent  of  the  Arabic  far  ah  which  is  ap- 
plied to  any  small  rodent. 

the  tortoise']  t%db.  Rather,  the  great 
lizard.  The  Septuagint  calls  it  the  land- 
crocodile  (which  is  mentioned  by  Herodotus, 
IV.  192,  where  see  Sir  G.  Wilkinson’s  note), 
and  the  other  ancient  versions  simply  the  croco- 
dile. It  is  not  mentioned  elsewhere  in  the 
O.  T.  Bochart  considers  the  Hebrew  word 
to  be  allied  to  the  Arabic  dhab.,  the  name  of 
a large  lizard,  often  two  feet  long,  which 
abounds  in  Egypt  and  Syria.  Tristram  identi- 
fies it  with  the  Uromastix  spinipes  (‘  Nat. 
Hist.’  p.  255).  According  to  Hasselquist,  its 
flesh  is  dried  by  some  of  the  Eastern  nations 
as  a charm  or  medicine,  which  in  past  ages 
was  sent  to  Venice  and  Marseilles  as  an  article 
of  commerce.  He  adds  that  the  Arabs  make 
broth  of  its  fresh  flesh,  p.  220.  St  Jerome, 
who  calls  it  the  land-crocodile,  says  that  the 
Syrians  in  his  time  were  accustomed  to  eat  its 
flesh,  ‘ Adv.  Jovin.’  ii.  7,  p.  334.  Some  have 
taken  t%ab  for  the  toad.  Lewysohn,  § 281. 

30.  the  ferret]  andkdh  ; fivydXr] ; my  gale. 
Rather,  the  gecko.  The  Hebrew  word 
appears  to  mean  the  squeaker  or  croaker. 
While  the  Septuagint  and  the  Vulgate  identify 
this  with  the  shrew  mouse,  the  Eastern  ver- 
sions take  it  on  better  ground  for  some  sort  of 
lizard.  Bochart,  Gesenius,  Knobel,  and  Tris- 


V-  31— 35-] 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


553 


Icon,  and  the  lizard,  and  the  snail,  and 
the  mole. 

31  These  are  unclean  to  you  among 

all  that  creep : whosoever  doth  touch 
them,  when  they  be  dead,  shall  be  un- 
clean until  the  even.  # 

32  And  upon  v/hatsoever  any  of 
them,  when  they  are  dead,  doth  fall, 
it  shall  be  unclean ; whether  it  be 
any  vessel  of  wood,  or  raiment,  or 
skin,  or  sack,  whatsoever  vessel  it  he^ 
wherein  any  work  is  done,  it»  must 
be  put  into  water,  and  it  shall  be 
unclean  until  the  even  \ so  it  shall  be 
cleansed. 


tram  agree  with  the  latter.  Rosenmuller  sup- 
poses it  to  be  the  gecko  (Lacerta gecko),  which 
makes  a noise  something  like  the  croaking  of 
a frog,  and  has  feet  of  a peculiar  construction 
which  enable  it  to  walk  on  ceilings.  It 
often  intrudes  into  dwelling-rooms.  The 
animal  is  not  named  in  any  other  passage  of 
the  O.  T. 

tije  cha^neleori]  koach.  Our  translators  have 
here  followed  the  Septuagint,  Vulgate  and 
Targums.  But  a word,  to  be  noticed  lower 
down,  has  better  claims  to  denote  the  chame- 
leon. Knobel,  comparing  koach  with  the  Arab 
word  keek,  with  kou^,  the  word  by  which 
Aristophanes  represents  the  croaking  of  frogs, 
and  the  Latin  coaxare,  supp*oses  it  to  denote 
the  frog.  According  to  its  supposed  etymo- 
logical sense  (the  strong  one)  it  might  fairly 
belong  to  the  frog,  from  the  great  muscular 
power  which  that  animal  exhibits  in  leaping. 
Gesenius,  Robinson  and  Keil  prefer  to  apply 
it  to  one  of  the  Monitors,  especially  the  Lacerta 
Nilotica. 

the  lizard]  let  a ah',  d(rKa\aj3(oTr]s’i  stellio. 
All  the  ancient  versions  take  this  to  be  a newt 
or  lizard  of  some  kind.  The  Septuagint 
identifies  it  with  the  gecko  mentioned  above. 
It  may  rather  be  one  of  the  Monitors  men- 
tioned in  the  preceding  note.  The  Talmud 
appears  to  use  the  word  as  a general  name  for 
lizards.  Lewysohn,  § ^72. 

the  snail]  c hornet ; o-avpa',  lacerta.  Our 
version  here  follows  the  Targum  of  Palestine 
and  most  Jewish  authorities.  The  old  ver- 
sions in  general  take  c hornet  for  a lizard  of 
some  kind.  The  word  appears  to  come  from 
a root  which  signifies  to  lie  flat.  Some  have 
supposed  that  the  slow- worm  (^Anguis  fragiUs) 
is  intended,  which  forms  a link  between  the 
snakes  and  the  lizards.  The  proper  Hebrew 
word  for  “the  snail”  is  shanjlul.  P's.  Iviii.  8. 

the  mole]  Rather,  the  chameleon;  tinshe- 
meth  {i.e.  the  breather  or  inflater);  dcr’Koka^', 
talpa.  The  same  Hebrew  name  is  applied  to 
a bird  in  nj.  18.  The  ancient  versions  agree 


33  And  every  earthen  vessel,  where- 
into  any  of  them  falleth,  whatsoever 
is  in  it  shall  be  unclean  ; and  ^ye  shall 
break  it. 

34  Of  all  meat  which  may  be  eaten, 
that  on  which  such  water  cometh  shall 
be  unclean  : and  all  drink  that  may  be 
drunk  in  every  such  vessel  shall  be 
unclean. 

35  And  every  thing  whereupon  any 
part  of  their  carcase  falleth  shall  be 
unclean  ; whether  it  he  oven,  or  ranges 
for  pots,  they  shall  be  broken  down : 
for  they  are  unclean,  and  shall  be  un- 
clean unto  you. 


with  ours  in  rendering  the  word  7nole,  in 
this  place.  It  is  however  supposed  by  most 
modern  critics  to  denote  the  chameleon,  to 
which  the  name  might  belong  either  from  the 
old  notion  that  it  lives  upon  air  or  from  its 
well-known  habit  of  inflating  the  body  when 
it  is  excited  (Bochart,  Gesenius,  Knobel,  Keil, 
Herxheimer,  Tristram).  Its  flesh  was  sup- 
posed by  the  ancients  to  possess  medicinal 
virtues.  Pliny,  ‘H.  N.’  xxviii.  29. 

31.  (Lvhen  they  be  dead]  That  is,  whether 
they  had  died  naturally  or  had  been  killed. 
Cf.  07.  39. 

32 — 35.  These  regulations  seem  to  be  given 
in  consequence  of  its  being  more  probable  that 
the  bodies  of  the  animals  which  are  mentioned 
in  0)07.  29,  30  should  accidentally  come  into 
contact  with  cooking  apparatus  and  other 
domestic  furniture  than  the  bodies  of  the 
other  unclean  animals.  It  may  also  have 
served  as  an  emphatic  caution  in  connection 
with  the  use  that  might  have  been  made  of 
such  creatures  in  gravy  or  soup,  “the  broth  of 
abominable  things,”  Is.  Ixv.  4.  The  rule  can 
hardly  be  intended  to  intimate,  as  some 
Jewish  and  other  commentators  (Maimonides, 
Kurtz,  &c.)  have  imagined,  that  their  flesh 
would  communicate  a peculiar  degree  of  pol- 
lution, beyond  that  spoken  of  in  0707.  ii,  12,  13. 

32.  07essel  of  ovood...ovhatsoeo7er  07essel] 
utensil  rather  than  vessel.  The  word  here 
and  in  07.  33  is  a term  of  wide  meaning  like 
the  Greek  o-/ceGoj.  See  on  Ex.  xxvii.  19. 

33.  ea7'then  07esser]  See  on  vi.  28 ; cf. 
07.  34. 

35.  00701,  or  ranges  for  pots]  The  word 

here  used  for  oven  is  tanur,  the  name  for  the 
earthenware  oven  in  common  use.  See  on 
Lev.  ii.  4.  The  word  rendered  “ ranges  for 
pots  ” is  a peculiar  one,  in  the  dual  number. 
It  has  been  conjectured  to  mean  either  an 
excavated  fireplace,  fitted  to  receive  a pair  of 
ovens  (Kimchi,  Gesenius,  Rosenmuller,  Herx- 
heimer), a vessel  consisting  of  two  parts,  like 


554 

36  Nevertheless  a fountain  or  pit, 
■Heb.  wherein  there  is  plenty  of  water,  shall 
Iff/o-"''  be  clean:  but  that  which  toucheth 
pettier  of  tj^eir  carcase  shall  be  unclean. 

if  any  part  of  their  carcase 
fall  upon  any  sowing  seed  which  is  to 
be  sown,  it  shall  be  clean. 

38  But  if  any  water  be  put  upon 
the  seed,  and  any  part  of  their  carcase 
fall  thereon,  it  shall  be  unclean  unto 
you. 

39  And  if  any  beast,  of  which  ye 
may  eat,  die ; he  that  toucheth  the 
carcase  thereof  shall  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

40  And  he  that  eateth  of  the  car- 
case of  it  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and 
be  unclean  until  the  even : he  also 
that  beareth  the  carcase  of  it  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

41  And  every  creeping  thing  that 
creepeth  upon  the  earth  shall  be  an 
abomination ; it  shall  not  be  eaten. 

42  Whatsoever  goeth  upon  the 
t Heb.  belly,  and  whatsoever  goeth  upon  all 

or  whatsoever  Uiath  more  feet 


[v.  36—47. 

among  all  creeping  things  that  creep 
upon  the  earth,  them  ye  shall  not  eat ; 
for  they  are  an  abomination. 

43  Ye  shall  not  make  your  ^selves  iHeb. 
abominable  with  any  creeping  thing 
that  creepeth,  neither  shall  ye  make 
)murselves  unclean  with  them,  that  ye 
should  be  defiled  thereby. 

44  For  I a?n  the  Lord  your  God: 
ye  shall  therefore  sanctify  yourselves, 
and  shall  be  holy;  for  L am  holy: 
neithe/  shall  ye  defile  yourselves  with  fpet.  1.15 
any  manner  of  creeping  thing  that 
creepeth  upon  the  earth. 

45  For  I am  the  Lord  that  bringeth 
you  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  to 
be  your  God:  ye  shall  therefore  be 
holy,  for  I am  holy. 

46  This  is  the  law  of  the  beasts, 
and  of  the  fowl,  and  of  every  living 
creature  that  moveth  in  the  waters, 
and  of  every  creature  that  creepeth 
upon  the  earth : 

47  To  make  a difference  between 
the  unclean  and  the  clean,  and  between 
the  beast  that  may  be  eaten  and  the 
beast  that  may  not  be  eaten. 


LEVITICUS.  XL 


a stewpan  and  its  cover  (Knobel,  Keil,  the 
Targums),  or  a support  to  sei-ve  as  a trevit 
(LXX.),  perhaps  like  a pair  of  andirons._  Mr 
Palgrave  speaks  of  a contrivance  found  in  the 
remoter  parts  of  Arabia  which  may  illustrate 
and  contirm  the  last  of  these  conjectures. 
He  describes  it  as  “an  open  fireplace  hollow- 
ed in  the  ground-floor,  with  a raised  stone 
border,  and  dog-irons  for  the  fuel,  and  so 
forth,  just  like  what  may  be  seen  in  Spain  and 
some  old  English  manor-houses.”  ‘Travels 
in  Arabia,’  Vol.  I.  p 50. 

36.  That  is,  whatever  touched  the  carcase, 
in  the  act  of  removing  it,  or  otherwise,  be- 
came unclean. 

37,  38.  If  the  seed  had  been  wetted  it 
would  imbibe  the  pollution.  The  exemption 
applied  exclusively  to  dry  grain  which  was  to 
be  used  for  seed.  That  which  was  to  be  eaten 
recpiired  purification  like  other  things. 

39,  40.  'Fhe  carcase  of  a clean  beast  which 
had  not  been  properly  slaughtered  (cf.  Lev. 
xvii.  15)  was  under  the  same  conditions,  as 
regards  mere  contact,  as  the  dead  body  of  an 
uncl'.‘an  beast.  Hut  the  eating  of  its  llesh  is 
treated  as  what  m’ght  possibly  occur,  and  the 
terms  of  puritication  for  him  who  had  eaten 
are  given.  'J'his  may  have  been  to  meet  the 
probability  of  the  body  of  an  ox,  a sheep,  or 
a goat,  bciUg  recovered  from  a wild  beast  and. 


from  need  or  economy,  eaten  by  its  owner. 
See  on  xvii.  ii,  15,  16. 

41_43.  But  all  “creeping  things”  are 
unconditionally  forbidden,  because  “they  are 
an  abomination.”  In  like  manner  the  prohi- 
bitions to  eat  of  the  other  unclean  animals  are 
expressed  without  condition,  'vnj.  8,  ii,  13. 
The  command  is,  not  that  he  who  may  eat  of 
them  should  purify  himself,  but  that  they 
should  not  be  eaten  at  all. 

42.  WhaUoe'ver  goeth  upon  the  bslly]  That 

is,  all  footless  reptiles,  and  mollusks,  such  as 
snakes  of  all  kinds,  snails,  slugs,  and  worms. 
Whatsoever  goeth  upon  all  four;  that  is,  of 
“creeping  things,”  or  vermin;  such  as  the 
weasel,  the  mouse  or  the  lizard.  See  on  vv. 
20 — 23.  Whatsoever  hath  more  feet;  all  in- 
sects, except  the  locust  family  {y.  22),  myria- 
pods, spiders,  and  caterpillars. 

One  letter  in  the  Hebrew  word  which  is 
rendered  belly  in  this  verse  is  said  by  the  Jews 
to  be  the  middle  ‘letter  of  the  Pentateuch,  and 
is  printed  in  the  Hebrew  Bibles  in  a larger 
type  than  the  rest. 

44,  47.  Then  follows,  in  immediate  con- 
nection with  the  prohibition  of  creeping  things, 
a setting  forth  of  the  spiritual  ground  on  which 
the  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  is 
based.  Cf.x.  10,  xx.  25,  26;  i Peter  i.  15,  16. 


55 


LEVITICUS.  XL 

NOTE  on  Chap.  xi.  2 — 30. 


On  the  Distinction  between  Clean 
AND  Unclean  in  respect  to  Food. 

I.  T^he  distinction  made  by  the  Lazu  a special 
mark  of  the  chosen  people.  II.  Different 
theories  of  the  details.  III.  The  primary 
distinction.,  that^  bet^ueen  Life  and  Death. 

* IV.  Conditions  of  animal  food.  V.  The 
distinction  on  Its  practical  side  not  peculiar 
to  the  La^v.  VI.  The  'wisdom  of  It  on 
sanitary  grounds.  VII.  hi  what  was 
the  Mosaic  Law  of  distinction  peculiar  1 

I.  The  object  of  this  law  is  declared  in 
nr'v.  43,  47,  and  is  emphatically  repeated  in  ch. 
XX.  24 — 26,  “ I am  the  Lord  your  God,  which 
have  separated  you  from  other  people.  Ye 
shall  therefore  put  difference  between  clean 
beasts  and  unclean,  and  between  unclean  fowls 
and  clean : and  ye  shall  not  make  your  souls 
abominable  by  beast,  or  by  fowl,  or  by  any 
manner  of  living  thing  that  creepeth  on  the 
ground,  which  I have  separated  from  you  as 
unclean.  And  ye  shall  be  holy  unto  me:  for 
I the  Lord  am  holy,  and  have  severed  you 
from  other  people,  that  ye  should  be  mine.” 

The  basis  of  the  obligation  to  maintain  the 
prescribed  distinction  is  thus  declared  to  be 
the  call  of  the  Hebrews  to  be  the  peculiar 
people  of  Jehovah.  It  was  to  be  something 
in  their  daily  life  to  remind  them  of  the 
Covenant  which  distinguished  them  from 
the  nations  of  the  world.  It  might  so  become 
an  apt  type  of  the  call  itself,  the  clean  animals 
answering  to  the  Israelites  and  the  unclean  to 
the  Gentiles.  St  Peter’s  vision  of  the  vessel 
like  a sheet  knit  at  the  four  corners,  “ wherein 
were  all  manner  of  foorfooted  beasts  of  the 
earth,  and  wild  beasts,  and  creeping  things, 
and  fowls  of  the  air”  (Acts  x.  12),  appears 
to  recognize  it  in  this  way.  It  was  at  that 
time  made  known  to  the  apostle  that  the 
revelation,  which  had  broken  down  the  middle 
wall  of  partition  between  Jew  and  Gentile, 
had  pronounced  every  creature  of  God  to  be 
clean;  that  every  creature  of  God  is  good, 
and  nothing  to  be  refused,  if  it  be  received 
with  thanksgiving  (i  Tim.  iv.  4);  that  it  is 
not  that  which  goeth  into  the  mouth  which 
defileth  a man,  but  that  which  cometh  out 
of  the  mouth.  Matt.  xv.  ii.  The  elect  peo- 
ple were  no  longer  to  be  tied  by  the  letter  of 
the  Law  in  regard  to  their  food,  but  were  to 
be  left  to  the  exercise  of  a regenerated  judg- 
ment. They  were  to  learn  that  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  not  eating,  or  abstaining,  from  meats 
and  drinks;  but  righteousness,  and  truth,  and 
peace,  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  Rom. 
xiv.  17. 

II.  Various  opinions  have  been  formed  as 
to  what  considerations  directed  the  line  by 
which  clean  animals  were  separated  from  un- 
clean. 

It  has  been  held,  (i)  That  the  food  forbid- 


den was  such  as  was  commonly  eaten  by  the 
neighbouring  nations,  and  that  the  prohibition 
served  as  a check  to  keep  the  people  away 
from  social  intercourse  with  the  Gentiles*. 
(2)  That  the  flesh  of  certain  animals  from 
which  the  Egyptians  abstained,  because  they 
held  it  to  be  sacred,  was  pronounced  clean, 
and  treated  as  common  food;  and  that  the 
flesh  of  other  animals,  which  was  associated 
with  the  practice  of  magic,  was  abominated 
as  unclean,  in  order  that  the  Israelites  might 
in  their  daily  life  bear  a testimony  against 
idolatry  and  superstition^.  (3)  That  it  is 
impossible  to  refer  the  line  of  demarcation  to 
anything  but  the  arbitrary  will  of  God-k 
(4)  But  the  notion  which  has  been  accepted 
with  most  favour  is  that  the  distinction  is 
based  wholly  or  mainly  upon  symbolical 
ground.  By  some  it  has  been  connected  with 
the  degradation  of  all  creation  through  the 
fall  of  man.  The  apparent  reflection  of  moral 
depravity  in  the  disposition  of  some  animals 
has  been  identified  in  rather  a loose  way  with 
the  unclean  crealTires  of  the  Law  4.  Follow- 
ing in  the  wake  of  many  of  the  Fathers,  qr 
perhaps  rather  turning  their  figurative  lan- 
guage into  formal  interpretation,  some  modern 
critics  have  attached  symbolism  also  to  the 
particulars  in  the  form  and  physiology  of 
animals,  from  which  rules  are  laid  down  for 
distinguishing  the  classes  of  clean  and  un- 
clean animals.  The  cloven  hoof,  standing 
firmly  on  the  ground,  and  yet  well  adapted 
for  locomotion,  has  been  taken  as  a figure  of 
the  standing  in  the  world  and  the  walk  in  the 
road  of  life  of  the  believer:  the  ruminating 
process  is  regarded  as  intended  to  remind  the 
Israelites  of  the  duty  of  forming  a habit  of 
meditating  again  and  again  on  the  divine  coun- 
sels (Josh.  i.  8).  As  the  fins  of  a fish  are 
intended  to  raise  it  out  of  the  mud  in  which 
such  creatures  as  the  eel  dwell,  so  prayer  and 
faith  are  meant  to  raise  the  soul  out  of  dark- 
ness and  pollution®.  (3)  Many  have  consi- 
dered that  the  prohibition  of  the  unclean 
animals  was  based  mainly  or  entirely  upon 
sanitary  grounds,  their  flesh  being  regarded  as 
unwholesome®. 

Davidson,  Hnt.  to  O.  T.’  I.  258. 

^ Origen,  ‘Cont.  Cels.’  iv.  p.  225.  See  on 
Lev.  xi.  iS,  19,  29. — It  is  surprising  to  find  Ewald 
imagining  that  the  Israelites  ate  oxen  and  other 
animals  out  of  ridicule  of  the  idolatry  of  those 
animals  by  the  Egyptians.  ‘Hist,  of  Israel,’  I. 
p.  5 73.  Beef  was  eaten  by  the  Egyptians  as  freely 
as  by  the>  Israelites.  Wilkinson,  i.  p.  166. 

® CuniEus,  ‘de  Rep.  Fleb.’  Ii.  24  in  ‘Critici 
Sacri.’ 

Barnabas,  ‘Ep.’  ch.  x.  Aristoeus  in  Euseb. 
‘Prep.  Evan.’  viir.  9.  Jones  of  Nayland,  ‘Zoo- 
logia  Ethica.’  Keil. 

^ See  Kurtz,  ‘Sac.  Worship,’  pp.  28,  20. 

® hlaimon.  ‘Mor.  Nev.’  HI.  48.  Spencer,  ‘de 


55<5 


LEVITICUS.  XI. 


The  different  views  which  have  been  held 
on  the  subject  are  discussed  at  length  by 
Spencer  ancl  by  Michaelis.  We  may  briefly 
remark,  in  regard  to  the  First  view  we  have 
stated,  that  the  animal  food  of  the  ancient 
Egyptians  and  Arabians  appears  to  have 
been,  with  but  little  exception,  the  same  as 
that  of  the  Israelites  E in  regard  to  the 
Second,  that  the  clean  ox,  sheep,  goat,  and 
stag  were  amongst  the  animals  which  were 
held  as  most  sacred  by  the  Egyptians.  O n the 
Third  nothing  need  be  said,  except  that  it  is 
arbitrary  and  unsatisfactory  In  regard  to  the 
Fourth,  it  is  strange  that  its  advocates  should 
overlook  the  facts  that  the  morose  and 
sulky  bull  and  the  capricious  goat  are  clean, 
while  the  patient  camel  and  the  hare  are 
unclean;  and  that  the  hoof  of  the  unclean 
horse  and  the  foot  of  the  unclean  camel  seem 
to  be  better  adapted  to  symbolize  the  outward 
life  of  the  faithful  believer  than  the  foot  of  the 
ox  or  the  sheep. 

III.  In  order  to  come  to  anything  like  a 
satisfactory  conclusion  on  the  subject,  it  seems 
necessary  to  look  more  strictly  than  some 
have  done  at  the  way  in  which  this  law  was 
regarded  in  the  practical  life  of  the  Flebrews. 
The  division  which  was  the  foundation  of  the 
law  was  not  one  of  li'ving  animals.  Unclean- 
ness, as  such,  belonged  to  no  creature  while 
it  was  alive.  The  Hebrew  treated  his  camel 
and  his  ass  with  as  much  care  as  he  did  his 
ox  or  his  sheep,  and  came  into  contact  with 
them  as  freely.  And  further,  regarding  them 
as  authorized  symbols  of  spiritual  truth,  the 
Eion  and  the  Eagle  were  in  the  vision  of  the 
prophet  coordinate  with  the  Ox  and  the  Man, 
Ezek.  i.  lo.  But  according  to  the  whole  spirit 
of  the  Eaw,  as  well  as  its  letter,  every  dead 
body,  whether  of  a human  being,  of  an  animal 
clean  or  unclean,  if  it  had  died  of  itself  or  had 
been  killed  in  a common  way,  was  a polluted 
thing,  not  to  be  touched.  We  have  thus 
brought  before  us  the  great  opposition  be- 
tween Life  and  Death.  As  every  living  animal 
was  clean,  so  every  dead  animal,  in  its  natural 
condition,  was  unclean. 

IV.  But  it  was  necessary  to  make  pro- 
vision for  human  food.  The  Law  therefore 
pointed  out  those  animals  which  Divine  wi.s- 
dom  decided  to  be  the  best  for  the  purpose ; 
and  it  ordained  that,  when  they  were  required  as 
food,  they  should  be  slaughtered  in  a particular 
manner  and  sanctihed  by  being  brought  to  the 
door  of  the'Fabernacle  (l.ev.  xvii.  3 — 6).  They 
thus  became  ceremonially  excepted  from  the 
general  taint  of  tleath.  'Fhe  blood,  in  which 
was  “tlv*  life  of  the  flesh”  (Lev.  xvii.  ii,  see 
note),  was  carefully  drawn  off  from  the  meat, 
which  having  been  presented  before  Jehovah, 
was  endowed  with  a new  relation.  It  was  made 

I.eg.  Ileb.’  I.  ch.  7.  Michaelis,  ‘Laws  of 
Moses,’  Xo.  ccii.,  &c. 

^ See  below,  § V. 


clean  and  fit  to  be  the  food  of  Jehovah’s 
people.  See  Note  after  ch.  xvii. 

V.  The  distinction  between  clean  and  un- 
clean animals  was  no  new  thing  at  the  time  of 
the  giving  of  the  Law.  It  had  been  recognized 
before  the  flood  and  immediately  afterwards 
(Gen.  vii.  2,  3,  viii.  20).  But  we  are  not  told 
how  far  the  patriarchal  rule  coincided  with 
the  Mosaic.  , 

The  chief  part  of  the  animal  food  of  culti- 
vated nations  has  in  all  ages  and  in  all  parts  of 
the  world  been  taken  from  the  same  kinds  of 
animals.  The  ruminating  quadrupeds,  the 
fishes  with  fins  and  scales,  the  gallinaceous 
birds  and  other  birds  which  feed  on  veget- 
ables, are  evidently  preferred  by  the  general 
choice  of  mankind.  Where  there  has  been 
no  prescribed  law  the  common  usage  has 
tended  to  the  same  practical  result.  The 
ancient  Gentile  laws  on  the  subject,  as  far  as 
we  are  acquainted  with  them,  are,  with  very 
inconsiderable  exceptions,  in  agreement  with 
this  law  of  Moses.  The  Egyptian  priests,  we 
are  told,  abstained  from  the  flesh  of  all  solid- 
hoofed  quadrupeds,  all  which  have  toes  and 
all  which  have  not  horns ; from  birds  of 
prey  and  from  fishL  The  Parsees  are  said 
to  reject  the  flesh  of  all  beasts  and  birds  of 
prey  and  of  the  hare.  The  ancient  Arabians, 
though,  like  the  modern  Moslems,  they  ate 
the  flesh  of  the  camel,  carefully  abstained  from 
pork  (see  notes  on  4,  ?)•  According  tc 
the  Moslem  law,  all  beasts  and  birds  of  prey, 
the  ass,  the  mule,  and  (in  the  judgment  of  the 
best  authorities)  the  horse,  all  insects  except 
locusts,  and  all  animals  living  in  the  water  ex- 
cept true  fish,  are  prohibited^.  The  Brahmin 
rule  is  based  upon  an  appeal  to  a certain  divine 
law  which  is  infringed  in  the  ordinary  facts  of 
nature.  It  is  assumed  to  be  right  that  only 
the  higher  creature  should  eat  the  flesh  of  the 
lower.  When,  as  in’the  case  of  beasts  and  birds 
of  prey,  an  animal  feeds  upon  another  in  the  same 
rank  with  itself,  the  order  is  disturbed,  and  its 
flesh  becomes  impure  and  unfit  for  the  food  of 
the  Brahmin.  Menu  says,  “ for  the  sustenance 
of  the  vital  spirit,  Brahma  created  all  this  animal 
and  vegetable  system ; and  all  that  is  move- 
able  or  immoveable  that  spirit  devours.  Things 
which  do  not  move  are  eaten  by  creatures  with 
locomotion  ; toothless  animals,  by  animals  with 
teeth  ; those  without  hands,  by  those  to  whom 
hands  are  given ; and  the  timid,  by  the  bold. 
He  who  eats  according  to  (this)  law  commits 
no  sin,  even  though  every  day  he  taste  the  flesh 
of  such  animals  as  may  lawfully  be  tasted ; since 
both  the  animals  which  may  be  eaten,  and 
those  who  eat  them,  were  equally  created  by 
Brahma  ”.  It  would  seem  that  the  flesh  of  the 
cow,  from  which  nearly  all  modern  Hindoos 

^ Chicremon,  quoted  by  Porphyry,  ‘De  Abst.’ 
IV.  7. 

^ ‘ Iledaya,’  Vol.  IV.  p.  74. 

3 ‘InstiUilcs  of  Menu,’  ch.  v.  28 — 35. 


V.  1—4.] 


LEVITICUS.  XIL 


557 


strictly  abstain,  was  originally  not  excepted 
from  the  lawful  diet  of  the  Brahmins h But 
beasts  of  prey,  quadrupeds  which  have  solid 
hoofs  and  those  which  have  five  toes  (except  the 
hare  and  a few  others),  the  tame  pig,  car- 
nivorous birds,  webfooted  birds,  the  heron, 
the  raven,  the  parrot,  and  fish  of  all  kinds, 
appear  to  have  been  expressly  prohibited  from 
the  earliest  times 

VI.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  dis- 
tinction which  is  substantially  recognized  by 
these  different  nations  is  in  agreement  with  the 
laws  of  our  earthly  life.  All  experience  tends  to 
shew  that  the  animals  generally  recognized  as 
clean  are  those  which  furnish  the  best  and  most 
wholesome  sorts  of  food.  The  instinct  of  our 
nature  points  in  the  same  direction.  Every 
one  dislikes  the  snake  and  the  toad.  No  one 
likes  the  form  and  habits  of  the  pig’.  We 
shrink  from  the  notion  of  eating  the  flesh 
of  the  hycena  or  the  vulture.  When  we 
ai'e  told  of  our  fellow-creatures  eating  slugs, 
snails  and  earthworms,  and  accounting  the 
grubs  found  in  rotten  wood  a peculiar  de- 
licacythe  feeling  of  disgust  which  arises 
within  us  would  not  seem  to  be  the  off- 
spring of  mere  conventional  refinement. 
This  conclusion  is  not  invalidated  by  the 
fact  that  our  own  repugnant  feelings  have 
been  subdued  in  the  case  of  the  oyster  and 
the  pig.  In  regard  to  the  distinction  as  it 
is  laid  down  in  the  Mosaic  Law,  Cyril  ap- 
pears to  be  amply  Justified  in  saying  that  it 

^ Colebrooke,  quoted  in  ‘The  Hindoos,’  pub- 
lished by  Knight,  ch.  viii. 

^ Menu,  V.  ii — 18. 

^ See  note  on  Lev.  xi.  7. 

See  Hieron.  ‘adv.  Jovin.’  ii.  7. 


coincides  with  our  natural  instinct  and  obser- 
vation 

It  has  indeed  been  alleged  by  modern  critics 
that  the  Law  “cannot  be  supposed  to  have  a 
dietetic  object.”  (Kurtz,  Keil,  &c.)  But  this 
is  surely  taking  a very  contracted  view  of  the 
subject.  He  who  gave  the  Law  to  Moses 
created  the  earth  with  all  that  it  contains 
and  man  who  lives  upon  it.  It  cannot  have 
been  beneath  Him  or  His  chosen  servant  to 
instruct  His  people  to  live  in  accordance 
with  the  harmony  of  which  He  is  the  author, 
and  to  obey  His  laws  whether  they  relate  to 
the  body  or  the  spirit. 

VII.  But  if  the  distinction  of  animals  laid 
down  by  Moses  agreed  in  the  main  with  that 
recognized  by  other  nations  than  the  Hebrews, 
we  may  ask  what  just  claim  has  this  law  to  the 
distinctive  character  ascribed  to  it  in  Lev.  xi. 
43 — 47i  XX.  25,  26?  In  what  way  was  it 
essentially  connected  with  the  separation  of 
Israel  from  the  nations  of  the  world  ? The 
answer  appears  to  be  this; — the  ordinance 
of  Moses  was  for  the  avbole  nation.  It  was 
not,  like  the  Egyptian  law,  intended  for  priests 
alone ; nor  like  the  Hindoo  law,  binding  only 
on  the  twice-born  Brahmin ; nor  like  the 
Parsee  law,  to  be  apprehended  and  obeyed 
only  by  those  disciplined  in  spiritual  matters. 
It  was  a law  for  the  people,  for  every  man, 
woman  and  child  of  the  race  chosen  to  be 
“a  kingdom  of  priests,  an  holy  nation” 
(Exod.  xix.  6).  It  was  to  be  one  of  the 
foreshadows  of  the  higher  spiritual  equality  of 
the  better  seed  of  A braham  which  was  in  later 
ages  pronounced  ‘ ‘ a chosen  generation,  a royal 
priesthood,  an  holy  nation,  a peculiar  people.” 

I Pet.ii.  9 ; cf.  Is.  Ixi.  6,  also  i Cor.  x.  17. 

® ‘Cont.  Jul.’  IX.  p.  316. 


CHAPTER  XIL 

I The  purification  of  women  after  childbirth. 
6 Her  offerings  for  her  purifying. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
saying.  If  a woman  have  conceived 


seed,  and  born  a man  child : then  she 
shall  be  unclean  seven  days ; accord- 
ing to  the  days  of  the  separation  for 
her  infirmity  shall  she  be  unclean. 

3 And  in  the  “^eighth  day  the  flesh 

of  his  foreskin  shall  be  circumcised.  John  7. 22 

4 And  she  shall  then  continue  in  . 
the  blood  of  her  purifying  three  and 


CEREMONIAL  PURIFICATIONS. 

Chapters  XIL— XV. 

The  Purifications  of  the  Law  fall  under 
three  heads;  (i)  those  for  defilement  arising 
from  secretions;  (ii)  those  for  the  Leprosy; 
(iii)  those  for  pollution  from  corpses.  The 
first  and  second  classes  are  described  in  these 
chapters;  the  last,  as  relates  to  human  corpses, 
in  Num.  xix.,  and  as  relates  to  the  bodies  of 
dead  animals,  in  Lev.  xi.  24 — 28,  31 — 40. 

VoL.  1. 


Chapter  XII. 

Purification  after  Child-birth. 

It  would  seem  that  this  chapter  would  more 
naturally  follow  the  fifteenth.  See  Prel.  Note 
to  ch.  XV. 

1.  untoMQses'\  The  Lawgiver  is  now  again 
addressed  alone,  not  along  with  Aaron,  as  in 
the  preceding  chapter  and  the  following  one. 

2.  according  to.,  &c.]  Rather,  “tlie  same 
as  the  days  of  separation.”  Her  un- 

N N 


558 


LEVITICUS.  XII. 


[v.  5—8. 


thirty  days  j she  shall  touch  no  hallowed 
thing,  nor  come  into  the  sanctuary, 
until  the  days  of  her  purifying  be  ful- 
filled. 

5 But  if  she  bear  a maid  child,  then 
she  shall  be  unclean  two  weeks,  as  in 
her  separation : and  she  shall  continue 
in  the  blood  of  her  purifying  three- 
score and  six  days. 

6 And  when  the  days  of  her  puri- 
fying are  fulfilled,  for  a son,  or  for  a 

Heb.  daughter,  she  shall  bring  a lamb  ^of 
' the  first  year  for  a burnt  offering, 

and  a young  pigeon,  or  a turtledove, 
for  a sin  offering,  unto  the  door  of 


cleanness  was  accounted  to  be  of  the  same 
degree  as  that  described  xv.  19  sq. 

3.  On  circumcision,  see  Gen.  xvii.  10,  13. 

4.  During  the  first  period  of  seven  days 
the  mother  was  called  “unclean ’’and  commu- 
nicated defilement  to  whomever,  or  to  whatever, 
she  touched.  During  the  second  period  of 
thirty-three  days  she  was  said  to  be  “in  the 
blood  of  her  purifying,”  Her  impurity  at  this 
time  was  not  infectious,  but  she  was  restrained 
from  joining  in  the  public  religious  sennces. 
It  should  be  obseiwed  that  the  Levitical  law 
ascribed  impurity  exclusively  to  the  Mother, 
in  no  degree  to  the  Child.  See  Note  after 
ch,  XV. 

5.  No  very  satisfactory  reason  appears  to 
have  been  given  for  this  doubling  of  each  of 
the  two  periods.  Some  of  the  Fathers,  and 
several  modern  writers,  conceive  that  it  was 
intended  to  remind  the  people  of  the  fact  that 
woman  represents  the  lower  side  of  human 
naUire,  and  was  the  first  to  fall  into  tempta- 
tion. I Tim.  ii.  13 — 15;  i Pet.  iii.  7.  But  to 
whatever  reason  it  is  to  be  assigned,  a notion 
appears  to  have  prevailed  amongst  the  ancients 
that  the  mother  suffers  for  a longer  time  after 
the  birth  of  a girl  than  after  the  birth  of  a 
Iwy.  According  fo  Hippocrates  and  Aris- 
totle, the  period  required  for  the  restoration 
of  her  health  in  the  one  case  was  thirty  days, 
and  in  the  other,  it  was  forty  or  forty-two 
days.  This  notion  may  have  been  connected 
with  a general  custom  of  observing  the  distinc- 
tion as  early  as  the  time  of  Moses.  Arist. 

‘ Hist.  An.’  VII.  3,  § a;  4,  § 3 I Hippoc.  Vol, 
I.  p.  392,  edit.  Kuhn;  Hesychius  in  loc. 

6 — 8.  d’he  purification  of  the  mother  is 
completed  by  a sacrificial  act  which  expressed 
an  acknowledgment  of  sin  and  a dedication 
of  herself  to  Jehovah.  The  same  was  done  by 
those  who  were  purified  from  their  issues  (xv. 
14)  15)  ^9)  30);  addition  of  a 


the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
unto  the  priest : 

7 Who  shall  offer  it  before  the 
Lord,  and  make  an  atonement  for 
her;  and  she  shall  be  cleansed  from 
the  issue  of  her  blood.  This  is  the 
law  for  her  that  hath  born  a male  or 
a female. 

8 ^ And  if  ^ she  be  not  able  to  ^ Luke  2. 
bring  a lamb,  then  she  shall  bring 

two  turtles,  or  two  young  pigeons ; 
the  one  for  the  burnt  offering,  and  s^lffidency 
the  other  for  a sin  offering : and  the 
priest  shall  make  an  atonement  for 
her,  and  she  shall  be  clean. 


Trespass-offering,  by  the  cleansed  Leper  (xiv. 
12 — 20),  and  the  reconsecrated  Nazarite(Num'. 
vi.  II,  12).  Every  complete  act  of  sacrificial 
worship  under  the  Law  began  with  a Sin- 
offering.  See  Introd.  § xvi.  That  there  is 
nothing  emphatic  in  the  Sin-offering  in  con- 
nection with  childbirth  (as  some  have  ima- 
gined) is  evidently  shewn  not  only  by  these 
parallel  cases,  but  by  the  inferiority  of  the  vic- 
tim for  a Sin-offering  compared  with  that  for 
the  Burnt-offering,  the  first  being  a bird,  the 
other  a lamb.— The  Virgin  Mary  availed  her- 
self of  the  liberty  which  the  Law  allowed  to 
the  poor,  and  offered  the  inferior  Burnt-offer- 
ing, Luke  ii,  24. 

6.  of  the  first  year']  Literally,  as  in  the 
margin, of  his  year]  cf.  xiv,  10.  This 
expression  is  supposed  to  mean  one  less  than 
a year  old,  while  the  son  of  a year  is  one  that 
has  just  completed  its  first  year. 

8.  a lamb]  Rather,  one  of  the  flock; 
either  a sheep  or  a goat,  Heb.  seh\  in  ns.  6, 
the  word  is  kebes.  See  Introd.  § iv. 

t^-ivo  turtles^  or  tdeo  young  pigeons]  See  on 

i.  14. 

she  shall  be  clean]  Unclean  ness  was  gene- 
rally ascribed  to  childbirth,  according  to  the 
usages  of  the  most  ancient  nations.  The  Hindoo 
law  pronounced  the  mother  of  a newborn  child 
to  be  impure  for  forty  di^^’s,  required  the  father 
to  bathe  as  soon  as  the  birth  had  taken  place, 
and  debarred  the  whole  family  for  a period 
from  religious  rites,  while  they  were  to  “ con- 
fine themselves  to  inward  remembrances  of  the 
Deity:”  in  a Brahmin  family  this  rule  ex- 
tended to  all  relations  within  the  fourth  degree, 
for  ten  days,  at  the  end  of  which  they  had  to 
bathe.  According  to  the  Parsee  law,  the  mo- 
ther and  child  were  bathed,  and  the  mother 
had  to  live  in  seclusion  for  forty  days,  after 
which  she  had  to  undergo  other  purifying 
rites.  I’he  Arabs  are  said,  by  Burckhardt,  to 
regard  the  mother  as  unclean  for  forty  days. 


LEVITICUS.  XIII.  XIV. 


The  ancient  Greeks  suffered  neither  childbirth, 
nor  death,  to  take  place  within  consecrated 
places : both  the  mother  and  child  were  bathed, 
and  the  mother  was  not  allowed  to  approach 
an  altar  for  forty  days.  The  term  of  forty  days, 
it  is  evident,  was  generally  regarded  as  a criti- 
cal one  for  both  the  mother  and  the  child. — 
The  day  on  which  the  Romans  gave  the  name 
to  the  child,  the  eighth  day  for  a girl  and  the 
ninth  for  a boy,  was  called  lustricus  dies^  “the 
day  of  purification,”  because  certain  lustral 
rites  in  behalf  of  the  child  were  performed  on 
the  occasion,  and  some  sort  of  offering  was 


made.  The  Amphidromia  of  the  Greeks  was 
a similar  lustration  for  the  child,  when  the 
name  was  given,  probably  between  the  seventh 
and  tenth  days  (Menu,  v.  62;  Ayeen  Akbery, 
Vol.  II.  p.  556;  Zend  Avesta,  ap.  Bahr; 
Thucyd.  iii.  104;  Eurip.  ‘ Iph.  Taur.’  382; 
Callim.  ‘ Hym.  ad  Jov.’  16,  ‘ Hym.  ad  Del.’ 
123  ; Censorin.  ‘ De  Die  Nat.’  cap.  xi.  p.  51 ; 
Gelsus,  II.  i;  Festus,  s.  Lustrici  Dies,  with 
the  note  in  Lindemann  ii.  480;  Smith,  ‘ Diet, 
of  Antiquities,’  s.  Aynphidromid).  On  the 
essential  distinction  of  the  Mosaic  purification,  ' 
see  Note  at  the  end  of  ch.  xv. 


Chapters  XIII.  XIV. 

The  Laws  relating  to  Leprosy. 


Preliminary  Note  on  the  Character  of  the 
Disease. 

I,  Importance  of  the  subject.  II.  Names  of 
the  Disease.  III.  Its  nature.  IV.  The 
Tuberculated  'variety.  V.  The  Anesthetic 
'variety.  VI.  Each  form  recognised  by 
the  ancients.  VII.  Subordinate  'varieties. 
VIII.  Is  it  incurable^  IX.  Is  it  heredi- 
tary'? X.  Is  it  endemic?  XI.  What  cir- 
cumstances foster  it?  XII.  Is  it  contagious? 

1.  The  Leprosy  is  the  most  terrible  of  all 
the  disorders  to  which  the  body  of  man  is  sub- 
ject. There  is  no  disease  in  which  hope  of 
recovery  is  so  nearly  extinguished.  From  a 
commencement  slight  in  appearance,  with  but 
little  pain  or  inconvenience,  often  in  its  earlier 
stage  insidiously  disappearing  and  reappearing, 
it  goes  on  in  its  strong  but  sluggish  course, 
generally  in  defiance  of  the  efforts  of  medical 
skill,  until  it  reduces  the  patient  to  a mutilated . 
cripple  with  dulled  or  obliterated  senses,  the 
voice  turned  to  a croak,  and  ghastly  deformity 
of  features.  When  it  reaches  some  vital  part 
it  generally  occasions  what  seem  like  the 
symptoms  of  a distinct  disease  (most  often 
Dysentery),  and  so  puts  an  end  to  the  life  of 
the  sufferer. 

Its  mode  of  selecting  its  victims  has  some- 
thing of  the  same  mysterious  deliberation  as 
its  mode  of  attack.  It  passes  on  slowly  from 
country  to  country  and  from  race  to  race,  as 
little  checked  by  variations  of  climate  as  by 
artificial  remedies.  If  the  type  of  disease  is  in 
some  degree  modified  in  different  countries, 
or  in  particular  cases,  by  local  circumstances 
or  constitutional  peculiarities,  it  never  fails  to 
have  its  own  way  in  the  general  character  of 
the  effect  produced.  From  the  time  of  Moses 
till  the  coming  of  Christ  we  know  that  it  pre- 
vailed amongst  the  Hebrew  race.  At  this 
time,  that  race,  as  a whole,  does  not  seem  to 
be  especially  subject  to  it.  It  has  moved  off 
and  has  in  turn  visited  almost  every  other 
branch  of  the  human  family.  On  the  most 
superficial  view  of  the  subject,  it  would  seem 
that  no  disease  could  so  well  deserve  to  be 


singled  out  by  Divine  wisdom  as  the  object  of 
special  lawsk 

Owing  to  the  happy  exemption  in  modern 
times  of  the  greater  part  of  Europe  from  the 
dreadful  scourge,  as  well  as  to  the  lurking 
secrecy  of  its  own  nature,  the  subject  in  its 
bearing  on  the  Levitical  law  has  been  beset 
with  doubts  until  within  the  last  few  years. 
Our  information  respecting  it  was  incoherent 
and  unsatisfactory,  being  mainly  derived  from 
the  insulated  and  imperfect  reports  of  indivi- 
dual observers  in  distant  lands,  not  one  of 
whom  had  well  examined  a sufficient  number 
of  cases  to  furnish  ground  for  fair  generaliza- 
tion. Even  to  this  day,  the  great  question  as 
to  the  disease  being  contagious  cannot  be  an- 
swered with  well-grounded  confidence.  It 
was  not  until  the  appearance  of  a Report  on 
the  Leprosy  in  Norway,  drawn  up  under  the 
sanction  of  the  government  by  Dr  Daniels- 
sen,  chief  physician  of  the  leper  hospital  at 
Bergen,  and  Prof.  Boeck  (published  in  Paris, 
1848),  that  there  were  materials  for  treating 
the  inquiry  in  a methodical  way.  Recent  medi- 
cal writers,  especially  Mr  Erasmus  Wilson  and 
Dr  A.  T.  Thomson,  have  added  some  im- 
portant observations.  Mr  Wilson  has  devoted 
a chapter  of  his  book  ‘On  Diseases  of  the 
Skin’  to  the  illustration  of  Lev.  xiii.  (4th 
edit.  p.  384).  But  since  the  publication 
that  work,  the  College  of  Physicians  have  is 
sued  a series  of  questions  regarding  the  nature 
of  Leprosy,  its  prevalence,  and  its  treatment, 
to  which  answers  have  been  received  from  the 
best  qualified  persons  in  above  fifty  places  on 
the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean,  in  India, 
China,  our  African  and  North  American  colo- 
nics and  the  West  Indies:  from  these  an- 
swers a Report  has  been  drawn  up.  Mr  E. 
Atkinson  of  Leeds,  formerly  surgeon  to  the 
Jews’  hospital  at  Jerusalem,  collected  a valu- 
able body  of  observations,  in  his  visits  to  the 
leper  houses  from  1856  to  i860,  with  which 
the  writer  has  been  favoured  in  manuscript. 
Chiefly  from  these  sources  the  information 

^ See  Note  on  xlii.  45,  46. 

N N 2 


LEVITICUS.  XIII.  XIV. 


560 

contained  in  the  following  notes  respecting 
the  nature  and  symptoms  of  the  disease  has 
been  drawn  h Not  only  the  explanation  of 
the  Levitical  law,  but  the  importance  which 
the  Leprosy  assumes  in  the  history  of  the  hu- 
man race,  and  of  the  Israelites  in  particular, 
may  justify  the  space  which  is  here  given  to 
the  subject. 

II.  Much  confusion  has  arisen  from  the 

ambiguity  of  the  name  in  popular  use.  The 
Hebrew  word  for  the  disease  to  which  the 
Law  relates  is  tzara^ath  ) or  nega' 

tzardath  In  the  English  Bible 

tzara'ath  is  always  rendered  Leprosy,  negd 
tzardath^  a plague  of  Leprosy.  F rom  its  de- 
rivation, tzardath  has  nearly  the  same  meaning 
as  negd ^ i.e.  a stroke.  But  tzardath  became 
the  specific  name  of  the  disease,  and  is  nowhere 
found  in  any  other  sense,  except  in  so  far  as  it 
is  applied  to  a disease  with  similar  aspect  in 
Lev.  xiii.  12.  See  note.  Nega\  on  the  contrary, 
is  a general  name  for  plague,  stroke,  or  wound. 
Gen.  xii.  17;  Dent.  xvii.  8;  2 Chron.  vi.  28; 
Ps.  xxxviii.  II,  Ixxxix.  32;  Is.  liii.  8,  &c. 
From  the  way  in  which  its  visitation  was  re- 
garded, negd  is,  however,  frequently  applied 
to  it  without  tzardath^  as  stroke  is  applied 
to  paralysis  among  ourselves.  Lev.  xiii.  17, 
22,  32,  &c. 

It  is  now  considered  by  all  the  best  autho- 
rities that  tzardath  does  not  denote  the  dis- 
ease which  is  more  properly  called  the  Leprosy^, 
but  that  which  is  known  to  physicians  as  the 
Elephantiasis.  As  the  right  distinction  in 
applying  the  names  was  clearly  observed  by 
the  Greek  and  Latin  medical  writers^,  and  as 
both  the  Elephantiasis  and  the  Leprosy  must 
have  been  familiarly  known  in  Egypt,  it  is 
remarkable  that  the  LXX.  should  have  adopted 
AeVpa  as  the' rendering  of  tzardath.  To  them 
must  be  ascribed  the  fact  that  Leprosy  has  be- 
come the  established  scriptural  name  and  that 
by  which  the  disease  was  universally  known 
in  the  middle  ages. 

It  seems  worth  while  to  observe  that  Ele- 
phantiasis is  often  popularly  used  as  the  name 
of  a disease,  properly  called  Bucnemia^  or,  from 
the  place  in  which  it  was  first  known  to  prevail, 
•‘the  Barbadoes  leg.”  Its  distinguishing  mark 
is  an  enlargement  of  the  leg,  and  it  is  want- 
ing in  the  more  important  features  of  the  dis- 
eas"*  of  which  it  sometimes  usurps  the  name^. 

III.  Elephantiasis  is  now  considered  by 
most  observers  to  be  quite  distinct  in  its 
nature  from  any  of  those  diseases  with  which 
it  has  often  been  supposed  to  be  connected, 
such  as  the  Lepra  vulgaris.  Psoriasis,  Sy- 

^ To  these  may  be  added,  ‘Notes  on  the  Leper 
Hospital  at  Hranafla,’  by  Dr  Webster,  ii)  the 
‘ Mcdico-Chirurgical  Transactions,’  Vol.  XLIII. 

^ The  proper  Lei)njsy  U>epra  7’atg,.ris)  is  a dis- 
ease of  a different  and  much  more  superficial 
nature.  .See  on  xiii.  12. 

^ See  § VI. 

•*  ‘ Keiiort  of  the  College  of  Physicians,’  p.  viii. 


philis.  Yaws,  &c,^  Its  character  seems  indeed 
to  be  more  strongly  individualized  than  that 
of  almost  any  other  malady.  Its  origin  is 
ascribed  to  “ an  animal  poison  generated  in 
or  received  into  the  blood,  accumulated  there- 
in probably  by  a process  analogous  to  fermen- 
tation.” (Wilson.)  This  poison  primarily 
affects  either  the  skin,  by  depositing  in  it  a 
peculiar  albuminous  substance,  or  the  nerves 
and  nervous  centres,  at  last  destroying  them 
so  as  to  take  away  sensation.  In  this  way,  two 
forms  of  elephantiasis  are  distinguished,  the 
Tuberculated  Elephantiasis and  the  Anesthetic 
or  N on-tuber culated  Elephantiasis^.  Some  of 
the  most  obvious  external  effects  of  these 
forms,  in  well-marked  cases,  bear  such  differ- 
ent aspects  that  they  might  easily  be  taken 
to  belong  to  two  entirely  distinct  maladies. 
But  the  identity  of  their  origin  appears  to  be 
clearly  proved  by  several  facts.  In  many  cases, 
the  characteristic  features  of  the  two  forms 
are  combined^;  instances  occur  in  which  one 
form  changes  entirely  into  the  other  8;  and  in 
hereditary  transmission,  the  parent  is  some- 
times afflicted  with  one  form  and  the  child 
with  the  other 

The  numbers  in  brackets  prefixed  to  the 
particulars  described  in  the  two  following 
paragraphs  are  referred  to  in  the  notes  on  those 
expressions  in  Lev.  xiii.  which  the  particulars 
appear  to  illustrate. 

IV.  (i)  The  Tuberculated  Elephantiasis  is 
the  more  common  form.  It  generally  first 
shews  itself  by  inflamed  patches  in  the  skin, 
on  the  face,  ears  or  hands,  of  a dull  red  or 
purplish  hue,  from  half  an  inch  to  two  inches 
in  diameter.  (2)  These  soon  change  to  a 
brownish  or  bronze  colour,  with  a metallic 
or  oily  lustre,  and  a clearly-defined  edge,  and 
in  this  state  they  often  remain  for  several 
weeks  or  months.  (3)  In  some  cases  these  ex- 
ternal symptoms  disappear  altogether,  and 
after  a while  again  shew  themselves.  (4)  By 
degrees  the  discoloured  surface  becomes  hard, 
and  rises  here  and  there  into  tubercles  at  first 
reddish,  but  afterwards  either  bronzed  or 
white.  The  scarf  skin  often  scales  off.  The 
hardness  and  rising  result  from  a thicken- 
ing of  the  true  skin  by  the  injection  of  albu- 
minous matter.  (5)  After  another  period, 
of  weeks,  or  months,  or  even  of  years,  many 
of  the  tubercles  subside  and  leave  a kind  of 
cicatrix,  thinner  than  the  surrounding  skin, 
which*  may  remain  either  bronzed  or  white. 
(6)  The  tubercles  which  do  not  subside,  or 
which  break  out  again,  may  vary  from  the 
size  of  a pea  to  that  of  a pigeon’s  egg;  and 
after  continuing,  it  may  be  for  years,  with  no 
external  change,  they  ulcerate,  discharging  a 
whitish  matter.  The  ulcers  often  eat  into  the 

" ‘Report,’  pp.  xli.,  Ixviii. 

‘ Rei)ort,’  p.  Ixix. 

7 ‘Report,’  pp.  ix.,  xi.,  xv.,  &c. 

^ ‘ Report,’  p.  Ixiv. 

^ ‘Report,’  p.  Ixviii.,  &c. 


LEVITICUS.  XIIL  XIV.  561 


muscle  till  they  expose  the  bones,  or,  occasion- 
ally, heal  over  and  leave  hard  white  cicatrices, 
(7)  Should  there  be  any  hair  on  the  tubercles, 
it  either  falls  off,  or  turns  white,  and  the  hair 
of  the  head  and  eyebrows  mostly  disappears!. 
From  the  gradual  swelling  of  the  features  the 
face  assumes  a sort  of  lion-like  or  satyr-like 
aspect,  which  suggested  the  names  which  have 
been  sometimes  applied  to  the  disease,  Leonti- 
asis  and  Satyriasis.  The  change  on  the  surface 
of  the  skin  has  given  rise  to  other  names,  in 
more  modern  times,  such  as  the  Black  Leprosy, 
and  the  Humid  Leprosy.  “ When  the  disease 
is  fully  formed,  the  distorted  face,  and  the 
livid,  encrusted  and  ulcerated  tubercles,  the 
deformed,  sightless  and  uncovered  eyes,  the 
hoarse,  whispering  voice,  the  fcetid  breath  and 
cutaneous  excretion,  the  contorted  joints, 
which  are  often  burled  in  or  absolutely  dis- 
located by  tubercles,  the  livid  patches  on  those 
parts  of  the  body  not  yet  tuberculous,  all 
form  a picture  which  is  not  exceeded  in  the 
horror  of  its  features  by  any  other  disease” 
(Dr  A.  T.  Thomson).  (8)  The  disease  for 
the  most  part  creeps  on  with  irresistible  pro- 
gress until  it  attacks  some  vital  organ  and 
occasions  death. 

V.  (i)  The  A naesthetic  Elephantiasis  often 
commences  in  the  forehead  (see  2 Chron. 
xxvi.  19,  ao),  Vvdth  shining  white  or  copper- 
coloured  patches  and  vesicles,  technically  call- 
ed bulla;,  which  are  developed  suddenly  with- 
out pain,  soon  burst,  and  discharge  a milk-like 
matter.  (2)  An  inflamed  ulcerated  surface  is 
left,  v/hich  is  very  tender,  but  heals  after  a time 
and  leaves  a smooth,  white,  insensible  cicatrix 
without  hair.  The  hair  in  some  cases  returns, 
but  it  is  always  white  and  fine.  For  a period, 
sometimes  of  years,  fresh  crops  of  bullae  arise. 

(3)  The  disease  soon  attacks  the  joints  of  the 
fingers  and  toes,  and  afterwards  those  of  the 
lai-ger  limbs,  which  drop  off  bone  by  bone. 
In  some  cases  the  bones  appear  to  be  absorbed. 
The  ulcers  heal  with  wonderful  celerity  and 
completeness.  It  is  said  that  amputation  by 
Elephantiasis  will  often  “bear  comparison  with 
the  most  finished  performance  of  the  surgeon.” 

(4)  The  limbs  which  are  affected  but  do  not 
ulcerate  become  at  last  so  completely  devoid 
of  sensation  that  portions  of  them  may  be 
burned,  cut,  or  nibbled  off  by  mice,  without 
the  person  being  conscious  of  it.  (5)  The 
face  never  becomes  so  utterly  deformed  as  in 
Tuberculated  Elephantiasis,  but  the  skin  is, 
for  the  most  part,  tightly  strained  over  the 
features  with  a mummy- like  aspect,  the  eye- 
lids droop,  tears  continually  flow,  and  the 
lower  lip  hangs  down  and  exposes  the  teeth 
and  gums.  The  taste,  sight  and  smell  fail, 
but  the  voice  is  not  affected.  (6)  The  eye- 
brows and  lashes,  and  the  other  hair,  generally 
fall  or  becor®e  white.  (7)  The  progress  of 
the  disease  is  even  much  slower  than  that  of 

^ See  on  Lev.  xiii.  3. 


Tuberculated  Elephantiasis,  and  its  fatal  termi- 
nation is  not  so  nearly  certain.  The  average 
duration  of  life  after  the  fu'st  appearance  of  the 
disease  in  the  one  is  ten  years,  in  the  other 
nearly  twenty,  or,  in  India,  above  thirty  years 2. 
In  each  of  the  two  forms  death  is  mostly 
preceded  by  an  attack  of  Dysentery.  See  § 1. 
(8)  Anaesthetic  Elephantiasis  is  sometimes 
called  the  Joint  evil,  and  sometimes  the  Dry 
Leprosy:  but  it  is  still  more  frequently  known 
as  the  White  Leprosy,  and  under  that  name  is 
confounded  with  what  is  more  properly  called 
the  Leprosy,  to  which  it  bears,  in  its  early 
stages,  a superficial  resemblance.  See  § IL, 
and  notes  on  Lev.  xiii.  12,  38. 

VI.  Both  these  forms  of  Elephantiasis  were 
well  known  to  the  ancient  physicians  and 
were  accurately  described  by  them,  but  they 
were  treated  as  separate  diseases.  Aretaeiis 
and  Celsus  have  well  described  the  Tuber- 
culated form  under  the  name  Elephantiasis. 
Celsus  has  described  the  Anaesthetic  form 
under  the  name  of  Vitiligo  alba  or  AciIkt;.  Lie 
has  associated  it,  but  not  confounded  it  (as 
many  moderns  have  done),  with  the  common 
white  Leprosy,  which  he  calls  by  the  name 
aX0oy,  the  word  which  the  LXX.  have  right- 
ly used  in  Lev.  xiii.  39.  Herodotus  also, 
with  better  knowledge  than  some  of  his  com- 
m.entators,  distinguishes  Xeii/cr;  from  XeVpa 
(the  latter  appears  to  be  the  same  as  the  dXcjyos 
of  Celsus),  both  of  which  were  regarded  as 
unclean  by  the  ancient  Persians,  not  distin- 
guished as  they  were  in  the  Mosaic  law 3. 

VI I.  It  has  appeared  desirable  thus  far  to 
discriminate  the  two  forms  of  Elephantiasis  in 
order  to  explain  the  references  to  particular 
symptoms  in  this  chapter  of  Leviticus.  At 
this  present  time,  that  which  prevails  by  far 
the  most,  especially  in  Egypt  and  Syria,  is  the 
Tuberculated  form.  But  it  should  be  kept 
in  view  that  the  two  in  a great  number  of 
cases  work  together  (see  § HI.);  and,  as  it 
did  in  the  days  of  Moses,  the  disease  appears 
occasionally  in  an  am.biguous  form  on  some 
one  part  of  the  body,  with  but  little  or  no 
tendency  to  spread.  One  variety  (Morphofa 
alba)  sometimes  affects  a single  limb  with  “ a 
dead  pearl-like  whiteness.”  Mr  Wilson  likens 
the  thigh  of  one  of  his  patients  to  “ a piece  of 
beautiful  white  marble  sculptured”  This 
reminds  one  of  the  hand  of  Moses,  “leprous 
as  snow,”  Ex.  iv.  6,  and  of  the  application 
of  the  same  expression  to  the  leprosy  of 
Miriam,  Num.  xii.  10,  and  to  that  of  Gehazi, 
2 K.  V.  27.  Other  local  varieties,  to  which 
reference  appears  to  be  made  in  the  Law,  will 
be  noticed  in  the  notes  on  Lev.  xiii.  29 — 40. 
In  some  rare  cases,  the  Tuberculated  Ele- 

2 ‘ Report,  ’ p.  Ixv. ; ‘Abstract  of  Replies,  ’ p- 1 rf- 

3 Aretcieus,  p.  T74sq.,  edit.  Kiihn ; Celsus,  lib. 
III.  p.  25;  Festus,  s.  Vitiligo,  with  Lindemann’s 
note,  p.  742;  Herodot.  i.  r38. 

* ‘Diseases  of  the  Skin,’  p.  376. 


LEVITICUS.  XIII.  XIV. 


phantiasls  becomes  acute,  the  tubercles  rapidly 
rise  and  become  ulcerated,  and  the  disease 
runs  its  course  in  a few  weeks  h This  may 
perhaps  explain  Job  ii.  7,  8. 

VIII.  iMedical  skill  appears  to  have  been 
more  completely  foiled  by  Elephantiasis  than 
by  any  other  malady.  That  the  Israelites  re- 
garded it  as  beyond  the  reach  of  natural  reme- 
dies has  been  inferred  from  the  words  of  the 
king  of  Israel,  “ Am  I God  to  kill  and  to 
make  alive,  that  this  man  doth  send  unto  me 
to  recover  a man  of  his  leprosy  ?”  2 K.  v.  7. 
The  ancient  physicians  prescribed  treatment 
for  it,  but  it  appears  to  have  been  commonly 
regarded  as  incurable  in  the  times  of  Cyril 
and  Augustin 2,  Of  modern  physicians,  a 
great  number  express  themselves  with  entire 
hopelessness  in  regard  to  Tuberculated  Ele- 
phantiasis; but  the  Aniesthetic  form  seems  to 
be  in  some  degree  amenable  to  remedies  and 
regimen.  It  has  however  been  observed  that, 
from  the  false  shame  usually  felt  by  those  who 
are  afflicted  with  it,  the  disease  in  either^  form 
is  rarely  Seen  by  the  physician  until  it  has 
passed  the  stage  in  which  remedies  might  be 
applied  with  hope  of  success.  Change  of 
climate  and  habit  of  living,  with  certain  medi- 
cines, chiefly  preparations  of  iron,  iodine  and 
arsenic,  seem  to  have  done  good  in  some 
cases  2,  The  disease  appears  at  times  to  stop 
of  itself  and  to  lie  dormant  for  years,  and 
some  spontaneous  cures  are  recorded  k It  is 
a fact  worthy  of  notice,  that  the  people  of  Jeru- 
salem and  its  neighbourhood  do  not  send  pure 
Anaesthetic  cases  to  the  leper  houses,  because 
they  believe  them  to  be  curable  (Mr  Atkinson). 

IX.  It  cannot  reasonably  be  doubted  that 
Elephantiasis  is  hereditary.  (Cf.  a K.  v.  27.) 
There  are  families  in  which  it  has  been  handed 
down  for  ages.  The  lepers  of  New  Brunswick 
afford  a remarkable  instance.  The  disease 
was  brought  into  the  settlement  by  a French 
emigrant  family  named  Bredau,  originally 
from  St  Malo.  Of  the  twenty-two  inmates 
of  the  leper  house,  every  one  is  related  by 
blood  to  that  unfortunate  stock  Jt  how- 
ever frequently  skips  over  a generation,  and 
affects  only  one  or  two  members  of  a fa  nily. 
The  children  of  leprous  parents  are  in  infancy 
as  fair,  and  seem  to  be  as  healthy,  as  otiaers. 
The  morbid  symptoms  generally  make  their 
first  appearance  about  the  age  of  puberty, 
and  the  work  of  destruction  then  c -eeps  on 

^ Wilson,  p.  3^2. 

2 Cyril,  ‘Glaph.  in  Lev.’ p.  36;  August.  ‘Serm. 
ad  Pop,’  78.— Aretceus  (p.  34L  considered  that 
there  was  hope  of  cure  if  the  disease  was  taken 
in  its  early  stage,  but  that  when  advanced  it  was 
incurable.  In  accordance  with  the  belt  results 
of  modern  ex])crience,  he  chiefly  recommended 
as  remedies  baths  and  attention  to  diet, 

• Report,’  pp.  liv.—  lvi.,  Ixxi. 

■*  ‘ Report,’  pp.  liv. — Ivi.,  Ixxi.,  Ixxii. ; Wil- 
son, pp.  337>  3.s5- 

* ‘ Report,  ‘ Abstract  of  Replies,’  p.  o. 


until  the  comely  child  becomes  a disfigured 
and  mutilated  man.  But  there  are  many  cases 
in  which  the  malady  first  appears  in  more  ad- 
vanced life,  when  there  seems  to  be  no  heredi- 
tary transmission.  Of  213  cases  examined  in 
Norway,  189  proved  to  be  hereditary,  and 
24  of  spontaneous  origin.  In  Crete,  out  of  122 
cases,  76  were  hereditary,  and  46  spontaneous^ 
— It  is  a well-established  fact  that  in  almost  all 
places  where  the  disease  prevails,  there  are 
many  more  men  affected  with  it  than  women. 

X.  The  attachment  of  Elephantiasis  to 
particular  races  may  be  regarded  as  subordi- 
nate to  its  hereditary  transm.ission.  The  pre- 
valence of  the  disease  appears  to  be  much 
more  dependent  on  local  or  special  circum- 
stances than  on  race,  which  evidently  does 
not  circumscribe  the  instances  of  its  sponta- 
neous appearance.  The  evidence  bearing  on 
these  points  is  remarkable.  In  Syria,  Ele- 
phantiasis still  keeps  its  ground,  but  it  Is  said 
to  be  unknown  among  the  Jews  who  live 
there7;  Mr  Atkinson,  however,  saw  a single 
Jew  leper  at  Jerusalem.  No  leper  of  Jewish 
race  has  been  knowm  for  many  years  to  die 
in  the  Presidency  of  Bombay,  where  the  num- 
ber of  lepers  is  perhaps  as  great  as  in  any  part 
of  the  world.  At  Aden,  where  Arabs,  Hin- 
doos and  Parsees  all  suffer  from  the  disease,  the  ' 
Jews  enjoy  the  same  immunity  as  the  Euro- 
peans®. Lower  Egypt,  the  old  seat  of  Elephan- 
tiasis, maintains  its  unhappy  distinction  in 
spite  of  the  change  in  the  races  which  inhabit 
it ; but  there  it  prevails  more  among  the  Jews 
than  among  the  Arabs.  As  was  probably  the 
case  in  ancient  times,  in  and  near  this  same 
region,  the  Anaesthetic  form  more  affects  the 
Jew^s,  and  the  Tuberculated  form,  the  Arabs®. 
In  Crete,  where  there  are  supposed  to  be  a 
thousand  lepers,  it  spares  no  race,  but  the 
Greeks  have  it  in  the  most  aggravated  degree. 
It  has  been  observed  that  in  Crete,  Cyprus  and 
Scio,  the  Moslems  are  less  subject  to  it  than 
the  Christians,  and  their  exemption  is  ascribed 
to  their  abstaining  from  pork,  and  using  fre- 
quent ablutions'”.  In  the  West  Indies,  the 
blacks  and  coloured  races  are  the  most  affect- 
ed, while  the  Jews  appear  to  suffer  in  the 
next  degree,  and  in  some  parts  of  Jamaica 
they  suffer  more  than  any  The  native  races 
of  India,  and  the  Chinese,  appear  at  the  present 
time  to  be  more  subject  to  the  disease  than 
any  other  peoples.  In  the  Presidency  of 
Bombay,  and  the  Deccan,  there  are  villages 
in  which  the  lepers  exceed  one  per  cent,  of 
the  population 'k  There  are  900  in  the  leper 
asylum  at  Canton,  and  2,500  are  supposed  to 

**  ‘Report,’  pp.  xxxix.,  xli.,  Ixvii.  ; ‘Abstract 
of  Replies,’  p.  64. 

7 ‘ Report.  Abstract,’ 54— 57.  Cf.  ‘ Report,’ 
pp.  xxix.,  Ixvi. 

^ ‘Ab-stract,’  p.  110.  ® ‘/abstract,’  p.  53, 

'0  ‘Abstract,’ pp.  55—65. 

" ‘Report,’ p.  xxix. ; ‘ Abstract,’ pp.  9 — 15 

'2  ‘ Abstract,’ p.  1 12,  &c. 


LEVITICUS.  XIII.  XIV. 


be  getting  their  living  in  the  city  as  beggars 
and  pedlars^. 

XI,  The  inquiry  into  the  circumstances 
which  may  produce  or  foster  Fdephantiasis  is 
connected  with  its  local  distribution.  It  was 
in  Norway  that  it  was  first  observed  that  the 
disease  prevails  most  on  the  seacoast,  where 
the  people  live  chielly  upon  fish.  Extensive 
observations  have  since  been  made  elsewhere, 
and  it  may  be  considered  as  well  established, 
that  those  commuinities  who  live  mainly  upon 
fish,  and  those  whose  chief  meat  is  the  flesh  of 
ill-fed  pigs,  are  the  most  subject  to  Elephan- 
tiasis. The  tendency  is  aggravated  where  the 
fish  and  pork  are  generally  salted.  The  Jews 
of  Jamaica,  among  whom  the  disease  pre- 
vails, eat  more  fish  than  any  other  part  of 
the  population  2.  On  the  importance  of  these 
facts,  as  regards  our  present  purpose,  see 
notes  on  Lev.  xi.  7,  9 — 12.  Oil  used  as  food 
in  excess,  or  in  a rancid  state,  also  appears  to 
encourage  the  disease 

An  impression  has  prevailed  that  Elephan- 
tiasis. prevails  more  amongst  the  poor  than 
amongst  those  who  are  in  comfortable  circum- 
stances. The  habits  of  living  which  poverty 
is  apt  to  engender  might  seem  to  make  this 
reasonable.  But  there  are  some  strong  testi- 
monies on  the  other  side  respecting  the  Jews 
of  Jamaica  and  Constantinople,  and  respecting 
other  races,  in  Mauritius,  Tobago,  and  else- 
where: and  it  has  been  remarked  that  a large 
proportion  of  the  lepers  who  are  in  good  cir- 
cumstances are  kept  out  of  sight,  so  that  their 
number  is  probably  underrated.  The  evidence 
from  Barbadoes  seems  to  favour  the  conclu- 
sion that  Tuberculated  Elephantiasis  prevails 
equally  amongst  all  classes,  but  that  the  Anses- 
thetic  form  is  more  common  amongst  the  poor^. 

XII.  But  the  question  whether  Elephan- 
tiasis is  contagious  or  not,  is  the  one  of  most 
peculiar  interest  in  connection  with  the  Leviti- 
cal  law.  The  Committee  of  the  College  of 
Physicians  consider  that  the  weight  of  evi- 
dence is  decidedly  on  the  negative  side^.  Tlie 
freedom  with  which  lepers  often  live  with 
others  in  the  closest  domestic  relation  indi- 
cates that  common  opinion  practically  takes 
the  same  view.  Several  surgeons  are  said  to 
have  wounded  themselves  in  the  dissection 
of  leprous  bodies,  without  suffering  any 
characteristic  injury s.  But  many  of  those 
who  have  replied  to  the  Leprosy  Committee 

1 ‘ Abstract,’ p.  77. 

See  ‘Abstract  of  Replies,’  from  Norway, 
New  Brunswick,  China,  Japan,  India,  Mauritius, 
&c.  ‘ Report,’  p.  Ixviii,  and  Dr  Webster's  ‘Notes 
on  the  Granada  Hospital.’ 

^ ‘ Report,’  p.  Ixvii.  ‘ Abstract  of  Replies,’ 
from  Smyrna,  Crete,  the  Ionian  Islands. 

‘Abstract,’ pp.  30,  31.  ^ ‘ Report,’ p.  vii. 

® ‘Abstract,’  pp.  32.  86,  &c.  Wilson,  p.  356. 
But  see  on  the  other  side  Mr  Wilson’s  cases  de- 
scribed in  the  Appendix,  pp.  235,  239;  and 
‘Notes  on  the  Granada  Hospital.’ 


563 

affirm  their  belief  that  the  disease  is  con- 
tagious in  a certain  stage,  when  the  ulcers 
are  running^.  It  is  evident  that,  if  the  dis- 
ease is  contagious,  a very  rare  and  critical 
concurrence  of  circumstances  is  required  to 
develope  the  contagion.  But  it  should  not 
be  overlooked  that  the  contagiousness  of  a dis- 
ease cannot  be  disproved  by  the  multitude  of 
escapes,  if  there  are  a few  well-attested  and 
well-observed  facts  in  its  favour.  It  cannot, 
at  any  rate,  be  doubted  that  the  few  English- 
men who  have  suffered  from  Elephantiasis  have 
always,  or  nearly  always,  associated  with  le- 
prous people,  or  lived  in  leprous  countries’^. 

The  case  of  Dr  Robertson,  who  while  super- 
intending the  leper  house  in  the  Seychelles 
islands  became  a leper,  is  a very  important 
one^. — The  recent  investigations  have  not 
tended  to  confirm  the  popular  opinion  which 
in  different  ages  has  assigned  the  origin  of 
cases  of  Leprosy  to  irregularities  of  life 

We  have  thus  far  given  an  outline  of 
those  particulars  in  the  nature  of  the  disease 
in  question,  v/hich  seem  most  likely  to  throw 
light  upon  the  reasons  and  the  forms  of  this 
portion  of  the  Levitical  law.  Some  few  fur- 
ther details,  \^'hich  seem  to  be  referred  to  in  the 
text,  will  be  given  in  the  notes. — On  the  mode 
in  which  lepers  have  been  treated  in  different 
ages  and  nations,  see  Note  after  chap.  xiii. 

We  believe  that  it  will  be  found  that  modern 
observations  and  science  not  only  tend  to  set 
forth  the  Divine  wisdom  which  directed  the 
mind  of  Moses,  but  that  they  also  shew  the 
precision  of  the  terms  used  in  the  Law.  It 
should  however  be  carefully  observed  that  the 
particular  features  of  the  disease  which  are 
here  mentioned  are  those  belonging  to  its  earlier 
stages,  at  the  time  when  its  actual  presence  is 
more  or  less  doubtfuLb  The  object  of  these 
directions  was  to  enable  the  prie.sts  to  decide 
upon  such  cases.  That  the  Israelites  were 
familiar  with  the  horrors  of  its  more  miatured 
development  is  sufficiently  shewn  by  Num.  xii. 

12,  and,  probably,  by  Job  ii.  7, 

7 ‘ Ab.stract,’ pp.  25,  32,  36,  67,  77,  108. 

® ‘ Observations,’ by  Mr  Wilson,  in  the  Ap- 
pendix to  the  Report,  p.  231.  ‘Notes  on  the 
Granada  Hospital.’ — An  excellent  observer  in 
Mauritius,  in  a private  letter,  states  that  he  has 
personally  known  only  two  Europeans  affected 
wdth  the  disease.  Each  of  these  had  married 
Creole  women,  apparently  free  from  disease,  but 
they  have  left  leprous  children. 

^ ‘ Abstract,’  p.  90. 

See  Theod.  ‘ Quoest.  in  Lev.’  21;  Otho, 
‘Rabb.  Lex.’  p.  367.  ‘Report,’  pp.  xli.,  xiii. 

A recent  writer  speaks  of  “the  confused 
and  imperfect  account  of  the  leprosy  given  in 
Leviticus.”  A more  careful  perusal  of  the  text 
might  have  shewn  him  that  Moses  does  not  pre- 
tend to  give  an  account  of  tlie  disease,  which 
must  have  been  familiar  enough,  in  its  great  fea- 
tures, to  those  for  whose  immediate  use  he  wrote. 

^2  Origen  was  most  probably  right  in  callingthe 
disease  of  Job  Elephantiasis.  ‘ Cont.  Cels.’  p.  305. 


564 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


[v-  I— S- 


« Or, 

s^uelling. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


I The  laivs  and  tokens  whereby  the  priest  is  to 
he  guided  m discerning  the  leprosy. 

and  the  Lord  spake  unto  A^Io- 
±\.  ses  and  Aaron,  saying, 

2 When  a man  shall  have  in  the 
skin  of  his  fiesh  a ''  rising,  a scab,  or 
bright  spot,  and  it  be  in  the  skin  of 
his  flesh  like  the  plague  of  leprosy; 
then  he  shall  be  brought  unto  Aaron 
the  priest,  or  unto  one  of  his  sons  the 
priests : 

3 And  the  priest  shall  look  on 
the  plague  in  the  skin  of  the  flesh : 
and  when  the  hair  in  the  plague  is 
turned  white,  and  the  plague  in  sight 


be  deeper  than  the  skin  of  his  flesh, 
it  is  a plague  of  leprosy:  and  the 
priest  shall  look  on  him,  a.nd  pro- 
nounce him  unclean. 

.4.  If  the  bright  spot  be  white  in 
the  skin  of  his  flesh,  and  in  sight  be 
not  deeper  than  the  skin,  and  the  hair 
thereof  be  not  turned  white ; then  the 
priest  shall  shut  up  him  that  hath  the 
plague  seven  days : 

5 And  the  priest  shall  look  on 
him  the  seventh  day:  and,  behold, 
if  the  plague  in  his  sight  be  at  a 
stay,  and  the  plague  spread  not  in 
the  skin ; then  the  priest  shall  shut 
him  up  seven  days  more : 


Chapter  XIII. 

The  Signs  of  Leprosy,  i — 44. 

1.  Both  Moses  and  Aaron  are  now  ad- 
dressed. See  on  xii.  i. 

The  first  marks  of  the  Disease.  2 — 8. 

2.  the  skin  of  his  fiesld]  This  expression 
is  found  nowhere  but  in  this  chapter.  The 
word  rendered  skin  (’or)  is  commonly  used 
for  the  external  skin  either  of  man  or  of  an 
animal.  See  Ex.  xxxiv.  29 ; Job  vii.  5 ; Lev. 
iv.  II,  vii.  8,  &c.  Mr  Wilson  has  inferred 
from  the  nature  of  the  case  that,  in  this  con- 
nection, the  phrase  “ skin  of  his  flesh  ” de- 
notes the  cuticle  or  scarf  skin,  as  distinguished 
from  the  cutis  or  true  skin.  He  observes  that 
one  of  the  most  important  distinctions  be- 
tween Elephantiasis  and  other  diseases  which 
outwardly  resemble  it  in  its  early  stages,  is  that 
it  affects  the  cutis  rather  than  the  cuticle.  See 
Prel.  Note  to  this  chap.,  § iii.,  § iv.  4.  We 
are  thus  to  understand  the  expression  in  the 
next  verse,  and  elsewhere  in  the  chapter, 
“ deeper  than  the  skin  of  his  flesh,”  as,  below 
tlie  scarf  slrin. 

'^rising — '^scah — ^bright  spot]  The  Hebrew 
words  thus  fairly  rendered  according  to  their 
tlerivation,  are  used  only  in  reference  to  the 
L>eprosy.  They  are  repeated  in  the  same  order 
in  xiv.  56.  They  seem  to  be  technical  names 
applied  to  the  common  external  signs  of  incipi- 
ent Elephantiasis:  (i)  either  the  Tubercle  of 
the  Tuberculated  form  or  the  Bulla  of  the 
Ansesthctic  (Prel.  Note,  § iv.  4,  § v.  i),  (2)  the 
Cicatrix  (§  iv.  5,  § v.  2),  and  (3)  the  Glossy 
patch  (§  IV.  2.  § v.  i).  The  rendering  of 
the  LXX.,  though  it  is  rather  loose,  appears 
to  countenance  this  view  of  the  words,  which 
are  summed  up  as,  a symptomatic  or  shining 
scar—  ovXt)  (rrjfxaa'ui^  rj  Tr]\avyi]s.- — -The  refer- 
ences on  the  word  scab.,  in  the  margin  of  the 
later  editions  of  our  Authorized  Version,  be- 
long more  properly  to  verse  18,  where  the 
original  word  is  different.  See  on  2;.  18. 


like  the  plague  of  leprosy]  like  a stroke  of 
Leprosy.  T here  is  no  article. 

3.  the  hair  in  the  plague  is  turned  ■•white] 
The  sparing  growth  of  very  fine  whitish  hair 
on  leprous  spots  in  the  place  of  the  natural 
hair,  appears  to  have  been  always  regarded  as 
a characteristic  symptom  (Prel,  Note,  §iv.  7, 
§ V.  6).  Dr  Davison,  after  carefully  examining 
nearly  a hundred  lepers  in  Madagascar,  says: 
“ The  hairs  upon  the  part  become  yellow  and 
stunted,  and  after  a time  fall  off,  leaving  the 
hair  bulbs  empty  and  enlarged,  especially  on 
the  face,  so  as  to  present  one  of  the  fnost  dia- 
gnostic signs  of  the  malady.”  (Appendix  to 
‘Report,’  p.  221.)  Wilson  speaks  of  the 
diseased  hair  as  “so  fine  as  to  be  hardly 
perceptible.”  Celsus,  in  reference  to  the  Anaes- 
thetic Elephantiasis,  speaks  of  it  as  like  pale 
down  (in  eaque  albi  pili  sunt,  et  lanuginis 
similes).  The  “yellow  thin  hair”  is  men- 
tioned in  nj.  30.  The  Arabs  are  said  to  regard 
a case  of  Elephantiasis  as  curable,  if  dark  hairs 
are  found  on  the  spots.  (Forskal,  quoted  by 
Keil.)  It  should  however  be  kept  in  view  that 
the  hair  of  the  head,  even  when  this  is  not  the 
part  of  the  body  visibly  diseased,  generally 
falls;  and,  if  it  returns,  it  is  always  whitish; 
see  on  wv.  29 — 37:  sometimes  the  hair  is 
white  in  patches.  Hence  a white  head  was 
regarded  by  the  ancients  as  a common  sign 
of  the  disease.  Aischylus,  ‘ Choeph.’  276; 
Aischines,  ‘ Epist.’  I.;  Aristotle,  ‘Hist.  An.’ 
III.  10,  § 5. 

the  plague  in  sight  be  deeper  than  the  skin  of 
his  flesh]  the  stroke  appears  to  be  deeper 
than  the  scarf  skin.  See  on  -v.  2.  This 
symptom,  along  with  the  whitish  hair,  at  once 
decided  the  case  to  be  one  of  Leprosy. 

4.  bright  spot... not  deeper  than  the  skin] 
See  Prel.  Note,  § iv.  2,  § v.  i. 

5.  and  the  plague  spread  not]  Rather,  ad- 
vance not,  so  as  to  shew  that  the  disease  is 
under  the  cuticle  and  to  assume  the  defined 


V.  6—13.] 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


565 


6 And  the  priest  shall  look  on 
him  again  the  seventh  day : and,  be- 
hold, if  the  plague  be  somewhat  dark, 
and  the  plague  spread  not  in  the  skin, 
the  priest  shall  pronounce  him  clean : 
it  is  but  a scab : and  he  shall  wash  his 
clothes,  and  be  clean. 

7 But  if  the  scab  spread  much 
abroad  in  the  skin,  after  that  he 
hath  been  seen  of  the  priest  for  his 
cleansing,  he  shall  be  seen  of  the 
priest  again : 

8 And  if  the  priest  see  that,  be- 
hold, the  scab  spreadeth  in  the  skin, 
then  the  priest  shall  pronounce  him 
unclean  : it  is  a leprosy. 

9 ^ When  the  plague  of  leprosy  is 


edge  and  the  glossy  surface  that  are  character- 
istic of  leprous  spots.  See  on  'v.  % and  Prel. 
Note,  § IV.  2.  The  old  English  versions,  in- 
stead of  ‘ ‘ spread  not,  ” have  ‘ ‘ grow  not,  ” and  this 
rendering  is  more  in  accordance  with  the  LXX. 
and  Vulgate.  The  Hebrew  verb  {pasah)  oc- 
curs nowhere  but  in  this  and  the  following 
chapter.  It  is  applied  only  to  the  progress 
made  by  a spot  of  Leprosy,  and  there  is  no 
reason  why  its  meaning  should  be  restricted 
to  superficial  extension. 

6.  soyne<what  dar/i]  Rather,  somewhat 
dim:  that  is,  if  the  spot  is  dying  away,  or 
wanting  either  in  the  gloss  or  in  the  clearly 
defined  outline  by  which  leprous  spots  are 
distinguished.  Prel.  Note,  § iv.  2. 

spread  not]  i.e.  advance  not. 

it  is  but  a scab]  If  it  was  a mere  common 
scab,  not  the  result  of  Leprosy,  the  man  had  to 
wash  his  clothes  in  order  that  he  might  appear 
no  longer  as  a leper. 

7.  spread  much  abroad  in  the  skin]  Rather, 
advance  much  in  the  skin. 

seen  of  the  priest  for  his  cleansing]  The 
purport  of  these  words  is  doubtful.  They 
probably  mean  “seen  by  the  priest  and  pro- 
nounced clean.”  Taken  in  this  way,  they 
would  refer  to  the  visit  of  the  suspected  leper 
to  the  priest  at  the  end  of  the  second  week. 
The  direction  here  given  would  thus  bear  on 
a recurrence  of  the  morbid  symptoms  after 
the  case  had  been  discharged  (Prel.  Note,  § iv. 
3).  So  Vulg.,  Luther,  Geneva  Fr.  and  Eng., 
Rosenmuller,  Herxh.,  Luzzatto,  VVogue. 
We  are  thus  left  to  draw  the  inference  that 
if,  at  the  end  of  the  first  week,  the  spot  was 
seen  to  have  advanced,  the  person  was  at  once 
declared  a leper  (cf.  ’v.  32).  But  some  have 
taken  the  words  to  mean  “ seen  by  the  priest 
with  a view  to  be  pronounced  clean  ” (de 
Wette,  Knobel,  Keil).  Our  Version  has, 
perhaps  rightly,  preserved  the  ambiguity  of 
the  original.  The  Law  according  to  the  ex- 


in a man,  then  he  shall  be  brought 
unto  the  priest ; 

10  And  the  priest  shall  see  him: 
and,  behold,  if  the  rising  be  white  in 
the  skin,  and  it  have  turned  the  hair 
white,  and  there  be  ^ quick  raw  flesh 

in  the  rising;  einngof 

1 1 It  is  an  old  leprosy  in  the  skin  feTk. 
of  his  flesh,  and  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  unclean,  and  shall  not  . 
shut  him  up:  for  he  is  unclean. 

12  And  if  a leprosy  break  out  a- 
broad  in  the  skin,  and  the  leprosy 
cover  all  the  skin  of  hi/n  that  hath 
the  plague  from  his  head  even  to  his 
foot,  v/heresoever  the  priest  looketh ; 

13  Then  the  priest  shall  consider; 


planation  here  preferred  regards  the  sentence 
of  the  priest  as  provisional,  holding  good  only 
till  the  symptoms  may  appear  to  resume  their 
progress.  Gf.  2;.  35. 

8.  spreadeth]  advances.  See  on  2;.  5. 

Case  of  confirmed  L eprosy . 9 — 1 1 . 

When  the  disease  had  become  confirmed 
before  the  patient  was  brought  to  the  priest, 
which  might  occur  either  through  mistake, 
indifference,  the  natural  unwillingness  to  un- 
dergo examination,  or  the  rapid  progress  of 
the  stroke  (Prel.  Note.  § vn.,  § viii.),  the 
man  was  at  once  pronounced  unclean. 

10.  if  the  rising  be  'white]  Rather,  if  there 
toe  a white  rising.  The  term  very  pro- 
bably denotes  the  white  Bulla  of  Anaesthetic 
Elephantiasis  when  it  has  re-appeared.  Prel. 
Note,  § v.  I,  2. 

quick  raw  flesh  in  the  jusing]  The  margin 
gives  the  literal  rendering.  The  symptom  here 
denoted  exhibits  a more  advanced  stage  of 
the  disease  than  those  that  have  been  previ- 
ously mentioned.  The  expression  might  de- 
note an  ulcer  or  open  sore  with  fungous  granu- 
lations (or  “proud  flesh”)  appearing  in  it. 
If  this  is  not  the  meaning,  it  may  possibly  be 
referred  to  that  excessive  tenderness  {hyperes- 
thesia') which,  especially  in  Anaesthetic  Ele- 
phantiasis, affects  the  surface  before  it  becomes 
insensible.  Prel.  Note,  § v.  2,  cf.  § iv.  6.  The 
interpretation  of  the  LXX.  and  the  Mishna, 
which  some  have  adopted,  that  an  insulated 
spot  of  sound  flesh  in  the  midst  of  a Tubercle 
is  meant,  must  be  a mistake. 

Case  of  the  Common  Leprosy.  12 — 17. 

If  a great  part  of  the  surface  of  the  body 
had  turned  white,  with  none  of  the  proper 
symptoms  of  Elephantiasis,  the  man  was  to 
be  pronounced  clean.  But  if,  after  he  had  been 
discharged  by  the  priest,  ulceration  made  its 
appearance,  he  was  to  be  regarded  as  a leper 


566 


LEVITICUS.  XIIL 


[v.  14—23. 


and,  behold,  if  the  leprosy  have  co- 
vered all  his  flesh,  he  shall  pronounce 
hhn  clean  that  hath  the  plague : it  is 
all  turned  white : he  is  clean. 

14  But  when  raw  flesh  appeareth 
in  him,  he  shall  be  unclean. 

15  And  the  priest  shall  see  the 
raw  flesh,  and  pronounce  him  to  be 
unclean : for  the  raw  flesh  is  unclean  : 
it  is  a leprosy. 

16  Or  if  the  raw  flesh  turn  again, 
and  be  changed  unto  white,  he  shall 
come  unto  the  priest  \ 

17  And  the  priest  shall  see  him: 
and,  behold,  if  the  plague  be  turned 
into  white ; then  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  clean-  that  hath  the  plague : 
he  is  clean. 

18  ^ The  flesh  also,  in  which,  even 
in  the  skin  thereof,  was  a boil,  and  is 
healed. 


unless  the  ulceration  proved  to  be  but  tempo- 
rary. 

12.  the  leprosy]  The  Hebrew  word  t%a- 
ra'ath  appears  to  be  here  used  with  the  same 
sort  of  breadth  as  Leprosy^  in  modern  times, 
and  Vitiligo^  in  ancient  times.  The  disease 
indicated  appears  to  be  that  now  known  as 
Lepra  •vulgaris^  the  common  White  Leprosy, 
or  Dry  Tetter.  Prel.  Note.  § ii.,  § vi.  Cf.  on 
•v.  39.  It  first  shews  itself  in  reddish  pimples, 
the  surface  of  which  becomes  white  and  scaly, 
spreading  in  a circular  form  till  they  meet 
each  other  and  cover  large  patches  of  the 
body.  It  scarcely  affects  the  general  health, 
and  for  the  most  part  disappears  of  itself, 
though  it  often  lasts  for  years. 

from  his  head  e'ven  to  his  foot^  'wheresoenser 
the  priest  looketh]  The  first  appearance  of 
the  Lepra  vulgaris  may  take  place  in  any 
part  of  the  body,  especially  however  at  the 
larger  joints  of  the  limbs;  but  the  spots  of 
Elephantiasis  are  almost  always  first  seen  on 
those  parts  which  are  habitually  exposed,  the 
face,  ears  and  hands. 

16.  ra^du  flesh]  See  on  10.  The  exist- 
ence of  an  open  sore  on  the  white  surface 
might,  it  would  seem,  prove  to  be  either  the 
ulceration  of  Elephantiasis  complicated  with 
the  milder  disease,  as  described  in  i;.  14,  or  a 
sore  of  a common  sort  that  would  soon  heal. 

Special  cases  of  Leprosy.  18 — 28. 

The  first  case  of  this  sort  is  spoken  of  in 
•v'v.  18 — 23.  The  Hebrewwordj/^^-r/jJ;/  (‘2’.  18), 
rendered  ‘“boil,”  is  of  doubtful  origin.  The 
most  probable  Hindering  of  it  here  and  in 
most  other  places  is  ulcer:  so  the  LXX.  and 


19  And  in  the  place  of  the  boil 
there  be  a white  rising,  or  a bright 
spot,  white,  and  somewhat  reddish, 
and  it  be  shewed  to  the  priest ; 

20  And  if,  when  the  priest  seeth 
it,  behold,  it  be  in  sight  lower  than 
the  skin,  and  the  hair  thereof  be 
turned  white;  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  unclean : it  is  a plague 
of  leprosy  broken  out  of  the  boil. 

21  But  if  the  priest  look  'on  it, 
and,  behold,  there  he  no  white  hairs 
therein,  and  if  it  he  not  lower  than 
the  skin,  but  be  somewhat  dark ; then 
the  priest  shall  shut  him  up  seven 
days : 

22  And  if  it  spread  much  abroad 
in  the  skin,  then  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  unclean : it  is  a plague. 

23  But  if  the  bright  spot  stay  in 
his  place,  and  spread  not,  it  is  a 


Vulg.  It  is  applied  (i)  to  the  “boil”  of 
Hezekiah,  which  might  have  been  an  abscess 
or  carbuncle.  Is.  xxxviii.  21;  2 K.  xx.  7; 
(2)  to  the  “ boils”  of  Job,  Job  ii.  7,  8 ; (3)  to 
the  “boils  breaking  forth  with  blains”  (i.e. 
pustules)  of  the  Egyptians,  Ex.  ix.  9 ; and 
(4)  to  “the  botch  of  Egypt,”  Deut.  xxviii. 
27,  35.  In  these  latter  instances,  but  espe- 
cially in  the  second  and  fourth,  it  would  seem 
highly  probable  that  the  word  expresses  the 
ulcers  of  Elephantiasis:  so  Gesenius  and  Ftirst 
As  Elephantiasis  has  certainly  been  from  early 
times  a characteristic  disease  of  Egypt,  see 
Note  on  xiii.  45,  46,  § i.,  and  as  its  nature  is 
so  dreadful,  it  seems  most  likely  that  it  should 
be  the  first  named  of  the  diseases  to  which 
the  Egyptians  were  subject  in  such  a list  as 
that  given  in  Deut.  xxviii.  27.  Admitting  this, 
there  is  probably  reference  to  the  special  action 
of  AniEsthetic  Elephantiasis,  “the  Joint  evil,” 
in  T’.  35  of  the  same  chapter:  “The  Lord 
shall  smite  thee  in  the  knees,  and  in  the  legs, 
with  a sore  botch  that  cannot  be  healed.” 

19 — 21.  The  passage  appears  to  refer  to 
one  of  the  ordinary  modes  in  which  Elephan- 
tiasis is  now  known  to  reappear  when  tubercles, 
bullx'  or  glossy  spots,  white  or  reddish,  ap- 
pear in  the  scar  of  an  ulcer.  Prel.  Note,  § iv. 
5,  6,  § V.  2. 

20.  L^er  thaji  the  skin]  Rather,  reach- 
ing below  the  scarf  skin.  See  on -z;.  2. 
The  same  correction  should  be  made  in  ‘v.  21. 
As  compared  with  the  word  deeper.,  3,  4, 
(See.,  the  word  lo^joer  might  justly  represent 
the  Hebrew.  It  would  seem,  however,  that 
no  distinction  of  meaning  is  intended. 

boil]  Rather,  ulcer.  Wd-).  shechln. 


V.  2^ 29-]  ' 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


burning  boil;  and  the  priest  shall 
pronounce  him  clean. 

24  H Or  if  there  be  any  flesh,  in 
t Hcb.  the  skin  whereof  there  is  ^ a hot  burn- 

ing,  and  the  quick  Jiesh  that  burneth 
have  a white  bright  spot,  somewhat 
reddish,  or  white ; 

25  Then  the  priest  shall  look  up- 
on it : and,  behold,  if  the  hair  in 
the  bright  spot  be  turned  white,  and 
it  he  in  sight  deeper  than  the  skin  ; it 
is  a leprosy  broken  out  of  the  burn- 
ing; wherefore  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  unclean  : it  is  the  plague 
of  leprosy. 

26  But  if  the  priest  look  on  it, 
and,  behold,  there  be  no  white  hair 


in  the  bright  spot,  and  it  be  no  lower 
than  the  other  skin,  but  be  somewhat 
dark;  then  the  priest  shall  shut  him 
up  seven  days : 

27  And  the  priest  shall  look  upon 
him  the  seventh  day : and  if  it  be 
spread  much  abroad  in  the  skin,  then 
the  priest  shall  pronounce  him  un- 
clean : it  is  the  plague  of  leprosy. 

2-8  And  if  the  bright  spot  stay  in 
his  place,  and  spread  not  in  the  skin, 
but  it  be  somewhat  dark;  it  is  a 
rising  of  the  burning,  and  the  priest 
shall  pronounce  him  clean : for  it  is 
an  inflammation  of  the  burning. 

29  ^ If  a man  or  woman  have  a 
plague  upon  the  head  or  the  beard ; 


somewhat  darJf^  Rather,  somewhat  dim. 

22.  spread  much  abroad^  Rather,  ad- 
vance much.  See  on  7. 

plague~\  i.e.  the  stroke  of  leprosy.  Prel.  Note, 

§ n. 

23.  a hurnmg  boir\  Rather,  the  scar  of 
the  ulcer;  literall  y , the  burn  of  the  ulcer. 

The  second  special  case  of  Leprosy  is  spoken 
of  in  "vu,  24 — 28.  The  main  question  here 
is,  what  is  denoted  by  “a  hot  burning”? 
The  Hebrew  is  literally  rendered  in  the  mar- 
gin. The  greater  number  of  commentators, 
Jewish  as  well  as  Christian,  take  it  as  a burn, 
,in  the  simple  sense  of  the  word.  Some  sup- 
pose it  to  be  a Carbuncle.  It  may  perhaps  de- 
note a place  previously  affected  by  any  sort  of 
inllammation  resulting  either  from  disease  or 
injury.  Such  a spot  may  be  either  more  liable 
to  leprous  development,  or  liable  to  be  affect- 
ed by  the  disease  in  such  a peculiar  vray  as  to 
claim  distinct  notice.  It  should  be  observed 
that  in  each  of  the  two  special  cases  which 
have  been  mentioned,  only’ a single  period  of 
quarantine  is  appointed,  instead  of  the  two 
periods  which  were  provided  when  the  disease 
came  in  its  usual  course. 

24.  The  sense  of  this  verse  in  accordance 
with  the  view  we  have  given  might  be  thus 
expressed : — Or  if  there  be  flesh  of  which  the 
skin  has  been  affected  by  senjere  inflammation., 
and  the  sore  of  the  inflammation  has  become  a 
glossy  spot,  somewhat  reddish  or  white. 

26.  no  lower  than  the  other  skin\  The 
word  other  is  here  out  of  place.  The  Hebrew 
is  the  same  as  in  n).  20,  and  means,  not  be- 
neath the  scarf  skin. 

somewhat  darki  K-ather,  somewhat  dim. 
See  on  2;  6. 

27.  spread  much  abroad]  Rather,  have 
made  much  advance.  See  on  2'.  5. 


28.  This  verse  might  perhaps  be  rendered: 

■ — -And  if  the  glossy  spot  continues  unchanged 
and  makes  no  ad’vance  in  the  skin,  and  is  rather 
indistinct  (see  on  2;.  6),  it  is  the  mark  of  the 
inflamyy^ation,  and  the  priest  shall  pronounce  him 
clean,  for  it  is  the  (ynere)  hurt  of  inflammation. 

The  Leprosy  upoji  the  Head  or  Chin.  29 — 37. 

The  Leprosy  which  made  its  appearance 
amongst  the  hair  of  the  head  or  of  the  beard, 
was  formally  distinguished  from  the  Leprosy 
in  other  parts  of  the  body  (see  also  ch.  xiv. 
54),  and  was  called  jiethek,  which  our.  trans- 
lators have  rendered  a scall,  or  a dry  scall. 
As  scall  is  the  name  for  another  disease  not 
allied  to  the  Leprosy,  it  would  have  been  bet- 
ter to  retain  the  original  word.  The  chief 
features  of  the  disease  are  the  same  as  those  of 
ordinary  Elephantiasis,  the  morbid  affection  of 
the  entire  depth  of  the  skin  and  the  yellow  or 
whitish  hairs.  It  is  a true  Elephantiasis,  and 
is  recognised  by  modern  writers  under  the 
name  of  Morphuta  alopeciata,  or  the  F ox  mange. 
It  usually  appears  in  one  or  two  circular 
patches,  from  which  the  hair  falls  off  either 
suddenly  or  by  degrees.  The  hair  sometimes 
appears  again  of  its  natural  colour,  and  the 
disease  is  then  subdued.  See  2;.  37.  But  if  the 
hair  returns,  as  it  often  does,  while  the  disease 
is  advancing,  it  appears  whitish  and  impoverish- 
ed. A common  seat  of  the  nethek  in  adult 
men  is  the  chin.  It  is  sometimes  permanent 
for  life,  but  it  more  frequently  pass  s away 
after  a period  of  months  or  years  (Wilson, 
p.  383).  The  ancients  called  this  form  of 
Elephantiasis,  Lichen.  Pliny  uses  the  specific 
name,  Mentagra,  i.e.  the  beard  evil,  and  de- 
scribes an  aggravated  variety  of  it,  which  he 
says  first  appeared  in  the  beard,  often  spread 
over  the  face,  and  at  times  over  the  breast  and 
hands.  It  was  brought  into  Italy  from  Asia 
in  the  time  of  Tibeiius.  The  Lichin  men- 


lO 


68 

30  Then  the  priest  shall  see  the 
plague : and,  behold,  if  it  be  in  sight 
deeper  than  the  skin ; and  there  be 
in  it  a yellow  thin  hair;  then  the 
priest  shall  pronounce  him  unclean : 
it  is  a dry  scall,  even  a leprosy  upon 
the  head  or  beard. 

31  And  if  the  priest  look  on  the 
plague  of  the  scall,  and,  behold,  it 
be  not  in  sight  deeper  than  the  skin, 
and  that  there  is  no  black  hair  in 
it;  then  the  priest  shall  shut  up  him 
that  hath  the  plague  of  the  scall  seven 
days : 

32  And  in  the  seventh  day  the 
priest  shall  look  on  the  plague : and, 
behold,  if  the  scall  spread  not,  and 
there  be  in  it  no  yellow  hair,  and 
the  scall  be  not  in  sight  deeper  than 
the  skin; 

33  He  shall  be  shaven,  but  the 
scall  shall  he  not  shave  ; and  the 
priest  shall  shut  up  him  that  hath  the 
scall  seven  days  more : 

34  And  in  the  seventh  day  the 
priest  shall  look  on  the  scall  : and. 


[v.  30—40. 

behold,  if  the  scall  be  not  spread  in 
the  skin,  nor  be  in  sight  deeper  than 
the  skin ; then  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  clean : and  he  shall  wash 
his  clothes,  and  be  clean. 

35  But  if  the  scall  spread  much  in 
the  skin  after  his  cleansing; 

36  Then  the  priest  shall  look  on 
him : and,  behold,  if  the  scall  be 
spread  in  the  skin,  the  priest  shall 
not  seek  for  yellow  hair;  he  is  un- 
clean. 

37  But  if  the  scall  be  in  his  sight 
at  a stay,  and  that  there  is  black 
hair  grown  up  therein;  the  scall  is 
healed,  he  is  clean : and  the  priest 
shall  pronounce  him  clean. 

38  fl  If  a man  also  or  a v/oman 
have  in  the  skin  of  their  flesh  bright 
spots,  even  white  bright  spots ; 

39  Then  the  priest  shall  look : and, 

behold,  if  the  bright  spots  in  the  skin 
of  their  flesh  be  darkish  white ; it  is  a 
freckled  spot  that  groweth  in  the 
skin;  he  A clean.  tHeb. 

40  And  the  man  whose  ' hair  is 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


tioned  by  j^ischylus,  in  which  the  hair  round 
the  temples  turned  white,  was  probably  of  the 
same  kind,  still  more  aggravated,  and  was 
that  which  in  the  'time  of  iiischines  afflicted 
the  people  of  Delos,  .^^isch.  ‘ Choeph.’  276, 
Aischines,  ‘ Ep.’  i.,  Aretaeus,  p.  iL,  Plin. 

‘ H.  N.’  XXVI.  2. 

29.  a plague^  See  Prel.  Note,  ii. 

30.  if  it  be  hi  sight  deeper  than  the  s.kin^ 
if  it  appears  to  be  deeper  than  the 
scarf  skin.  See  on  -v.  5.  The  same  correc- 
tion is  required  in  'V‘tK  32,  34,  35,  36. 

a yellow  thin  hair~\  I'he  indefinite  article 
should  be  omitted.  See  on  v.  3. 

31.  there  is  no  black  hair  in  if]  More  pro- 
bably, there  is  no  yellow  hair  in  it. 
In  order  to  make  sense  with  the  context,  we 
must  either  (i)  change  the  copulative  con- 
junction into  an  adversative  one,  so  as  to 
read,  if  the  spot  is  not  seen  to  be  deeper  than 
the  cuticle  and  yet  there  is  no  black  hair  in 
it.  'Phis  would  imply  that  the  presence  of 
dark  hair  (see  on  2,-.  3)  would  be  needful  in 
order  to  save  the  person  from  (juarantine  (Dru- 
sius,  several  Jewish  authorities,  De  Wette, 
l ierxheimer);  or  (2)  omit  the  negative  before 
black.  'Phis  would  mean  that  the  person 
should  be  shut  up  on  account  of  the  suspi- 
cious aspect  of  the  spot,  although  it  might 
appear  only  on  the  surface  and  the  hair  on  it 


had  not  yet  changed  colour  (Vulgate);  or  (3) 
Ye2.(X  yellow  instead  of  black  (Septuagint,  Lu- 
ther, Knobel,  Keil).  This  last  gives  the 
best  sense,  and  it  is  likely  that  the  LXX.  and* 
the  old  Italic  represent  the  original  reading  of 
the  Hebrew. 

32.  We  must  infer  that  if  the  diseased 
spot  had  advanced  at  the  end  of  the  first  week, 
the  person  was  immediately  pronounced  un- 
clean. See  on  nj.  7. 

37.  be  in  his  sight  at. a stay]  does  not 
alter  in  appeafance. 

The  Freckled  spot.  38,  39. 

39.  freckled  spot]  The  original  word, 
bohak^  is  said  to  be  still  used  by  the  Arabs  for 
a siq)erficial  skin  disease,  neither  dangerous 
nor  contagious.  It  appears  that  the  Eastern 
and  Southern  Arabs  call  it  baras^  while  they 
call  Elephantiasis  djedani.  Palgrave,  Vol.  n. 
p.  34.  Burton,  Vol.  ii.  p.  182.  The  LXX. 
use  a\^os  in  this  place.  Prel.  Note,  vi.  If 
IK  12  refers  to  the  Lepra  vulgaris,  as  seems 
most  probable,  the  Hebrew  bohak  may  denote 
some  kind  of  Eczema.,  a skin  disease  of  a some- 
what similar  external  character.  (Wilson, 
p.  165.) 

These  verses  (38,  39)  seem  to  intrude  be- 
tween the  Leprosy  of  the  hairy  head  and  that 
of  the  bald  head.  They  would  seem  more  in 
their  natural  place  between  'vu.  17,  18. 


V.  41—5°-] 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


509 


fallen  off  his  head,  he  is  bald ; yet  is 
he  clean. 

41  And  he  that  hath  his  hair 
fallen  off  from  the  part  of  his  head 
toward  his  face,  he  is  forehead  bald : 
yet  is  he  clean. 

42  And  if  there  be  in  the  bald 
head,  or  bald  forehead,  a white  red- 
dish sore ; it  is  a leprosy  sprung  up  in 
his  bald  head,  or  his  bald  forehead. 

43  Then  the  priest  shall  look  up- 
on it : and,  behold,  if  the  rising  of 
the  sore  he  white  reddish  in  his  bald 
head,  or  in  his  bald  forehead,  as  the 
leprosy  appeareth  in  the  skin  of  the 
flesh ; 

44  He  is  a leprous  man,  he  is  un- 
clean : the  priest  shall  pronounce  him 
utterly  unclean  ; his  plague  is  in  his 
head. 

45  And  the  leper  in  whom  the 
plague  /j,  his  clothes  shall  be  rent, 
and  his  head  bare,  and  he  shall  put 


a covering  upon  his  upper  lip,  and 
shall  cry,  Unclean,  unclean. 

46  All  the  days  wherein  the  plague 
shall  be  in  him  he  shall  be  defiled  ; 
he  is  unclean  : he  shall  dwell  alone  ; 

without  the  camp  shall  his  habita-  ^ Numb.  5 

tion  be.  2 Kings  15 

47  ^ The  garment  also  that  the 
plague  of  leprosy  is  in,  whether  it  be  a 
woollen  garment,  or  a linen  garment ; 

48  Whether  it  be  in  the  warp,  or 
woof ; of  linen,  or  of  woollen  ; whe- 
ther in  a skin,  or  in  any  ^ thing  made  t Heb. 
of  skin; 

,49  And  if  the  plague  be  greenish 
or  reddish  in  the  garment,  or  in  the 
skin,  either  in  the  warp,  or  in  the 
woof,  or  in  any  ^ thing  of  skin ; it  is  t Heb. 
a plague  of  leprosy,  and  shall  be  shewed  ifistrn- 
unto  the  priest : 

50  And  the  priest  shall  look  upon 
the  plague,  and  shut  up  it  that  hath  * 
the  plague  seven  days : 


The  Leprosy  in  the  Bald  head.  40 — 44. 

Baldness  was  no  mark  of  unclean  disease  : 
but  when  signs  which  might  be  those  of 
Elephantiasis  appeared  in  a bald  head,  they 
were  to  be  dealt  with  as  in  other  cases.  Ac- 
cording to  Jewish  tradition,  there  were  two 
periods  of  quarantine  assigned  for  this  form 
of  Leprosy  as  in  that  of  the  hairy  head. 
Mishna,  ‘ Negaim,’  x.  10. 

42.  sorel  Rather,  stroke.  The  word 
here  and  in  nj.  43  is  nega\  which  elsewhere 
in  this  and  the  next  chapter  is  rendered 
plague.  Prel.  Note  ii. 

43.  rising  of  the  sene']  Rather  rising  of 
the  stroke.  See  Prel.  Note  iv.  4. 

The  la-jj  for  the  Confirmed  Leper.  45,  46. 

45.  The  leper  was  to  carry  about  with 
him  the  usual  signs  of  mourning  for  the  dead. 
Cf.  Ezek.  xxiv.  1 7 ; Lev.  x.  6.  Ke  was  to 
mourn  for  himself  as  one  over  whom  death 
had  already  gained  the  victory.  See  Note  at 
the  end  of  the  chap. 

his  head  hare]  Rather,  “his  head  neg- 
lected.” See  on  Lev.  x.  6. 

Unclean.,  unclean]  Cf.  Lam.  iv.  14,  15. 

46.  dwell  alone]  More  properly,  dwell 
apart;  that  is,  separated  from  the  people. 

without  the  camp]  Cf.  Num.  v.  2 — 4, 
xii.  14,  15  ; 2 K.  vii.  3,  xv.  5 ; Lukexvii.  12. 
According  to  the  Mishna,  a leper  polluted 
everything  in  the  house  which  he  entered. 
A separate  space  used  to  be  provided  for 


lepers  in  the  Synagogues  (‘  Kelim,’  i.  4 ; ‘ Ne- 
gaim,’ XIII.  II,  12). 

Leprosy  in  Clothing  and  Leather. 

Chapter  XIII.  47 — 59. 

47.  The  garment]  Rather,  The  clothing, 
in  a general  sense  of  material.  The  word  should 
be  thus  rendered  throughout  this  section.  The 
ordinary  dress  of  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness 
was  probably  like  that  of  the  Egyptians  de- 
scribed by  Herodotus  (ii.  81),  consisting  of  a 
linen  tunic  with  a fringe  (Num.  xv.  38)  and 
a woollen  cloak  or  blanket  thrown  on  in 
colder  weather.  Wool  and  flax  were  the 
great  materials  for  clothing  also  in  later  times 
(Hos.  ii.  9 ; Prov.  xxxi.  13).  They  could  not 
be  spun  together.  See  on  xix.  19. 

47,  48,  The  meaning  of  these  verses  may 
be  thus  given  : — And  the  clothing  m which  there 
is  a stroke  of  Leprosy,  whether  the  stroke  is  m 
clothing  of  wool  or  in  clothing  of  linen;  or  in  yarn 
for  warp  or  in  yarn  for  woof  either  for  linen 
clothing  or  for  woollen  clothing;  or  in  a skin  of 
leather  or  in  any  article  made  of  leather. — The 
warp  and  the  woof  here  and  in  nsns.  49,  51,  52, 
53,  56,  cannot  mean,  as  is  implied  in  our  ver- 
sion, the  constituent  parts  of  woven  cloth. 
The  original  words  would  as  well  denote 
prepared for  warp  and  yarn  prepared  for  woof 
and  the  connection  evidently  requires  this 
sense.  So  De  Wette,  Knobel,  Keil,  Wogue. 

■ 49,  51,  53.  either  in  the  warp]  This  ex- 
pression in  all  these  verses  should  be,  “ or  in  the 


570 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


[''•  51—59- 


51  And  he  shall  look  on  the  plague 
on  the  seventh  day : if  the  plague  be 
spread  in  the  garment,  either  in  the 
warp,  or  in  the  woof,  or  in  a skin,  or 
in  any  work  that  is  made  of  skin ; the 
plague  is  a fretting  leprosy;  it  is  un- 
clean. 

52  Fie  shall  therefore  burn  that 
garment,  whether  warp  or  v/oof,  in 
woollen  or  in  linen,  or  any  thing  of 
skin,  wherein  the  plague’  is : for  it  is 
a fretting  leprosy;  it  shall  be  burnt  in 
the  lire. 

53  And  if  the  priest  shall  look,  and, 
behold,  the  plague  be  not  spread  in 
the  garment,  either  in  the  warp,  or  in 
the  woof,  or  in  any  thing  of  skin ; 

54  I'hen  the  priest  shall  command 
that  they  wash  the  thing  wherein  the 
plague  is^  and  he  shall  shut  it  up  seven 
days  more : 

55  And  the  priest  shall  look  on  the 
plague,  after  that  it  is  washed : and, 
behold,  if  the  plague  have  not  changed 
his  colour,  and  the  plague  be  not 


spread ; it  is  unclean ; thou  shalt  burn 
it  in  the  fire ; it  is  fret  whether  tHeb. 

it  be  bare  within  or  without.  hef aS in 

56  And  if  the  priest  look,  and,  be- 
hold,  the  plague  he  somewhat 

after  the  washing  of  it;  then  he  shalww^/ 
rend  it  out  of  the  garment,  or  out  of 
the  skin,  or  out  of  the  warp,  or  out  of 
the  woof : 

57  And  if  it  appear  still  in  the  gar- 
• ment,  either  in  the  warp,  or  in  the 
woof,  or  in  any  thing  of  skin;  it  is  2i 
spreading  plague:  thou  shalt  burn  that 
wherein  the  plague  is  with  fire. 

58  And  the  garment,  either  warp, 
or  woof,  or  whatsoever  thing  of  skin 
it  be^  which  thou  shalt  wash,  if  the 
plague  be  departed  from  them,  then 
it  shall  be  washed  the  second  time, 
and  shall  be  clean.  • 

59  This  is  the  law  of^he  plague  of 
leprosy  in  a garment  of  woollen  or 
linen,  either  in  the  warp,  or  woof,  or 
any  thing  of  skins,  to  pronounce  it 
clean,  or  to  pronounce  it  unclean. 


wai*p.”  In  the  is  coordinate  with  in  the 

clothing,  &c.  See  preceding  note. 

52.  For  the  same  reason,  in  this  verse, 
“whether  warp”  should  be  “or  warp.” 

51.  a fretting  leprosy'l  /.<?.  a malignant  or 
corroding  Leprosy.  What  was  the  nature  of 
the  Leprosy  in  clothing,  w^hich  produced  green- 
ish or  reddish  spots,  cannot  be  precisely  deter- 
mined. It  was  most  likely  destructive  mil- 
dew, perhaps  of  more  than  one  kind.  Knobel 
and  others  are  inclined  to  connect  it  with  stains 
from  leprous  ulcers  in  the  flesh.  But  there 
are  no  known  facts  to  confirm  this. 


56.  some^vhat  darli]  Rather  “somewhat 
faint.” 

57,  58,  59.  either,  in  each  of  these  verses, 
should  be  or.  See  on  -vu.  47,  49. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  no  religious  or 
symbolical  rite  is  prescribed  for  Leprosy  in 
clothing.  The  priest  had  only  to  decide 
whether  the  process  of  decay  was  at  work  in 
the  article  presented  to  him  and  to  pronounce 
accordingly.  Compare  the  Leprosy  in  houses, 
xiv.  33— 53- 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xiii.  45,  46. 


On  the  Treatment  of  Lepers  and 

THE  GROUNDS  OF  THE  LAWS  RESPECT- 
ING THEM. 

I.  The  Leprosy  in  Egypt.  II.  The  ^vay  in 
nejhich  Lepers  have  been  regarded.  III. 
Their  treatment  accorditig  to  the  I.avu. 
IV.  The  Leprosy  in  Europe.  V.  Segrega- 
tion of  Lepers.  V I . Its  probable  effects. 
VII.  Objects  of  the  I.a^v  respecting 
Leprosy.  V 1 1 1 . The  Lavj  vuas  not  cruel. 

1.  FpypI  regarded  in  ancient  times  as 
the  great  seat  of  Idephantiasis.  Lucretius 
says  that  the  disease  originated  on  the  banks 
of  the  Nile,  and  Pliny  repeats  the  statement, 


calling  Egypt  “ genet rix  talium  vitiorumh” 
Vvte  know  that  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  lived 
upon  nearly  the  same  food  as  the  Egyptians 
(Num.  xi.  5;  cf.  Prel.  Note,  § xi.).  We 
thus  seem  to  have  reason  to  infer  that 
the  disease  must  have  prevailed  considerably 
amongst  the  Hebrews  while  they  were  in 
E-gypt.  I'he  legend  repeated  in  a later  age, 
which  connects  the  Leprosy  with  the  departure 
of  the  Israelites’*',  may  not  be  w'holly  with- 

1 Lncret.  vi.  1112;  Plin.  ‘H.N.’  xxvi.  3,  5. 

2 Diod.  Sic.  Vol.  ii.  p.  542;  Tacitus,  ‘Hist.’ 
v.  3,  4;  Justin  xxxvi.  2;  Joseph.  ‘Ant.’  ill. 
II.  § 4;  Choc-remon  and  Manetho,  quoted  by 
Josepluis,  ‘Cont.  Ap.’  i.  26,  32,  34. 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


571 


out  an  element  of  truth  in  that  form  in 
which  it  is  given  by  Manetho.  The  king  of 
Egypt  is  said  to  have  driven  out  from  the 
country  a multitude  of  Egyptian  lepers  along 
with  the  Israelites.  If  any  such  expulsion 
of  lepers  took  place  about  the  time  of  the 
Exodus,  it  seems  very  likely  that  a number 
of  them  joined  the  “ mixed  multitude,”  which 
travelled  into  the  Wilderness  along  with  the 
Israelites  (Ex.  xii.  38).  That  the  people  were 
in  danger  from  Leprosy,  and  were  very  familiar 
with  it,  cannot  be  doubted,  from  the  pro- 
minence which  Moses  has  given  to  it  in  the 
Law. 

11.  The  separation  of  Lepers  from  the  fa- 
miliar intercourse  of  social  life  has  been  com- 
mon to  nearly  all  nations  and  ages.  The  effect 
of  the  malady  in  disfiguring  its  victims,  with 
the  dread  of  contagion,  whether  justly  founded 
or  not  (see  Prel.  Note  to  ch.  xiii.  § xii.),  might 
sufficiently  account  for  this  practice.  But  at 
the  same  time  must  be  noticed  the  all  but 
universal  impression  that  the  Leprosy,  above 
all  other  diseases,  comes  upon  man  as  an  irre- 
sistible stroke  of  superhuman  power,  either  in 
the  way  of  punishment  for  personal  sin  or 
of  an  infliction  with  some  definite  purpose. 
This  natural  suggestion  was  confirmed  and 
realized  upon  several  occasions  in  the  history 
of  the  Israelites.  A stroke  of  Leprosy  was 
the  mark  of  the  divine  displeasure  at  the  slow 
faith  of  Moses,  at  the  contumacy  of  Miriam, 
at  the  dishonesty  of  Gehazi,  and  at  the  im- 
pious presumption  of  Uzziah.  One  of  the 
denunciations  against  Joab,  on  account  of  the 
death  of  Abner,  was  that  his  children  should 
be  lepers^. 

The  ancient  Persians  did  not  allow  their 
lepers  to  enter  a city  nor  to  have  any 
dealings  with  other  men,  and  they  excluded 
foreign  lepers  from  their  country.  According 
to  Herodotus,  they  regarded  the  disease  as 
a penalty  for  some  offence  committed  against 
the  Sun : according  to  the  Zendavesta,  it  was 
a scourge  sent  by  Ahriman.  They  had  forms 
of  prayer  to  be  used  by  the  devout  when  they 
happened  to  meet  a leper  2.  The  Greek  writers 
speak  of  Leprosy  as  an  infliction  from  Phoebus 'k 
Aretaeus  says  that  lepers  were  avoided  by  all 
men,  even  their  nearest  relations,  and  that  most 
of  them  withdrew  into  solitudes  (p.  183).  The 
Arabs  will  not  sleep  near  a leper,  nor  eat  with 
him,  nor  contract  marriage  with  a family  in 
which  the  Leprosy  is  known  to  exist.  (Burck- 
hardt,  quoted  by  Knobel.)  In  China  the  disease 
is  commonly  spoken  of  as  a retribution  for  sin, 
and  lepers  are  excluded  from  society  as  objects 

^ Ex.  iv.  6;  2 K.  V.  27;  2 Chron.  xxvi.  iQ, 
20;  2 S.  iii.  29;  Deut.  xxiv.  8,  xxviii.  27,  with 
note  on  Lev.  xiii.  18. 

^ Herodot.  i.  138:  Ctesias,  ‘Pers.’  4r,  v.dth 
Biihr's  note,  p.  181. 

^ .Tschylus,  ‘ Choeph.’ 276  ; Tischines,  ‘Ep.’ 


of  disgust  and  aversion:  they  often  commit 
suicide,  and  there  is  a proverb  common  amongst 
Chinese  lepers,  “to  die  is  to  become  clean 
intermarriage  with  leprous  families  is  forbid- 
den, though  it  sometimes  takes  place.  In 
Japan,  Madagascar  and  New  Zealand,  the 
disease  is  looked  upon  in  the  same  light,  and 
lepers  are  treated  in  nearly  the  same  manner k 

III.  We  are  told  in  the  Law  that  the 
lepers,  during  the  period  of  their  uncleanness, 
were  to  dwell  apart,  and  to  have  their  habita- 
tion without  the  camp.  Though  thus  ex- 
cluded from  general  intercourse  with  society, 
it  is  not  likely  that  they  ceased  to  be  objects  of 
sympathy  and  kindness,  such  as  they  now  are 
in  those  Christian  and  Moslem  countries  in 
which  the  Leprosy  prevails.  That  they  asso- 
ciated together  in  the  Holy  Land,  as  they  do 
at  present,  is  evident  from  2 K.  vii.  3 ; Luke 
xvii.  12.  It  has  been  conjectured  that  a habi- 
tation was  provided  for  them  outside  of  Jeru- 
salem, on  the  hill  Gareb,  which  is  mentioned 
only  in  Jer.  xxxi.  40.  It  is  mostly  identified 
with  Bezetha  (Gesenius,  Winer),  the  northern 
hill,  which  was  brought  within  the  city  by  the 
wall  built  by  Agrippa.  The  name  Gareb 
means,  “the  scabby  hill;”  and,  assumJng  this 
to  denote  the  hill  of  the  lepers,  it  is  supposed 
to  be  appropriately  associated  with  Goath  (on 
rather  insecure  ground  identified  with  Gol- 
gotha), “the  hill  of  the  dead.”  and  Tophet, 
“ the  valley  ot  the  dead  bodies,”  as  making  up 
the  three  polluted  spots  that  were  to  be  purged 
and  included  within  the  limits  of  the  reno- 
vated Holy  City,  according  to  the  vision  of 
Jeremiah 

IV.  A few  facts  from  the  history  of  the 
Leprosy  in  Europe  will  not  be  out  of  place. 
Some  of  the  varieties  of  Elephantiasis  were 
known  in  Greece  m ‘the  fourth  century  A.C., 
and  probably  in  the  fifth.  But  the  disease 
appears  not  to  have  made  its  way  into  western 
Europe  till  the  time  of  Pompey,  when  it  was 
brought  into  Italy  from  Egypt.  It  is  said  to 
have  disappeared  soon  afterwards,  but  it  is 
likely  that  it  lingered  on  from  this  time  with- 
out spreading  much  ®.  A canon  of  the  Council 
of  Cornpiegne,  a.d.  759,  allows  Leprosy  to  be  a 
ground  for  divorce  (Fleury).  During  the  Cru- 
sades, in  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries,  the 
disease  appears  to  have  spread  all  over  Europe. 
At  this  lime  the  public  care  of  lepers  was  left 
exclusively  to  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  7. 
At  Constantinople,  in  the  twelfth  century, 

‘ Replies  to  the  Leprosy  Committee/ pp.  76, 
79,  221,  223. 

^ Ifengstenberg,  ‘ Christology,’  Vol.  li.  p.  45c. 

® zEschyl.  ‘Choeph.’  271  ; ALschines,  ‘Epist.’ 
I.;  Pliny,  ‘H.  N.’  xxvi.  1—5;  Celsus,  ill.  25. 

7 After  the  rise  of  the  Franciscan  Order,  they 
made  lepers  the  object  of  their  particular  care. 
St  Francis  himself  expressed  his  thankfulness 
that  he  had  overcome  his  repugnance  to  come 
into  contact  with  Leprosy.  ‘ Monum.  Francisc.’ 
Appendix,  p.  562. 


572 


LEVITICUS.  XIII. 


lepers  were  admitted  into  the  churches,  and 
mixed  in  social  life  without  restraints  But  in 
other  places  they  were  shut  out  of  the  churches, 
and  did  not  mix  in  society.  At  the  third 
Lateran  Council,  a.d.  1179,  decreed, 

that  wherever  there  was  a sufficient  number 
of  lepers  they  should  have  a church,  a priest, 
and  a cemetery  of  their  own,  and  that  lepers 
should  be  exempted  from  paying  tithe 
(Fleury).  A similar  canon  was  passed  at 
the  Synod  of  Westminster,  a.d.  i:ioo2.  In 
the  fifteenth  century  an  ecclesiastical  form  was 
used,  by  which  lepers  were  cut  off  from 
general  intercourse,  and  were  bound  to  wear 
a peculiar  dress.  On  this  ground,  according 
to  a canon  passed  at  Nougarot,  in  Armagnac, 
A.D.  1290,  they  could  not  be  brought  before 
lay  tribunals  (Fleury).  When  a monk  was 
stricken  with  Leprosy  funeral  obsequies  were 
performed  over  him  in  the  convent  chapel,  and 
he  was  taken  in  a sort  of  funeral  procession 
to  the  abode  of  his  relations  (Ducange,  s.  Le- 
prosi).  In  England  the  Leprosy  was  common 
from  the  tenth  century  to  the  beginning  of 
the  sixteenth -k  Leper  homes  were  numerous, 
but  as  most  of  them  were  found  to  be  empty 
in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.  they  were  destroy- 
ed, or  turned  to  some  other  purpose-.  The 
disease  lingered  longer  in  Scotland.  A thanks- 
giving was  celebrated  in  Shetland  in  1742,  on 
account  of  the  disappearance  of  the  Leprosy  in 
the  islands;  but  a Shetland  leper  survived  in 
Edinburgh  till  1798k  On  the  continent  of 

^ Balsamon,  ap.  Siiicer,  s.  K€wp6s. 

^Johnson’s  ‘Canons,’  Vol.  ii.  p.  91,  edit. 
1851. — A small  opening  which  is  found  in  some 
old  churches  near  the  altar  has  been  supposed  to 
have  been  used  to  hand  out  the  consecrated  ele- 
ments to  leprous  communicants,  as  they  knelt 
outside.  But  this  matter  is  involved  in  doubt. 
See  ‘Archaeological  Journal,’  Vol.  iv.  p.  314. 

^ The  gradual  disappearance  of  the  disease  in 
England  may  be  curiously  traced  in  our  litera- 
ture. In  Lydgate’s  ‘Testament  and  Complaint 
of  Creseide,’  published  in  Speght’s  and  other 
early  editions  of  Chaucer,  the  most  striking  fea- 
tures of  Islephantiasis  are  described  in  clear  and 
graphic  terms,  and  Creseide  has  to  dwell  as  “a 
lazarous  ” in  a “leper  lodge,”  and  to  go  about 
begging  with  “a  cup  and  clapper.”  (SeeNares’ 

‘ Clossary,’ s.  Clapdish.)  The  writer  must  have 
been  familiar  with  what  he  describes.  Shak- 
speare  speaks  of  the  Leprosy,  but  applies  the 
name  to  a different  disease.  Milton  does  not 
mention  it,  even  in  that  terrible  vision  of  the 
diseases  to  come  upon  mankind  which  Michael 
sets  before  Adam.  ‘ P.  L.’  xi.  470  sq. 

Tlie  largest  leper  house  in  England  is  said  to 
have  given  tlie  name  to  tlie  village  of  Burton- 
lazars  in  Leicestershire.  I'here  Avere  six  in  Lon- 
don ; of  which  one,  according  to  Pennant,  occu- 
pied the  site  of  St  James’s  palace.  Dugdale 
has  given  a list  of  eiglity-five  in  different  parts  of 
I'higland  ; but  his  list  is  far  from  complete. 

® .Simp  on,  ‘Antiquarian  Notices  of  Leprosy,’ 
quoted  by  Wilson. 


Europe  lepers  became  less  numerous  from  the 
fifteenth  century,  but  the  disease  maintained 
its  ground  in  the  northern  maritime  parts.  In 
1641  Evelyn  saw  “divers  leprous  poor  crea- 
tures dwelling  in  solitary  huts,”  between  Delf 
and  the  Hague,  who  were  supported  by 
charity®.  It  would  seem  that  in  Iceland,  and 
on  the  coast  of  Norway,  Elephantiasis  has 
rather  increased  during  the  present  century; 
and  the  Anaesthetic  form  is  more  frequent 
there  than  elsewhere,  unless  some  parts  of 
India  may  be  excepted.  The  disease  appears  to 
be  slowly  disappearing  in  the  south  of  Spain 

V.  The  countries  in  Avhich  the  Leprosy  is 
known  to  have  prevailed  for  the  longest  period 
are  Egypt  and  Syria.  No  provision  appears  to 
have  been  made  in  Egypt  for  the  segregation  of 
lepers.  In  Syria,  on  the  contrary,  leper  houses 
have  existed  from  time  immemorial,  and  it  can 
hardly  be  unreasonable  to  connect  this  fact 
with  the  operation  of  the  Law  of  Moses 
continued  from  age  to  age,  even  if  we  do 
not  rest  upon  the  conjecture  regarding  the  ap- 
propriation of  the  hill  Gareb  (see  § in.).  There 
are  at  present  such  homes  at  Jerusalem, 
Damascus,  Nablus  and  Ramleh.  VVe  are  in- 
debted to  Mr  Atkinson  for  the  following  par- 
ticulars relating  to  the  home  at  Jerusalem..  It 
consists  of  a row  of  huts  enclosed  by  a wall 
just  within  the  south  gate  of  the  city.  The 
lepers  are  maintained  in  part  by  a fund  left  by 
a pious  Mussulman,  but  mainly  by  alms. 
Parties  of  four  or  five  take  their  stand  to  beg 
at  certain  spots  outside  the  city.  Their  re- 
ceipts are  equally  shared.  One  of  their  num- 
ber is  appointed  as  Sheikh  by  the  Pacha  of  Jeru- 
salem to  transact  the  business  of  the  commu- 
nity. They  are  exempt  from  taxes.  They  are 
bound  to  reside  within  their  quarter,  but  they 
are  free  to  go  into  the  city  and  to  receive  visits 
from  their  friends.  The  distinction  between 
Christian  and  Moslem  is  wholly  disregarded 
in  their  intercourse  amongst  themselves  (cf. 
Luke  xvii.  16).  In  i860  the  home  contained 
24  males  and  9 females;  all  the  latter  were 
married  except  one.  One  of  the  women  was 
in  good  health,  and  appeared  to  have  suffered 
originally  only  from  the  Lepra  vulgaris;  but 
having  been  pronounced  a leper,  she  could  not 
be  liberated  owing  to  the  want  of  some  such 
provision  as  the  purification  of  the  Levitical 
Law.  Compare  the  case  of  Simon  the  leper. 
Matt.  xxvi.  6;  Mark  xiv.  3. 

In  modern  times,  since  Elephantiasis  has 
been  more  carefully  observed,  the  segregation 
of  lepers  has  become  general.  In  the  replies  to 
the  Committee  of  the  College  of  Physicians  it 

® ‘Dia’-y’  Vol.  i.  p.  18.  See  also  Howell’s 
‘Letters,’  Bk.  i.  § 2,  Letter  13. 

7 Dr  Webster’s  ‘Notes  on  the  Leper  Hospital 
at  Granada.’— There  is  a paper  on  the  ‘ Geogra- 
phical Distribution  of  Leprosy  at  the  present 
time,’ by  Dr ‘Gavin  Milroy,  in  the  Appendix  to 
the  ‘ Report  on  Leprosy  ’ by  the  College  of  Phy- 
sicians, p.  227. 


LEVITICUS.  XIIL 


573 


is  very  generally  recommended  as  the  best  way 
of  checking  the  advance  of  the  disease.  Some 
striking  facts  bearing  on  this  point  are  ad- 
duced, In  Madagascar,  the  law  has  been  re- 
laxed within  the  last  few  years  and  the  number 
of  lepers  has  increased.  The  law  has  been  strin- 
gently enforced  at  New  Brunswick  and  the 
number  has  diminished.  In  most  cases  in 
which  a diminished  prevalence  of  the  disease 
is  reported,  it  is  said  to  be  connected  with 
the  same  cause.  Segregation  has  however  been 
pronounced  by  the  Committee  as  most  pro- 
bably inoperative  in  checking  the  progress  of 
the  diseased  It  must  of  course  be  admitted 
that,  from  the  nature  of  the  malady,  the  re- 
sults of  any  agencies  to  resist  its  operation  can 
only  be  estimated  by  long  and  widely-spread 
observation, 

VI,  But  without  insisting  on  the  probability 
that  the  Leprosy  is,  under  certain  rare  condi- 
tions, contagious  2,  it  is  obvious  that  segrega- 
tion must  have  a salutary  tendency  in  check- 
ing intermarriage  between  lepers  and  others. 
The  Mosaic  Law  must  have  had  this  effect 
to  the  same  extent  as  the  modern  usage  of 
segregation.  We  know  however  that  the  dis- 
ease continued  to  infest  the  Hebrew  race  as 
long  as  they  dwelt  in  their  own  land,  though 
probably  in  a diminishing  degree.  It  is  worthy 
of  remark  that  the  Jews  at  this  day  are  much 
affected  by  Leprosy  in  the  West  Indies  and  in 
Egypt,  while  they  are  as  free  from  it  as  any 
race  in  Syria,  India  and  Europe,  But  what- 
ever may  be  the  state  of  existing  facts,  it  is 
difficult  to  imagine  that  the  exclusion  of  lepers 
from  common  intercourse,  maintained  during 
a very  long  period,  can  have  failed  to  help  in 
relieving  the  race  of  its  terrible  burden, 

VII,  Michaelis,  in  accordance  with  his 
general  views  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  regard- 
ed the  laws  respecting  Leprosy  as  based  entirely 
upon  sanitary  considerations  and  the  desira- 
bleness of  keeping  unsightly  objects  out  of 
the  way  of  common  concourse : and  on  this 
ground  he  takes  the  rites  enjoined  for  the  healed 
leper  as  meant  for  little  more  than  artificial 
sanctions  to  impress  the  minds  of  the  people. 
Such  a theory  is  neither  consistent  with  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  Legislator  nor  with  the  dignity  of 
the  Law.  But  some  writers  seem  to  have  erred 
in  a contrary  direction  by  denouncing  a regard 
to  sanitary  results  as  unworthy  of  “ an  am- 
bassador of  God.”  (Cf.  Note  after  ch.  xi.  § vi.) 
To  believe  that  the  Law  took  cognizance  of  the 
instincts  which  are  common  to  our  nature,  and 
that  its  enactments  were  such  as  tended  to 
promote  the  material  benefit  of  the  chosen 
people,  in  accordance  with  the  dictates  of 
sound  political  wisdom,  is  in  nowise  incon- 
sistent with  the  belief  that  it  also  comprised  a 
Spiritual  meaning  distinguishing  it  from  ordi- 
nary legislation.  The  teaching  of  that  which 

^ ‘Report,’  p.  vii. 

^ See  Preliminary  Note  to  ch.  xiii.,  § xil. 


is  invisible  by  means  of  visible  objects  cannot 
be  less  efficient  when  it  consists  in  an  appeal 
to  real  analogies  in  nature  than  when  the  sen- 
sible objects  of  illustration  are  arbitrarily 
chosen  on  account  of  their  mere  external  ap- 
pearance. The  healing  of  the  soul  by  the  for- 
giveness of  sins  was  revealed  by  the  Son  of 
God  through  the  visible  fact  of  the  heal- 
ing-of  the  body.  See  Matt.  ix.  2.  In  like 
manner,  the  proper  treatment  of  Leprosy  as  a 
disease  of  the  body  became  a type  of  the  pro- 
per treatment  of  sin,  not  through  a mere  re- 
semblance which  might  recommend  itself  to 
the  fancy,  but  through  the  Law  being  an  in- 
spired interpretation  of  the  Truths  of  nature. 

That  the  Leprosy  was  entitled  to  the 
distinction  with  which  it  was  treated  in 
the  ceremonial  Law  is  indeed  most  obvious. 
Disease  is  the  usher  of  death.  Every  sort  of 
disease  should  convey  a lesson  not  only  to  him 
that  suffers  from  it,  but  to  him  that  witnesses  it. 
But  it  is  evident  that  there  could  be  no  arrange- 
ment to  make  every  case  of  disease  bear  its  for- 
mal testimony,  which  would  be  feasible  or  com- 
patible with  the  material  welfare  of  the  peo  d . 
The  malady  which  was  most  palpably  expres- 
sive of  the  nature  common  to  all  disease  became 
therefore  the  fit  subject  of  special  ordinances 
superadded  to,  or  rather  grafted  upon,  the 
sanitary  regulations.  The  leper  is  one  in  whom 
it  may  be  said  “ death  lives”  during  the  period 
of  his  leprous  existence:  he  has  been  called 
“a  walking  tomb”  (sepiilchrum  amhulans)^ 
“a  parable  of  death.”  It  was  the  sight  first 
of  a decrepit  old  man,  then  of  a horribly  de- 
formed Leper,  and  lastly  of  a putrid  corpse, 
which,  according  to  the  legend,  confirmed 
Gotama  Buddha  in  his  resolution  to  retire  from 
a world  full  of  decay  and  death  in  order  to 
lead  the  life  of  an  ascetic.  Hardy,  ‘ Manual  of 
Buddhism,’  p.  154.  The  leper  was  thus  the 
best  parable  in  the  world  of  the  sin  of  which 
death  was  the  wages ; not  the  less  so  because 
his  suffering  might  have  been  in  no  degree  due 
to  his  own  personal  deserts.  He  bore  about 
•with  him  at  once  the  deadly  fruit  and  the 
symbol  of  the  sin  of  his  race.  Ex.  xx.  5. 
As  his  body  slowly  perished,  first  the  skin, 
then  the  flesh,  then  the  bone,  and  fell  to  pieces 
while  yet  the  animal  life  survived,  he  was  a 
terrible  picture  of  the  gradual  corruption  of 
the  spirit  wrought  by  sin.  The  best  of  all 
types  of  the  healing  of  the  Spirit,  was  the 
healing  of  the  Leper.  In  his  formal  Cleansing, 
Consecration,  and  Atonement  by  sacrifice  (see 
notes  on  xiv.  9 — 20),  the  ministers  of  the  Sanc- 
tuary bore  public  witness  that  he  was  restored 
to  the  blessing  of  communion  with  h:s  brethren 
and  with  Jehovah.  Hence  when  the  Son  of 
God  proved  His  divine  mission  by  healing  the 
lepers  (Matt.  xi.  5)  He  did  not  excuse  them 
from  going  to  the  priest  to  “offer  for  the 
cleansing  these  things  which  Moses  command- 
ed” (Mark  i.  44 ; Luke  v,  14)  “ for  a testimony 
to  the  people,”  Matt.  viii.  4. 


O O 


574 


LEVITICUS.  XIV. 


[v.  1—4. 


How  closely  the  Hebrews  associated  the 
Leprosy  with  Death  is  expressly  shewn  by  the 
signs  of  mourning  which  the  leper  had  to 
wear  (Lev,  xiii.  45),  by  Miriam  being  spoken 
of  “as  one  dead”  (Num.  xii.  12),  and  by  the 
words  of  Josephus,  that  the  Law  excludes 
lepers  from  civil  life,  as  being  “in  no  wise 
different  from  the  dead” — veKpdv  fxrjbev  diacfie- 
povras^. 

The  lower  symbolical  bearing  of  the  law  of 
Leprosy — that  which  related  to  Cleansing,  as 
distinguished  from  Consecration  (see  on  Lev. 
xiv.  9) — comes  out  in  strong  relief  in  what 
relates  to  that  which  was  termed  the  Leprosy, 
in  materials  for  clothing  and  shelter.  The 
name  appears  to  have  been  applied  to  certain 
processes  of  decay  of  which  we  cannot  ascer- 
tain the  precise  nature  (Lev.  xiii,  47 — 59,  xiv. 
33 — 53).  The  rites  ordained  for  cleansing 
evidently  point  to  an  analogy  between  that 
which  slowly  corrodes  dead  matter  and  the 
action  of  the  poison  of  Leprosy  on  the  body 
of  man. 

VIII.  It  has  been  objected  that  the  treat- 
ment of  lepers  according  to  the  Law  was  an 
inhuman  confusion  between  sin  and  misfor- 
tune. It  may  seem  that  the  leper  had  to 
endure  a legal  punishment  in  addition  to  the 
stroke  of  disease 2.  It  was  indeed,  in  itself, 
a hard  condition  that  lepers  were  excluded 
from  the  Sanctuary.  But  the  lesson  which  their 
disease  was  intended  by  Divine  wisdom  to 
teach  the  nation,  could  not  be  made  com- 
plete without  this.  Not  that  the  Leper  was 
merely  made  use  of  for  the  sake  of  others; 
the  lesson  was  for  himself  as  well  as  for  them, 

1 ‘Ant.’ III.  II,  §3. — On  the  connection  be- 
tween the  Leprosy  and  sin,  see  especially  Theo- 
doret,  ‘ Qiisest.  in  Lev.’  xvi. ; Hesych.  in  loc.  ; 
Cyril.  Alex.  ‘ Glaph.’  in  loc. 

2 Tertullian  answers  Marcion  on  this  point, 

‘ Adv.  Marc.’  iv.  35. 


hard  as  it  may  have  been  for  him  to  apply  it. 
If  he  accepted  it  in  faith  and  submission, 
though  the  ordinary  means  of  grace  were 
straitened  for  him,  he  might  still  have  the 
spiritual  satisfaction  that  he  was  fulfilling  an 
ordained  purpose  of  Self-sacrifice  in  acquiescing 
from  his  heart  in  the  full  meaning  of  the 
Divine  Law.  This  mode  of  regarding  the 
position  of  the  outcast  leper  is  remarkably 
shewn  in  a very  ancient  and  widely-accepted 
interpretation  of  Isaiah  liii.  4,  according  to 
which  the  prophet  foresaw  the  Messiah  es- 
teemed as  a Leper.,  smitten  of  God.,  and  afflicted 
{quasi  leprosum  et  percussion  a Deo  et  humi- 
liatum.  Vulgate).  This  rendering  has  the 
authority  of  Symmachus,  Aquila,  St  Jerome, 
Procopius,  and  many  moderns. 

But  it  may  fairly  be  questioned  whether 
the  regulations  of  the  Law  lessened  in  any 
degree  the  amount  of  natural  enjoyment 
of  which  the  Leprosy  left  its  victim  capable. 
When  we  consider  the  loathsome  outward 
effects  of  the  disease,  the  consciousness  in 
the  leper  that  he  was  a marked  and  stricken 
man,  and  the  fact  that  he  was  for  the  most 
part  in  no  need  of  those  attentions  which 
relieve  and  solace  ordinary  invalids,  he  might 
have  found  his  burden  greater  and  more 
galling  in  the  common  intercourse  of  life 
than  in  the  position  marked  out  for  him  by 
the  Law.  If  he  was  cut  off  from  society 
which  he  might  else  have  enjoyed,  he  was  less 
frequently  reminded  that  he  was  an  object  of 
aversion  to  his  neighbours,  and  he  probably 
had  a much  larger  share  of  unqualified  sym- 
pathy^. 

^ This  view  of  the  effect  of  segregation  on  the 
happiness  of  lepers  is  strikingly  confirmed  by 
Mr  Atkinson  (MS.  notes),  Dr  Webster  (‘Notes 
on  the  Hospital  at  Granada’),  and  in  several  of 
the  Replies  to  the  Leprosy  Committee. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


I The  rites  and  sacrifices  in  cleansing  of  the 
leper.  33  The  signs  of  leprosy  in  a house. 
43  The  cleansing  of  that  house. 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 This  shall  be  the  law  of  the  leper 


in  the  day  of  his  cleansing:  He  ‘^shall  ‘"Matt.  8. 
be  brought  unto  the  priest : Mark  i. 

3 And  the  priest  shall  go  forth  out  lukes.  12. 
of  the  camp;  and  the  priest  shall  look, 

and,  behold,  if  the  plague  of  leprosy 
be  healed  in  the  leper; 

4 Then  shall  the  priest  command 


Chap.  XIV. 

The  Purification  of  the  Leper.  1 — 32. 

1.  unto  Hoses']  The  directions  for  the 
Purification  are  addressed  to  Moses  alone, 
those  for  the  Examination  to  Moses  and 
Aaron  conjointly,  xiii.  i. 

The  Leper  was  excluded  not  only  from  the 
Sanctuary  but  from  the  Camp.  The  ceremony 
of  restoration  which  he  had  to  undergo  was 
tliercfore  twofold.  T'he  first  part,  performed 


outside  the  camp,  entitled  him  to  come  within 
and  to  mix  with  his  brethren,  3 — 9.  The 
second  part,  performed  in  the  court  of  the 
Tabernack  and  separated  from  the  first  by  an 
inteiwal  of  seven  days,  restored  him  to  all 
the  privileges  of  the  Covenant  with  Jehovah, 
10 — 3a. 

The  Kites  performed  avithout  the  Camp.  3 — 7. 

2,  3.  The  priest  had  to  go  to  the  entrance 


, LEVITICUS.  XIV. 


V.  5-] 


to  take  for  him  that  is  to  be  cleansed 
two  "birds  alive  and  clean,  and  cedar 
wood,  and  scarlet,  and  hyssop : 


5 And  the  priest  shall  command 
that  one  of  the  birds  be  killed  in  an 
earthen  vessel  over  running  water : 


of  the  camp  at  a time  agreed  on  to  meet  and 
examine  the  cured  Leper. 

4.  t'vjo  birds']  Our  translators  have  in- 
serted in  the  margin,  “or  sparrov^s,”  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  rendering  of  the  Vulgate. 
There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  Hebrew 
word  t%ippor^  evidently  formed  from  the  sound 
of  chirping  or  twittering,  may  often  denote 
a sparrow  (Ps.  Ixxxiv.  3,  civ.  17,  &c.);  but 
it  is  for  the  most  part  used  for  a bird  in  the 
general  sense.  Gen.  vii.  14,  xv.  10;  Deut.  iv. 
17,  &c. — This  ceremony  of  the  two  birds 
has  been  very  generally  regarded  by  Com- 
mentators as  a sacrifice  in  the  proper  sense 
of  the  word,  like  the  two  goats  of  the  Day 
of  Atonement.  On  the  objections  to  this, 
see  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

cedar  <wood,  and  scarlet^  and  hyssop]  These, 
with  the  two  birds  and  the  spring  water,  were 
employed  in  cleansing  the  leprous  house  in 
precisely  the  same  manner  as  they  were  on 
this  occasion.  See  'v'v.  49,  51,  52.  In  burn- 
ing the  Red  heifer  (Num.  xix.  6),  they  were  all 
three  cast  into  the  fire  and  burnt  with  the 
victim  instead  of  being  dipped  in  the  blood. 
Hyssop  was  used  in  sprinkling  the  blood  of 
the  Paschal  lamb  upon  the  doorposts  and 
lintels  of  the  Israelites  in  the  observance  of 
the  Passover  in  Egypt  (Exod.  xii.  22),  and  in 
sprinkling  the  water  of  purification  on  a tent, 
a person  or  a vessel  polluted  by  the  touch 
of  a dead  body,  Num.  xix.  18.  The  scarlet 
and  the  hyssop,  as  well  as  the  water  mixed 
with  the  blood  of  victims,  are  mentioned 
by  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
(ix.  19,  20),  as  having  been  used  by  Moses 
in  sprinkling  the  Book  of  the  Covenant 
and  the  people,  though  only  the  blood  -is 
named  in  Ex.  xxiv.  6.  From  these  pas- 
sages we  may  infer  that  the  three  substances 
were  used  as  the  common  materials  in  rites 
of  purification.  How  far  their  natural  quali- 
ties may  have  recommended  them  for  this 
purpose,  will  be  seen  in  the  following  notes. 
In  their  being  burned  with  the  Red  heifer 
(Num.  xix.  6),  their  symbolical  import  was 
simply  expressed  by  their  presence  in  the  fire. 
But  they  seem  to  have  been  generally  employed 
as  instruments  in  the  act  of  sprinkling.  See  the 
next  three  notes.  Their  full  meaning  in  its 
deepest  relation  is  brought  out  in  the  expression 
of  the  Psalmist,  “Purge  me  with  hyssop  (the 
name  here  represents  the  whole  rite)  and  I shall 
be  clean,”  li.  7. 

cedar  ^vood]  According  to  the  Mishna,  this 
was  a stick  of  cedar  a cubit  in  length.  ‘ Negaim,’ 
xiv.  6.  But  the  name  cedar  appears  to  have 
been  given  by  the  ancients  not  only  to  the 
well-known  Cedar  of  Lebanon,  but  to  a Juni- 


per {Juniper ns  oxycedrus')^  and  it  is  almost  cer- 
tainly this  which  is  here  meant.  It  should 
be  distinguished  from  the  juniper  with  the 
fragrant  wood  of  which  we  are  familiar  as 
“the  pencil  cedar”  {Juniperus  Bermudiand)^ 
the  qualities  of  which  are  somewhat  similar. 
We  are  told  by  Pliny  that  the  wood  was 
burnt  in  temples  as  incense  before  the  time 
of  the  Trojan  war.  Its  smoke  was  probably 
used  as  a disinfectant.  The  resin  or  turpentine 
obtained  from  it  (/ceSpta,  cedria)  was  employed 
to  preserve  various  substances  from  decay,  and 
in  its  application  to  books  it  made  the  name 
cedar  into  a common  proverb  for  literary  im- 
mortality (Horat.  ‘ A.P.’  332 ; Ovid.  ‘ Trist.’  i. 

‘ EL’  I.  7 ; Martial,  III.  ‘ Epig.’  il.  7 ; Pers. 

‘ Sat.’  I.  42).  It  -^"as  applied  by  the  Egyptians 
to  preserve  dead  bodies  from  decay.  It  pre- 
served clothes  from  moth.  The  wood  itself 
of  this  Juniper  is  so  enduring  that  it  was  spoken 
of  as  everlasting,  and  the  statues  of  deities  were 
often  made  of  it.  Cf.  Is.  xl.  20.  Medicines  were 
made  of  the  turpentine  which  were  used  in  Ele- 
phantiasis and  other  skin  diseases.  Herodot.  ii. 
87;  Theophrastus,  see  Schneider’s  ‘Index 
rerum,’  s.  v.  KeSpoy;  Plin.  ‘H.  N.’  xiii.  i,  ii, 
XVI.  21,  76,  § I,  79,  XXIV.  II  ; Dioscorides, 

‘ Mat.  Med.’  i.  105  with  Kuhn’s  note;  cf.  Is. 
xl.  19;  Suicer,  s.  v.  KeSpo?,  § iil.  These  tes- 
timonies make  sufficiently  clear  the  meaning 
which  was  given  to  the  cedar  wood  in  its 
ceremonial  use,  and  especially  in  cleansing  the 
leper. 

scarlet]  If  we  may  trust  to  the  Mishna  this 
was  a “tongue,”  or  band,  of  twice-dyed 
scarlet  wool,  with  which  the  living  bird,  the 
hyssop,  and  the  cedar  wood  were  tied  together 
when  they  were  dipped  into  the  blood  and 
water.  ‘Negaim,’  xiv.  i,  with  the  notes.  The 
scarlet  wool  is  generally  supposed  to  express 
the  rosy  colour  v/hich  is  associated  with  health 
and  vital  energy.  (Bahr,  Kurtz,  Keil,  &c.) 
It  is  worth  notice  that  scarlet  is  used  by  the 
prophets  with  a contrary  signification.  Isa. 
i.  18  ; Nahum  ii.  3.  The  Mishna  says  that  “a 
tongue  of  scarlet”  was  attached  to  the  horns 
of  the  Scapegoat  when  he  was  sent  into  the 
wilderness.  Lev,  xvi.  22. 

hyssop]  See  Ex.  xii.  22.  It  is  veiy  doubt- 
ful what  plant  is  meant.  The  Hebrew  name 
is  e%db^  and  that  used  by  the  LXX.  vaaooTros. 
It  is  generally  admitted  that  it  cannot  be  the 
plant  now  called  hyssop  (Hyssopus  officinalis')^ 
which  appears  to  have  been  unknown  in 
ancient  Syria  and  Egypt.  It  is  by  no  ^means 
certain  to  what  plant  the  Greeks  gave  the 
name  vVo-cotto?.  The  references  to  the  Hyssop 
of  the  Scriptures  would  seem  to  require  (i)  that 
the  plant  should  be  found  in  Egypt,  the  desert, 
and  the  Holy  Land;  (2)  that  it  should  grow 

0 0 2 


Ol 


576 


[v.  6 — II. 


LEVITICUS.  XIV.^ 


6 As  for  the  living  bird,  he  shall 
take  it,  and  the  cedar  wood,  and  the 
scarlet,  and  the  hyssop,  and  shall  dip 
them  and  the  living  bird  in  the  blood 
of  the  bird  that  was  killed  over  the 


f Heb. 
■jtpojt  the 
face  of  the 
field. 


running  water : 

7 And  he  shall  sprinkle  upon  him 
that  is  to  be  cleansed  from  the  leprosy 
seven  times,  and  shall  pronounce  him 
clean,  and  shall  let  the  living  bird 
loose  ' into  the  open  field. 

8 And  he  that  is  to  be  cleansed 
shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  shave  off 
all  his  hair,  and  wash  himself  in  water, 
that  he  may  be  clean : and  after  that 
he  shall  come  into  the  camp,  and 


shall  tarry  abroad  out  of  his  tent 
seven  days. 

9 But  it  shall  be  on  the  seventh 
day,  that  he  shall  shave  all  his  hair 
off*  his  head  and  his  beard  and  his  eye- 
brows, even  all  his  hair  he  shall  shave 
off:  and  he  shall  wash  his  clothes, 
also  he  shall  wash  his  flesh  in  water, 
and  he  shall  be  clean. 

10  And  on  the  eighth  day  he  shall 
take  two  he  lambs  without  blemish, 
and  one  ewe  lamb  +of  the  first  year 
without  blemish,  and  three  tenth  deals  ter  of  her 
of  fine  flour  for  a meat  offering, 
mingled  with  oil,  and  one  log  of  oil.^ 

1 1 And  the  priest  that  maketh  him 


amongst  stones  and  upon,  walls,  and  that  it 
should  be  of  low  growth,  so  as  to  furnish 
a contrast  when  compared  with  the_  Cedar  of 
Lebanon  (i  K.  iv.  33);  (3)  that  it  should 
have  a stem  capable  of  forming  a stick  of 
considerable  length  (Joh.  xix.  2,9);  and  (4) 
that  it  should  have  such  qualities  as  might  fit 
it  for  use  in  the  rites  of  purification.— The 
Jewish  authorities,  most  of  the  older  critics 
and  some  recent  ones,  are  inclined  to  identify 
the  ezdb  of  the  Old  Testament  with  some  spe- 
cies of  marjoram  {Origanum  jEgyptiacum  or 
O.  Syriacmti).  Several  other  well-known  plants, 
most  of  them  possessing  aromatic,  detergent, 
or  disinfecting  properties,  such  as  rosemary, 
southernwood,  thyme,  and  lavender,  have  been 
suggested.  But  no  one  of  these  is  capable  of 
producing  a sufficiently  long  stick,  to  which 
the  sponge  could  have  been  attached  when  it 
was  raised  to  the  lips  of  our  Saviour.  Bochait, 
who  identifies  the  e%db  with  marjoram  of  some 
kind,  is  in  consequence  driven  to  suppose  that 
the  Evangelist  spoke  of  a different  plant  bear- 
ing the  same  Greek  name.  _ On  the  whole,  it 
must  be  admitted  that  no  single  plant  appeals 
to  mt'et  all  the  conditions  which  Scripture  seems 
to  require  so  well  as  the  Caper  plant  {Capparis 
spinosaY  the  claims  of  which  were  advanced 
by  the  late  Prof.  J.  Forbes  Royle.  It  grows 
freely  in  all  the  countries  bordering  on  the 
Mediterranean  Sea.  One  of  the  lyimes  that 
the  Arabs  give  it  is  asuf  which  comes 
very  close  to  the  Hebrew  word.  It  is  men- 
tioned by  Dean  Stanley  as  a “ bright  green 
creeper,  which  climbs  out  of  the  fissures  ot 
the  rocks.”  It  commonly  grows  in  the  most 
barren  soil,  on  rocks,  ruins,  and  walls.  Its 
stem  will  often  furnish  a stick  of  considerable 
length.  Its  cleansing  virtues  as  a medicine, 
and  its  use  in  the  treatment  of  ulcers  and 
diseases  of  the  skin  allied  to  Leprosy,  are  no- 
ticfd  by  Pliny  (‘  H.  N.’  xx.  59).  Se^  a paper, 
‘On  the  Hyssop  of  Scripture,’  by  1 
j.  borbes  Royle,  in  the  ‘Journal  of  the  Asiatic 


Society,’  Vol.  viii.;  Stanley,  ‘ S.  and  P.’  p.  21 ; 
Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’  s.  v.— The  Jews  say  that  the 
sprig  of  hyssop  used  for  sprinkling  was  eight 
or  nine  inches  in  length.  Maimon.  in  ‘ Negaim,’ 
XIV.  6.  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the 
scarlet  band  was  used  to  tie  the  hyssop  upon 
the  cedar,  so  as  to  make  a sort  of  brush,  such 
as  would  be  convenient  for  sprinkling. 

5.  running  'voater~\  Literally,  living  water, 
i.e.  water  fresh  from  the  spring  (Gen.  xxvi. 
19),  such  as  was  used  with  the  ashes  of  the 
Red  heifer  for  the  water  of  purification.  Num. 
xix.  17. 

7.  3en)en  timei\  The  seal  of  the  Covenant, 
expressed  in  the  number  seven,  was  renewed 
in  sprinkling  him  who,  during  his  Leprosy, 
had  lived  as  an  outcast. 

9.  He  was  again  reminded  of  the  number 
of  the  Covenant  by  the  seventh  day  of  his  ex- 
clusion from  domestic  life,  on  which  he  had  to 
wash  and  to  cut  off  his  hair  more  thoroughly 
than  he  had  been  previously  required  to  do. 

he  shall  be  clean-]  What  was  strictly  the 
Purification  of  the  leper  was  completed  within 
the  week  of  his  first  entrance  into  the  camp, 
while  he  was  still  excluded  from  the  Sanctuary, 
and  from  his  own  abode.  That  which  fol- 
lowed was  a Consecration,  by  which  he  was 
reinstated  in  his  position  as  one  of  the 
“ holy  nation”  (Ex.  xix.  6).  Hence  the  cere- 
monial bore  a strong  resemblance  to  that  of 
the  Consecration  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  to  the 
prii  sthood  (Lev.  viii.).  The  points  of  distinc- 
tion will  be  noticed  below. 

The  Rites  auithin  the  Court.  10 — 32. 

10,  11.  On  the  eighth  day,  the  cleansed 
leper  had  to  bring  to  the  priest  who  had  re- 
ceived him  into  the  camp  two  young  rams 
from  one  to  three  years  old  (not  lambs),  a 
ewe  lamb  in  her  first  year  (see  xii.  6),  three 
tenth  parts  of  an  ephah  (something  over  ten 


LEVITICUS.  XIV. 


577 


V.  12 ^*20.] 


clean  shall  present  the  man  that  is  to 
be  made  clean,  and  those  things,  before 
the  Lord,  at  the  door  of  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation  : 

12  And  the  priest  shall  take  one  he 
lamb,  and  offer  him  for  a trespass 

*Exod.'29.  offering,  and  the  log  of  oil,  and  ^wave 
them  for  a wave  offering  before  the 
Lord  : 

13  And  he  shall  slay  the  lamb  in 
the  place  where  he  shall  kill  the  sin 
offering  and  the  burnt  offering,  in  the 

‘ Chap.  7.  holy  place:  for  ^as  the  sin  offering  is 

7-  the  priest’s,  so  is  the  trespass  offering : 

it  is  most  holy: 

14  And  the  priest  shall  take  some 
of  the  blood  of  the  trespass  offering, 
and  the  priest  shall  put  it  upon  the 
tip  of  the  right  ear  of  him  that  is  to 
be  cleansed,  and  upon  the  thumb  of 
his  right  hand,  and  upon  the  great  toe 
of  his  right  foot : 

15  And  the  priest  shall  take  some 
of  the  log  of  oil,  and  pour  it  into  the 
palm  of  his  own  left  hand : 


16  And  the  priest  shall  dip  his  right 
finger  in  the  oil  that  is  in  his  left 
hand,  and'  shall  sprinkle  of  the  oil 
with  his  finger  seven  times  before  the 
Lord  : 

17  And  of  the  rest  of  the  oil  that 
is  in  his  hand  shall  the  priest  put  upon 
the  tip  of  the  right  ear  of  him  that 
is  to  be  cleansed,  and  upon  the  thumb 
of  his  right  hand,  and  upon  the  great 
toe  of  his  right  foot,  upon  the  blood 
of  the  trespass  offering: 

18  And  the  remnant  of  the  oil  that 
is  in  the  priest’s  hand  he  shall  pour 
upon  the  head  of  him  that  is  to  be 
cleansed : and  the  priest  shall  make 
an  atonement  for  him  before  the 
Lord. 

19  And  the  priest  shall  offer  the 
sin  offering,  and  make  an  atonement 
for  him  that  is  to  be  cleansed  from 
his  uncleanness ; and  afterward  he 
shall  kill  the  burnt  offering: 

20  And  the  priest  shall  offer  the 
burnt  offering  and  the  meat  offering 


pints  and  a-half)  of  fine  flour  mingled  with 
oil,  and  a log  (about  half-a-pint,  see  on  xix.  35) 
of  oil.  The  priest  presented  both  the  man 
and  his  offerings  to  Jehovah  at  the  en- 
trance of  the  Tent  of  meeting.  See 
on  i.  3. 

12.  a nva-ve  off'ering]  One  of  the  young 
rams  was  taken  % the  priest  for  a Trespass 
offering,  and,  along  with  the  log  of  oil,  was 
solemnly  made  over  to  Jehovah  by  the  cere- 
mony of  waving.  This  Trespass-offering, 
with  its  blood  and  the  oil,  must  be  regarded 
as  the  main  feature  in  the  ceremony.  There 
appears  to  be  no  other  case  in  which  an 
entire  victim  was  waved  before  Jehovah. 
Introduct.  § ix.  The  Levites  are  spoken  of 
as  “a  wave  offering,”  Num.  viii.  ii — 15  (see 
margin).  The  man  in  this  case,  represented 
by  his  Trespass- offering,  was  dedicated  as  a 
Wave-offering  in  like  manner. 

13.  The  Trespass-offering  was  sacrificed 
in  the  usual  manner.  See  Note  at  the  end  of 
this  chapter. 

it  is  most  holy]  See  on  vi.  25,  cf.  vii.  7. 

14.  The  priest  applied  the  blood  of  the 
Trespass-offering  to  the  person  of  the  cleansed 
Leper,  in  the  same  way  as  the  blood  of  the  Ram 
of  Consecration  was  applied  to  the  priests,  and 
with  the  same  significance.  See  Lev.  viii.  23. 
It  is  said  that  a portion  of  the  blood  was 


caught  by  the  priest  in  the  palm  of  his  hand 
as  it  ran  from  the  victim.  It  was  no  doubt 
applied  vv^ith  the  finger.  ‘ Negaim,’  xiv.  8. 

15 — 17.  Having  sprinkled  seven  drops  of 
the  oil  in  succession  towards  the  entrance  of 
the  Tabernacle,  the  priest  touched  with  the  oil 
the  spots  on  the  person  of  the  cleansed  Leper, 
which  he  had  already  stained  with  the  blood  of 
the  Trespass- offering.  The  sevenfold  sprink- 
ling of  the  oil  before  the  Sanctuary,  in  addition 
to  the  waving  of  it,  seems  to  have  been  in- 
tended to  consecrate  it  to  represent  the  spiritual 
gift  (see  Note  after  Lev.  ii.)  consequent  upon 
the  Covenant,  the  sealing  of  which  had  been 
figured  by  the  sacramental  blood  of  the  offer- 
ing. 

17.  him  that  is  to  be  cleansed]  Rather,  of 
him  that  has  been  cleansed.  The  He- 
brew would  bear  either  rendering,  but  the 
fact  spoken  of  here  is  a completed  one ; see  on 
«i;.  9.  The  same  correction  is  needed  -u.  19. 

18.  pour]  More  properly,  put;  literally, 
gi^e.  The  quantity  left  in  the  hand  could 
hardly  have  been  sufficient  to  pour. 

19.  the  sin  offering]  i.  e.  the  ewe  lamb,  2;.  10. 

him  that  is  to  be  cleansed]  See  on  2;.  17. 

19,  20.  The  work  of  the  priest  connect- 
ed with  the  Trespass-offering  and  the  oil 
brought  the  cleansed  Leper  into  that  position 


578 


LEVITICUS.  XIV. 


[v.  21—34. 


upon  the  altar:  and  the  priest  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  him,  and  he 
shall  be  clean. 

tHeb.  21  And  if  he  he  poor,  and  ^cannot 
%achnot  much ; then  he  shall  take  one 

t Heb.  ' lamb  for  a trespass  offering  ^ to  be 
fora  waved,  to  make  an  atonement  for 
him,  and  one  tenth  deal  of  fine  flour 
mingled  with  oil  for  a meat  offering, 
and  a log  of  oil ; 

22  And  two  turtledoves,  or  two 
young  pigeons,  such  as  he  is  able  to 

^ get ; and  the  one  shall  be  a sin  offer- 
ing, and  the  other  a burnt  offering. 

23  And  he  shall  bring  them  on  the 
eighth  day  for  his  cleansing  unto  the 
priest,  unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation,  before  the  Lord. 

24  And  the  priest  shall  take  the 
lamb  of  the  trespass  offering,  and  the 
log  of  oil,  and  the  priest  shall  wave 
them  for  a wave  offering  before  the 
Lord  : 

25  And  he  shall  kill  the  lamb  of 
the  trespass  offering,  and  the  priest 
shall  take  some  of  the  blood  of  the 
trespass  offering,  and  put  zV  upon  the 
tip  of  the  right  ear  of  him  that  is  to 
be  cleansed,  and  upon  the  thumb  of 
his  right  hand,  and  upon  the  great  toe 
of  his  right  foot : 

26  And  the  priest  shall  pour  of  the 
oil  into  the  palm  of  his  own  left  hand : 


27  And  the  priest  shall  sprinkle 
with  his  right  finger  some 'of  the  oil 
that  is  in  his  left  hand  seven  times 
before  the  Lord  : 

28  And  the  priest  shall  put  of  the 
oil  that  is  in  his  hand  upon  the  tip  of 
the  right  ear  of  him  that  is  to  be 
cleansed,  and  upon  the  thumb  of  his 
right  hand,  and  upon  the  great  toe  of 
his  right  foot,  upon  the  place  of  the 
blood  of  the  trespass  offering: 

29  And  the  rest  of  the  oil  that  if  in 
the  priest’s  hand  he  shall  put  upon 
the  head  of  him  that  is  to  be  cleansed, 
to  make  an  atonement  for  him  before 
the  Lord. 

30  And  he  shall  offer  the  one  of  the 
turtledoves,  or  of  the  young  pigeons, 
such  as  he  can  get ; 

31  £z/e^  such  as  he  is  able  to  get, 
the  one  for  a sin  offering,  and  the 
other  for  a burnt  offering,  with  the 
meat  offering:  and  the  priest  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  him  that  is  to 
be  cleansed  before  the  Lord. 

32  This  is  the  law  of  him  in  whom 
is  the  plague  of  leprosy,  whose  hand 
is  not  able  to  get  that  which  pertaineth 
to  his  cleansinp;. 

33  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

34  When  ye  be  come  into  the  land 
of  Canaan,  which  I give  to  you  for  a 


in  which  he  could  avail  himself  of  the  accus- 
tomed law  of  sacrifice  as  one  completely  re- 
stored. 'Fhe  ewe  lamb  was  now  offered  in 
his  behalf  as  a Sin-offering,  one  of  the  young 
rams  as  a Burnt-offering,  and  the  fine  flour 
mingled  with  oil  as  a Meat-offering.  From 
the  mode  in  which  the  Meat-offering  is  here 
mentioned,  it  seems  evident  that  it  constituted 
a distinct  sacrifice.  See  on  ii.  i. 

21 — 23.  A cleansed  Leper  who  was  poor 
might  bring  birds  for  the  Sin-  and  Burnt-offer- 
ings (cf.  on  i.  14),  and  one-tenth  of  an  ephah 
of  fine  flour  instead  of  three-tenths;  but  no 
alteration  was  permitted  in  the  Trespass-offer- 
ing or  in  the  log  of  oil,  which  constituted  the 
characteristic  part  of  the  ceremony  of  Con- 
secration. The  directions  respecting  these  in 
-z'-u.  24 — 29  are  repeated  from  •v'v.  12 — 18. 

It  may  be  observed  that  the  consecrating 
rites  for  the  priests  (ch.  viii.),  which  bore  most 
resemblance  to  those  for  the  cleansed  Leper, 
di.ffered  from  them  in  the  following  particu- 


lars:—(i)  In  the  order  in  which  they  were 
performed : the  blood  was  put  upon  the 
priest  after  the  sacrifice  of  the  Sin-  and 
Burnt-offerings,  it  Avas  put  upon  the  cleans- 
ed Leper  before  these  sacrifices.  (2)  In 
the  character  of  the  victim  from  which  the 
consecrating  blood  was  taken : the  Ram  of 
Consecration  partook  of  the  nature  of  a Peace- 
offering (Lev.  viii.  22),  the  Leper  was  touched 
with  the  blood  of  a 'I'respass-offering.  (3)  In 
the  oil  for  anointing  and  the  mode  of  using 
it:  the  priest  was  anointed  on  his  garments 
as  well  as  his  person  with  the  holy  oil  of  the 
Sanctuary  (Lev.  viii.  12,  30),  the  cleansed 
Leper  only  on  specified  parts  of  his  person, 
with  common  oil  supplied  by  himself. 

The  Leprosy  in  the  House.  33—53. 

33.  Moses  and — Aaron\  This  law  is  ad- 
dres.sed  to  them  conjointly,  that  relating  to 
human  Leprosy  to  Moses  alone. 

34.  When  ye  be  come  into  the  land  of  Ca- 


V.  35—5°-] 


LEVITICUS.  XIV. 


579 


possession,  and  I put  the  plague  of 
leprosy  in  a house  of  the  land  of  your 
possession ; 

35  And  he  that  owneth  the  house 
shall  come  and  tell  the  priest,  saying. 
It  seemeth  to  me  there  is  as  it  were  a 
plague  in  the  house : 

36  Then  the  priest  shall  command 

I Or,  that  they  “ empty  the  house,  before 
prepare,  priest  go  luto  it  to  See  the  plague, 

that  all  that  is  in  the  house  be  not 
made  unclean : and  afterward  the 
priest  shall  go  in  to  see  the  house : 

37  And  he  shall  look  on  the  plague, 
and,  behold,  if  the  plague  be  in  the 
walls  of  the  house  with  hollow  strakes, 
greenish  or  reddish,  which  in  sight 
are  lower  than  the  wall ; 

38  Then  the  priest  shall  go  out  of 
the  house  to  the  door  of  the  house, 
and  shut  up  the  house  seven  days : 

39  And  the  priest  shall  come  again 
the  seventh  day,  and  shall  look  : and, 
behold,  if  the  plague  be  spread  in  the 
walls  of  the  house ; 

40  Then  the  priest  shall  command 
that  they  take  away  the  stones  in 
which  the  plague  zV,  and  they  shall 
cast  them  into  an  unclean  place  with- 
out the  city: 

41  And  he  shall  cause  the  house 
to  be  scraped  within  round  about,  and 
they  shall  pour  out  the  dust  that  they 
scrape  off  without  the  city  into  an 
unclean  place: 

42  And  they  shall  take  other  stones, 
and  put  the?n  in  the  place  of  those 


stones;  and  he  shall  take  other  mor- 
ter,  and  shall  plaister  the  house. 

43  And  if  the  plague  come  again, 
and  break  out  in  the  house,  after  that 
he  hath  taken  away  the  stones,  and 
after  he  hath  scraped  the  house,  and 
after  it  is  plaistered; 

44  Then  the  priest  shall  come  and 
look,  and,  behold,  if  the  plague  be 
spread  in  the  house,  it  is  a fretting 
leprosy  in  the  house : it  is  unclean. 

45  And  he  shall  break  down  the 
house,  the  stones  of  it,  and  the 
timber  thereof,  and  all  the  morter  of 
the  house;  and  he  shall  carry  them 
forth  out  of  the  city  into  an  unclean 
place. 

46  Moreover  he  that  goeth  into  the 
house  all  the  while  that  it  is  shut  up 
shall  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

47  And  he  that  lieth  in  the  house 
shall  wash  his  clothes;  and  he  that 
eateth  in  the  house  shall  wash  his 
clothes. 

48  And  if  the  priest  ^ shall  comet^'^^-. 
in,  and  look  upon  it.^  and,  behold,  ill  shall 
the  plague  hath  not  spread  in  the 
house,  after  the  house  was  plaistered : 
then  the  priest  shall  pronounce  the 
house  clean,  because  the  plague  is 
healed. 

49  And  he  shall  take  to  cleanse 
the  house  two  birds,  and  cedar  wood, 
and  scarlet,  and  hyssop: 

50  And  he  shall  kill  the  one  of 
the  birds  in  an  earthen  vessel  over 
running  water: 


naan\  This  section  is  separated  from  that  on 
Leprosy  in  clothing  (xiii.  47 — 59)  with  which 
it  would  seem  to  be  naturally  connected,  and 
is  placed  last  of  all  the  laws  concerning  Leprosy, 
probably  on  account  of  its  being  wholly  pro- 
spective. While  the  Israelites  were  in  the 
Wilderness,  the  materials  of  their  dwellings 
were  of  nearly  the  same  nature  as  those  of 
their  clothing,  and  would  be  liable  to  the  same 
sort  of  decay.  They  were  therefore  included 
under  the  same  law. 

I put  the  plague]  Jehovah  here  speaks  as  the 
Lord  of  all  created  things,  determining  their 
decay  and  destruction  as  well  as  their  pro- 
duction. Cf.  Isa.  xlv.  6,  7 ; Jonah  iv.  7 ; Matt, 
xxi.  ao. 

36.  The  removal  of  the  furniture  shews 


that  the  law  of  the  Leprosy  in  the  house  was 
not  based  on  the  fear  of  infection. 

37.  hollo^u  strakes.,  greenish  or  reddish.,... in 
sight  lo^er  than  the  'wall]  Rather,  depress- 
ed spots  of  dark  green  or  dark  red, 
appearing  beneath  (the  surface  of)  the 
wall.  See  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

49—53.  This  ceremony  with  the  two 
birds  is  exactly  the  same  as  that  performed  on 
behalf  of  the  healed  Leper  outside  the  camp  or 
city  (yv.  3 — 6). 

49.  cleanse  the  house]  Strictly,  purge  the 
house  from  sin.  The  same  word  is  used  in 
‘v.  52;  and  in  -u.  53  it  is  said,  “ and  make  an 
atonement  for  it.”  Cf.  Exod.  xxix.  36,  Ezek. 
xliii.  22,  where  the  Hebrew  is  the  same.  Such 
language  must  of  course  be  used  figuratively 


58o 


LEVITICUS.  XIV. 


U 5^—57. 


51  And  he  shall  take  the  cedar 
vvood^  and  the  hyssop,  and  the  scarlet, 
and  the  living  bird,  and  dip  them  in 
the  blood  of  the  slain  bird,  and  in  the 
running  water,  and  sprinkle  the  house 
seven  times  : 

52  And  he  shall  cleanse  the  house 
with  the  blood  of  the  bird,  and  with 
the  running  water,  and  with  the  liv- 
ing bird,  and  with  the  cedar  wood, 
and  with  the  hyssop,  and  with  the 
scarlet : 

53  But  he  shall  let  go  the  living 


bird  out  of  the  city  into  the  open 
fields,  and  make  an  atonement  for  the 
house  : and  it  shall  be  clean. 

54  This  is  the  law  for  all  nranner 

of  plague  of  leprosy,  and  "^scall,  ^chap.  13. 

55  And  for  the  leprosy  of  a gar- 
ment,  and  of  a house, 

56  And  for  a rising,  and  for  a 
scab,  and  for  a bright  spot : 

57  To  teach  ^ when  it  is  unclean, 
and  when  it  is  clean  : this  is  the  law 

r , clean,  mm 

or  leprosv.  in  the 

flfihc 


when  it  is  applied  to  things,  not  to  persons,  elusion  to  the  laws  of  Leprosy  contained  in 
See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter.  chaps,  xiii.,  xiv.  The  technical  names  of  the 

first  external  symptoms  of  Leprosy  of  the  per- 
54 — 57.  These  verses  are  a formal  con-  son  are  repeated  in  ’v.  from  xiii.  2.. 


NOTES  on  i^^hap.  xiv. 


I.  On  the  two  Birds  of  the  healed 
Leper,  4 — 7. 

These  birds  were  provided  by  the  priest  for 
the  man.  They  were  not,  like  the  offerings  for 
the  Altar,  brought  by  the  man  himself  (cf.  4 
with  ‘v.  10),  they  were  not  presented  nor 
brought  near  the  Sanctuary,  nor  was  any  por- 
tion of  them  offered  on  the  Altar.  It  has 
been  usual  with  commentators,  Jewish  and 
Christian,  ancient  and  modern,  to  liken  them 
to  the  two  goats  of  the  Day  of  Atonement. 
But  it  should  be  kept  in  view  that  the  resem- 
blance is  only  on  the  surface.  It  seems  hardly 
to  extend  beyond  the  fact  that  the  two  crea- 
tures in  each  case  go  to  make  up  a single  type. 
The  significance  of  the  two  goats  is  obviously 
sacrificial,  and  holds  a quite  different  place  in 
the  scope  of  the  ceremony  to  which  it  belongs 
See  on  xvi.  8.  The  slain  goat  was  a Sin-of- 
fering, the  slain  bird  was  no  sacrifice  at  all; 
the  Scape-goat  typically  bore  away  a burden  of 
sin,  the  bird  let  loose  figured  a man  restored 
to  freedom. 

The  older  Jewisli  writers  allegorized  each 
particular  connected  with  the  two  birds  in 
such  a way  that  Maimonides  condemns  all 
their  explanations  as  inconsistent  with  the 
spirit  of  the  Hebrew  Law,  and  gives  up  the 
matter  in  despair.  Abarbanel  appears  to  have 
come  near  to  the  truth  in  taking  the  cere- 
mony as  symbolizing,  in  its  immediate  bearing, 
no  more  than  the  renewed  health  of  the  L.eper. 
'I'he  living  bird,  according  to  him,  represented 
the  restored  vigour  and  freedom  of  the  vital 
functions;  the  c-dar  wockI,  the  flesh  redeemed 
from  decay  and  putrefaction;  the  scarlet,  the 
purged  blood  giving  the  hue  of  health  to  the 
complexion;  and  the  hyssop,  deliverance  from 
the  fetor  which  is  characteristic  of  the  disease. 


The  details  of  a restoration  to  health  and  tive- 
dom  appeiu*  to  be  well  expressed  in  the  whole 
ceremony.  Each  of  the  birds  represented  the 
Leper.  They  were  to  be  of  a clean  kind,  be- 
cause they  stood  for  one  of  the  chosen  race. 
The  death-like  state  of  the  Leper  during  his 
exclusion  from  the  camp  was  expressed  by  the 
killing  of  one  of  the  birds.  The  living  bird 
was  identified  with  the  slain  one  by  being  dip- 
ped in  his  blood  mixed  with  the  spring  water 
that  figured  the  process  of  purification,  while 
the  cured  Leper  was  identified  with  the  rite 
by  having  the  same  water  and  blood  sprinkled 
over  him.  The  bird  then  liberated  leaves  be- 
hind him  all  the  symbols  of  the  death  disease 
and  of  the  remedies  associated  with  it,  and  is 
fi'ee  to  enjoy  health  and  social  freedom  vvdth 
his  kind. 

The  natural  image  thus  presented  to  the 
mind  easily  suggests  the  way  in  which 
St  Paul  speaks  of  the  better  rcsunTction — 
“Therefore  rve  are  buried  with  him  by  bap- 
tism into  death ; that  like  as  Christ  w-as  raised 
up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father, 
even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newmess  of 
life.”  The  Fathers,  especially  Origen,  Cyril, 
Theodoret  and  Hesychius,  have  freely  followed 
out  this  thought.  Many  modern  ^vl■iters  have 
taken  the  same  line.  Bochart  has  enumerated 
eighteen  particulars  in  which  the  ceremony 
appears  to  supply  figures  of  spiritual  truth 
connected  w’ith  our  redemption.  (‘  Oiiera,' 
Vol.  HI.  p.  15 1.)  If  regarded  merely  as 
figures  of  speech  and  kept  wdthin  proper 
bounds,  such  applications  are  allow^able.  But 
they  tlo  not  come  within  the  legitimate  range 
of  scriptural  interpretation.  They  should  not 
be  pj'nnitted  to  divert  our  minds  from  the 
obvious  scope  of  this  particular  observance  of 
the  Law,  the  meaning  of  which  was  realized 


LEVITICUS.  XIV. 


in  visible  fact,  and  which  should  not  be 
placed  on  the  same  ground  as  the  rites  of  the 
Altar,  which  pointed  directly  and  exclusively  to 
spiritual  antitypes.  If  we  fail  to  observe  this 
distinction,  we  lose  the  edifying  lesson  conveyed 
by  the  two  parts  of  the  Leper's  restoration  to 
his  position  as  one  of  the  chosen  people,  con- 
fusing what  properly  belonged  to  the  outside 
of  the  Camp  with  that  which  could  only  be 
performed  within  the  court  of  the  Sanctuary. 

II.  On  THE  Trespass-offering  of  the 
Leper,  12 — 18.- 

The  sacrifice  of  a Trespass-offering  formed 
a point  of  resemblance  between  the  consecra- 
tion of  the  Leper  and  the  reconsecration  of  the 
Nazarite  who  had  incurred  defilement  by  con- 
tact with  the  dead;  but  the  latter  was  not 
touched  with  the  blood  of  the  victim.  In  his 
case,  as  in  that  of  the  priests,  a Sin-offering 
and  a Burnt-offering  were  sacrificed  before  the 
Consecration.  After  directing  the  priest  to 
offer  in  the  defiled  Nazarite’s  behalf  the  two 
birds  for  Sin-  and  Burnt-offerings,  the  words  of 
the  Law  are; — “for  that  he  sinned  by  the 
dead,  and  shall  hallow  his  head  that  same  day. 
And  he  shall  consecrate  unto  the  Lord  the 
days  of  his  separation,  and  shall  bring  a lamb 
of  the  first  year  for  a trespass-offering.”  Num. 
vi.  II,  12. 

As  regards  the  sequence  of  the  rites,  it  is 
obvious  that  the  starting-point  of  the  Leper 
was  different  from  that  either  of  the  Priest  or  of 
the  Nazarite.  Though  the  Nazarite  had  been 
defiled  in  respect  to  his  Nazarite  vow,  he  had 
in  no  degree  lost  his  position  as  an  Israelite. 
In  his  national  relation  he  stood  on  a par  with 
a son  of  Aaron  before  he  was  consecrated: 
both  were  in  the  full  sense  members  of  the 
priestly  people.  The  Consecration  of  the  priest 
was  to  qualify  him  for  the  service  of  the 
Altar;  that  of  the  Nazarite,  to  distinguish  him 
from  his  brethren  as  a devoted  person.  But 
the  Leper  was  in  a very  different  position.  He 
had  to  begin  the  ceremony,  not  indeed  quite 
as  an  alien — for  he  was  a circumcised  son  of 
Israel  and  had  been  readmitted  into  the  camp 
by  a formal  act — but  as  one  cut  off  from  his 
people  on  account  of  personal  defilement,  with 
whom  the  Covenant  with  Jehovah  required  to 
be  resealed.  Until  this  was  done,  until  his  Con- 
secration had  taken  place,  he  could  not  bring 
as  an  accepted  worshipper  the  offerings  which 
were  to  testify  his  sense  of  sin,  his  devotion  of 
body,  soul  and  spirit  to  Jehovah,  and  his  faith 
in  atonement  by  sacrifice. 

The  Peace-offering  seems  to  have  been  the 
natural  Consecration-sacrifice  for  the  priest. 
The  blood  of  no  other  victim  could  have  been 
so  clearly  significant  of  the  work  of  him  who 
was  to  administer  the  symbols  of  reconciliation 
between  Jehovah  and  His  people.  But  the 
connection  between  the  Trespass- offering  of  the 
Consecrations  of  the  defiled  Nazarite  and  the 
cleansed  Leper  is  not  quite  so  obvious. 


581 

We  have  seen  that  the  Trespass-offering 
appears  to  have  been  a forfeit  for  the  violated 
rights  of  others,  whether  of  Jehovah  as  the 
head  of  the  nation  or  of  a fellow  mortal. 
See  on  Lev.  v.  14  seq.  It  related  more  imme- 
diately to  the  consequence  of  sin  than  to  sin 
itself  in  the  heart  of  the  sinner.  Now  this 
perhaps  brings  us  to  a point  at  which  we  can 
see  the  reason  of  the  connection  of  the  Trespass- 
ofiering  with  these  two  Consecrations.  The 
Trespass-offering,  though  it  was  not  immediate- 
ly connected  with  the  special  personal  sin  of  the 
Nazarite  or  the  Leper,  expressed  the  share 
which  each  bore  of  the  consequence  of  sin  in 
general ; it  bore  witness  that  disease  and  death 
and  the  defilements  connected  with  them  (see 
Note  after  ch.  xv.)  are  the  wages  of  sin  for 
the  whole  race. 

The  notion  of  Keil  that  the  Trespass- offer- 
ing was  not  sacrificed  in  its  proper  significa- 
tion ; and  that  of  Knobel,  that  it  was  a forfeit 
for  the  Leper’s  non-attendance  at  the  Sanc- 
tuary, seem  to  be  not  worth  much. 

III.  On  the  Leprosy  in  the  House. 

33—53- 

Many  of  the  old  commentators,  and  some 
of  later  times,  have  imagined  that  the  house 
Leprosy  (as  well  as  the  Leprosy  in  clothing) 
was  in  some  way  connected  w th  the  human 
disease.  The  prewailing  Jewish  notion  seems 
to  have  been  that  it  was  something  peculiar  to 
the  Holy  Land,  and  to  the  time  of  the  Law, 
divinely  purposed  as  a punishment  for  an  evil 
tongue.  It  was  regarded  as  a first  warning; 
if  it  did  not  take  effect,  the  Leprosy  attacked 
the  garments ; and  if  the  transgressor  still  per- 
sisted, he  was  smitten  with  the  disease  in  his  per- 
son h The  Targum  of  Palestine,  with  rather 
more  aptness,  makes  it  a visitation  on  a house 
that  has  been  built  by  means  of  unjust  gains. 

It  seems,  however,  more  probable  that  it 
was  some  form  of  ordinary  decay  which  was 
familiarly  known.  Some  have  considered  that 
the  object  of  the  law  respecting  it  was  chiefly 
or  wholly  practical  utility,  in  order  to  secure 
for  the  Israelites  sound  and  wholesome  houses 2. 
That  it  may  have  tended  towards  this  end,  by 
inducing  a care  in  the  selection  of  materials 
and  a habit  of  keeping  the  house  clean  and  in 
good  repair,  is  probable.  But  the  form  in 
which  the  law  is  expressed  in  n)n).  49,  53, 
appears  to  intimate  that  its  meaning  was  pri- 
marily symbolical.  Leprosy  in  the  person, 
above  all  other  affections  of  living  bodies, 
represented  decay  and  corruption.  Decay  in 
all  material  substances  has  a common  ground. 
In  everything  it  is  the  dissolution,  the  falling 
to  pieces,  of  that  which  is  naturally  one.  But 
decay  in  what  covers  the  body  and  what 

^ Maimon.  ‘ More  Nev.’  iii.  47.  Abarbanel 
and  others  quoted  by  Patrick. 

2 Michaelis,  ‘ L.  of  M.’  Vol.  iii.  p.  303.  David- 
son, ‘Introd.  to  O.  T.’  Vol.  i.  p.  260. 


582  LEVITT 

shelters  it  must  bear  the  nearest  relationship 
to  the  decay  of  the  body  itself.  The  Leprosy 
in  houses,  the  Leprosy  in  clothing,  and  the 
tenable  disease  in  the  human  body,  were  re- 
presentative forms  of  decay  which  taught  the 
lesson  that  all  created  things,  in  their  own 
nature,  are  passing  away,  and  are  only  main- 
tained for  their  destined  uses  during  an  ap- 


us.  XV.  [V.  I-I4. 

pointed  period,  by  the  power  of  Jehovah.  See 
Note  after  chap,  xiii.  § vii. 

Several  of  the  Fathers  have  applied  the 
Leprosy  in  the  house  as  an  apt  figure  to  illus- 
trate the  histories  of  the  Jewish  nation  and  of 
the  Christian  Church.  See  Theod.  ‘Qusest. 
in  Lev.’  xviii. ; Cyril,  ‘ Glaph.’  in  loc. ; Hieron. 
in  Zeph.  i.  13 ; Hesychius  in  loc. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

I The  nncleanness  of  7nen  hi  their  issues.  1 3 

The  cleansing  of  them.  19  The  uncleanness 

of  women  in  their  issues . 28  Their  cleansing. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
]f\^  and  to  Aaron,  saying, 

2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them.  When  any 

a Or,  man  hath  a ''  running  issue  out  of 
flesh,  because  of  his  issue  he  Is 
reins.  Ulicleail. 

3 And  this  shall  be  his  unclean- 
ness in  his  issue  : whether  his  flesh 
run  with  his  issue,  or  his  flesh  be 
stopped  from  his  issue,  it  is  his  un- 
cleanness. 

4 Every  bed,  whereon  he  lieth 
that  hath  the  issue,  is  unclean  : and 

t Heb.  every  ^ thing,  whereon  he  sitteth, 
vessel.  unclean. 

5 And  whosoever  toucheth  his  bed 
shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  him- 
self in  water,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

6 And  he  that  sitteth  on  any  thing 
whereon  he  sat  that  hath  the  issue 
shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  him- 
self in  water,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

7 And  he  that  toucheth  the  flesh  of 
him  that  hath  the  issue  shall  wash  his 
clothes,  and  bathe  himself  in  water, 
and  be  unclean  until  the  even. 


Chapter  XV. 

Uncleanxess  from  Secretions,  i — 33. 

This 'chapter  would  seem  to  take  its  place 
more  naturally  before  the  Twelfth,  with  the 
subject  of  which  it  is  immediately  connected. 
Cf.  especially  xii.  % with  xv.  19.  It  stands 
here  between  two  chapters,  with  neither  of 
which  has  it  any  close  connection. 

1.  This  law  is  addressed  to  Moses  and 
Aaron. 

2 . running  issue']  See  Jos.  ‘Ant.’ ill.  ii, 


8 And  if  he  that  hath  the  issue 
spit  upon  him  that  is  clean  ; then  he 
shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  him- 
self in  water,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

9 And  what  saddle  soever  he  rideth 
upon  that  hath  the  issue  shall  be  un- 
clean. 

10  And  whosoever  toucheth  any 
thing  that  was  under  him  shall  be 
unclean  until  the  even  : and  he  that 
beareth  any  of  those  things  shall  wash 
his  clothes,  and  bathe  himself  in  wa- 
ter, and  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

11  And  whomsoever  he  toucheth 
that  hath  the  issue,  and  hath  not 
rinsed  his  hands  in  water,  he  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  himself 
in  water,  and  be  unclean  until  the 
even. 

12  And  the  ‘’'vessel  of  earth,  that « chap  6 
he  toucheth  which  hath  the  issue, 

shall  be  broken  : and  every  vessel  of 
w^ood  shall  be  rinsed  in  water. 

13  And  when  he  that  hath  an  issue 
is  cleansed  of  his  issue ; then  he  shall 
number  to  himself  seven  days  for  his 
cleansing,  and  wash  his  clothes,  and 
bathe  his  flesh  in  running  water,  and 
shall  be  clean. 

14  And  on  the  eighth  day  he  shall 
take  to  him  two  turtledoves,  or  two 
young  pigeons,  and  come  before  the 


§ 3 ; Maimon.,  Note  on  ‘ Zabim,’  ii.  2,  &c., 
&c. 

13.  The  mere  cessation  of  the  issue  does 
not  make  him  clean:  he  must  wait  seven 
days,  and  then  bathe  and  wash  his  clothes 
preparatory  to  his  offering  sacrifice  fw.  13, 
14).  As  long  as  the  cause  of  his  uncleanness 
continued,  he  communicated  a degree  of  pol- 
lution to  any  person  or  thing  with  which  he 
might  come  into  contact. — On  the  distinction 
between  earthen  and  wooden  utensils  (no.  12), 
see  on  vi.  28,  xi.  33,  35. 


V.  15— 30-J 


LEVITICUS.  XV. 


583 


t Heb. 
in  her 
separa- 
t on. 


Lord  unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation,  and  give  them 
unto  the  priest : 

15  And  the  priest  shall  offer  them, 
the  one  for  a sin  offering,  and  the 
other  for  a burnt  offering  ; and  the 
priest  shall  make  an  atonement  for 
him  before  the  Lord  for  his  issue. 

16  And  if  any  man’s  seed  of  co- 
pulation go  out  from  him,  then  he 
shall  wash  all  his  flesh  in  water,  and 
be  unclean  until  the  even. 

ly  And  every  garment,  and  every 
skin,  whereon  is  the  seed  of  copu- 
lation, shall  be  washed  with  water, 
and  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

18  The  woman  also  with  whom 
man  shall  lie  with  seed  of  copula- 
tion, they  shall  both  bathe  themselves 
in  water,  and  be  unclean  until  the 
even. 

19  ^ And  if  a woman  have  an  is- 
sue, and  her  issue  in  her  flesh  be 
blood,  she  shall  be  ^ put  apart  seven 
days : and  whosoever  toucheth  her 
shall  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

20  And  every  thing  that  she  lieth 
upon  in  her  separation  shall  be  yn- 
clean  : every  thing  also  that  she  sitteth 
upon  shall  be  unclean. 

21  And  whosoever  toucheth  her 
bed  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe 
himself  in  water,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

22  And  whosoever  toucheth  any 
thing  that  she  sat  upon  shall  wash  his 
clothes,  and  bathe  himself  in  water, 
and  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

23  And  if  it  he  on  her  bed,  or  on 


any  thing  whereon  she  sitteth,  when 
he  toucheth  it,  he  shall  be  unclean 
until  the  even. 

24  And  if  any  man  lie  with  her 
at  all,  and  her  flowers  be  upon  him, 
he  shall  be  unclean  seven  days  ; and 
all  the  bed  whereon  he  lieth  shall  be 
unclean. 

25  And  if  a woman  have  an  is- 
sue of  her  blood  many  days  out  of 
the  time  of  her  separation,  or  if  it 
run  beyond  the  time  of  her  separa- 
tion ; all  the  days  of  the  issue  of  her 
uncleanness  shall  be  as  the  days  of 
her  separation  : she  shall  be  unclean. 

26  Every  bed  whereon  she  lieth 
all  the  days  of  her  issue  shall  be 
unto  her  as  the  bed  of  her  separa- 
tion : and  whatsoever  she  sitteth  upon 
shall  be  unclean,  as  the  uncleanness 
of  her  separation. 

27  And  whosoever  toucheth  those 
things  shall  be  unclean,  and  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  himself 
in  water,  and  be  unclean  until  the 
even. 

28  But  if  she  be  cleansed  of  her 
issue,  then  she  shall  number  to  her- 
self seven  days,  and  after  that  she 
shall  be  clean. 

29  And  on  the  eighth  day  she  shall 
take  unto  her  two  turtles,  or  two 
young  pigeons,  and  bring  them  unto 
the  priest,  to  the  door  of  the  taberna- 
cle of  the  congregation. 

30  And  the  priest  shall  offer  the 
one  for  a sin  oftering,  and  the  other 
for  a burnt  offering;  and  the  priest 
shall  make  an  atonement  for  her  be- 


16 — 18.  Most  of  the  ancient  religions 
made  a similar  recognition  of  impurity  and  of 
the  need  of  purification.  On  the  Babylonians, 
Egyptians,  Greeks  and  Romans,  see  Herodot. 
I.  198,  II.  64;  Strabo,  xvi.  p,  745;  Hesiod. 
‘Op.  et  Dies’  731;  Eurip.  ‘Ion’  150;  Pers. 
‘Sat.’  II.  15;  Tibull.  Lib.  ii.  i.  i.  On  the 
Hindoos,  ‘Menu’  v.  63.  On  the  Parsees, 
Zendavesta  ap.  Bahr;  ‘Symb.’  ii.  p.  466.  On 
the  Moslems,  Koran,  iv,  v.  See  also  a remark- 
able passage  in  Porph.  ‘de  Abst.’  iv.  7,  20. 

17.  en)ery  garment^  Cf.  Jude  v.  23. 

19 — 24.  From  the  commencement  of  the 
period  uncleanness  was  to  last  seven  days, 
20 — 23. 


24.  This  must  refer  to  an  unexpected  oc- 
currence. Intercourse  during  the  acknow- 
ledged period  was  a heavy  crime,  and  was  to 
be  punished  by  “cutting  off.”  Lev.  xviii.  19, 
XX.  18;  Ezek.  xviii.  6.  It  is  so  regarded  in 
the  Hindoo,  Parsee,  and  Moslem  Laws. 
‘ Menu,’  IV.  40,  v.  8 ; ‘ Koran’  11. ; ‘ Hedaya,’ 
Vol.  IV.  p.  103,  II.  620;  Biihr,  Ii.  p.  466;  cf. 
Porph.  ‘ De  Abst.’  ii.  50. 

25 — 30.  If  the  period  was  irregular,  the 
uncleanness  was  in  all  respects  equal  to  that 
of  him  who  had  an  issue  (gunj.  2 — 15),  each 
state  being  one  of  disease.  See  Note  at  the 
end  of  the  chapter,  § ii. 


5^4 


LEVITICUS.  XV. 


[v.  31—33- 


fore  the  Lord  for  the  issue  of  her 
uncleanness. 

31  Thus  shall  ye  separate  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  from  their  uncleanness; 
that  they  die  not  in  their  uncleanness, 
when  they  defile  my  tabernacle  that 
is  among  them. 


32  This  is  the  law  of  him  that  hath 
an  issue,  and  of  him  whose  seed  goeth 
from  him,  and  is  defiled  therewith ; 

33  And  of  her  that  is  sick  of  her 
flowers,  and  of  him  that  hath  an  issue, 
of  the  man,  and  of  the  woman,  and  of 
him  that  lieth  with  her  that  is  unclean. 


31 — 33.  This  solemn  admonition  is  ad-  place  (niishkan)^  as  in  Lev,  viii.  10,  xvii.  4, 
dressed  to  Moses  and  Aaron,  see -z;,  i,  xxvi.  ii.  The  word  rendered  “tabernacle” 

elsewhere  in  Leviticus  is  properly  Tent  {phel), 
31.  my  tabernacle']  Strictly,  my  dzuelling-  See  on  Ex.  xxvi.  i. 


NOTE  on  Chaps,  xii. — xv. 


Ox  THE  PuraricATioNS  of  the  Law  in 
GENERAL. 

i.  Legal  pollution  was  not  in  any  mode 
or  degree  connected  with  the  personal  sin  of 
the  individual  by  whom  it  was  occasioned 
or  contracted.  It  originated  only  in  certain 
physical  conditions.  The  corpse  of  a saint 
was  as  impure  as  that  of  the  most  degraded 
criminal,  and  any  human  corpse  communi- 
cated even  a greater  degree  of  impurity  by 
contact  or  approximation  than  the  body  of 
an  animal.  The  Law  made  no  distinction 
between  the  Leprosy  which  an  unoffending 
child  inherited  from  its  parents  and  that  which 
might  have  been  inflicted  as  a visitation  for 
crime. 

We  have  already  had  occasion  to  speak  of 
the  strong  light  in  which  the  Law  places  the 
difference  between  Life  and  Death.  Note  after 
chap.  xi.  It  has  also  been  observed  that  the 
defilement  of  the  Leprosy  arose  from  the  Leper 
being  regarded  as  already  amongst  the  dead. 
Note  after  chap.  xiii.  §vii.  The  conclusion 
follows  that  two  out  of  the  three  kinds  of 
pollution  obviously  hinge  upon  the  idea  of  the 
uncleanness  of  IDeath.  A question  remains  as 
to  the  defilement  resulting  from  the  secretions. 
Why  should  those  mentioned  in  the  Law  be 
distinguished  from  the  other  secretions  of  the 
body  ? 

It  has  been  assumed  that,  as  human  life 
ends  in  corruption,  leaving  behind  an  unclean 
corpse,  so  it  must  begin  in  corruption.  The 
sinfulness  of  human  nature  would  thus  be 
n-presented  by  the  unclean  ness  of  its  two  poles, 
Ibrlh  and  Death  (Biihr).  But  this,  which  re- 
fers immediately  to  purification  after  child- 
l;irth,  falls  to  the  ground  as  an  explanation,  if 
we  consider  that  it  was  not  the  newborn 
child  who  was  recognized  as  unclean,  but  its 
mother  h I'he  defilement  of  childbirth  is  thus 
brought  into  close  relationship  with  the  de- 
filements mentioned  in  ch.  xv. 

'The  inejuiry  into  the  meaning  of  this  sort 

^ See  on  xii.  4,  6 — 8. 


of  uncleanness  must,  it  would  seem,  remain 
involved  in  a share  of  that  mystery  which 
shrouds  the  whole  of  the  subject  with  which 
it  is  connected.  The  best  clue  we  can  get 
towards  a solution  appears  to  be  that  furnished 
by  such  passages  as  Gen,  iii.  16,  Rom.  vii,  24, 
viii.  21,  in  connexion  with  that  feeling  of  shame 
which  is  common  to  all  human  beings  not  en- 
tirely debased,  of  which  we  gather  the  history 
from  Gen.  ii.  25,  iii.  7,  10,  ii. 

ii.  All  need  of  purification  without  doubt 
took  its  rise  in  a sense  of  the  sinfulness  of  m.an. 
Legal  uncleanness  would  not  else  have  excluded 
the  person  from  participation  in  the  service  of 
the  Sanctuary,  But  the  connection  between  sin 
and  uncleanness  is  not  immediate.  The  con- 
necting links  between  them  are  the  disease  and 
death  which  are  the  offspring  of  sin.  I'he 
pains  of  childbirth  and  the  suffering  of  death 
were  the  two  sentences  pronounced  by  God 
upon  mankind  after  the  first  sin  2.  The  case, 
seems  to  be  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  the 
diseased  conditions  of  uncleanness  (xv.  2,  25), 
compared  with  the  healthy  ones,  are  treated  as 
if  they  had  a double  ground  of  pollution  ; they 
alone  require  sacrificial  atonement.  The  con- 
clusion then  appears  to  be  reasonable  that  all 
the  rites  of  purification  were  intended  to  re- 
mind the  Israelite  that  he  belonged  to  a fallen 
race  and  that  he  needed  a Purification  and 
Atonement  which  he  could  not  effect  for  him- 
self. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  same  causes 
of  uncleanness  have  been  generally  recognized 
by  the  ancient  nations.  Some  authorities  on 
this  point  as  to  details  have  been  given  in  the 
preceding  notes.  It  would  seem  that  the  law 
of  purifications,  in  its  three  great  lines  of  ap- 
plication (see  note  before  ch.  xii.),  coincides 
with  the  suggestions  of  the  common  instinct, 
or  of  the  common  tradition,  of  the  human 
race. 

iii.  But  it  is  important  to  observe  in  the 
way  of  contrast  with  what  completeness  and 

2 Gen.  ii.  17,  iii.  16,  19;  Rom.  v.  12;  Heb, 
ii.  14,  15  ; I Tim.  ii.  15. 


V.  I— 3-] 


LEVITICUS.  XVI. 


'*  chap. 
2. 


logical  consistency  the  Law  of  Moses  treats 
the  subject,  and  how  it  raises  it  above  the 
level  of  natural  feeling  to  a higher  sphere. 
When  the  Law  in  later  ages  was  misrepresent- 
ed by  the  rabbinical  teachers,  its  logical  dis- 
tinctions were  crumbled  away,  and  attention 
to  minute  artificial  rules  became  the  badge  of 
the  self-righteous  Jew.  The  deep  significance 
of  the  ceremonial  purifications  was  confounded 
with  the  mere  forms,  not  necessarily  with  the 
reality,  of  cleanliness.  Hence  came  in  the 
washing  of  hands  and  “of  cups  and  pots, 
brazen  vessels  and  of  tables.”  Markvii.  a — 8. 
Just  the  same  kind  of  confusion  is  to  be 
traced  in  all  the  Gentile  systems  of  purifi- 
cation. The  Hindoos,  for  example,  put  into 
the  same  category  of  pollution  a corpse,  an 
outcast  for  deadly  sin,  and  a newborn  child 
with  all  its  relations  within  a certain  degree 
of  consanguinity,  which  is  specially  extended 
beyond  the  common  limits  for  the  Brahmin^. 
But  the  rules  of  the  Moslems  bear  a yet 
closer  outward  resemblance  to  those  of  the 
rabbinical  Jews  denounced  by  our  Saviour 2. 

^ ‘ Menu,’  V.  62,  85  ; note  on  Lev.  xii.  8. 

2 See  Koran  v. ; Lane,  ‘ Mod.  Egypt.’  ch.  iii. 


5^5 

The  original  character  of  the  Mosaic  law  of 
purifications  is  remarkably  shewn  in  its  belong- 
ing to  every  member  of  the  nation  without 
distinction,  so  testifying  to  his  position  before 
Jehovah  (cf.  Note  after  chap.  xi.  § vii.),  and  by 
its  clearness  and  practical  method.  In  all  cases, 
a period  of  uncleanness  was  defined — in  ordi- 
nary defilements,  either  one  day  or  seven  days 
■ — at  the  end  of  which  a formal  washing  of  the 
person,  and  in  certain  prescribed  instances  of  the 
clothes  also,  was  to  take  place.  The  purifying 
rite  could  thus  never  be  hurried  so  as  to  impair 
its  solemnity ; the  person  was  to  have  time  to 
realize  the  sense  of  his  iincleanness.  It  could 
not,  like  most  of  the  Gentile  purifications,  be 
performed  immediately  when  the  occasion  for 
it  occurred,  as  if  the  object  were  mainly  to 
cleanse  the  flesh.  But  above  all,  it  should  be 
observed  that  every  Levitical  purification  of  a 
graver  kind  culminated  in  a Sin-offering  and  a 
Burnt-offering  sacrificed  to  Jehovah  according 
to  the  general  law  of  sacrificial  worship.  And 
the  atoning  act  of  the  priest  gave  its  meaning 
not  merely  to  the  single  occasion  on  which  the 
sacrifices  were  offered,  but  to  every  rite  of 
purification,  whether  great  or  small,  which 
was  prescribed  by  the  Law. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

I How  the  high  priest  must  enter  into  the  holy 
place.  1 1 The  sin  offering  for  huiiself.  1 5 
The  sin  offering  for  the  people.  20  The 
scapegoat.  29  The  yearly  feast  of  the  ex- 
piations. 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
±\^  after  "the  death  of  the  two  sons 
of  Aaron,  when  they  offered  before 
the  Lord,  and  died; 

2 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 


Speak  unto  Aaron  thy  brother,  that 
he  "^come  not  at  all  times  into  the^Exod.  30. 
holy  place  within  the  vail  before  the  Heb.  9. 7. 
mercy  seat,  which  is  upon  the  ark; 
that  he  die  not:  for  I will  appear  in 
the  cloud  upon  the  mercy  seat. 

3 Thus  shall  Aaron  come  into  the 
\\o\p  place:  v/ith  a young  bullock  for 
a sin  offering,  and  a ram  for  a burnt 
offering. 


Chap.  XVI. 

The  Day  of  Atonement,  i — 34. 

The  Day  of  Atonement,  or,  as  it  is  in  the 
Hebrew,  the  Day  of  Atonements  {Ydyn  Kippu- 
rim).,  is  called  by  the  Rabbins  Toma.^  i.e.  the 
Bay,  which  is  the  title  of  the  treatise  on  it  in 
the  Mishna.  Philo  calls  it  “the  Festival  of 
Fasting,”  and  St  Luke  (probably)  “ the  Fast.” 
See  Acts  xxvii.  9.  The  purpose  of  the  ob- 
servance of  the  day  is  expressly  stated  in  the 
Law:  “to  make  an  atonement  for  the  children 
of  Israel  for  all  their  sins  (and  uncleanness) 
once  a year.”  See  aono.  34  and  16. — Cf.  with 
this  chap.,  xxiii.  26 — 32. 

1.  The  instructions  for  observing  this  day 
seem  naturally  to  follow  the  laws  of  Sacri- 
fices and  Purifications.  See  on  0)00.  33,  34* 
The  chapter  would  on  this  ground  appear  to 
hold  its  proper  place.  The  reference  to  the 


death  of  Nadab  and  Abihu  is  not  therefore  to 
be  regarded  as  a resuming  of  the  historical 
narrative  from  ch.  x.  20,  but  as  a notice  of  the 
occasion  on  which  the  instructions  were  given, 
well  calculated  to  add  point  and  emphasis  to 
the  solemn  admonition  to  the  High  priest  in 
the  second  verse.  The  death  of  his  sons,  for 
drawing  nigh  to  Jehovah  in  an  unauthorized 
manner,  was  to  serve  as  a warning  to  Aaron 
himself  never  to  transgress  in  this  respect. 

2.  the  holy  place  ojuithin  the  ajail~\  See  Ex. 
xxvi.  33;  Heb.  ix.  3. 

the  cloud~\  Cf.  Ex.  xvi.  10,  xix.  9,  xl.  34; 
Num.  ix.  15;  I K.  viii.  10.  See  ay.  13. 

the  mercy  seat]  See  Note  on  Ex.  xxv.  17. 

3.  Thus]  More  strictly.  With  this;  that 
is,  with  the  offerings  about  to  be  mentioned. 

holy  place]  This  name  here  denotes  the 
Sanctuary,  the  whole  sacred  enclosure,  the 


586 


LEVITICUS.  XVI. 


[v.  4—7. 


4 He  shall  put  on  the  holy  linen 
coat,  and  he  shall  have  the  linen 
breeches  upon  his  flesh,  and  shall  be 
girded  with  a linen  girdle,  and  with 
the  linen  mitre  shall  he  be  attired: 
these  are  holy  garments ; therefore 
shall  he  wash  his  flesh  in  water,  and 

put  them  on. 

5 And  he  shall  take  of  the  congre- 
gation of  the  children  of  Israel  two 


kids  of  the  goats  for  a sin  offering, 
and  one  ram  for  a burnt  offering. 

6 And  Aaron  shall  offer  his  bullock 
of  the  sin  offering,  which  is  for  him- 
self, and  ‘^make  an  atonement  for^^®^- 
himself,  and  for  his  house. 

7 And  he  shall  take  the  two  goats, 
and  present  them  before  the  Lord 
at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation. 


court  of  the  Tabernacle.  The  offerings  were 
for  Aaron  and  his  sons,  supplied  by  himself. 
See  n).  6. 

4.  In  preparing  for  the  ordinary  ministra- 
tions the  priest  had  to  wash  only  his  feet  and 
hands;  Ex.  xxx.  19 — 21,  xl.  31.  But  the 
High  priest  when  he  changed  his  dress  on  this 
day  was  required  to  bathe  himself.  This 
was  done  when  he  resumed  his  “golden 
garments”  (Ex.  xxviii.),  as  well  as  on  this 
occasion.  See  -l’.  24.  According  to  Jewish 
tradition  the  High  priest  himself  in  his  golden 
garments  had,  on  this  day,  and  for  the  pre- 
vious week,  to  offer  the  regular  daily  sacrifices, 
and  to  perform  the  other  sacerdotal  duties  of 
the  Sanctuary,  which  were  usually  performed 
by  a common  priest. — The  dress  of  white 
linen,  which  he  now  put  on,  appears  to  have 
been  like  the  ordinary  dress  of  the  common 
priests,  except  in  the  substitution  of  a linen 
mitre  for  the  bonnet  (or  cap),  and  of  a plain 
linen  girdle  for  the  variegated  one.  Ex.  xxviii. 
40 — 43,  witli  notes.  I'he  mitre  still  distin- 
guished him  as  the  fligh  priest,  and  the  plain 
white  girdle  was  in  exact  keeping  with  the 
other  parts  of  the  dress.  It  has  been  supposed 
by  many  that  this  white  dress  was  worn  by 
the  High  priest  to  mark  that  he  reduced  him- 
self on  this  occasion  to  the  level  of  a common 
priest,  as  an  act  of  humiliation  becoming  the 
character  of  the  Day  of  Atonement.  It  is 
alleged  that  he  could  have  worn  these  peculiar 
garments  only  as  a humbled  penitent  asking 
for  forgiveness  when  he  offered  the  Sin-offering 
for  himself,  n).  6.  (Several  Jewish  authorities, 
quoted  by  Drusius,  Cyril  Alex.,  a Lapide, 
Grotius,  RosenmUller,  Knobel,  Kurtz,  &c.) 
But  it  seems  to  be  justly  urged  against  this: 
(i)  that  the  dress,  though  it  was  like  that  of 
the  common  priests  in  being  white,  was  still 
distinguished  by  the  insignia  of  the  High- 
priesfhood;  (2)  that  these  garments  are  em- 
phatically called  holy  4,  32),  in  virtue, 

it  would  seem,  of  their  special  significance, 
not  merely  in  the  same  sense  as  the  golden 
garments,  which  were  consecrated  by  the 
anointing  oil,  I'.x.  xxviii.  2,  xxix.  21;  Lev. 
viii.  30;  (3)  that  even  admitting  that  they 
were  intended  to  assimilate  to  the  tlress  of  the 
common  priests,  they  were  not  the  more  sym- 


bolical of  humiliation,  for  this  dress  was 
appointed  “for  glory  and  beauty”  as  much 
as  the  golden  garments  of  the  High  priest. 
See  Ex.  xxviii.,  cf.  nj.  2 with  -v.  40;  (4)  and, 
above  all,  that  whiteness  never  appears  to  have 
been  connected  by  the  Hebrews  with  mourn- 
ing or  penitence;  on  the  contrary,  all  the 
evidence  we  have  appears  to  make  it  signifi- 
cant of  triumphant  holiness.  See  Eccles.  ix. 
8;  Ezek.  ix.  2,  x.  2;  Dan.  x.  5,  xii.  6;  Matt, 
xvii.  2,  xxviii.  3 ; Mark  ix.  3 ; Luke  ix.  29 ; 
R.ev.  iii.  4,  iv.  4,  vi.  ii,  xix.  14,  &c.  &c. 
Hence  it  seems  most  probable  that  the  High 
priest,  in  preparing  to  enter  the  Holy  of  holies, 
attired  himself  in  spotless  white  as  a token  of 
the  holiness  without  which  none,  in  a spiritual 
sense,  can  enter  the  divine  presence.  SoOrigen, 
Hesychius,  Keil,  Wogue.  He  thus  became 
a more  distinct  foreshadow  of  the  greater 
High  Priest,  who  is  “ holy,  harmless,  unde- 
filed, separate  from  sinners;”  who  has  once 
for  all  “ entered  into  that  within  the  vail,” 
Heb.  vii.  26,  vi.  19,  20.  This  significance  be- 
longed to  the  High  priest  only  in  his  official 
capacity  as  mediatory  in  his  own  person  he 
had  infirmity,  and  was  required  “to  offer  up 
sacrifice,  frst  for  his  own  sins,  and  then 
for  the  people’s.”  Heb.  vii.  27.  See  on  ix. 
7 — 14.  On  the  same  ground  it  was  that,  al- 
though as  a mediator  he  had  to  enter  the  Most 
Holy  place,  as  sinful  flesh  he  needed  the  cloud 
of  incense  as  a vail  to  come  between  him  and 
the  holiness  of  Jehovah.  See  13. 

5.  take  of  the  congregation]  The  two  goats 
for  the  Sin-offering  for  the  people,  and  the 
ram  for  their  Burnt-offering,  were  to  be  sup- 
plied at  the  public  cost,  as  the  Sin-offering  and 
the  Burnt-offering  for  the  priests  were  to  be 
supplied  by  the  High  priest.  See  1;.  3. 

t^o  kids  of  the  goats]  This  should  be,  two 
shaggy  he-goats.  See  on  iv.  23.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Mishna  these  were  to  be  of  the 
same  colour,  size,  and  value  (‘ Yoma,’  vi.  i). 

6.  shall  offer]  Rather,  shall  present, 
as  in  'v'v.  7,  10,  &c.  The  word  expresses  the 
formal  act  of  placing  the  victims  in  front  of 
the  entrance  of  the  Tabernacle.  Introd.  § v. 

for  himself^  and  for  his  house]  That  is,  for 
himself  as  the  High  jiriest  and  all  the  common 
priests.  Cf.  on  ix.  7 — 14. 


V.  8 — 1 4-] 


LEVITICUS.  XVI. 


587 


8 And  Aaron  shall  cast  lots  upon 
the  two  goats ; one  lot  for  the  Lord, 

Other  lot  for  the  ^scapegoat. 

9 And  Aaron  shall  bring  the  goat 

t Heb.  upon  which  the  Lord’s  lot  Tell,  and 
wentiip.  ^ offeHllg. 

10  But  the  goat,  on  which  the  lot 
fell  to  be  the  scapegoat,  shall  be  pre- 
sented alive  before  the  Lord,  to  make 
an  atonement  with  him,  to  let 
him  go  for  a scapegoat  into  the  wil- 
derness. 

1 1 And  Aaron  shall  bring  the  bul- 
lock of  the  sin  offering,  which  is  for 
himself,  and  shall  make  an  atonement 


for  himself,  and  for  his  house,  and 
shall  kill  the  bullock  of  the  sin  offer- 
ing which  is  for  himself : 

12  And  he  shall  take  a censer  full 
of  burning  coals  of  fire  from  off'  the 
altar  before  the  Lord,  and  his  hands 
full  of  sweet  incense  beaten  small,  and 
bring  it  within  the  vail : 

13  And  he  shall  put  the  incense 

upon  the  fire  before  the  Lord,  that 
the  cloud  of  the  incense  may  cover 
the  mercy  seat  that  is  upon  the  testi- 
mony, that  he  die  not:  ‘^Hch.g. 

14  And  '^he  shall  take  of  the  blood  & 10.  4- 
of  the  bullock,  and  ^sprinkle  it  with  g 


8.  The  two  goats  formed  a single  Sin-of- 
fering, 1;.  5.  In  order  duly  to  bring  out  the 
meaning  of  the  sacrifice  it  was  necessary  that 
the  act  of  a living  being  should  be  performed 
after  death.  See  on  -v.  22  As  this  could  not 
possibly  be  visibly  set  forth  with  a single  victim, 
two  were  employed,  as  in  the  case  of  the  birds 
in  the  rite  for  the  healed  leper.  See  Note  after 
chap.  xiv.  The  two  goats  were  presented  to- 
gether before  Jehovah.  Up  to  this  point  they 
were  on  a par,  and  to  decide  which  of  them 
should  die  recourse  was  had  to  casting  lots. 
See  Note  on  Ex.  xxviii.  30,  § v.  3. 

ybr  the  scapegoat^  Rather,  for  Azazel.  In 
the  uncertainty  which  exists  respecting  the 
meaning  of  the  original  word,  it  would  be 
better  to  retain  it  in  the  text  of  our  Bible.  It 
thus  appears  in  the  Geneva  French,  Junius 
and  Tremellius,  and  nearly  all  modern  critical 
translations,  Jewish  and  Christian.  The  word 
has  no  article  in  Heb.,  and  is  probably  a pro- 
per name.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

9.  offer  him  for  a sin  offering~\  Rather, 

“present  him  for  a sin  offering.”  Cf.  nj.  6. 
The  goat  was  not  to  be  offered  on  the  Altar 
until  after  the  sacrifice  of  the  High  priest’s 
Sin-offering,  ii — 14.  It  should  be  ob- 

sei-ved  that  -v^v.  9,  10  merely  speak  of  the  pur- 
poses for  which  the  two  goats  were  destined. 
The  practical  directions  respecting  them,  in 
which  the  required  details  are  given,  will  be 
found  in  verses  15,  16,  20 — 22. 

10.  on  ^duhich  the  lot  fell  to  be  the  scapegoat] 
Rather,  on  which'the  lot  ‘for  Azazel’ 
fell. 

an  atonement  ^ith  him]  Different  opinions 
have  been  held  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  original 
words.  It  is  most  probable  that  they  express 
that  the  goat  “for  Azazel”  was  to  be  con- 
sidered as  taking  his  part  along  with  the  other 
goat  in  the  great  symbol  of  atonement.  The 
words  of  our  version  thus  appear  fairly  to  re- 
present the  Hebrew. 

for  a scapegoat  into  the  wilderness]  Rather, 
“to  Azazel,  into  the  Wilderness.” 


11 — 25.  It  is  important,  in  reference  to  the 
meaning  of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  to  observe 
the  order  of  the  rites  as  they  are  described  in 
these  verses,  (i)  The  Sin-offering  for  the 
priests  (gv.  ii).  (2)  The  High  priest  enters 
the  First  time,  within  the  vail,  with  the 
incense  12,  13).  (3)  He  enters  the  Second 
time  with  the  blood  of  the  priest's  Sin-offer- 
ing (gv.  14).  (4)  The  sacrifice  of  the  goat 

“for  Jehovah”  (^».  15).  (5)  The  High  priest 
enters  the  Third  time  within  the  vail  with 
the  blood  of  the  goat  (gv.  15).  (6)  The 

atonement  for  the  Tent  of  meeting  (note 
on  “u.  16).  (7)  The  atonement  for  the  Altar 

of  Burnt-offering  in  the  court  (gvn).  18,  19). 
(8)  The  goat  sent  away  to  Azazel  (giw. 
20 — 22).  (9)  The  High  priest  bathes  him- 

self and  resumes  his  golden  garments  (gv^s. 
23,  24).  (10)  The  Burnt-offerings  for  the 

High  priest  and  the  people,  with  the  fat  of 
the  two  Sin-offerings,  offered  on  the  Altar 
(gv2.\  24,  25).  (ii)  The  accessory  sacrifices 
mentioned  Num.  xxix.  8 — ii  (see  on  Lev. 
xxiii.  20),  appear  now  to  have  been  offered. 
(12)  According  to  Jewish  tradition,  the  High 
priest  again  resumed  his  white  dress  and  entered 
a Fourth  time  within  the  vail  to  fetch  out  the 
censer  and  the  bowl  (‘ Yoma,’  viil.  4). 

12.  a censer]  See  on  Ex.  xxv.  38.  Literally, 
the  censer.  According  to  the  Mishna,  a 
golden  censer  was  used  on  this  occasion.  If 
the  English  version  is  right  in  Heb.  ix.  4,  it  is 
what  is  there  called  Svixtarffiov.  See  in  loc. 
and  on  Ex.  xxx.  6.  It  is  here  called  by  the 
LXX.  TO  TTVpeiOV. 

the  altar  before  the  Lord]  i.e.  the  Altar  of 
Burnt-offering  on  which  the  fire  was  always 
burning. 

sweet  incense]  See  Exod.  xxx.  34 — 36. 

13.  the  cloud  of  the  incense]  See  on  Ex. 
xxx.  7,  8. 

mercy  seat  that  is  upon  the  testimony]  See 
Note  on  Ex.  xxv.  17. 

14.  and  he  shall  take  of  the  blood]  The 
High  priest  must  have  come  out  from  the 


LEVITICUS.  XVL 


[v.  15—20. 


his  finger  upon  the  mercy  seat  east- 
ward ; and  before  the  mercy  seat  shall 
he  sprinkle  of  the  blood  with  his  fin- 
ger seven  times. 

15  ^ Then  shall  he  kill  the  goat 
of  the  sin  offering,  that  is  for  the  peo- 
ple, and  bring  his  blood  within  the 
vail,  and  do  with  that  blood  as  he  did 
with  the  blood  of  the  bullock,  and 
sprinkle  it  upon  the  mercy  seat,  and 
before  the  mercy  seat : 

16  And  he  shall  make  an  atone- 
ment for  the  holy  place^  because  of 
the  uncleanness  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  because  of  their  transgres- 
sions in  all  their  sins : and  so  shall  he 
do  for  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 

tHeb.  tion,  that  Temaineth  among  them  in 
‘ the  midst  of  their  uncleanness. 


17  -^And  there  shall  be  no  man  in /Luke  i. 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation 
when  he  goeth  in  to  make  an  atone- 
ment in  the  holy  place^  until  he  come 

out,  and  have  made  an  atonement  for 
himself,  and  for  his  household,  and  for 
all  the  congregation  of  Israel. 

18  And  he  shall  go  out  unto  the  altar 
that  is  before  the  Lord,  and  make  an 
atonement  for  it  5 and  shall  take  of 
the  blood  of  the  bullock,  and  of  the 
blood  of  the  goat,  and  put  it  upon  the 
horns  of  the  altar  round  about. 

19  And  he  shall  sprinkle  of  the 
blood  upon  it  with  his  finger  seven 
times,  and  cleanse  it,  and  hallow  it 
from  the  uncleanness  of  the  children 
of  Israel. 

20  ^ And  when  he  hath  made  an 


Most  Holy  place  to  fetch  the  blood,  leaving 
the  censer  smoking  within,  and  then  have  en- 
tered again  within  the  vail.  According  to  the 
most  probable  interpretation  of  the  verse,  it 
would  appear  that  he  sprinkled  the  blood  seven 
times  upon  the  Mercy  seat,  on  its  east  side 
(not  “eastward’’),  and  then  seven  times  upon 
the  floor  in  front  of  it  (so  Knobel,  Keil,  and 
others).  If  the  Mercy  seat  may  be  regarded  as 
an  Altar,  the  holiest  one  of  the  three,  on  this 
one  occasion  in  the  year  atonement  was  thus 
made  for  it,  as  for  the  other  Altars,  with  sa- 
crificial blood  (Ewald,  Kurtz,  &c.).  But  the 
Jewish  writers  in  general,  and  some  others, 
do  not  think  that  the  Mercy  seat  itself  was 
touched  with  the  blood,  and  would  render  the 
preposition  on)cr  against  (not  “upon”)  the 
Mercy  seat.  Josephus  says  that  the  blood 
was  sprinkled  first  upon  the  ceiling  and  then 
upon  the  floor  of  the  Most  Holy  place  (‘  Ant.’ 
III.  10,  § 3).  Cf.  on  iv.  6. 

15.  Having  completed  the  atonement  in 
the  Holy  of  holies  on  behalf  of  the  priests,  the 
High  priest  has  now  to  do  the  same  thing  on 
behalf  of  the  people. 

16.  l^y  “the  holy  place'"'  appears  to  be 
lure  meant  the  place  within  the  vail,  the  Holy 
of  holies.  The  first  part  of  the  verse  thus  re- 
fers to  the  rites  already  performed. 

tabernacle  of  the  congregation'\  Tent  of 
meeting.  Atonement  was  now  to  be  made 
for  the  d'abernacle  as  a whole.  The  sense  is 
very  briefly  expressed,  but  there  seems  to  be 
no  room  to  doubt  that  the  High  priest  was 
to  sprinkle  the  blood  of  each  of  the  victims 
before  the  Altar  of  incense,  as  he  had  done 
before  the  Mercy  seat  within  the  vail.  Josephus 
so  understood  the  matter.  ‘ Ant.’  iii.  10.  § 3. 
That  the  High  priest  had  on  this  occasion 


also  to  touch  with  blood  the  horns  of  the 
Altar  of  incense  appears  from  Ex.  xxx.  10. 

that  remaineth  among  them  in  the  midst  of 
their  uncleanness']  A nearly  similar  expression 
is  used  in  ‘u.  19  regarding  the  Brazen  altar. 
The  most  sacred  earthly  things  which  came 
into  contact  with  the  nature  of  man  needed 
from  time  to  time  to  be  cleansed  and  sanctified 
by  the  blood  of  the  Sin-offerings  which  had 
been  taken  into  the  presence  of  Jehovah.  See 
on  Ex.  xxviii.  38. 

18.  the  altar  that  is  before  the  Lord]  Some 
of  the  rabbins,  and  others,  have  taken  this  for 
the  Golden  altar  (Biihr,  Knobel,  &c.).  But 
the  words,  “he  shall  go  out,”  in  connection 
with  ‘UT’.  16,  17,  would  intimate  that  he  was 
to  go  out  of  the  Tabernacle  into  the  Court. 
That  the  designation  may  properly  belong  to 
the  Brazen  altar,  is  proved  by  la.  See  Ex. 
xxix.  II,  12 ; Lev.  i.  5.  So  Josephus,  ‘ Ant.’  iii. 
10.  § 3.  The  order  of  the  ceremony  required 
that  atonement  should  first  be  made  for  the 
Most  Holy  place  with  the  Mercy  seat,  then  for 
the  Holy  place  with  the  Golden  altar,  and  then 
for  the  Altar  in  the  court.  See ‘rry.  20,  33.  The 
horns  of  the  Brazen  altar  were  touched  with 
the  blood,  as  they  were  in  the  ordinary  Sin- 
offerings.  Lev.  iv.  25,  30,  34.  Cf.  Ezek. 
xliii.  19 — 22;  Heb,  ix.  21,  22. 

of  the  blood  of  the  bullock^  and  of  the  blood  of 
the  goat]  The  Jewish  tradition  is  that,  for  this 
purpose,  some  of  the  blood  of  the  two  victims 
was  mingled  together  in  a basin. 

19.  upon  it]  The  Hebrew  is  here  exactly 
represented.  The  blood  may  have  been  sprin- 
kled either  on  the  top  or  the  side  of  the  Altar. 
In  reference  to  the  sprinkling  of  the  Mercy  seat, 
in  'v.  14,  the  front,  or  east  side,  is  distinctly 
expressed. 


V.  21 — 26.] 


LEVITICUS.  XVI. 


589 


end  of  reconciling ‘the  holy  place^  and 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
and  the  altar,  he  shall  bring  the  live 
goat : 

21  And  Aaron  shall  lay  both  his 
hands  upon  the  head  of  the  live  goat, 
and  confess  over  him  all  the  iniquities 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  all  their 
transgressions  in  all  their  sins,  putting 
them  upon  the  head  of  the  goat,  and 
fHeb,  shall  send  him  away  by  the  hand  of  ^a 
fit  into  the  wilderness: 

opportu- 

«‘iy-  22  And  the  goat  shall  bear  upon 

him  all  their  iniquities  unto  a land 
* Heb.  1 xiot  inhabited : and  he  shall  let  go 
the  goat  in  the  wilderness. 

23  And  Aaron  shall  come  into  the 


tabernacle  of  the  congregatfon,  and 
shall  put  oft'  the  linen  garments,  which 
he  put  on  when  he  went  into  the  holy 
place^  and  shall  leave  them  there : 

24  And  he  shall  wash  his  flesh  v/ith 
water  in  the  holy  place,  and  put  on 
his  garments,  and  come  forth,  and 
offer  his  burnt  offering,  and  the  burnt 
offering  of  the  people,  and  make  an 
atonement  for  himself,  and  for  the 
people. 

25  And  the  fat  of  the  sin  offering 
shall  he  burn  upon  the  altar. 

26  And  he  that  let  go  the  goat  for 
tftie  scapegoat  shall  wash  his  clothes, 
and  bathe  his  flesh  in  water,  and  after- 
ward come  into  the  camp. 


20—22.  Kot  until  the  atonement  by  blood 
of  the  holy  places  on  behalf  of  the  priests  and 
: the  people  had  been  accomplished,  was  the 

i High  priest  to  complete  the  Sin-offering  of  the 

two  goats  by  sending  the  living  one  into  the 
Wilderness.  See  on  1 1 — zj. 

21.  confess  on^er  hirn\  According  to  the 
Mishna,  the  form  of  confession  used  on  this 
Occasion  in  later  times  was: — “O  Lord,  thy 
people,  the  house  of  Israel,  have  transgressed, 
they  have  rebelled,  they  have  sinned  before 
thee.  I beseech  thee  now  absolve  their  trans- 
gressions, their  rebellion  and  their  sin  that  they 
have  sinned  against  thee,  as  it  is  written  in  the 
law  of  Moses  thy  servant,  that  on  this  day  he 
shall  make  atonement  for  you  to  cleanse  you 
from  all  your  sins,  and  ye  shall  be  clean.” 
‘ Yoma,’  VI.  2. 

a fit  mari\  Literally,  a timely  man^  or,  a man 
at  band.  Tradition  says  that  the  man  was 
appointed  for  this  work  the  year  before. 

22.  shall  bear  upon  him  all  their  iniquities 
unto  a land  not  inhabited']  Literally,  unto  a 
place  cut  off,  or  (as  in  the  margin)  a place 
“ of  separation.” — The  Jewish  tradition  that 
the  goat  was  hooted  and  goaded  away  and  at 

: last  thrown  down  a precipice  (‘  Yoma,’  vi.  4 ; 

I ^ Otho,  ‘ Rab.  Lex.’  p.  zzo),  must  be  a corrupt 
i fable  utterly  alien  to  the  true  idea  of  the  rite. 

It  is  evident  that  the  one  signification  of  the 
! ceremony  of  this  goat  was  the  complete  remo- 

! val  of  the  sins  which  were  confessed  over  him. 

I See  Note  on  Azazel  at  the  end  of  the  chapter, 

1 §§  III.  IV.  The  atonement  for  the  sins  com- 

: mitted  had  been  signified  by  the  blood  of  the 

[ slain  goat:  peace  had  so  been  made  with 

j Jehovah.  Still  the  sins  were  facts,  their  con- 

sequences remained.  That  which  Milton  has 
. so  naturally  put  into  the  mouth  of  our  first 

parent,  is  the  burden,  and  may  be  the  snare,  of 
; every  believer  who  feels  that  be  has  sinned ; — 

i VOL.  1. 


“ But  past  who  can  recal,  or  done  undo  ? 

Not  God  omnipotent,  nor  fate — ” 

Heathen  literature  shews  emphatically  how 
the  thought  has  haunted  the  human  mind  in 
different  ages.  See  Soph.  ‘Trach.’  742;  Arist. 

‘ Ethic.’  VI.  2;  Hor.  iii.  ‘ Od.’xxix.  45.  We 
know  that  the  mercy  of  God  does  nothing  by 
halves.  The  spiritual  restoration  of  the  recon- 
ciled sinner  is  perfect  before  Him.  Ps.  li.  7, 
ciii.  12;  Isa.  i.  18.  But  it  is  in  accepting  this 
truth  that  the  believer  needs  special  help. 
Temptation  continues  to  assail  his  heart,  the 
sense  of  sin  abides  with  him,  and  is  apt  to 
seem  to  him  in  itself  to  be  sin.  No  symbol 
could  so  plainly  set  forth  the  completeness  of 
Jehovah’s  acceptance  of  the  penitent,  as  a Sin- 
offering  in  which  a life  was  given  up  for  the 
Altar,  and  yet  a living  being  survived  to  carry 
away  all  sin  and  uncleanness.  The  truth  of 
atonement  was  involved  in  every  Sin-offering; 
but  it  was  only  in  the  offering  of  the  two 
goats  in  this  great  annual  rite  that  the  expres- 
sion of  it  was  carried  out  into  complete  detail. 
The  declared  object  of  the  obseiwance  was  that 
the  Israelites  might  be  “clean  from  all  their 
sins  before  the  Lord,”  ‘v.  30.  Cf.  Ps.  ciii. 
10 — 12;  Isa.  liii.  6,  ii,  12;  Micah  vii.  19; 
Joh.  i.  29;  Heb.  ix.  28;  i Pet.  ii.  24. 

26—28.  Both  he  who  led  away  the  goat 
and  he  who  burned  the  parts  of  the  Sin-offer- 
ings had  to  purify  themselves.  It  was  pro- 
bably a rule  that  those  who  went  out  of  the 
camp  during  a religious  solemnity  incurred 
uncleanness.  Many  however  suppose  that 
pollution  was  communicated  by  contact  with 
the  Scape-goat  and  with  the  flesh  of  the  Sin- 
offering.  But  there  is  no  hint  of  this  kind 
in  reference  to  the  flesh  which  was  burnt  of 
the  Sin-offerings  given  in  ch.  iv.  ninj.  12,  21. 
Cf.  also  vi.  27,  and  Note  on  Azazel  at  the  end 
of  this  chapter,  § iv. 

P P 


590 


LEVITICUS.  XVI.  [v.  27-33. 


^ chap.  6.  27  ^And  the  bullock  for  the  sin 

ifeb.  13.  offering,  and  the  goat  for  the  sin  offer- 
ing,  whose  blood  was  brought  in  to 
make  atonement  in  the  holy  place^ 
shall  one  carry  forth  without  the 
camp;  and  they  shall  burn  in  the  fire 
their  skins,  and  their  flesh,  and  their 
dung. 

28  And  he  that  burneth  them  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  his  flesh 
in  water,  and  afterward  he  shall  come 
into  the  camp. 

29  ^ And  this  shall  be  a statute 
for  ever  unto  you : that  in  the  seventh 
month,  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  month’ 
ye  shall  afflict  your  souls,  and  do  no 
v/ork  at  all,  whether  it  be  one  of  your 


own  country,  or  a stranger  that  so- 
journeth  among  you: 

30  P'or  on  that  day  shall  the  priest 
make  an  atonement  for  you,  to  cleanse 
you,  that  ye  may  be  clean  from  all 
your  sins  before  the  Lord. 

31  It  shall  be  a sabbath  of  rest  unto 
you,  and  ye  shall  afflict  your  souls,  by 
a statute  for  ever. 

32  And  the  priest,  whom  he  shall 
anoint,  and  whom  he  shall  Tonsecrate  tHeb. 
to  minister  in  the  priest’s  office  in  his'jfilS'^ 
father’s  stead,  shall  make  the  atone- 
ment, and  shall  put  on  the  linen 
clothes,  even  the  holy  garments: 

33  And  he  shall  make  an  atone- 
ment for  the  holy  sanctuary,  and  he 


2 7 . shall  burn  in  the fire']  That  is,  consume 
■with  fire,  not  burn  sacrificially.  See  on  i. 
9,  iv.  12 ; Heb.  xhi.  ii. 

29.  seventh  months  on  the  tenth  day]  The 
month  Ethanim  or  Tisri,  as  being  the  seventh 
in  the  Sacred  year,  has  been  called  the  Sabba- 
tical month.  On  the  first  day  was  celebrated 
the  Feast  of  Trumpets,  Lev.  xxiii.  24,  the  tenth 
day  was  the  Day  of  Atonement,  and  on  the 
fourteenth  day  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  com- 
menced. Fx.  xxiii.  16;  Note  on  Lev.  xxiii.  24. 

afflict  your  souls]  In  chap,  xxiii.  27—32,  the 
direction  as  to  the  mode  in  which  the  people 
were  to  obseiwe  the  Day  of  Atonement  is 
expanded,  and  sanctioned  by  a sentence  of 
cutting  off  from  the  nation  whoever  trans- 
gressed it.  It  was  to  be  a day  of  Holy  Convo- 
cation of  the  strictest  observance  (see  on  xxiii. 
7),  a Sabbath  of  rest  in  which  no  work  what- 
ever Avas  to  be  done  from  evening  to  evening, 
th<at  is,  from  the  evening  of  the  9th  to  the 
evening  of  the  loth  day.  The  expression  “to 
afflict  the  soul,”  appears  to  be  the  old  term  for 
fasting;  but  its  meaning  evidently  embraces, 
not  only  abstinence  from  food,  but  that  peni- 
tence and  humiliation  which  give  scope  and 
purpose  to  the  outward  act  of  fasting.  The 
specific  word  for  abstinence  {t%um)  is  not 
found  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  often  occurs  in 
the  Prophets  and  Historical  books.  The  Day 
of  Atonement  was  the  only  public  fast  com- 
manded by  the  I.avv  of  Moses.  On  fasts 
obsei-ved  in  later  times,  see  Zech.  viii.  19,  &c., 
and  on  those  of  the  Pharisaic  Jews,  which 
were  multiplied  to  twenty-nine  annual,  and 
two  weekly  fasts,  see  Reland,  ‘ Antiq.’  p.  270. 

a stranger  that  sojourneth  among  you]  Ra- 
ther, the  foreigner  who  dwelleth  a- 
mong  you.  See  on  Fx.  xx.  10.  The  mean- 
ing is,  one  of  foreign  blood,  who  dwelt  with 
the  Israelites,  had  abjured  false  gods,  and  had 
become  familiarly  known  to  his  neighbours. 


The  Kenites  appear  to  have  been  foreigners  of 
this  kind  (Judg.  iv.  ii,  &c.) ; and,  in  the 
next  age,  the  Gibeonites  (Josh.  ix.).  It  is  not 
improbable  that  a considerable  portion  of  the 
“ mixed  multitude”  of  Ex.  xii.  38  (cf.  v.  48) 
might  have  taken  a similar  position.  As  he 
had  the  blessing  and  protection  of  the  Law 
(Num.  XXXV.  15;  Josh.  xx.  9;  Deut.  x. 

18;  Lev.  xix.  10,  xxiii.  22,  xxiv.  22),  the  fi> 
reigner  was  bound  to  obey  its  statutes. 

He  had  to  observe  the  Sabbath  (Ex.  xx.  10, 
xxiii.  12),  the  Day  of  Atonement,  abstinence 
from  blood  (Lev.  xvii.  10),  and  the  law  of 
marriage  (Lev.  xviii.  26).  He  was  subject 
to  the  ordained  punishments  for  the  wor- 
ship of  Molech  (Lev.  xx.  2),  and  for  blas- 
phemy (Lev.  xxiv.  16).  He  could  partake  in 
the  festivities  of  Pentecost  and  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles  (Deut.  xvi.  ii,  14).  He  could 
offer  Burnt-offerings  and  Peace-offerings  (Lev. 
xvii.  8,  xxii.  18)  and  Sin-offerings  (Num. 

XV.  29).  The  Law  expressly  states  that  he 
could  not  take  part  in  the  Passover,  unless  he 
was  circumcised.  Ex.  xii.  48,  Num.  ix.  14. 
We  may  infer  that  this  condition,  expressed 
exclusively  in  regard  to  the  great  national 
festival,  applied  to  some  other  of  his  religious 
privileges. 

32.  <whom  he  shall  anoint — nvhom  he  shall  * 
consecrate]  wiio  shall  be  anointed — who 
shall  be  consecrated.  See  on  iv.  3 ; on 
the  form  of  expression,  see  on  Fx.  xxxvii.  1—5. 

the  holy  garments]  See  on  v.  4. 

3'S,  34.  There  is  here  a summary  of  what 
was  done  on  the  Day  of  Atonement.  Its  pur- 
pose was  to  signify  Atonement  for  the  whole 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  from  the  fligh  priest 
to  the  lowest  of  the  people. 

It  has  been  held  that  the  atonement  of  this 
day  related  to  all  the  sins  committed  by  the 
people  for  which  atonement  had  not  been 


V.  34-] 


LEVITICUS.  XVI. 


591 


shall  make  an  atonement  for  the  ta- 
bernacle of  the  congregation,  and  for 
the  altar,  and  he  shall  make  an  atone- 
ment for  the  priests,  and  for  all  the 
people  of  the  congregation. 


34  And  this  shall  be  an  everlasting 
statute  unto  you,  to  make  an  atone- 
ment for  the  children  of  Israel  for  all 
their  sins  ''^once  a year.  And  he  did'^'^xod. 
as  the  Lord  commanded  Adoses.  Heb.  9. 


duly  made  at  the  Altar  in  the  course  of  the 
past  year  (Knobel,  Keil,  Herxheimer).  But 
it  would  rather  seem  that  the  Day  was  in- 
tended as  an  occasion  for  expressing  more 
completely  than  could  be  done  in  the  ordi- 
nary sacrifices  the  Spiritual  truth  of  Atone- 
ment, with  a fuller  acknowledgment  of  the 
sinfulness  and  weakness  of  man  and  of  the 
corruptible  nature  of  all  earthly  things,  even 
of  those  most  solemnly  consecrated  and  de- 
voted to  the  service  of  God.  It  belonged  to 
its  observances  especially  to  set  forth,  by  the 
entrance  of  the  High  priest  into  the  Holy 
of  holies,  that  Atonement  could  only  be  ef- 
fected before  the  throne  of  Jehovah  Himself 
(cf.  Matt.  ix.  6;  Mark  ii.  7 — 10;  Heb.  iv.  16, 
&c.) ; and,  by  the  goat  sent  into  the  Wilder- 
ness, that  the  sins  atoned  for  were  not  only  for- 
given, but  carried  wholly  away.  See  on  n),  22. 
The  rites  were  not  in  any  proper  sense  sup- 
plemental, but  were  a solemn  gathering  up,  as 
it  were,  of  all  other  rites  of  atonement,  so  as 
to  make  them  point  more  expressively  to  the 
revelation  to  come  of  God’s  gracious  purpose 
to  man  in  sending  His  Son  to  be  delivered  for 
our  offences,  and  to  rise  again  for  our  justifi- 


cation; to  be  our  great  High  Priest  for  ever 
after  the  order  of  Melchisedec,  and  to  enter 
for  us  within  the  vail  (Rom.  iv.  25 ; Heb.  vi. 
20).  The  Day  of  Atonement  expanded  the 
meaning  of  every  Sin-offering,  in  the  same 
way  as  the  services  for  Good  Friday  and  Ash 
Wednesday  expand  the  meaning  of  our  Litany 
days  throughout  the  year,  and  Easter  Day,  that 
of  our  Sundays. 

34.  And  he  did  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses'\  There  is  a similar  notice  of  the  first 
obsei-vance  of  the  Passover  at  the  conclusion 
of  the  instructions  respecting  it.  Ex.  xii.  jc. 


The  modern  Jews  are  said  to  observe  the 
Day  of  Atonement  by  the  slaughter  of  a fowl. 
See  Buxtorf’s  ‘ Synagoga  Judaica,’chap.  xxvi.; 
DrMcCaul’s  ‘The  Old  Paths,’  No.  36. — The 
external  form  of  the  ceremony  of  the  goat  set 
free  may  have  been,  as  many  have  supposed, 
pre-Mosaic.  But  the  Law  must  have  given 
it  a new  and  distinct  meaning  in  making  it  part 
of  the  great  Sin-offering  of  the  year.  See. 
Introd.  §§  xvi.  xvii. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xvi.  8. 


On  Azazel. 

I.  Origin  of  the  word.  II.  Is  it  the  name  of 
a Personal  being 'I  III.  Lhe  function  of 
the  Goat  sent  away.  IV.  His  typical  cha- 
racter. V.  Names  of  the  Ewl  one.  VI. 
Other  explanations  of  A%a%el. 

I.  The  word  '‘azd%el  (^TXty)  occurs  no- 
where in  the  Old  Testament  except  in  this 
chapter.  What  is  denoted  by  it,  is  a ques- 
tion to  which  no  very  certain  answer  can  be 
given.  The  best  modern  scholars  consider  its 
most  probable  derivation  to  be  from  a root  in 
use  in  Arabic,  but  not  in  Hebrew,  signifying 
to  remonje.,  or  to  separate.  They  are  equally 
agreed  as  to  the  word  expressing  the  destina- 
tion to  which  the  goat  was  sent,  not  (as  in 
our  Version)  the  goat  itself.  The  etym.ology 
suggested  by  Buxtorf  and  the  earlier  critics, 
according  to  which  the  word  answered  to  our 
own  “ scape-goat,”  is  now  almost  universally 
rejected. 

II.  The  acceptance  of  Azazel  as  the  name  of 
a personal  being  placed  in  opposition  to  Jeho- 
vah, seems  to  be  the  only  mode  of  justifying  the 
relation  in  which  the  two  lots  stood  to  each 
other.  Upon  this  a great  majority  of  critics, 
ancient  as  well  as  modem,  are  agreed.  But 


different  views  have  been  held  regarding  the 
nature  of  this  personal  being.  The  Syriac 
version  appears  to  give  to  Azazel  the  sense 
of  the  mighty  God  (Deus  forth  Simas').,  which 
may  be  supported  oy  an  explanation  of  the 
etymology  not  wholly  improbable.  This  no- 
tion has  been  adopted  by  Le  Moyne  and  in- 
geniously carried  out  so  as  to  make  Azazel 
denote  God  as  the  God  of  power  in  His 
relation  to  the  Gentiles,  as  distinguished  from 
Jehovah,  revealed  as  the  God  of  grace  to  the 
chosen  people^.  The  greater  number  of  cri- 
tics are  however  inclined  to  take  Azazel  as 
the  name  of  an  evil  spirit  to  whom  the  goat 
was  sent.  It  is  considered  that  the  name 
itself,  signifying  the  entirely  separate  one, 
one  dwelling  in  banishment,  is  in  favour  of 
this  meaning  (Knobel,  Hengstenberg,  &c.). 
That  the  Hebrews  were  familiar  with  the 
notion  of  evil  spirits  making  their  abode  in 
desert  places  is  evident  from  Is.  xiii.  21,  xxxiv. 
14  (cf.  on  Lev.  xvii.  7)  ; Matt.  xii.  43 ; Luke 
viii.  27;  Rev.  xviii.  2.  Several  Jewish  tradi- 
tions point  to  the  same  conclusion.  The  name 
Azalzel,  easily  conaipted  from  Azazel,  is 
applied  to  a fallen  angel  in  the  book  of  Enoch, 
which  was  most  likely  written  by  a Jew  about 

^ Carpzov,  ‘App.  Grit.’  p.  439. 


LEVITICUS.  XVI. 


40  A.c.  Some  of  the  rabbinists  identify  Azazel 
with  Sammael,  the  name  given  by  the  Jews  to 
the  angel  of  death,  the  chief  of  the  devils^. — 
Origen  expressly  says  that  Azazel  denoted 
the  devil  (‘Cont.  Cels.’  lib.  vi.  p.  305). 

III.  Taking  then  Azazel  as  the  evil  one, 
the  important  question  remains,  in  what  ca- 
pacity was  the  goat  dismissed  to  him  ? Was 
he  sent  as  a sacrifice,  to  bribe,  or  mollify 
him?  (Spencer,  Gesenius,  Rosenmuller,  &c.) 
Against  this  it  is  justly  urged,  that  the  two 
goats  formed  together  one  Sin-ofiering,  and  as 
such  had  been  presented  to  Jehovah : and 
also  that  anything  like  the  worship,  by  sacrifice 
or  otherwise,  of  an  evil  spirit  was  forbidden 
by  the  whole  spirit  of  the  Law. — Or,  is 
the  strange  notion  to  be  entertained  that  the 
goat  was  sent  out  with  his  symbolical  burden 
of  sin,  as  if  to  vex  the  devil,  “to  deride  and 
to  triumph  over  him  ” in  his  own  dominion  ? 
(Witsius,  Hengstenberg,  Kurtz.) — May  not 
the  matter  be  rather  put  in  this  way,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  sense  given  in  the  preceding  notes  ? 
It  is  evident  that  the  goat  sent  away  could  not 
stand  in  the  same  relation  to  Azazel  as  the  other 
did  to  Jehovah.  Having  been  presented  to 
Jehovah  before  the  lots  were  cast,  each  goat 
stood  in  a sacrificial  relation  to  Him.  The 
casting  of  lots  was  an  appeal  to  the  decision 
of  Jehovah  (cf.  Josh.  vii.  16,  17,  xiv.  % ; 
Prov.  xvi.  33  ; Acts  i.  26,  &c.) ; it  was 
therefore  His  act  to  choose  one  of  the  goats 
for  His  service  in  the  way  of  ordinary  sa- 
crifice, the  other  for  His  service  in  carrying 
off  the  sins  to  Azazel.  The  idea  to  be  set 
before  the  Israelites  was  the  absolute  anni- 
hilation, by  the  atoning  sacrifice,  of  sin  as  a 
separation  between  Jehovah  and  His  people, 
the  complete  setting  free  of  their  consc'ences. 
See  note  on  t.-.  22.  This  was  expressed  in 
later  times  by  the  Psalmist;  “As  tar  as  the 
east  is  from  the  west,  so  far  hath  he  removed 
our  transgressions  from  us”  (ciii.  12);  and 
by  the  Prophet:  “ He  will  subdue  our  iniqui- 
ties ; and  thou  wilt  cast  all  their  sins  into  the 
depths  of  the  sea.”  Micah  vii.  19.  By  this 
expressive  outward  sign  the  sins  were  sent 
back  to  the  author  of  sin  himself,  “the  en- 
tirely separate  one,”  who  was  banished  from 
the  realm  of  grace. 

IV.  The  removal  of  the  sins  which  had  been 
atoned  for  could  only  be  effected  by  means  as 
holy,  as  much  belonging  to  Jehovah,  as  those 
which  had  been  employed  in  the  atonement 
itself.  They  were  not,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Sin-offering,  put  upon  the  head  of  the  goat 
by  the  offerers,  nor  by  the  elders  of  the  people 
as  their  representatives  (see  Lev.  iv.  15) ; 
but  by  the  High  priest  in  his  holy  white 
robes  lately  come  from  the  presence  of  Je- 
hovah in  the  innermost  Sanctuary,  presenting 
the  signs  of  his  mediatorial  character  in  the 

^ Buxt.  ‘ .Syn.  Jucl.’  c.  xxvi ; ‘Lex.  Talm.’  p. 
1495.  Roscnmiillcr,  on  Lev.  xvi.  8. 


strongest  light.  The  goat  itself  could  not 
have  lost  the  sacred  character  with  which  it 
had  been  endued  in  being  presented  before 
Jehovah.  It  was,  as  much  as  the  slain  goat, 
a figure  of  Him  wTo  bore  our  griefs  and 
carried  our  sorrows,  on  whom  the  Lord  laid 
the  iniquity  of  us  all  (Is.  liii.  4,  6),  that 
we  might  become  a sanctified  Church  to  be 
presented  unto  Himself,  not  having  spot  or 
wrinkle  or  any  such  thing  (Eph.  v.  26,  27). 

The  Fathers  in  general  speak  of  each  goat 
as  a figure  of  our  Saviour.  (Cyril  Alex., 
Theodoret,  Hesychius,  Jerome.)  But  they  do 
not  agree  with  the  view  Vv^hich  has  been  given 
as  to  the  destination  of  the  living  goat.  Re- 
garding the  animal  as  a type  of  the  risen 
Saviour,  Cyril  supposed  the  place  to  which  he 
was  sent  to  represent  Heaven  to  which  Christ 
was  to  ascend:  Theodoret,  taking  the  same 
general  view,  conceived  it  to  symbolize  the 
impassibility  of  the  di‘vine  ?:ature  (ro  arrade^  r^v 
OeoTijTos),  upon  which  the  sins  were  cast  and 
lost  all  their  virulence.  Cyril,  ‘ Glaph.’  p.  374; 
Theod.  ‘ Quaest.  in  Lev.’  xxii. 

V.  We  do  not  see  the  practical  end  of  such 
inquiries  as  have  occupied  the  attention  of  so 
many  critics  regarding  the  identity  or  non- 
identity of  Azazel  with  the  serpent  of  Genesis 
iii.,  with  Satan,  with  the  Egyptian  Typhon, 
or  v/ith  some  other  recognized  aspect  of  the 
evil  spirit 2.  Our  spiritual  enemy  has  never 
been  made  known  to  us  by  a proper  name. 
We  can  only  here  and  there  trace  the  mention 
of  him  in  the  Scriptures  until  his  personality 
becomes  most  clearly  developed  in  his  struggle 
with  the  Son  of  God ; but  even  then  he  has 
no  stedfast  name.  He  is  called  the  serpent 
(Gen.  iii ; Rev.  xii.  9),  the  enemy  or  fiend, 
(“  Satan,”  Job  i.  6 ; Zech.  iii.  i,  2 ; Rev.  xii.  9, 
XX.  2),  the  accuser,  or  slanderer  (Matt.iv.  10; 
Luke  X.  18;  Rom.  xvi.  20;  Rev.  xii.  9,  &c. 
&c.),  the  tempter  (Matt.  iv.  3 ; i Thess.  iii.  5), 
the  prince  of  this  world  (John  xii.  31,  xiv.  30, 
xvi.  ii),  the  prince  of  the  power  of  the  air 
(Eph.  ii.  2),  the  destroyer  (Rev.  ix.  ii  ; cf. 
Job  xxvi.  6 ; Prov.  xxvii.  20,  where  the  same 
Hebrew  word  abadddn\  is  used),  and 

the  Jews  called  him  by  the  name  of  the  Phi- 
listine god,  Beelzebub  (Matt.  x.  25  ; Luke  xi. 
15,  &c.).  In  this  place  he  appears  to  be 
called  by  a name  which  was  no  doubt  prse- 
Mosaic  (as  Gesenius  and  Ewald  have  re- 
marked), with  a very  apposite  meaning.  This 
variety  of  designation  in  different  ages,  and 
under  different  circumstances  of  development, 
may  tend  to  shew  in  what  a practical  v»^ay  the 
idea  of  one  who  is  a rebel  against  God  and  a 
spiritual  enemy  to  man  naturally  arises  in  the 
human  mind.  It  tends  to  prove  the  important 
fact  that  the  belief  in  the  existence  of  such  a 
being,  through  a succession  of  ages,  has  not 
been  dependent  on  the  tradition  of  a name. 

2 Gesen.  ‘Thes.’  p.  1012.  Ewald,  ‘Altcrthlim.’ 
403.  Hengstenberg,  ‘ Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
Moses,’  p.  170.  Kurtz,  ‘S.  W.’  402,  &c. 


V.  1—4.] 


LEVITICUS.  XVIL 


593 


VI.  The  other  chief  explanations  of  the 
word  'aza^el  may  be  briefly  noticed. 

(1)  The  word  has  been  taken  as  a verbml 
substantive  signifying,  with  its  preposition, ybr 
complete  remonjal  (Bilhr,  Winer,  Tholuck,  &c.). 
As  a formal  explanation  of  the  Hebrew  word, 
this  is  of  very  recent  authority,  but  it  may 
have  some  countenance  from  the  rendering  of 
the  Septuagint  in  two  out  of  the  four  places  in 
which  "'azazel  occurs  {"v^.  lo,  26),  and  still 
more  from  the  Old  Italic,  which  reads  “ ad 
dimissionem.” 

(2)  It  has  been  understood  to  signify  some 
mountainous  desert  place.  Saadia,  several 
Jewish  writers  quoted  by  Vatablus,  Bochart, 
Carpzov,  Reland,  Le  Clerc,  &c.  But  this 
notion  is  opposed  to  w.  10,  21,  in  which  the 
desert  is  distinguished  from  Azazel  in  such  a 
way  as  hardly  to  admit  of  one  being  the  ex- 
planation of  the  other. 

(3)  Azazel  has  been  taken  as  a designa- 
tion of  the  goat  itself,  by  tlie  ancient  Greek 


versions  (but  the  LXX.  is  not  consistent  in 
this  respect  in  w.  10,  26),  the  Vulgate,  Lu- 
ther, the  English  Version,  &c.  The  word  used 
by  the  Septuagint  in  n).  8 (dnoTroixTralos)  can 
only  be  taken  in  an  active  sense  = the  a'verter  of^ 
ills^  a'verruncus^  not  as  it  is  by  several  of  the 
Fathers,  as  the  goat  dismissed.  Symmachus  has, 
the  goat  that  departs  (^dTrepgojjievos).,  Theodo- 
tion,  the  goat  sent  anjoay  (dcfnepevos),  Aquila, 
the  goat  set  free.,  strictly  “ the  scapegoat”  (utto- 
XeA.u/ifi/o?),  and  the  Vulgate,  caper  emissarlus. 
Josephus  agrees  in  sense  with  the  Septuagint. 
But  the  construction  of  the  Hebrew  is  cer- 
tainly not  in  favour  of  these  renderings,  nor 
of  Azazel  being  in  any  sense  applied  to  the 
goat  as  a proper  name. — If  on  one  of  the  lots 
the  prepositional  prefix  ^ has  the  ordinary 
sense  of  for  or  ^0,  it  is  not  likely  that,  on  the 
other,  it  would  mean,  appointed  to  be.  The 
inconsistency  which  our  translators  have  fallen 
into  in  following  the  Vulgate,  may  be  seen  in 
2;.  10. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


I The  blood  of  all  slain  beasts  must  be  offered  to 
the  Lord  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle.  7 
They  7?iust  not  offer  to  devils.  10  All  eating 
of  blood  is  fo7-bidden,  1 5 a7id  all  that  dieth 
alo7te,  or  is  tor7i. 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
Jf\_  ses,  saying, 

2  Speak  unto  Aaron,  and  unto  his 
sons,  and  unto  all  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them  ; This  is  the 


thing  which  the  Lord  hath  command- 
ed, saying, 

3 What  man  soever  there  he  of  the 
house  of  Israel,  that  killeth  an  ox,  or 
lamb,  or  goat,  in  the  camp,  or  that 
killeth  it  out  of  the  camp, 

4 And  bringeth  it  not  unto  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, to  offer  an  offering  unto  the 
Lord  before  the  tabernacle  of  the 


Chap.  XVII. 

The  leading  topic  of  this  chapter  is  the 
blood  of  animals;  what  it  is,  why  it  should 
be  held  sacred,  how  it  should  be  treated  in 
the  processes  of  daily  life.  The  subject  evi- 
dently has  a connection  with  what  goes  before, 
as  an  explanation  of  why  blood  should  be  an 
object  of  chief  significance  on  the  Altar,  and 
especially  in  the  rites  of  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment, in  which  its  meaning  was  brought  into 
its  holiest,  highest  association.  — But  this 
chapter  in  its  immediate  bearing  on  the  daily 
life  of  the  Israelites  stands  as  the  first  of  four 
(xvii. — XX.),  which  set  forth  practical  duties, 
directing  the  Israelites  to  walk,  not  in  the  way 
of  the  heathen,  but  according  to  the  ordi- 
nances of  Jehovah. 

On  slaying  Animals  for  Food. 

I — 16. 

1,  2.  The  Legislator  is  now  commanded  to 
address  the  whole  of  the  people  as  well  as  the 
priests.  The  subject-matter  of  the  laws  here 
expressed  is  one  in  which  the  ordinary  life  of 
the  people  was  brought  into  immediate  relation 
to  the  priests’. 


All  animals  are  to  be  slaughtered  before  the 
Tabernacle.  3 — 7. 

3,  4.  Every  domesticated  animal  that  was 
slain  for  food  was  a sort  of  Peace-offering 
(-IT.  5):  the  Mishna  says  that  the  shoulder, 
the  cheeks,  and  the  paunch  of  each  animal  so 
slaughtered  was  given  to  the  priests  (‘Cholin,’ 
X.  I,  see  on  vii.  32).  This  law,  though  it 
expressed  a great  principle  (see  on  1;.  7), 
was  only  provisional  in  its  practical  bearing. 
It  could  only  be  kept  as  long  as  the  children 
of  Israel  dwelt  in  their  camp  in  the  Wilderness. 
The  restriction  was  removed  before  they 
settled  in  the  Holy  Land,  wdiere  their  num- 
bers. and  diffusion  over  the  country  would 
have  rendered  its  strict  observance  impossible. 
See  Deut.  xii.  15,  16,  20 — 24.  On  the  mode 
of  slaughtering  see  Note  at  the  end  of  the 
Chapter. 

3.  lamb'\  Sheep.  See  on  iii.  7. 

4.  Rather  “And  bringeth  it  not  unto  the 
entrance  of  the  Tent  of  meeting  to  offer 
it  as  an  offering  before  the  Tabernacle 
(fi.e.  the  dwellingplace)  of  Jehovah,”  &c. 
See  on  Ex.  xxvi.  i : Lev.  i.  3. 


594 


LEVITICUS.  XVII. 


[v-  5—9- 


Lord;  blood  shall  be  imputed  unto  that 
man ; he  hath  shed  blood;  and  that  man 
shall  be  cut  olF  from  among  his  people : 

5 To  the  end  that  the  children  of 
Israel  may  bring  their  sacrifices,  which 
they  offer  in  the  ope*n  field,  even  that 
they  may  bring  them  unto  the  Lord, 
unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  unto  the  priest,  and  offer 
them yijr  peace  offerings  unto  the  Lord. 

6 And  the  priest  shall  sprinkle  the 
blood  upon  the  altar  of  the  Lord  at 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 


gregation, and  burn  the  fat  for  a "sweet  « Exod. 
savour  unto  the  Lord.  di‘ap.4. 

7 And  they  shall  no  more  offer 
their  sacrifices  unto  devils,  after  whom 
they  have  gone  a whoring.  This 
shall  be  a statute  for  ever  unto  them 
throughout  their  generations. 

8 ^ And  thou  shalt  say  unto  them. 
Whatsoever  man  there  be  of  the  house 
of  Israel,  or  of  the  strangers  which 
sojourn  among  you,  that  offereth  a 
burnt  offering  or  sacrifice, 

9 And  bringeth  it  not  unto  the 


blood  shall  be  imputed  unto  that  man\  i.  e.  he 
has  incurred  guilt  in  shedding  blood  in  an  un- 
lawful manner. 

cut  opf~\  See  on  Ex.  xxxi.  14. 

5.  sacrifices']  The  Hebrew  is  %ebdchim^ 

i.  e.  slain  beasts  or  beasts  for  slaughter.  See 
Introd.  § iii.  St  Augustin  (‘  Qiiaest.  in 
Lev.’  56)  understood  3 — 6 to  refer  to 

ceremonial  sacrifices.  The  older  versions  (with 
our  own)  seem  to  countenance  this.  But  the 
connection  justifies  most  of  the  modern  in- 
terpreters in  applying  the  words  to  animals 
slaughtered  for  food.  See  the  heading  in  our 
Bible.  The  whole  verse  might  be  rendered: 
In  order  that  the  children  of  Israel 
may  bring  their  beasts  for  slaughter, 
■which  they  (now)  slaughter  in  the 
open  field,  even  that  they  may  bring 
them  before  Jehovah  to  the  entrance 
of  the  Tent  of  meeting  unto  the 
priests,  and  slaughter  them  as  Peace- 
offerings  to  Jehovah. 

6.  sprinkle]  i.e.  cast  forth.  See  Introd. 
§ vi. 

buryi]  See  on  i.  9. 

fat]  i.e.  the  suet.  See  Introd.  § viii. 

7.  offer  their  sacrifices]  The  words  might 
be  rendered,  sacrifice  their  beasts  for 
slaughter.  See  on  ^v.  5. 

u-nto  de’vils]  The  word  sd'eer  denotes  a 
shaggy  goat.  See  on  iv.  23.  But  it  is  some- 
times employed,  as  here,  to  denote  an  object 
of  heathen  worship  or  a demon  dwelling  in  the 
deserts,  z Chron.  xi.  15;  Is.  xiii.  21,  xxxiv. 
14.  The  worship  of  the  goat,  accompanied 
by  the  foulest  rites,  prevailed  at  Mendes  in 
Lower  Egypt.  Herodot.  ii.  46;  Strabo,  xvil. 
p.  802;  Ailian,  ‘Hist.  An.’  vii.  19:  other 
authorities  are  given  by  Bochart,  ‘ Hicroz.’ 
lib.  II,  c.  53.  The  Israelites  may  have  been 
led  into  this  snare  while  they  dwelt  in  Egypt. 
See  Hengstenberg,  ‘ Egypt,’ &c.  p.  203.  Cf. 
Josh.  xxiv.  14,  15  ; Ezek.  xxiii.  8,  9,  21. 
There  is  however  no  evidence  to  shew  that 
the  slaughter  of  animals,  in  the  way  here 
alluded  to,  formed  any  part  of  the  goat  wor- 


ship of  Egypt.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
ancient  Persians  slew  victims  in  honour  of 
their  deities  in  the  open  fields.  Herodot.  i. 
132;  Strabo,  xv.  p.  732.  There  is  a refer- 
ence in  the  Koran  to  the  practice  of  the 
heathen  Arabs  of  calling  on  false  gods  in 
the  act  of  slaughter.  Sura  v.,  with  Sale’s 
note.  Cf.  Mishna,  ‘ Cholin,’  ii.  8.  See  also 
Palgrave,  ‘Arabia,’  Vol.  i.  p.  10.  The  or- 
dinances of  Menu  do  not  approve  of  any  flesh 
being  eaten  which  has  not  been  offered  to  a 
deity.  Ch.  v.  §§  23,  32,  34,  39>  4i,  5^.  These 
customs  seem  to  bear  clear  traces  of  a primeval 
habit  in  regard  to  taking  the  life  of  animals 
for  food,  which  the  Israelites  at  this  time  were 
in  some  form  or  other  tempted  to  invest  with 
idolatrous  associations.  It  might  be  better, 
following  the  hint  furnished  by  Is.  xiii.  21, 
xxxiv.  14,  to  render  the  expression,  to  tbe 
evil  spirits  of  tlie  desert.  Luther  has, 
to  feld  denjils. 

But  this  law  for  the  slaughtering  of  animals 
was  not,  as  some  have  suggested  {e.g.  Hiiver- 
nick,  ‘ Pent.’  p.  299),  merely  to  exclude  idola- 
try from  the  chosen  nation.  It  had  a more 
positive  and  permanent  purpose.  It  bore 
witness  to  the  sanctity  of  life;  it  served  to 
remind  the  people  of  the  solemnity  of  the 
grant  of  the  lives  of  all  inferior  creatures 
made  to  Noah  (Gen.  ix.  2,  3);  it  purged  and 
directed  towards  Jehovah  the  feelings  in  re- 
spect to  animal  food  which  seem  to  be  com- 
mon to  man’s  nature ; and  it  connected  a habit 
of  thanksgiving  with  the  maintenance  of  our 
human  life  by  means  of  daily  food,  i Tim. 
iv.  3 — 5.  Having  acknowledged  that  the 
animal  belonged  to  Jehovah,  the  devout  He- 
brew received  back  its  flesh  as  Jehovah’s  gift. 
Cf.  Note  after  Chap.  xi.  §§  iii.  I'V. 

No  Sacrifice  to  be  offered  except  in  the  Court. 

8,  9. 

The  precept  is  here  put  into  a negative 
form  which  has  already  been  expressed  posi- 
tively in  regard  to  each  kind  of  sacrifice  in 
detail.  Ch.  i.  ii.  iii.,  &c.  Cf.  Deut.  xii.  2. 


V.  10 — 14-] 


LEVITICUS.  XVIL 


595 


door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, to  ofl'er  it  unto  the  Lord; 
even  that  man  shall  be  cut  off  from 
among  his  people. 

10  And  whatsoever  man  there 
be  of  the  h-^use  of  Israel,  or  of  the 
strangers  that  sojourn  among  you, 
that  eateth  any  manner  of  blood;  I 
will  even  set  my  face  against  that  soul 
that  eateth  blood,  and  will  cut  him  off 
from  among  his  people. 

11  For  the  life  of  the  flesh  is  in 
the  blood : and  I have  given  it  to  you 
upon  the  altar  to  make  an  atonement 
for  your  souls : for  it  is  the  blood  that 
maketh  an  atortement  for  the  soul. 


12  Therefore  I said  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  No  soul  of  you  shall 
eat  blood,  neither  shall  any  stranger 
that  sojourneth  among  you  eat  blood. 

13  And  whatsoever  man  there  he 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  or  of  the 
strangers  that  sojourn  among  you, 

'which  hunteth  and  catcheth  any  beast  t Heb. 
or  fowl  that  may  be  eaten ; he  shall 

even  pour  out  the  blood  thereof,  and  tivnUng. 
cover  it  with  dust. 

14  f'or  it  is  the  life  of  all  flesh ; the 
blood  of  it  is  for  the  life  thereof : there- 
fore I said  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 

^ Ye  shall  eat  the  blood  of  no  manner  * Gen.  9. 4. 
of  flesh  : for  the  life  of  all  flesh  is  the 


8.  the  strangers  'njohich  sojourn']  the  fo- 
reigners who  dwell.  See  on  xvi.  29. 

or  sacrifice]  That  is,  a slaughtered  offering 
of  any  kind,  generally  a Peace-offering.  See 
Introd.  § iii. 

9.  cut  ojfi^  &c.]  See  Ex.  xxxi.  14. 

Blood  not  to  be  eaten^  and  <why.  10 — 14. 

The  prohibition  to  eat  blood  is  repeated  in 
seven  places  in  the  Pentateuch,  Gen.  ix.  4; 
Lev.  iii.  17,  vii.  26,  27,  xvii.  ig — 14,  xix.  26; 
Deut.  xii.  16,  23,  24,  xv.  23.  But  in  this 
passage  the  ground  of  the  law  is  stated  more 
fully  than  elsewhere. 

11.  This  verse  should  rather  be  render- 
ed;— For  the  soul  of  the  flesh  is  in  the 
blood;  and  I have  ordained  it  for  you 
upon  the  Altar,  to  make  atonement 
for  your  souls;  for  the  blood  it  is 
which  makes  atonement  by  means  of 
the  soul.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the 
chapter. 

the  life  of  the  flesh  is  in  the  blood]  The 
word  here  translated  life  {nephesh)  is  the  same 
which  is  twice  rendered  soul  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  verse.  This  is  one  of  the  places 
which  the  English  translators,  from  Wick- 
liffe  to  the  most  recent,  with  Luther,  de 
Sacy,  Diodati,  Luzzatto  and  others,  have  en- 
tangled in  difficulty  owing  to  the  vague  use 
which  they  have  made  of  the  word  soul.  The 
ajicient  versions,  with  Leo  Juda,  Junius 
, and  T remellius,  the  Geneva  F rench  and  the 
recent  German  versions,  consistently  follow 
the  original.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chap. 

I hanje  grven  it  to  you  upon  the  altar]  These 
words  (as  Kurtz  has  observed)  preclude  any 
superstitious  notion  that  there  was  atoning 
virtue  in  the  blood  itself.  It  had  a natural 
fitness  to  express  a truth  and  was  therefore 
the  symbol  chosen  by  Divine  wisdom  for  use 
upon  the  Altar. 

for  it  is  the  blood  that  maketh  an  atonement 


for  the  soul]  Our  translators  have  followed 
the  LXX.,  the  Vulgate,  the  Targums  and 
Luther.  A few  modern  critics  take  the  same 
course.  But  the  more  exact  rendering  of 
the  Hebrew  is  that  given  above.  So  Biihr, 
Zunz,  Kurtz,  Knobel,  Keil,  Herxheirner,  &c. 

12.  ' There  are  two  distinct  grounds  given 
for  the  prohibition  of  blood  as  food:  first,  its 
own  nature  as  the  vital  fluid;  secondly,  its 
consecration  in  sacrificial  worship.  We  have 
already  noticed  that  the  prohibition  of  fat 
(suet)  was  distinguished  from  that  of  blood 
by  its  being  grounded  simply  on  its  consecra- 
tion to  a peculiar  use  on  the  Altar  and  its  being 
limited  to  the  suet  of  the  animals  which  were 
oflTered  in  sacrifice.  See  on  vii.  25.  It  would 
seem  that  it  was  in  virtue  of  this  distinction 
that  the  Apostles  decided  to  retain  only  the 
restriction  regarding  blood,  confirmed  as  it  is 
by  the  primeval  prohibition,  Gen.  ix.  4. — The 
Mahometans,  in  like  manner,  abstain  from 
blood  but  not  from  fat.  See  Note  on  v.  3. — 

St  Augustin,  in  connection  with  the  saying  of 
our  Lord,  “ Except  ye  eat  my  flesh  and  drink 
my  blood,”  &c.,  remarks,  “quserendum  igitur 
quid  significet,  quod  homo  prohibetur  in  lege 
sanguinem  manducare,  eumque  Deo  fundere 
jubetur.”  ‘ Quasst.  in  Lev.’  57. 

13.  beast  or  fonvf]  See  on  xi.  7.  The 
same  rule  was  laid  down  for  the  blood  of 
domesticated  animals  when  at  a later  period 
they  were  no  longer  required  to  be  slaughtered 
in  the  court.  Deut.  xii.  15,  16,  22 — 24.  See 
Note  on  n.  II  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

14.  Rather,  For  tlie  soul  of  all  flesk 
is  its  blood  witli  its  soul  (j.e.  its  blood 
and  soul  together):  therefore  spake  I to 
the  children  of  Israel,  Ye  shall  not 
eat  the  blood  of  any  flesh,  ^or  the 
soul  of  all  flesh  is  its  blood,  &c.  The 
two  Geneva  versions,  Zunz,  Knobel,  Herx-  I 
heimer,  &c.  See  Note  on  v.  11. 


596 


LEVITICUS.  XVII. 


[v.  15,  16. 


blood  thereof : whosoever  eateth  it 
shall  be  cut  oft. 

t Heb.  And  every  soul  that  eateth  ^that 

which  died  of  itself  or  that  which 
was  torn  with  beasts^  whether  it  be  one 
of  your  own  country,  or  a stranger, 


he  shall  both  wash  his  clothes,  and 
bathe  himself  in  water,  and  be  un- 
clean until  the  even:  then  shall  he 
be  clean. 

16  But  if  hewashr/:'^  not,  nor  bathe 
his  flesh;  then  he  shall  bear  his  iniquity. 


15.  Cf.  Ex,  xxii.  31;  Lev.  xi.  39  (see 
note),  xxii.  8;  Deut.  xiv.  21.  This  law  ap- 
pears to  be  grounded  on  the  fact  that  the 
body  of  an  animal  killed  by  a wild  beast,  or 
which  has  died  of  itself,  still  retains  a great  por- 
tion of  its  blood.  The  importance  ascribed  to 
this  law  in  later  times  may  be  seen  i S.  xiv, 
32 — 35;  Ezek,  iv.  14,  xliv.  31,  and  still  more 
in  the  Apostolic  decision  regarding  “things 
strangled,”  which  are  pointedly  connected  with 
blood.  Acts  XV.  20.  See  Note  on  nj.  3 at  the 
end  of  the  chapter. 

a stranger]  a foreigner,  dwelling  with  the 


Israelites. — In  Ex.  xxii.  31  we  find  that  such 
carcases  were  to  be  given  to  the  dogs.  On  the 
apparent  modification  of  this  law  in  Deut.  xiv. 
21,  see  note  in  loc. 

15,  16.  The  sanction  of  this  law  is  less 
peremptory  than  that  of  the  law  against  the 
eating  of  blood.  See  on  'u.  12.  The  latter  was 
“cutting  off  from  among  his  people”  (y^v.  10, 
14);  the  former,  only  the  penalty  of  an  easy 
form  of  purification.  See  on  xi.  39,  40.  But 
if  the  prescribed  rite  of  purification  had  been 
neglected,  a Sin-offering  was  required.  See 
on  V.  2,  3. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xvii. 


I.  On  the  slaughtering  of  Animals. 
• -z;.  3. 

The  same  mode  of  slaughter  appears  to  have 
been  followed  by  the  Hebrews,  the  Egyptians, 
and  the  Arabs.  As  regards  the  mere  slaying 
the  animal,  there  is  no  trace  of  any  difference 
in  the  mode,  whether  it  was  intended  for  ordi- 
nary food  or  for  a sacrifice.  It  should  be 
observed  that,  amongst  the  Semitic  nations 
above  all  others,  the  taking  the  life  of  an 
animal,  especially  of  an  animal  of  a kind  which 
might  be  offered  in  sacrifice,  has  always  been 
regarded  as  a solemn  act,  partaking  of  a some- 
what religious  character.  There  is  a treatise 
on  the  subject  in  the  Mishna,  entitled  ‘ C ho- 
ling’ and  one  in  the  Hedaya-,  entitled  ‘ Zab- 
bah,’  which  show  the  importance  attached  to 
the  matter  in  Jewish  and  Arab  traditions. 
The  method  of  slaughter  may  be  clearly  ga- 
thered from  these  treatises.  The  three  points 
kept  in  view  were,  that  the  process  should  be 
as  expeditious  as  possible,  that  the  least  possi- 
ble suffering  should  be  inflicted  on  the  crea- 
ture, and  that  the  blood  should  flow  out  of 
the  carcase  in  the  most  speedy  and  thorough 
manner.  The  animal,  if  a large  one,  was 
thrown  down  by  hobbling.  The  slayer  was 
provided  with  a sword  or  long  knife  which 
he  drew  across  the  throat,  at  one  stroke  cut- 
ting through  the  windpipe,  the  gullet,  and  the 
large  blood-vessels  of  the  neck.  The  least 
tearing  of  the  flesh,  owing  to  a notched  or 
blunt  weapon,  or  to  clumsy  manipulation, 
rendered  the  carcase  unclean  In  some  ancient 

^ See  also  Philo,  ‘cle  Victimis,’  c.  v and 
L’fimpereur’s  Notes  on  ‘Middoth,’  c.  ill. 

2 Vol.  IV.  p.  62,  sq. 

^ The  present  Jews  observe  precisely  the  same 


Egyptian  pictures  this  method  is  shown.  In 
one  of  those  given  by  Wilkinson,  a man  is  hold- 
ing up  by  the  horns  the  head  of  the  dying  ox, 
while  an  attendant  is  removing  in  basins  the 
blood  as  it  runs  from  the  neck-^.  There  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  this  picture  accurately, 
represents  the  mode  pursued  in  the  court  of 
the  Tabernacle. 

The  verse  of  the  Koran  which  speaks  on  the 
subjects  of  this  chapter  is  worth  quoting: 
“That  which  dieth  of  itself,  and  blood,  and 
swine’s  flesh,  and  all  that  hath  been  sacrificed 
under  the  invocation  of  any  other  name  than 
that  of  God,  and  the  strangled,  and  the  killed 
by  a blow  or  by  a fall  or  by  goring,  and  that 
which  hath  been  eaten  by  beasts  of  prey  (un- 
less ye  make  it  clean  by  giving  the  death 
stroke  yourselves),  and  that  which  hath  been 
sacrificed  on  blocks  of  stone,  are  forbidden  to 
you®.”  The  “blocks  of  stones”  are  such  as 
were  set  up  for  the  purpose  by  the  pagan 
Ai'abs®.  All  Moslems  appear  to  reckon 
flesh  as  carrion,  unless  Bismillah  (/,  e.  ‘ in  the 
name  of  God  ’)  is  pronounced  when  the  throat 
of  the  animal  is  cut,  or,  in  the  case  of  game, 
when  the  gun  is  fired,  or  the  leash  of  the  dog 
slipped^.  The  strictness,  even  of  the  most 

rules.  It  would  seem  that  skill  in  the  slaughter- 
ing of  an  animal  was  as  little  degrading  to  the 
ancient  Israelite  as  the  skill  of  a sportsman  is 
amongst  ourselves.  Dean  Stanley  makes  a 
striking  remark  in  connection  with  the  Passover 
of  the  modern  Samaritans  which  bears  on  this 
subject.  ‘Jewish  Church,’  Vol.  ii.  p.  412. 

* ‘Popular  Account,’  i.  p.  175. 

6 Sura  v.,  Rodwell’s  translation,  p.  631. 

® Sale’s  note;  cf.  Burton,  ‘Arabia,’  Vol.  ill. 

P-  30.L 

7 ‘IIedh.ya,’  iv.  p.  6^;  Lane’s  ‘ Modern  Egyp- 


V.  I,  2. 


LEVITICUS.  XVIII. 


degraded  of  them,  in  this  respect  is  remarkable. 
Mr  Speke,  in  his  African  journey,  found  that 
his  Arab  attendants  would  not  eat  the  flesh 
of  any  animal  which  had  been  shot,  unless  they 
had  cut  its  throat  in  due  form  before  its  death. 

II.  On  the  Life  in  the  Blood,  v.  ii. 

There  are  three  words  relating  to  the  con- 
stitution of  man  in  the  Old  Testament,  and 
three  corresponding  ones  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, which  it  seems  desirable  to  notice  in 
their  connection  with  this  subject.  Olshausen, 
in  his  ‘ Opuscula,’  has  treated  the  words  at 
length  as  far  as  the  New  Testament  is  con- 
cerned, has  satisfactorily  vindicated  the  con- 
sistency and  clearness  of  the  sacred  writers, 
and  has  traced  out  the  way  in  which  confu- 
sion respecting  them  has  crept  into  theological 
language.  It  will  perhaps  be  sufficient  for  our 
purpose  thus  to  mark  the  difference  between 
the  words  in  question;  (i)  chay  (Tl), 

•vita^  denoting  Life,  as  opposed  to  death  L 
(2)  7iephesh  anima^  the  Soul, 

as  distinguished  from  the  body;  the  individual 
life  either  in  man  or  beast,  whether  united  to 
the  body  during  life  ichay')^  or  separated  from 
the  body  after  death;  observe  the  expression 
“living  soul,”  Gen.  ii.  7:  (3)  ruach  {JW\) 
TTVfvixa^  spiritus,  the  Spirit,  that  which  is  op- 
posed to  the  flesh,  Rom.  viii.  6 ; Gal.  v.  1 7 ; 
I Pet.  iii.  18,  and  is  distinguished  from  the 
life  of  the  flesh ; the  highest  element  in 
man,  that  which,  in  its  true  condition, 
holds  communion  with  God  (Rom.  viii.  4, 
5,  6).  Some  of  the  passages  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament which,  if  read  in  the  original,  the  Vul- 
gate, Erasmus,  Beza,  or  the  Geneva  French, 
illustrate  the  distinction  which  now  claims 
our  attention  are.  Matt.  vi.  25,  x.  28,  39, 
xvi.  25,  26;  Mark  viii.  35;  Luke  xii.  22,  23; 
I Cor.  XV.  44;  I Thess.  v.  23;  Heb.  iv.  12: 
while  several  of  these  in  our  version  exemplify 
the  confusion  of  which  we  have  spoken. 

The  words  nephesh  and  like  the  Eng- 

lish soul^  were,  however,  occasionally  used  for 
person.  Gen.  xlvi.  18;  Lev.  ii.  i (in  Hebrew), 
iv.  2,  V.  I,  15  ; Acts  vii.  14,  xxvii.  37,  &c. 
Compare  the  use  of  our  word  body  in  the 
Prayer-Book  Ps.  liii.  i,  and  in  the  compounds, 
nobody^  anybody.,  &c.  Nephesh  is  even  used  in 
some  cases  where  we  should  rather  use  dead 
body,  Num.  V.  2,  vi.  ii,  ix.  6,  10,  &c. 

tians,’  I.  134.  Cf.  Baker,  ‘Nile  Tributaries,’ 
pp.  137,  202;  Speke,  pp.  66,  230,  513. 

^ Gen.  i.  20,  24,  ii.  7;  Deut.  xxx.  15,  19; 
Prov.  xviii.  21. 


The  soul  {nephesh')  has  its  abode  in  the  blood 
as  long  as  life  lasts.  In  -u.  14,  the  Soul  is  iden- 
tified with  the  Blood,  as  it  is  in  Genesis  ix.  4. 
Deut.  xii.  23  'K  That  the  Blood  is  rightly  thus 
distinguished  from  all  other  constituents  of 
the  body  is  acknowledged  by  the  high- 
est authorities  in  physiology.  “It  is  the 
fountain  of  life  (says  Harvey),  the  first  to 
live,  and  the  last  to  die,  and  the  primary  seat 
of  the  animal  soul;  it  lives  and  is  nourished 
of  itself,  and  by  no  other  part  of  the  human 
body.”  John  Hunter  inferred  that  it  is  the 
seat  of  life,  because  all  the  parts  of  the  frame  are 
formed  and  nourished  from  it.  “ And  if  (says 
he)  it  has  not  life  previous  to  this  operation,  it 
must  then  acquire  it  in  the  act  of  forming ; 
for  we  all  give  our  assent  to  the  existence  of 
life  in  the  parts  when  once  formed.”  Milne 
Edwards  observes  that,  “if  an  animal  be 
bled  till  it  falls  into  a state  of  syncope,  and 
the  further  loss  of  blood  is  not  prevented, 
all  muscular  motion  quickly  ceases,  respira- 
tion is  suspended,  the  heart  pauses  from  its 
action,  life  is  no  longer  manifested  by  any 
outward  sign,  and  'death  soon  becomes  ine- 
vitable; but  if,  in  this  state,  the  blood  of 
another  animal  of  the  same  species  be  injected 
into  the  veins  of  the  one  to  all  appearance 
dead,  we  see  with  amazement  this  inanimate 
body  return  to  life,  gaining  accessions  of 
vitality  with  each  new  quantity  of  blood  that  is 
introduced,  by-and-bye  beginning  to  breathe 
freely,  moving  with  ease,  and  finally  walking 
as  it  was  wont  to  do,  and  recovering  com- 
pletely.” Art.  Blood.  ‘ Cyclopsedia  of  Anatomy 
and  Physiology.’  See  also  Stevens’  “Obser- 
vations on  the  Blood,”  p.  119.  The  more  or 
less  distinct  traces  of  the  recognition  of  blood 
as  the  vehicle  of  life  to  be  found  in  the  Greek 
and  Roman  writers  are  , collected — perhaps 
without  sufficient  discrimination — by  Von 
Lasaulx  (‘  Die  Siihnopfer  der  Griechen  und 
Romer,’  &c.),  and  by  de  Maistre  (‘ Eclaircisse- 
ment  sur  les  Sacrifices’).  The  knowledge  of 
the  ancients  on  the  subject  may  indeed  have 
been  based  on  the  mere  observation  that  an 
animal  loses  its  life  when  it  loses  its  blood. 
But  it  may  deepen  our  sense  of  the  wisdom  and 
significance  of  the  Law  of  Moses  to  know 
that  the  fact  which  it  sets  forth  so  distinctly 
and  consistently,  and  in  such  pregnant  con- 
nection, is  so  clearly  recognized  by  modern 
scientific  research. 

^ It  should  be  noted  that  the  LXX.  and  the 
Vulg.  are  consistent  in  rendering  the  Plebrew 
words  chay  and  nephesh  in  this  chap,  and  else- 
where. 


K 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mc- 
ses,  saying, 

2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

• I Unlawful  marj'iages.  19  Unlawful  lusts. 


598 


LEVITICUS.  XVIII. 


[''■  3—9- 


and  say  unto  them,  I am  the  Lord 
your  God. 

3 After  the  doings  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  wherein  ye  dwelt,  shall  ye 
not  do:  and  after  the  doings  of  the 
land  of  Canaan,  whither  I bring  you, 
shall  ye  not  do ; neither  shall  ye  walk 
in  their  ordinances. 

4 Ye  shall  do  my  judgments,  and 
keep  mine  ordinances,  to  walk  there- 
in : I am  the  Lord  your  God. 

5 Ye  shall  therefore  keep  my  sta- 
ffEzek.ao.  tutes,  and  my  judgments:  "^which  if  a 
Rom.  TO.  5.  man  do,  he  shall  live  in  them : I am 
G.a.  3- 12.  Lord. 


6 ^ None  of  you  shall  approach  to 
any  that  is  ^near  of  kin  to  him,  to  un-  t Heb. 
cover  nakedness : I am  the  Lord. 

7 The  nakedness  of  thy  father,  or-^"^*- 
the  nakedness  of  thy  mother,  shalt 
thou  not  uncover:  she  is  thy  mother; 
thou  shalt  not  uncover  her  nakedness. 

8 ^The  nakedness  of  thy  father’s  ^ chap.  20. 
wife  shalt  thou  not  uncover:  it  is  thy 
father’s  nakedness. 

9 The  nakedness  of  thy  sister,  the 
daughter  of  thy  father,  or  daughter  of 
thy  mother,  whether  she  be  born  at 
home,  or  born  abroad,  even  their  na- 
kedness thou  shalt  not  uncover. 


Chap.  XVIII. 

Of  Unlawful  Marriages  and  Lusts. 
1—30. 

2.  1 am  the  Lord  your  God]  This  for- 
mula, or  the  shorter  one,  / am  the  Lord, 
occurs  also  in  ■v’v.  4,  5,  6,  ai,  30.  Cf.  xi. 
44,  45.  It  is  found  several  times  in  the 
chapters  that  follow.  Its  frequent  repetition 
in  these  parts  of  the  Law  may  be  intend- 
ed to  keep  the  Israelites  in  mind  of  their 
Covenant  with  Jehovah  in  connection  with  the 
common  affairs  of  life,  in  which  they  might  be 
tempted  to  look  at  legal  restrictions  in  a mere 
secular  light.  It  is  but  sparingly  used  in  the 
laws  that  refer  to  the  observances  of  religion. 
Cf.  note  on  njv.  24 — 30. 

3.  the  land  of  E^ypt — the  land  of  Canaan] 
See  note  on  24 — 3 c, 

5.  ordtnances.  The  same  Heb. 
word  is  thus  rendered  in  4, 

^ajhich  if  a yuan  do,  he  shall  ll’ve  in  them] 
If  a man  keeps  the  ordinances  and  judgments 
of  the  Divine  Law,  he  shall  not  be  “cut  off 
from  his  people”  (cf,  v.  29),  he  shall  gain 
true  life,  the  life  which  connects  him  with 
Jehovah  through  his  obedience.  Ezek.  xx. 

11,  13,  21;  Luke  X.  28;  Rom.  x.  j;  Gal.  hi. 

12. 

Unlawful  Marriages.  6 — 18, 

6.  near  of  kin]  The  Hebrew  phrase 
, means  literally,  flesh  of  his  body.  The  term 

strictly  taken  would  express  all  blood  rela- 
tions (as  there  is  no  limitation  in  the  original 
answering  to  “near”)  and  no  others;  but 
it  was  evidently  used  to  denote  those  only 
who  came  within  certain  limits  of  consan- 
guinity, together  with  those  who  by  affinity 
were  regarded  in  the  same  relationship.  The 
rendering  of  the  LXX.  is  worthy  of  note — 
av6f)u>TTOs  Tipos  TTcivTci  oIkCiu  (Tapicos  aVTOV  ov 
TTpO(T(:\cV(JfT(lL. 

to  unco'ver... nakedness]  i.e.  to  have  inter- 


course. The  immediate  object  of  this  law 
was  to  forbid  incest. 

7 — 18.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

V.  Lhe  nakedness  of  thy  father,  or  the  naked- 
ness, &c.]  The  Hebrew  conjunction  is  copu- 
lative, not  adversative.  It  might  be  rendered 
and,  or  rather,  even;  that  is,  which  belongs 
to  both  parents  as  being  “one  flesh.”  Gen,  ii. 
24;  cp.  2^29.  8,  14.  These  prohibitions  are 
addressed  to  men  and  not  to  women,  as  is 
shewn  by  the  concluding  words  of  the  verse 
having  reference  only  to  the  mother, 

8.  Cf.  the  case  of  Reuben,  Gen.  xxxv.  22, 
xlix.  3,4;  St  Paul  speaks  of  intercourse  with 
a stepmother  as  an  abomination  “not  so 
much  as  named  among  the  Gentiles,”  i.e. 
among  the  Greeks,  i Cor.  v,  i. 

thy  fathers  nakedness]  See  on  21.  7. 

9.  thy  sister]  What  was  here  spoken  of 
was  the  distinguishing  offence  of  the  Egyptians. 
See  Note  on  2.’.  30  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

born  at  home,  or  born  abroad]  The  alter- 
native thus  expressed  has  been  taken  to 
mean; — (i)  legitimate  or  illegitimate;  (2) 
the  illegitimate  daughter  of  the  father  or  the 
illegitimate  daughter  of  the  mother;  (3)  the 
daughter  of  the  father  by  a previous  marriage 
{born  at  home'),  or  the  daughter  of  the  mother 
by  a previous  marriage  {born  abroad,  that  is, 
in  another  house).  But  the  phrase  might  be 
taken  in  a broader  sense  so  as  to  embrace  all 
of  these  alternatives. — According  to  the  third 
explanation,  the  connection  prohibited  would 
be  that  with  an  elder  half-sister.  Whether  the 
rule  regarding  a half-sister  by  the  father  was 
observed  by  the  old  Hebrews  has  been  ques- 
tioned from  the  instance  of  Abraham,  Gen.  xx. 
12,  where  Michaelis  (‘Laws  of  Moses,’  Art. 
cx.)  and  many  others  take  the  word  sister 
in  its  strict  sense.  But  Jewish  tradition  is 
probably  right  in  giving  a wider  meaning  to 
the  word  sister  (like  brother  Gen.  xiii.  8, 
xiv.  16),  and  in  regarding  Sarah  as  the  niece  of 


V.  10  — 21.] 


LEVITICUS.  XVIIL 


599 


10  The  nakedness  of  thy  son’s 
daughter,  or  of  thy  daughter’s  daugh- 
ter, even  their  nakedness  thou  shalt 
not  uncover:  for  theirs  is  thine  own 
nakedness. 

11  The  nakedness  of  thy  father’s 
wife’s  daughter,  begotten  of  thy  father, 
she  is  thy  sister,  thou  shalt  not  un- 
cover her  nakedness. 

^^chap.  20.  12  ^Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the 

nakedness  of  thy  father’s  sister:  she  is 
thy  father’s  near  kinswoman. 

13  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 
kedness of  thy  mother’s  sister : for  she 
is  thy  mother’s  near  kinswoman. 

rfchap.  20.  14  "^Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 

kedness  of  thy  father’s  brother,  thou 
shalt  not  approach  to  his  v/ife : she  is 
thine  aunt. 

fchap.  20.  15  '"Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 

^2-  kedness  of  thy  daughter  in  law:  she 
is  thy  son’s  wife;  thou  shalt  not  un- 
cover her  nakedness. 

^chap.  20.  /Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the 


nakedness  of  thy  brother’s  wife : it  is 
thy  brother’s  nakedness. 

17  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 
kedness of  a woman  and  h'er  daugh- 
ter, neither  shalt  thou  take  her  son’s 
daughter,  or  her  daughter’s  daughter, 
to  uncover  her  nakedness;  for  they 
are  her  near  kinswomen : it  /r  wicked- 
ness. 

18  Neither  shalt  thou  take  I'a  wife  11  Or, 
to  her  sister,  to  vex  her^  to  uncover 
her  nakedness,  beside  the  other  in  her 
life  time, 

19  ^Also  thou  shalt  not  approach 20. 
unto  a woman  to  uncover  her  naked- 
ness, as  long  as  she  is  put  apart  for 

her  uncleanness. 

20  Moreover  thou  shalt  not  lie 
carnally  with  thy  neighbour’s  wife,  to 
defile  thyself  with  her. 

21  And  thou  shalt  not  let  any 
thy  seed  ^^p^LSS  through  the  fire  to 
^Molech,  neither  shalt  thou  profane  Tailed, 
the  name  of  thy  God  : I ain  the  Lord. 


Abraham.  Jos.  ‘Ant.’  i.  6.  §5.  See  on  Gen. 
xi.  29,  XX.  12. 

11.  It  is  not  easy  to  determine  in  what 
way  the  meaning  of  this  verse  is  to  be  dis- 
tinguished from  that  of  v.  9.  But  however 
the  details  are  to  be  made  out,  it  is  obvious 
that  the  purpose  of  w.  9,  ii  is  emphati- 
cally to  forbid  connection  with  sisters  and 
half-sisters  in  whatever  way  the  relationship 
may  come. 

12.  thj  father's  sister']  The  instance  of  Amram 
and  Jochebed  (Exod.  vi.  20)  seems  to  shew 
that  marriage  with  an  aunt  was  not  con- 
sidered wrong  by  the  Israelites  when  they 
were  in  Egypt. 

16.  thy  brother's  nxsife]  That  is,  if  she  had 
children.  See  Deut.  xxv.  5.  On  the  ques- 
tion regarding  the  inference  drawn  from  this 
prohibition  that  it  is  unlawful  to  marry  the 
sister  of  a deceased  wife,  see  Note  on  non).  7 — 18 
at  the  end  of  the  chapter,  § iv.  The  law  here  ex- 
pressed was  broken  by  Antipas  in  his  con- 
nection with  Herodias.'  But  the  argument  to 
prove  that  St  John  the  Baptist  appealed  to 
this  law  rather  than  to  the  seventh  Com- 
mandment (see  Beda,  ‘ Hist.  Ecc.’  Lib.  i.  c. 
27),  appears  to  be  based  on  an  unsupported 
assumption  that  the  first  husband  of  Herodias 
was  dead  at  that  time.  See  Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’ 
xviii.  5.  § I. 

17.  It  is  here  forbidden  that  a man  should 
have  connection  with  both  a woman  and  her 


daughter,  or  with  both  a woman  and  her 
granddaughter.  The  former  prohibition  is 
repeated  in  Deut.  xxvii.  23.  The  rule  might 
have  had  immediate  reference  to  the  relation- 
ship incurred  by  concubinage  or  irregular  in- 
tercourse. The  Mussulman  law,  in  adopting 
the  rule,  applies  it  expressly  in  this  way,  and 
declares  intercourse  to  be  “a  principle  or 
cause  of  a mutual  participation  of  blood  be- 
tween the  parties  concerned  in  it.”  ‘Hedaya,’ 
Vol.  I.  pp.  81,  485.  Cf.  Amos  ii.  7;  i Cor. 
vi.  16.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  pro- 
hibition includes  the  mother,  the  daughter 
and  the  granddaughter,  of  either  a wife  or  a 
concubine.  See  note  on  ’v.  6.  It  should  be 
noticed  that  incest  with  a daughter  is  for- 
bidden only  in  this  indirect  manner,  while  the 
other  very  near  relationships  are  distinctly 
mentioned.  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the 
chapter. 

18.  to  'vex  her]  Literally,  to  bind  or  pack 
together.  The  Jewish  commentators  illus- 
trate this  by  the  example  of  Leah  and  Rachel. 
See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

Unlawful  Lusts.  19 — 23. 

19.  her  uncleanness]  Cf,  xx.  18. 

20.  thy  neighbour's  ^ife]  Cf.  Exod.  xx. 
14;  Deut.  V.  18,  &c.  See  on  xx.  10. 

21.  pass  through  the  fire  to  Molech]  Strictly, 
pass  through  to  Molech.  This  is  the  earliest 
mention  of  Molech.  See  on  xx.  2 — 5.  . 


6oo 


LEVITICUS,  XVIII. 


[v.  2 2 30. 


k chap. 
15- 


22  Thou  shalt  not  lie  with  man- 
kind, as  v/ith  womankind:  it  is  abo- 
mination. 

20.  23  '^’Neither  shalt  thou  lie  with 

any  beast  to  defile  thyself  therewith : 
neither  shall  any  woman  stand  before 
a beast  to  lie  down  thereto : it  is  con- 
fusion. 

24  Defile  not  ye  yourselves  in  any 
of  these  things:  for  in  all  these  the 
nations  are  defiled  which  I cast  out 
before  you: 

25  And  the  land  is  defiled:  there- 
fore I do  visit  the  iniquity  thereof 
upon  it,  and  the  land  itself  vomiteth 
out  her  inhabitants. 

26  Ye  shall  therefore  keep  my 
statutes  and  my  judgments,  and  shall 
not  commit  any  of  these  abominations  j 


neither  any  of  your  own  nation,  nor 
any  stranger  that  sojourneth  among 
you : 

27  (For  all  these  abominations  have 
the  men  of  the  land  done,  which  wej'e 
before  you,  and  the  land  is  defiled;) 

28  That  the  land  spue  not  you  out 
also,  when  ye  defile  it,  as  it  spued  out 
the  nations  that  were  before  you. 

29  For  whosoever  shall  commit 
any  of  these  abominations,  even  the 
souls  that  commit  the?n  shall  be  cut 
off  from  among  their  people. 

30  Therefore  shall  ye  keep  mine 
ordinance,  that  ye  commit  not  any  one 
of  these  abominable  customs,  which 
were  committed  before  you,  and  that 
ye  defile  not  yourselves  therein  : I am 
the  Lord  your  God. 


22.  The  ancient  Persian  law  sternly  con- 
demned this  offence  (‘  Vendid.’  viii.  10,  ap. 
Knobel).  Also  the  Hindoo  law  (‘Menu,’  xi. 
174,  175),  and  the  Koran,  vii.  78 — 80 

23.  The  story  of  Pasiphae  may  furnish 
proof  that  the  early  Greeks  abhorred  this 
offence.  The  Hindoo  law  punishes  it  severely 
‘ Menu,’  XI.  17,  ‘ Gentoo  Laws,’  p.  280.  The 
Moslem  law  condemns  it.  ‘ Hedaya,’  ii.  p. 
27. — On  the  abominations  of  ancient  Egypt, 
see  on  xvii.  7. 

it  is  confusion]  See  on  xix.  19. 

Conclusion.  24 — 30. 

24 — 30.  The  land  designed  and  conse- 
crated for  His  people  by  Jehovah  (Lev.  xxv. 
23)  is  here  impersonated,  and  represented  as 
vomiting  forth  its  present  inhabitants,  in  con- 
sequence of  their  indulgence  in  the  abomina- 
tions that  have  been  mentioned.  The  iniquity 
of  the  Canaanites  was  now  full.  See  Gen. 
XV.  16;  cf.  Isaiah  xxiv.  1—6.  The  Israelites 
in  this  place,  and  throughout  the  chapter, 
are  exhorted  t(i  a pure  and  holy  life,  on  the 
ground  that  Jehovah,  the  Holy  One,  is  their 


God  and  that  they  are  His  people.  Cf.  xix. 
2.  It  is  upon  this  high  sanction  that  they 
are  peremptorily  forbidden  to  defile  them- 
selves with  the  pollutions  of  the  heathen. 
The  only  punishment  here  pronounced  upoa 
individual  transgressors  is,  that  they  shall 
“bear  their  iniquity ’’and  be  “cut  off  from 
among  their  people.”  We  must  understand 
this  latter  phrase  as  expressing  an  ipso  facto 
excommunication  or  outlawry,  the  divine 
Law  pronouncing  on  the  offender  an  imme- 
diate forfeiture  of  the  privileges  which  be- 
longed to  him  as  one  of  the  people  in  Cove- 
nant with  Jehovah.  See  on  Exod.  xxxi.  14, 
and  on  Lev.  xx.  1 7.  The  same  purely  spiritual 
sanction  is  applied  to  the  string  of  statutes 
in  the  next  chapter.  But  in  chapter  xx. 
special  external  punishments  are  allotted  to 
the  offences  which  have  been  previously  named. 
The  course  which  the  Law  here  takes  seems 
to  be  first  to  appeal  to  the  conscience  of  the 
individual  man  on  the  ground  of  his  relation 
to  Jehovah,  and  then  to  enact  such  penalties 
as  the  order  of  the  state  required,  and  as  re- 
presented the  collective  conscience  of  the 
nation  put  into  operation.  See  xx.  26. 


NOTES  on  Chap,  xviii. 


1.  On  the  list  of  prohibited 
De(;rees.  'vv.  7 — 18. 

i.  The  relations  mentioned  or  evidently 
implied  in  these  verses  are: — 

Relations  by  blood. 

Mother,  ns.  7. 

Sister  and  half-sister,  ’v'v.  9,  ii. 
Granddaughter,  •v'v.  10,  17. 


Aunt,  paternal  and  maternal,  •w.  la,  13. 
Daughter,  't».  17  (see  note). 

Relations  by  affinity through  marriage  or  carnal 
connection. 

Wife’s  or  concubine’s  mother  ] 
Wife’s  or  concubine’s  daughter  [ ‘^•^7 
Wife’s  or  concubine’s  granddaughter) 

“ A wife  to  her  sister.”  See  Note  on  v.  18. 


LEVITICUS.  XVIII. 


6oi 


Relations  by  affinity^  through  the  marriage  of 
near  blood  relations. 

Stepmother,  v.  8. 

Father’s  brother’s  wife,  <1;.  14. 

Son’s  wife,  'v.  15.’ 

Brother’s  wife,  16. 

ii.  The  other  passages  in  the  Law  relating 
to  this  subject  are; — 

Lev.  XX.  II,  12,  14,  17,  19,  20,  21.  In  these 
verses  certain  punishments  are  appointed  for 
particular  kinds  of  unlawful  connection.  By 
the  inclusive  law  in  -v.  29  of  chapter  xviii.  all 
who  perpetrated  incest  were  to  be  “ cut  off  from 
among  their  people.”  But  it  is  enacted  in 
ch.  XX.  that  when  the  crime  was  committed 
with  a mother,  stepmother,  or  daughter-in- 
law,  a sentence  of  death  should  be  passed  upon 
both  the  offenders  (xx.  ii,  12):  when  with  the 
daughter  or  the  mother,  of  either  a wife  or  a 
concubine,  they  were  to  be  burned  (xx.  14, 
see  note) ; when  with  a sister  or  half-sister, 
they  were  to  be  “ cut  off  in  the  sight  of  their 
people”  (xx.  17,  see  note).  For  incest  with 
an  uncle’s  wife,  or  a brother’s  wife,  no  ex- 
ternal punishment  is  specified,  but  they  were 
to  bear  their  sin  and  to  be  childless  (see  on  xx. 
20).  The  wife  of  a mother’s  brother  is  here 
included  in  the  term  “ uncle's  wife:”  in  <v.  14 
of  chapter  xviii.  the  father’s  brother’s  wife  only 
is  mentioned. 

Deut.  xxii.  30.  The  rule  regarding  the 
mother  and  stepmother  is  repeated  in  its 
shortest  form. 

Deut.  XXV.  5 — 10.  By  this  law,  commonly 
known  as  ‘ ‘ the  Levirate  law,”  when  brethren 
were  dwelling  together,  if  one  died  leaving  a 
widow  without  children  the  single  brother 
was  required,  under  a certain  penalty,  to 
marry  her.  Cf.  Matt,  xxii,  24. 

Deut.  xxvii.  20,  22,  23.  In  the  Commina- 
tion,  which  was  to  be  proclaimed  on  taking 
possession  of  the  Holy  Land,  curses  were 
comprised  on  those  who  committed  incest 
with  a mother,  a stepmotJrer,  a sister,  a half- 
sister,  or  a mother-in-law.  The  mother- 
in-law  is  here  distinctly  mentioned  for  the 
first  time  in  connection  with  the  law  of  incest. 
She  is  however  implied  in  xviii.  17  and  in 

XX.  14. 

iii.  It  is  considered  by  most  critics  that 
neither  of  these  statements,  nor  the  whole  of 
them  together,  can  be  intended  to  present  a 
complete  list  of  the  proscribed  relationships. 
The  grandmother  and  the  niece  (see  on  9) 
are  certainly  omitted.  The  daughter  and  the 
full  sister  are  not  expressly  mentioned,  though 
they  are  necessarily  implied  in  vns.  9,  17.  It 
would  seem  that,  in  accordance  with  the 
pervading  practical  character  of  the  Mosaic 
statutes,  such  details  were  given,  or  repeated, 
from  time  to  time,  as  the  occasion  required, 
the  general  principle  of  the  law  having  been 
expressed  in  -u.  6. 

iv.  From  the  order  in  which  the  particulars 


are  given,  and  from  the  use  of  the  expression 
“near  of  kin  ” in  2;.  6,  there  would  seem  to 
have  been  a general  recognition  of  the  maxim 
that  the  relationships  of  the  husband  devolved 
on  the  wife,  and  those  of  the  wife  upon  the 
husband.  This  is  distinctly  put  as  regards  the 
husband’s  relations  concerning  the  stepmother 
in  the  expression,  “it  is  thy  father’s  naked- 
ness” (2;.  8),  and  in  similar  expressions  con- 
cerning the  brother’s  wife  and  the  uncle’s  wife 
(xviii.  16,  XX.  20,  21).  But  yet  there  is  un- 
doubtedly in  Lev.  xxi.  1 — 4 a clear  distinc- 
tion recognized  between  relations  by  blood 
and  relations  by  affinity.  And  it  has  been 
argued  that,  as  the  wife  lost  her  family  name, 
acquired  the  civil  rights  of  her  husband’s 
family,  and,  if  a priest’s  daughter,  lost  the 
privileges  she  had  as  such  (see  Lev.  xxi.  3, 
xxii.  12),  though  the  husband’s  relations  might 
have  become  the  wife’s,  the  wife’s  relations 
did  not,  in  the  full  sense,  become  the  hus- 
band’s. It  may  be  added  that  the  Levirate 
marriage  (Deut.  xxv.  5 — 10)  very  clearly 
proves  that,  even  in  the  case  of  the  wife,  the 
relationship  with  her  husband’s  kindred  was 
not  by  any  means  so  stringent  as  that  with  her 
near  blood  relations,  with  whom  connection 
could  under  no  circumstances  be  permitted. 

II.  On  Marriage  with  two  Sisters. 
n).  18. 

i.  Meaning  of  the  nuords  “ <2  ^ife  to  her  sister^"' 
ii.  Not  a prohibition  of  Polygamy,  iii.  The 
Ecclesiastical  question. 

i.  The  rule,  as  it  here  stands,  would  seem 
to  bear  no  other  meaning  than  that  a man  is  not 
to  form  a connection  with  his  wife’s  sister, 
while  his  wife  is  alive.  It  appears  to  follow 
that  the  Law  permitted  marriage  with  the 
sister  of  a deceased  wife.  A limitation  being 
expressly  laid  down  in  the  words,  “ beside  the 
other  in  her  lifetime,”  it  may  be  inferred  that, 
when  the  limitation  is  removed,  the  prohibition 
loses  its  force,  and  permission  is  implied. 

The  testimony  of  the  Rabbinical  Jews  in  the 
Targums,  the  Mishna  and  their  later  writings ; 
that  of  the  Hellenistic  Jews  in  the  Septuagint 
and  Philo  (‘de  Spec.  Legg.’  iii.  5) ; that  of  the 
early  and  medieeval  Church  in  the  old  Italic, 
the  Vulgate,  with  the  other  early  versions  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  in  every  reference  to  the 
text  in  the  Fathers  and  Schoolmen,  are  unani- 
mous in  supporting,  or  in  not  in  any  wise  op- 
posing, the  common  rendering  of  the  passage. 
This  interpretation  appears  indeed  to  have 
stood  its  ground  unchallenged  from  the  third 
century  before  Christ  to  the  middle  of  the 
sixteenth  century  after  Christ^. 

But  a different  version  of  the  words  ren- 
dered “ a wife  to  her  sister  ” was  given  by 
Junius  and  Tremellius  (a.  d.  1575),  was 

^ See  ‘ Ancient  interpretation  of  Leviticus 
xviii.  18,’  by  Dr  McCaul : ‘Report  of  the  Com- 
missioners on  the  Law  of  Marriage,’  p.  152. 


602 


LEVITICUS.  XVIII. 


treated  with  some  allowance  by  Drusius  (about 
A.D.  1600),  found  its  way  into  the  margin 
of  our  authorized  version  and  into  the  margin 
of  the  Geneva  French,  and  has  been  adopted 
more  recently  in  the  ‘ Berlenburger  Bibel.’  In 
our  margin,  the  words  “one  wife  to  another” 
are  offered  as  an  alternative  for,  “a  wife  to  her 
sister.”  The  command  would  thus  be  turned 
into  a prohibition  of  polygamy. 

ii.  It  is  quite  true  that  the  phrase  in  ques- 
tion, and  the  corresponding  one,  a man  to  his 
brother^  are  used  idiomatically  in  Hebrew  in 
cases  in  which  the  words  are  not  applied  in 
their  primary  sense  but  as  Pronouns.  But 
this  idiomatic  use  appears  regularly  to  follow 
a plural  antecedent,  and  involves  necessarily, 
not  the  sense  merely  of  oze  added  on  to 
another  single  one  (which  is  what  would  be  re- 
quired here),  but  a distributive  and  reciprocal 
sense,  answering  to,  each  one  to  another.  It  is 
so  applied  to  the  loops  of  the  curtains  of  the 
tabernacle,  to  the  tenons  of  the  boards,  in  Ex. 
xxvi.  3,  5,  6,  17),  and  to  the  wings  of  the 
cherubim  in  Ezek.  i.  ii,  23.  See  Robin- 
son, quoted  by  McCaul,  p.  59.  The  sug- 
gested interpretation  in  this  place  in  Leviticus 
is  rendered  still  more  improbable  by  the  fact 
that  the  words  are  the  same  as  are  used  else- 
where throughout  this  chapter  for  nvife  and 
sister. 

If  the  grammatical  argument  were  less 
clear,  the  acceptance  of  the  verse  as  a pro- 
hibition of  polygamy  would  be  obviously 
at  variance  with  the  laws  in  Ex.  xxi.  7 — ii, 
and  Deut.  xxi.  15 — 17,  which  direct  the  mode 
for  regulating  a family  in  which  there  are 
more  than  one  wife;  to  say  nothing  of  the 
cases  of  Elkanah,  David,  Joash  (2  Chro.xxiv,  3) 
and  others,  which  are  never  called  in  question 
as  breaches  of  the  Law.  By  these  instances, 
and  by  the  warning  for  the  king,  Deut.  xvii. 
17,  it  would  appear  that  the  Law,  while  it 
restricted  and  even  discouraged  polygamy, 
certainly  permitted  it  to  exist. 

iii.  It  must  be  kept  in  view  that  our  busi- 
ness here  is  only  to  inquire  what  the  Law  of 
Moses  actually  says.  The  great  practical  ques- 
tions relating  to  the  obligation  of  Christians  and 
to  the  alteration  which  has  been  proposed  in 
the  English  law  of  marriage,  have  been  argued 
at  large,  and  may  be  well  detennined,  upon  other 
grounds.  The  Ecclesiastical  rule  which  we 
have  to  obey  rests  upon  a basis  of  its  own, 
and  the  weighty  arguments  drawn  from  the 
conditions  of  social  life  may  be  deemed  suffi- 
cient to  support  our  law  as  it  exists;  but  with 
these  we  have  here  nothing  to  do. 

'Fhere  is  however  a question  which  has  been, 
in  the  eyes  of  some,  almost  identified  with 
the  practical  inquiry,  which  affects  in  an  im- 
portant degre*e  the  light  in  which  we  are  to 
regard  this  portion  of  the  Mosaic  law  in 
whatever  way  we  may  interpret  Lev.  xviii.  18. 
Are  tlie  prohibitions  contained  in  this  chapter, 
in  all  tiicir  details,  binding  upon  Christians? 


The  affirmative  has  been  strongly  insisted  on 
in  modern  times.  Our  Reformers  were  very 
decided  on  this  points.  It  has  been  contended 
that  the  Levitical  table  of  prohibitions  in  all 
its  details  is  as  much  a part  of  the  moral  law 
as,  “Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery,”  or 
any  other  of  the  Ten  Commandments. 

The  Fathers  in  general,  most  of  the  School- 
men and  the  mediseval  Church,  took  different 
ground.  They  considered  that  while  the  great 
principles  of  the  law  of  incest  must  ever  be 
binding  upon  mankind,  the  limits  to  which 
their  application  should  be  carried  out  were 
not  absolutely  fixed,  and  might  have  been  de- 
termined by  Moses  with  a view  to  the  parti- 
cular circumstances  and  condition  of  the  He- 
brew nation.  The  testimony  of  St  Basil, 
strongly  as  he  was  opposed  to  marriage  with 
the  sister  of  a deceased  wife,  is  remarkable  on 
this  head.  He  declares  that  the  Mosaic  law 
of  Prohibited  degrees  does  not  bind  Christians 
more  than  the  law  of  Circumcision;  but  he 
considers  that  the  marriages  in  question  are 
unlawful  because  man  and  wife  are  one,  and 
the  sister  in  law  is  to  be  regarded  in  the  same 
light  as  the  sister  by  bloods 

Every  particular  prohibition  actually  con- 
tained in  the  Mosaic  Law  has  however  been 
generally  acknowledged  in  the  Church.  But 
the  tendency  of  ecclesiastical  authorities,  up  to 
the  time  of  the  Reformation,  was  to  multiply 
prohibitions.  To  give  a few  examples— St 
Augustin,  in  setting  forth  the  reasons  of  laws 
against  connections  with  near  relations  upon 
natural  and  social  grounds,  strongly  objects 
to  marriages  between  cousins^.  Marriages 
between  first  cousins  were  forbidden  by  a law 
of  Theodosius,  which  was  revoked  by  Arca- 
dius  and  Honorius  a.d.  405.  St  Gregory  (a.d. 
590)  forbad  all  marriages  that  came  within  the 
fourth  degree  of  relationship.  The  Council  of 
London  assembled  by  Lanfranc  a.d.  1075, 
prohibited  anyone  from  marrying  one  of  his 
own  kindred,  or  one  of  the  kindred  of  a de- 
ceased wife,  within  the  seventh  degree,  and 
this  law  was  reenacted  in  1102  and  1126. 
In  the  Council  of  Westminster  a.d.  1200,  a 
man  was  forbidden  to  marry  any  relation  of 
a deceased  wife;  and  by  the  same  canon,-  a 
godson  was  forbidden  to  maiTy  the  daughter 
of  his  godfather.  This  state  of  the  Ecclesi- 
astical law,  along  with  the  abomination  of 
frequent  dispensations  which  it  entailed,  pro- 
bably occasioned  a reckless  revulsion  in  some 
minds  of  which  traces  may  be  seen  in  the 

^ See  especially  ‘ Reformatio  Legum,’  p.  47, 
edit.  1850. 

^ Ep.  cxcvii.  ‘ad  Diodotum.’  The  argument 
against  the  obligation  of  Christians  to  obey  the 
letter  of  the  I.aw  is  carried  out  by  Jeremy  Tay- 
lor, ‘Ductor  Dub.’  Bk.  ii.  ch.  ii,  and  by  Archdn. 
Hare,  in  his  Charge  for  1849,  entitled,  ‘The  True 
Remedy  for  the  evils  of  the  Age.’ 

^ ‘ I)e  Civ.  Dei,’  xv.  16.  The  passage  is  very 
striking. 


LEVITICUS.  XVIII. 


603 


controversy  regarding  the  divorce  of  Henry 
VI 11.  Our  Reformers  w^ere  perhaps  on  this 
account  driven  more  formally  to  entrench 
themselves  behind  the  authority  of  the  text  of 
Leviticus,  although  they  were  obliged  to  sup- 
plement it  in  some  particulars  in  constructing 
their  own  table  for  practical  use. 

III.  On  the  Prohibited  Degrees  among 
THE  Gentile  Nations,  •v.  30. 

The  excellence  of  the  law  contained  in  this 
chapter  of  Leviticus  is  shown  in  a strong 
light  if  contrasted  with  the  abominations  and 
irregularities  in  the  usages  of  the  most  culti- 
vated nations  of  antiquity. 

The  Egyptians  and  the  Persians  appear  to 
have  indulged  in  connections  with  near  relations 
to  a greater  degree  than  any  other  civilized  na- 
tions. In  Egypt  marriage  with  a full  sister 
was  permitted  in  very  early  times  h The 
custom  was  handed  down  in  the  royal  family 
from  the  Pharaohs  to  the  Ptolemies,  and 
seems  to  have  been  continued  till  the  termina- 
tion of  the  latter  dynasty  with  Cleopatra  and 
her  brother  2.  The  prevalence  of  the  custom 
is  shown  in  the  sculptures  in  both  Lower  and 
Upper  Egypt The  Medes  and  Persians  were 
in  the  habit  of  marrying  their  mothers  from 
the  earliest  ages.  Eastern  tradition  ascribes 
the  origin  of  this  to  Nimrod,  and  makes  it 
coeval  with  the  rise  of  the  Magian  religion  ^ 
But  marriage  with  a sister  appears  to  have 
been  unknown  in  Persia  till  the  time  of  Cam- 
byses®.  Later  writers  freely  ascribe  all  other 
kinds  of  incest  to  the  Persians®;  but  that  with 
a mother  continued  to  be  their  distinguishing 
opprobrium  ^ 

The  Greeks  and  Romans,  especially  the 
latter,  were  in  very  early  times  much  stricter 
in  this  branch  of  morality.  The  stories  of 
Oedipus  and  Hippolytus  sufficiently  show  the 
abhorrence  in  which  connections  with  mothers 
and  stepmothers  were  held^  Marriages  with 
sisters  were  condemned  as  barbarous  and  un- 
holy 9,  although  Solon  permitted  marriage 
with  a half-sister  by  the  father,  and  Lycur- 
gus  that  with  a half-sister  by  the  mother  1®. 

^ DioJ.  Sic.  I.  27. 

^ Dio.  Cass.  XLII.  44. 

® Wilkinson,  ‘Pop.  Account,’  Vol.  II.  p.  224. 

^ Selden,  ‘de  Jure  Gent.’ lib.  V.  cap.  n,  p.  552. 

® Herodot.  Iii.  31.  When  Cambyses  con- 
sulted his  wise  men  on  his  intention  to  marry  his 
sister,  they  replied  that  they  could  not  find  a law 
permitting  a man  to  marry  his  sister,  but  they 
found  one  to  allow  a king  to  do  as  he  liked. 

® Philo,  ‘ de  Sp.  Legg.’  III.  3 ; Hieron.  ‘ adv. 
Jovin.’  II.  7,  &c. 

^ Catullus,  ‘ Carm.’  xc. 

^ See  also  Virgil,  ‘Tin.’  x.  389. 

^ Eurip.  ‘Androm.’  174;  Aristoph.  ‘Ran.’  850; 
Plato,  ‘de  Legg.’  viii.  6. 

Philo,  ‘de  Sp.  Legg.’  III.  4.  Cimon  availed 
himself  of  Solon’s  law  in  marrying  Elpinice. 


Marriages  between  an  uncle  and  niece  ap- 
pear to  have  been  common  at  Sparta 
The  old  Roman  custom  was  to  avoid  mar- 
riage with  a blood  relation,  even  with  a first 
cousin.  From  the  second  century  A.c.  mar- 
riages between  uncles  and  nieces,  and  between 
cousins,  were  tolerated  ^2.  but  they  were  very 
infrequent,  and  those  between  uncles  and 
nieces  were  disgraceful  till  after  the  middle  of 
the  first  century  A.D.,  when  Claudius  set  the 
example  by  marrying  Agrippina^®. 

By  the  Brahmin  law  the  twice-born  man 
was  not  permitted  to  marry  any  woman  who 
came  within  the  sixth  degree  of  relationship, 
either  on  the  father’s  or  on  the  mother’s  side, 
or  was  known  by  her  family  name  to  belong 
to  the  same  stock.  Incest  with  a mother  was 
punished  by  death  with  frightful  torture;  that 
with  a sister,  aunt,  or  niece,  by  severe  pe- 
nance The  ancient  Arabs  are  said  to  have 
been  very  lax  ^5;  but  the  Moslem  law  is  based 
upon  the  Hebrew,  and  adds  to  the  prohibited 
degrees,  nieces,  foster-mothers  and  foster- 
sisters^®. 

It  seems  worthy  of  remark  that  in  early 
ages  incestuous  connections  appear  to  have 
been  avoided  for  the  most  part  from  instinc- 
tive repugnance  ruling  the  general  practice, 
rather  than  from  positive  statutes.  The  moral 
of  the  stories  of  CEdipus  and  Hippolytus  must 
have  been  rooted  in  the  Greek  mind  before 
there  were  positive  laws  on  the  subject.  When 
Claudius  wished  to  marry  his  niece  he  satis- 
fied himself  that  he  could  carry  out  his  pur- 
pose without  breaking  any  express  law.  W hen 
it  was  made  lawful  at  Athens  and  Sparta  to 
marry  half-sisters,  and  at  Rome  to  marry 
cousins  and  nieces,  the  people  showed  them- 
selves very  backward  in  availing  themselves 
of  the  license.  It  may  also  be  observed  in 
connection  with  this  operation  of  a common 
instinct  that  several  of  the  instances  which 
have  been  adduced  show  in  a very  marked 
manner  the  observance  in  heathen  nations  to 
have  been  stricter  in  early  ages  than  in  later 
ones.  The  Persians  and  Medes  seem  at  first 
to  have  made  incestuous  marriages  only  with 
mothers;  but  from  the  time  of  Cambyses  they 
began  to  throw  off  all  restraint.  The  Romans 
began  with  peculiar  strictness,  and  became  lax 
at  a late  period  and  by  slow  degrees.  The 
histories  of  the  family  of  Augustus  and  of 
the  Herods  sadly  show  how  entirely  the  old 
strictness  yielded  at  last  to  the  opposite  ex- 
treme. 

Herodot.  V.  39,  48,  cf.  VII.  239,  vi.  71. 

^2  Liv.  XLII.  34;  Cic.  ‘pro  Cluent.’  v. 

Plut,  ‘ Qusest.  Rom.’  p.  76,  edit.  Reiske ; 
Tacit.  ‘ Anna!.’  xii.  5,  6 ; Sueton.  ‘ Claud.’  xxvi. 

‘Menu,’  III.  5,  XI.  104,  171,'sq. 

Freytag,  ‘ Einleitung, ’ ap.  Rodwell,  p.  532. 

^®  Koran,  Sura  iv.  20,  sq.;  ‘Hedkya,’  Vol.  i. 
p.  76. 


6o4 


LEVITICUS.  XIX. 


[v.  I— 14. 


« ch.  II 
44- 
20.  7 
I Pet.  : 
16. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

A 7-cpctition  of  stnidry  laws. 

An  D the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
. ses,  saying, 

2 Speak  unto  all  the  congregation 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  say  unto 
them,  "Ye  shall  be  holy:  for  I the 
Lord  your  God  am  holy. 

3 ^ Ye  shall  fear  every  man  his 
mother,  and  his  father,  and  keep  my 
.sabbaths : I am  the  Lord  your  God. 

4 ^ Turn  ye  not  unto  idols,  nor 
make  to  yourselves  molten  gods:  I 
am  the  Lord  your  God. 

5 ^ And  if  ye  offer  a sacrifice  of 
peace  offerings  unto  the  Lord,  ye 
shall  offer  it  at  your  own  will. 

6 It  shall  be  eaten  the  same  day  ye 
offer  it,  and  on  the  morrow:  and  if 
ought  remain  until  the  third  day,  it 
shall  be  burnt  in  the  fire. 

7 And  if  it  be  eaten  at  all  on  the 
third  day,  it  is  abominable;  it  shall 
not  be  accepted. 

8 Therefore  every  one  that  eateth 


it  shall  bear  his  iniquity,  because  he 
hath  profaned  the  hallowed  thing  of 
the  Lord  : and  that  soul  shall  be  cut 
off  from  among  his  people. 

9 ^ And  '^when  ye  reap  the  har-'^’chap,  23. 
vest  of  your  land,  thou  shalt  not 
v/holly  reap  the  corners  of  thy  field, 
neither  shalt  thou  gather  the  glean- 
ings of  thy  harvest. 

10  And  thou  shalt  not  glean  thy 
vineyard,  neither  shalt  thou  gather 
every  grape  of . thy  vineyard ; thou 
shalt  leave  them  for  the  poor  and 
stranger:  I am  the  Lord  your  God. 

11  ^ Ye  shall  not  steal,  neither 
deal  falsely,  neither  lie  one  to  another. 

12  ^ And  ye  shall  not  swear  by Exod.  20. 
my  name  falsely,  neither  shalt  thou  Deut.  5.1 1. 
profane  the  name  of  thy  God : I am 

the  Lord.  12. 

13  qy  ^^Xhou  shalt  not  defraud  thy^^Eccius. 
neighbour,  neither  rob  him:  the  wages 

of  him  that  is  hired  shall  not  abide 
with  thee  all  night  until  the  morning. 

14  ^ Thou  shalt  not  curse  the 


Chap.  XIX. 

A Repetition  of  sundry  Laws,  i — 37. 

2.  Te  shall  he  holy:  for  J the  Lord  your 
God  am  holjh]  These  words  express  the  key- 
note to  the  whole  book  of  Leviticus,  being 
addressed  as  they  are  not  to  the  priests,  or 
the  rulers,  or  the  saintly  few,  but  to  the  whole 
nation.  Cf.  xi.  45 ; xx.  7,  a6 ; Ex.  xix.  6. — 
There  does  not  appear  to  be  any  systematic 
arrangement  in  the  laws  which  follow;  but 
it  is  evident  that  they  were  intended  as  guards 
to  the  sanctity  of  the  elect  people,  enforcing 
common  duties  by  immediate  appeal  to  the 
highest  authority.  Cf.  on  iwiii.  24 — 30. 

3.  Ex.  XX.  8,  12,  xxxi.  13,  14.  The  two 
laws  repeated  here  are  the  only  ones  in  the 
Decalogue  which  assum.e  a positive  shape,  all 
the  others  being  introduced  by  the  formula, 
“Thou  shalt  not.” — These  express  two  great 
central  points,  the  first  belonging  to  natural 
law  and  the  second  to  positive  law,  in  the 
maintenance  of  the  well-being  of  the  social 
body  of  which  Jehovah  was  the  acknowledged 
king. 

4.  Ex.  XX.  4,  xxxiv.  14 — 17;  see  on  Lev. 
xxvi.  I. 

5.  ye  shall  offer  it  at  your  0W071  nvilf  Ra- 
ther, ye  shall  offer  it  that  you  may  be 
accepted.  See  on  i.  3. 

6—8.  See  on  vii.  15 — 18.  Of  the  rules 


relating  to  holy  things  this  was  perhaps  one  of 
those  most  likely  to  be  transgressed  by  the 
people,  and  hence  the  propriety  of  its  being 
repeated  in  this  place. 

9,  10.  This  law  is  expressed  more  fully, 
Deut.  xxiv.  19 — 21.  As  regards  the  grain 
harvest  it  is  repeated  in  connection  with  the 
Feasts  of  Weeks,  Lev.  xxiii.  22.  It  was  a 
charitable  provision  that  related  to  every  sort 
of  grain  and  fruit.  The  word  rendered  “grape” 
in  0).  10  signifies  rather  fallen  fruit  of  any 
kind ; and  the  word  rendered  “ vineyard”  may 
also  be  applied  to  a fruit  garden  of  any 
kind.  Cf.  Deut.  xxiii.  24. — the  poor  is  the  poor 
Israelite — the  stranger  is  properly  the  fo- 
reigner, who  could  possess  no  land  of  his 
own  in  the  land  of  Israel.  See  on  xvi.  29; 
cf.  -w.  33,  34.  Like  the  law  in  •voj.  23 — 25 
(on  which  see  note)  this  was  prospective  in 
its  actual  operation. 

11,  12.  The  meaning  of  the  eighth  Com- 
mandment is  here  expanded  into  the  prohibi- 
tion of  (i)  theft,  (2)  cheating  (cf.  vi.  2,  3,  4), 
(3)  falsehood.  When  the  act  of  deception 
was  aggravated  by  an  oath  the  third  Com- 
mandment was  of  course  broken  as  well  as 
the  eighth.  Ex.  xx.  7,  15. 

13,  14.  The  aphorism  in  t;.  ii  forbids 
injuries  perpetrated  by  craft;  this  one,  those 
perpetrated  by  violence  or  power,  the  con- 
version of  might  into  right.  In  2;.  13  “ de- 


V.  IS— 1 9-] 


LEVITICUS.  XIX. 


fDeut.  27.  deaf,  ^nor  put  a stumblingblock  before 
the  blind,  but  shalt  fear  thy  God : I 
a7n  the  Lord. 

'■E.\od.23.  15  ^ Ye  shall  do  no  unrighteous- 

^eut.  I.  ness  in  judgment : thou  shalt  not 
?'i6.  19.  ’‘■aspect  the  person  of  the  poor,  nor 
Prov.  24.  honour  the  person  of  the  mighty : but 
fames 2. 9.  ill  righteousiiess  shalt  thou  judge  thy 
• neighbour. 

16  ^ Thou  shalt  not  go  up  and 
down  as  a talebearer  among  thy  people : 
neither  shalt  thou  stand  against  the 
blood  of  thy  nei2:hbour : I am  the 
Lord. 


605 


17  ^ ^1  hou  shalt  not  hate  thy -ti  John  2 
brother  in  thine  heart:  ■^'thou  shalt  in 
any  wise  rebuke  thy  neighbour,  “and 
not  suffer  sin  upon  him. 

18  ^ Thou  shalt  not  avenge,  nor 
bear  any  grudge  against  the  children 
of  thy  people,  Tut  thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbour  as  thyself : I am  the  Lord. 

19  ^ Ye  shall  keep  my  statutes. 

Thou  shalt  not  let  thy  cattle  gender 
with  a diverse  kind;  thou  shalt  not 
sow  thy  field  with  mingled  seed : nei- 
ther shall  a garment  mingled  of  linen 
and  woollen  come  upon  thee. 


18. 

15- 

Ecclus.  19. 

13- 

II  Or, 

that  thou 
bear  not 
sill  for 
him. 

^ Matt.  5. 
43- 

& 22.  39. 
Rom.  13.9. 
Gal.  5.  14. 
James  2.  8. 


fraud”  should  rather  be,  oppress.  The  rule 
given  in  the  latter  clause  is  expressed  at  more 
length  Deut.  xxiv.  14,  15 ; cf.  James  v.  4, 
The  meaning  of  -z,'.  14  appears  to  be,  Thou  shalt 
not  utter  curses  to  the  deaf  because  he  camiot 
hear  thee.,  neither  shalt  thou  put  a stumbling- 
block  in  the  q.uaj  of  the  blind  because  he  cannot 
see  thee  (cf.  Deut.  xxvii.  18),  but  thou  shah 
remember  that  though  the  -iveak  and  poor  cannot 
resist.,  nor  the  deaf  hear.,  nor  the  blind  see.,  God 
is  strong.,  and  sees  and  hears  all  that  thou  doest. 
Cf.  Job  xxix.  15.  The  principle  is  brought 
into  connection  with  the  law  of  thf'  Jubilee  in 
Lev.  XXV.  17,  36,  43* 

15,  16.  In  the  administration  of  justice 
there  is  to  be  no  respect  of  persons.  Judg- 
ment is  not  to  be  warped,  either  out  of  pity 
to  the  poor  or  to  win  favour  with  the  rich  : 
nor  is  it  to  be  based  upon  idle  tale-bearing 
(cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  I — 3,  8).  The  meaning  of  the 
latter  clause  of  v.  16  is  not  quite  so  clear. 
The  expression,  to  “stand  against  the  blood 
of  thy  neighbour,”  has  been  generally  under- 
stood to  mean,  to  put  his  life  in  danger  by 
standing  up  as  his  accuser.  But  most  of  the 
recent  Jewish  versions  follow  the  Talmud  in 
giving  another  sense  to  the  words,  which  it 
appears  the  Hebrew  will  bear:  Thou  shalt 
not  stand  by  idly  qjuhen  thy  neighbour"' s life  is 
in  danger.  So  Zunz,  Luzzatto,  Herxheimer, 
Leeser,  A^^ogue.  — Whichever  interpretation 
we  adopt,  from  the  connection  in  which  the 
passage  stands,  it  may’  be  inferred  that  the 
clause  prohibits  that  which  might  interfere 
with  the  course  of'justice. 

17,  18.  The  Israelite  was  not  to  conceal 
hatred  in  his  heart  towards  his  brother.  When 
injured  he  was  to  admonish  the  offender  at 
[ once,  and  not  to  incur  sin  by  retaining  any 

, feeling  of  unkindness.  Cf.  Matt,  xviii.  15  sq. 

I The  words  not  suffer  sin  upon  him^  should 

rather  be,  not  Pear  sin  on  his  account; 
that  is,  either  by  bearing  secret  ill-will  (Ephes. 

I iv.  26),  or  by  encouraging  him  to  sin  in 

! withholding  due  rebuke.  Rom.  i.  32.  All  feel- 

VOL.  I. 

i 


ing  of  vengeance  or  grudge  was  precluded  by 
the  commandment,  “ Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbour  as  thyself.”  Cf.  Matt.  xxii.  39; 
Luke  X.  27;  Rom.  xiii.  9;  Gal.  v.  14;  James 
ii.  8,  &c. 

19.  This  law  is  substantially  repeated 
Deut.  xxii.  9,  10,  ii.  The  distinctions  which 
God  has  established  in  the  physical  order  of 
the  world  were  thus  to  be  kept  in  view 
in  accordance  with  the  original  law  of  crea- 
tion. Gen.  i.  ii,  12,  21,  24,  25.  The  ob- 
servance also  of  deeply  rooted  conventional 
distinctions,  in  which  “ use  becomes  second 
nature”  {(pvais)-,  is  similarly  connected  with 
moral  obligation  in  Deut.  xxii.  5 ; cf.  i Cor. 
xi.  14,  15. 

linen  and  woollen"]  The  original  word  thus 
rendered  {shd' atne%)  is  a peculiar  one.  It  is 
found  only  here  and  in  Deut.  xxii.  ii,  where 
it  is  rendered  “ of  divers  sorts,”  and  the  ordi- 
nary Hebrew  words  for  woollen  and  linen 
which  there  follow  it  are  in  this  place  as- 
sumed by  our  translators  to  be  an  equivalent 
term.  But  sha'atne^  appears  to  be  a Coptic 
word  and  to  mean  spurious  or  adulterated 
(Gesenius,  Ftirst,  Knobel,  &c.);  LXX.  kl^- 
drjXoi.  The  mention  of  mixed  woollen  and 
linen  in  Deuteronomy  only  furnishes  an  illus- 
trative example  and  is  not  a rendering  of  sha'at- 
nez.. — But  there  is  a difficulty  in  reconciling 
this  law  with  the  combination  of  wool  and 
linen  used  in  the  dress  of  the  High  priest. 
On  Ex.  xxviii.  4.  Some  of  the  Jews  sup- 
pose that  this  law  was  made  only  for  the  laity ; 
others  refer  to  the  rabbinical  maxim  that  the 
Lord  could  at  pleasure  dispense  with  His  own 
law.  It  may  however  be  conjectured  that  the 
rule  was  not  intended  to  forbid  the  weaving  of 
different  kinds  of  yarn  into  one  piece  where 
each  material  could  be  distinctly  seen,  but 
only  the  spinning  into  one  thread  two  or  more 
different  materials.  This  may  perhaps  indi- 
cate the  meaning  of  sha'atnez  as  denoting 
such  tissues  as  linsey  woolsey.  It  should  be 
noticed  that  the  flax  is  spoken  of  in  Exodus  as 


6o6 


LEVITICUS.  XIX. 


[v.  20—28. 


20  ^ And  whosoever  lieth  carnally 
with  a woman,  that  is  a bondmaid, 
"pu  "betrothed  to  an  husband,  and  not  at 
^ all  redeemed,  nor  freedom  given  her; 
Reproach-  “ she  shall  be  scourged ; they  shall  not 
ed  by,  or,  death,  because  she  was  not 

for  vtan.  Jr  j 

il  Or,  they.  free. 

shall  21  And  he  shall  bring  his  tres- 
^'courging.  pass  offering  unto  the  Lord,  unto  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, even  a ram  for  a trespass  of- 
fering. 

22  And  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  him  with  the  ram  of 
the  trespass  offering  before  the  Lord 
for  his  sin  which  he  hath  done : and 
the  sin  which  he  hath  done  shall  be 
forgiven  him. 

23  ^ And  when  ye  shall  come  into 
the  land,  and  shall  have  planted  all 


manner  of  trees  for  food,  then  ye  shall 
count  the  fruit  thereof  as  uncircum- 
cised : three  years  shall  it  be  as  un- 
circumcised unto  you  : it  shall  not  be 
eaten  of. 

24  But  in  the  fourth  year  all  the 
fruit  thereof  shall  be  ^holy  to  praise  ^ 

the  Lord  withal.  praises  to 

25  And  in  the  fifth  year  shall  ye 
eat  of  the  fruit  thereof,  that  it  may 
yield  unto  you  the  increase  thereof : 

I am  the  Lord  your  God. 

26  ^ Ye  shall  not  eat  any  thing 
with  the  blood : neither  shall  ye  use 
enchantment,  nor  observe  times. 

27  Ye  shall  not  round  the  corners  '^chap.  21 
of  your  heads,  neither  shalt  thou  mar 

the  corners  of  thy  beard. 

28  Ye  shall  not  ^rnake  any  cut- -^Deut.  1. 
tings  in  your  flesh  for  the  dead,  nor 


spun  by  itself,  xxvi.  i,  xxvii.  16,  xxxvi.  8, 
xxxix.  24,  &c. 

20.  betrothed  to  an  husbandry  Rather,  ‘Who 
has  been  betrothed  to  a man.  The 
reference  appears  to  be  to  a bondwoman  who 
has  been  betrothed  to  a fellow-servant  by  her 
master.  Death  was  the  punishment _ for  un- 
faithfulness in  a betrothed  woman  in  other 
cases.  Dent.  xxii.  23,  24. 

she  shall  be  scourged'\  Literally,  there  shall 
be  a chastisement . Our  version  follows  the 
Targums.  But  a better  “ rendering  is  that 
of  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Syriac  and  many  recent 
versions,  they  shall  be  chastised.  The 
'I'respass-offering  was  especially  due  from  the 
man  as  having  not  only  sinned  with  the  wo- 
man, but  inflicted  an  injury  on  the  rights  of 
the  master.  See  on  v.  14. 

23—25.  When  a fruit-tree  of  any  kind 
was  planted,  its  produce  was  to  be  deemed 
imperfect  and  unfit  for  presentation  to  Je- 
hovah for  the  first  three  year^  In  the  fourth 
year  its  fruit  was  presented  in  the  Sanctuary 
(see  Deut.  xxvi.  2),  and  the  tree  was  thus  sanc- 
tified in  a way  which  bore  an  analogy  to  the 
circumcision  of  one  of  the  chosen  race.  Cf. 
“the  vine  undressed,”  literally,  the  Nazarite 
'Vine.  Lev.  xxv.  5,11.  Not  until  the  fifth  year 
was  the  owner  permitted  to  eat  of  the  fruit. 
In  regard  to  its  spiritual  lesson,  this  law  may 
Ixi  compared  with  the  dedication  of  the  first- 
born of  lx.‘asts  to  Jehovah.  Lx.  xiii.  12,  xxxiv. 
19.  d'hough  in  practical  operation  it  could 
be  only  })rospective,  like  the  law  of  gleaning 
in  'v'v.  9,  10,  its  meaning  in  a moral  point  of 
view  was  plain,  and  tended  to  illustrate  the 
spirit  of  the  whole  Law. 

I am  the  Lord']  See  on  xviii.  2,  xix.  2. 


26 — 28.  Certain  heathen  customs,  several 
of  them  connected  with  magic,  are  here  group- 
ed together.  The  prohibition  to  eat  anything 
rwith  the  blood  (strictly,  upon  the  bloody  may 
indeed  refer  to  the  eating  of  meat  which  had 
not  been  properly  bled  in  slaughtering,  and 
would  thus  take  its  ground  only  on  the_  gene- 
ral prohibition  of  blood.  Lev.  vii.  26,  xvii.  10; 
Deut.  xii.  23;  cf.  i S.  xiv.  32,  33.  But  it  ps 
not  improbable  that  there  may  be  a special 
reference  to  some  sort  of  magical  or  idolatrous 
rites.  Cf.  Ezek.  xxxiii.  25.  See  Spencer, 
Lib.  I.  c.  VIII.  § I. 

obser've  times]  It  is  not  clear  whether  the 
original  word  refers  to  the  fancied  distinction 
between  lucky  and  unlucky  days,  to  some 
mode  of  drawing  omens  from  the  clouds,  or  to 
the  exercise  of  “ the  evil  eye.” 

27.  round  the  corners  of  your  heads]  It  is 
supposed  that  this  may  allude  to  such  a custom 
as  that  of  the  Arabs  described  by  Herodotus. 
They  used  to  shew  honour  to  their  deity  Oro- 
tal  by  cutting  the  hair  away  from  the  temples 
in  a circular  form  (ill.  8).  Cf.  on  Jer.  ix.  26. 

mar  the  corners  of  thy  beard]  Cf.  xxi.  5 ; 
Jer.  xlviii.  37.  It  has  been  conjectured  that 
this  also  relates  to  a custom  which  existed 
amongst  the  Arabs  (see  Plin.  ‘ H.  N.’  vi.  32), 
but  we  are  not  informed  that  it  had  any  idol- 
atrous or  magical  association.  As  the  same, 
or  very  similar  customs,  are  mentioned  in  con- 
nexion with  cuttings  in  the  flesh  for  the  dead 
in  ch.  xxi.  5,  in  Deut.  xiv.  i,  as  well  as  here,  it 
would  appear  that  they  may  have  been  signs 
of  mourning.  See  Herodotus,  ii.  36. 

28.  cuttings  in  your  fesh  for  the  dead]  Cf. 
xxi.  5;  DeutJ  xiv.  i;  Jer.  xvi.  6,  xlviii.  37, 
&c.  Amongst  the  excitable  races  of  the  East 


V.  29—36.] 


LEVITICUS.  XIX. 


f Heb. 
profane. 


print  any  marks  upon  you : I am  the 

Lord. 

29  ^ Do  not  prostitute  thy  daugh- 
ter, to  cause  her  to  be  a whore ; lest 
the  land  fall  to  who-redom,  and  the 
land  become  full  of  wickedness. 

30  ^ Ye  shall  keep  my  sabbaths, 
and  reverence  my  sanctuary:  I am 
the  Lord. 

31^  ^ Regard  not  them  that  have 
familiar  spirits,  neither  seek  after 
wizards,  to  be  defiled  by  them : I am 
the  Lord  your  God. 

32  ^1  Thou  shalt  rise  up  before  the 
hoary  head,  and  honour  the  face  of 


the  old  man,  and  fear  thy  God : I ain 
the  Lord. 

33  % And  "^if  a stranger  sojourn 
with  thee  in  your  land,  ye  shall  not 
"vex  him. 

34  ’^But  the  stranger  that  dwelleth 
with  you  shall  be  unto  you  as  one 
born  among  you,  and  thou  shalt  love 
him  as  thyself ; for  ye  were  strangers 
in  the  End  of  Egypt : I am  the  Lord 
your  God. 

35  Ve  shall  do  no  unrighteous- 
ness in  judgment,  in  meteyard,  in 
weight,  or  in  measure. 

36  ^Just  balances,  just  Veights,  a 


607- 


Exod. 
22.  21. 

II  Or, 
oppress. 
^'Exod.  12. 
48,  49. 


o Prov.  I] 


& 16.  I 
& 20.  I 
t Heb. 
sto7ies. 


this  custom  appears  to  have  been  very  com- 
mon. Xenoph.  ‘Cyrop.’  iii.  i.  13,  m.  3.  67. 
Herodot.  iv.  71,  &c.  The  Persians,  Abys- 
smians,  Bedouins,  and  manv  other  nations  still 
practise  it. 

print  any  marks']  This  appears  to  refer  to 
the  process  of  tattooing,  in  which  different 
devices  are  formed  by  perforations  in  the 
cuticle,  and  ink,  or  some  other  coloured  sub- 
stance, is  rubbed  over  them  so  as  to  leave 
a permanent  mark.  It  was  probably  prac- 
tised in  ancient  Egypt,  as  it  is  now  by  the 
lower  classes  of  the  modern  Egyptians  (Lane, 
ch.  I.).  This,  as  well  as  the  other  practices 
here  named,  appears  to  have  been  connected 
with  superstitious  notions.  SeeMishna,  ‘Mak- 
koth,Tii.  6,  with  Bartenora’snote;  Theodoret, 
‘Quasst.  in  Lev.’  xxviii.  But  any  voluntary 
dishgurement  of  the  person  was  in  itself  an 
outrage  upon  God’s  workmanship,  and  might 
well  form  the  subject  of  a law. 

29.  This  command  would  seem  to  refer 
to  common  prostitution  as  well  as  to  that 
mentioned  Deut.  xxiii.  17,  which  is  connected 
with  idolatrous  rites. 

30.  Cf.  ns.  3,  xxvi.  2. 

31.  The  devotion  of  faith,  which  would 
manifest  itself  in  obedience  to  the  command- 
ment to  keep  God’s  Sabbaths  and  to  reverence 
his  Sanctuary  (ns.  30),  is  the  true  preservative 
against  the  superstition  which  is  forbidden  in 
t^his  verse.  The  people  whose  God  was  Je- 
hovah were  not  to  indulge  those  wayward 
feelings  of  their  human  nature  which  are  grati- 
fied m magical  arts  and  pretensions.  Cf.  Isa. 

Vlll.  19. 

them  that  hanse  familiar  spirits]  The  word 
thus  rendered  is  supposed  to  signify  bottles. 
So  the  Talitiud,  Gesenius,  Fiirst.  This  ap- 
plication of  the  word  is  supposed  to  have 
been  suggested  by  the  tricks  of  ventriloquists. 
Within  whose  bodies  it  was  fancied  that  spirits 

T ’-ise  the 

word  iyya(TTpL}xv6oi.  See  Theod.  ‘Quasst.  in 


Lev.’  xxrx.  The  word  which  here  and  in 
some  other  places  appears  to  denote  the  per- 
son practising  the  art,  is  in  other  cases  used 
for  the  familiar  spirit  which  he  pretended  to 
employ  in  order  to  consult,  or  to  raise,  the 
spirits  of  the  dead.  See  i S.  xxviii.  7,  8. 

nvTzard]  The  English  word  literally  answers 
to  the  Hebrew,  being  equivalent  to  a knonving 
man.,  or,  a cunning  man.  See  Lev.  xx.  6,  27; 
Deut.  xviii.  n;  cf.  Exod.  xxii.  18.  ’ 

32.  The  outward  respect  due  to  old  age 
is  here  immediately  connected  with  the  fear 
of  God.  Prov.  XX.  29  ; i Tim.  v.  i.  The 
ancient  Egyptians,  like  the  Lacedemonians 
and  the  old  Romans,  appear  to  have  been  ex- 
emplary in  this  respect  (Herodot.  11.  80; 
‘Aul.  Gell.’  II.  15),  as  were,  and  are  to  this 
day,  most  of  the  eastern  nations:  ‘Menu,’  ii. 
120,  121,  122;  Lane’s  ‘Modern  Egyptians,’ 
ch.  VIII.  XIII.  &c. 

33,  34.  the  stranger]  the  foreigner.  See 
on  xvi.  29.  In  Ex.  xxii.  21,  xxiii.  9,  the  Israelite 
was  forbidden  on  the  same  ground — that  he 
had  himself  been  a foreigner  in  Egypt — to  op- 
press the  foreigner;  but  he  is  now  commanded 
to  treat  him  without  reserve  like  a brother, 
to  love  him  as  himself.  See  on  Ex.  xxiii.  23! 
The  word  “ Butf  supplied  at  the  beginning 
of  34,  is  needless  and  rather  obscures  the 
meaning. 

35,  36.  In  all  kinds  of  exchanges,  strict 
justice  was  to  be  observed.  The  Ephah  is  here 
taken  as  the  standard  of  dry  measure,  and  the 
Hin  (see  on  Ex.  xxix.  40)  as  the  standard  of 
liquid  measure.  Cf.  Ezek.  xlv.  iq— 12.  Two 
very  different  estimates  of  the  capacities  of 
these  measure^  have  been  formed.  From  the 
statements  of  Josephus,  who  compares  the 
Hebrew  measures  with  the  Greek  (‘Ant.’  iii. 

9.  § 4,  viii.  2.  § 9,  &c.),  the  Ephah,  or  Bath, 
contained  above  eight  gallons  and  a half, 
and  the  Hin  (which  was  a sixth  part  of  the 
Ephah),  rather  less  than  one  gallon  and  a half. 
But  according  to  the  rabbinists,  who  make 

(^(^2 


6o8 


LEVITICUS.  XIX.  XX. 


[v.  37- 


-2. 


just  ephah,  and  a just  hin,  shaU  ye 
have:  I am  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt. 

37  Therefore  shall  ye  observe  all 
my  statutes,  and  all  my  judgments, 
and  do  them ; I am  the  Lord. 
CHAPTER  XX. 

I Of  him  that  giveth  of  his  seed  to  Molech.  4 
Of  him  that  favour eth  such  an  one.  o Uj 


going  to  wizards.  7 Of  sanctficatiojt.  9 
him  that  curseth  his  parents.  lo  Of  adul- 
tery. II,  14,  17,  19  Of  incest  13  Of 
sodomy.  IS  Of  beastiality.  Of  unclean- 
ness. 22  Obedience  is  required  with  holiness. 

•27  Wizards  must  be  put  to  death. 

and  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 "Again,  thou  shalt  say  to  the  «^chap. 
children  of  Israel,  Whosoever  he  be 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  or  of  the 


.the  contents  of  a hen’s  egg  their  standard,  the 
Ephah  did  not  hold  quite  four  gallons  and  a 
half,  and  the  Hin  not  quite  six  pints.  1 he 
Log  was  a twelfth  part  of  the  Hin^  The 
latter  estimate  is  to  be  preferred  on  grounds 
of  probability.— For  the  moral  duty  here_  en- 
joined, cf.  Dent.  XXV.  13— 16;  Prov.  xi.  i, 
xvi.  II,  XX.  10;  Ezek.  xlv.  10;  Micah  vi.  10, 

II ; Amosviii.  5. 

36  1 am  the  Lord  your  God.,  &c  ] A 

full  stop  should  without  doubt  precede  these 
words.  They  introduce  the  form-al  conclusion 
to  the  whole  string  of  precepts  in  this  chapter, 
which  are  all  enforced  upon  the  ground  ot 
the  election  of  the  nation  by  Jehovah  who 
had  delivered  them  from  the  bondage  of  Egypt. 
Cf.  on  v.  2. 

Chap.  XX. 

Punishments  appointed  for  certain 
Cremes,  i — 27. 

Respecting  the  relation  in  which  this  chap- 
ter stands  to  chapters  xviii.  and  xix.  see  on  xviii. 
24—30.  The  crimes  which  are  condemned 
in  those  chapters  on  purely  spiritual  groiind, 
the  absolute  prohibition  of  Jehovah,  have  here 
special  punishments  allotted  to  them  as  of- 
fences against  the  well-being  of  the  nation. 

2—5  Molech,  literally,  the  King,  called 
also  Moloch,  Milcom,  and  Malcham,  whose 
rites  are  here  so  severely  condemned,  was 
known  in  later  times  as  “the  abomination  of 
the  Ammonites,”  when  Chemosh  was  the 
abomination  of  the  Moabites,  and  Astarte  the 
abomination  of  the  Sidonians.  Solomon  de- 
dicated to  each  one  of  these  deities  a high 
place  (see  on  xxvi.  30),  most  probably  at  the 
corner  of  Terusalem  which  overlooked  the 
valley  of  Hinnom.  See  Stanley,  ‘Jewish 
Church,’  II.  p.  390.  These  were  destroyea 
and  defiled  by  Josiah.  i K.  xi.  5,  7;  2 K. 
xxiii.  10,  13.  Molech  was  called  Adramn^- 
lech  by  the  Sepharvites.  2 K.  xvii.  31.  He 
appears  to  have  been  the  f re-god  of  the  eastern 
nations;  related  to,  and  sometimes  made  iden- 
tical with,  Baal,  the  sun-god.  The  impious 
custom  with  which  his  name  is  mainly  con- 
nected was  called  in  full,  passing  children 
through  the  fire  to  Molech,  sometimes  elhpti- 
cally  (as  in  the  Hebrew  text  of  Lev.  xviii.  ai), 


passing  them  through  to  Molech;  or,  omitting 
the  name  of  the  god,  passing  them  througo  the 
lire.  In  this  place  the  children  are  spoken  of 
as  \iajen  to  Molech.  According  to  a Jewish 
tradition  of  very  light  authority,  the  deity 
was  worshipped  under  the  form  of  a brazen 
image,  having  the  head  of  an  ox,  with  the 
arms  extended  to  receive  the  babe,  who  was  m 
some  way  there  subjected  to  the  action  of  hre. 

A brass  image  of  the  god  Kronos,  said  to 
have  been  used  in  this  manner  by  the  Cartha- 
ginians, is  described  by  Diodorus  Siculus  (xx. 
14 j which  seems  to  have  furnished  the  rab- 
binists  with  the  suggestion.  But  the  nature 
of  this  rite,  and  of  what  others  there  may 
have  been  connected  with  the  name  of  Molech, 
is  very  doubtful.  The  practices  appear  to  have 
been  essentially  connected  with  magical  arts, 
probably  also  with  unlawful  lusts  5, 

6 ; xviii.  20,  21 ; Dent,  xviii.  10,  ii ; 2 K.  xvu. 
17  xxi.  6;  2 Chron.  xxxiii.  6;  Ezex.  xxiii. 
37),  and  with  some  particular  form  of  pro- 
fane swearing;  see  t.’.  3,  xviii.  21;  cf.  Zep  . 

I c.— It  is  a question  whether  the  child  who 
was  passed  through  the  fire  to  Molech  was 
destroyed  or  not;  whether  he  was  regarded  as 
a propitiatory  sacrifice,  or  as  the  object  of  a 
rite  imagined  to  be  in  some  way  beneficial  to 
him.  Maimoiiides  and  the  Jewish  autho- 
rities in  general  appear  to  take  the  latter  view. 
On  the  other  hand,  there  is  express  mention 
of  burning  children  as  sacrifices.  Ps.  cvi.  37, 
38;  Is.  Ivii.  5;  .Ri-.  vii.  3L  xix  5;  Ezek.  xvi 
21  xxiii.  39-  The  sacrifice  of  his  son  by  the 
kinit  of  Moab  (2  K.  iii.  27)  was  probab  y 
performed  to  the  Moabite  god  Chemosh, 
whose  worship,  it  may  reasonably  be  sup- 
posed, was  of  similar  nature  to  that  of  Mo- 
lech But  however  the  question  is  decided  m 
reference  to  later  times,  we  may  perhaps  con- 
iecture,  from  the  context  in  which  it  is  here 
mentioned,  that  the  rite  in  the  time  of  Moses 
belonged  to  the  region  rather  of  magic 
than  of  definite  idolatrous  worship,  and  that 
it  may  have  been  practised  as  a lustral 
charm,  or  fire-baptism,  for  the  "children  of 
incest  and  adultery.  Its  connection  with  the 
children  of  Ammon,  the  child  of  incest,  may 
be  worth  noticing  in  reference  to  this  sug- 
gestion. It  should  be  recollected  that  Idolatry 
and  Magic  of  all  kinds  are  closely  connect- 


V.  3—1 


LEVITICUS.  XX. 


609 


6.1 

strangers  that  sojourn  in  Israel,  that 
giveth  any  of  his  seed  unto  Molech; 
he  shall  surely  be  put  to  death : the 
people  of  the  land  shall  stone  him 
with  stones. 

3 And  I will  set  my  face  against 
that  man,  and  will  cut  him  off  from 
among  his  people;  because  he  hath 
given  of  his  seed  unto  Molech,  to  de- 
hle  my  sanctuary,  and  to  profane  my 
holy  name. 

4 And  if  the  people  of  the  land  do 
any  ways  hide  their  eyes  from  the  man, 
when  he  giveth  of  his  seed  unto  Mo- 
lech, and  kill  him  not: 

5 Then  I will  set  my  face  against 
that  man,  and  against  his  family,  and 
will  cut  him  off,  and  all  that  go  a 
whoring  after  him,  to  commit  whore- 
dom with  Molech,  from  among  their 
people. 

6 ^ And  the  soul  that  turneth  after 
such  as  have  familiar  spirits,  and  after 
wizards,  to  go  a whoring  after  them, 
I will  even  set  my  face  against  that 
soul,  and  will  cut  him  off  from  among 
his  people. 

* chap.  II.  7 '^Sanctify  yourselves  therefore, 

1^19. 2.  and  be  ye  holy : for  I am  the  Lord 
your  God. 

‘^Exod.21.  8 shall  keep  my  statutes, 

and  do  them : I am  the  Lord  which 

20.^  sanctify  you. 

4.“^  ■ 9 ^ ^ For  every  one  thatcurseth  his 


ed,  and  are  always  apt  to  run  into  each 
other,  while  true  Faith  is  equally  opposed  to 
both  of  them.  See  on  Exod.  xxii.  18.  Bacon 
reckons  as  two' “ declinations  from  religion,” 
‘‘  idolatry^  when  we  worship  false  gods,  sup- 
posing them  to  be  true;  and  witchcrafts 
when  we  adore  false  gods,  knowing  them 
to  be  wicked  and  false.”  ‘ Advancement  of 
Learning,’  Bk.  ii. — In  connection  with  this 
subject  the  matter  collected  by  Brand,  in  his 
accounts  of  May  day  and  Midsummer  day, 
is  of  interest,  ‘ Popular  Antiquities,’  Vol.  1. 

2.  strangers  that  sojourn\  foreigners 
who  dwell.  See  xvi.  29. 

people  of  the  land]  i.  e.  native  Hebrews.  See 
iv.  27. 

sto?ie  him  with  stones]  The  commonest  form 
of  capital  punishment.  It  was  probably  pre- 
ferred as  being  the  one  in  which  the  execution 
was  the  act  of  the  whole  congregation. 

3.  defle  my  sanctuary]  i.  e.  pollute  the 


father  or  his  mother  shall  be  surely 
put  to  death : he  hath  cursed  his  fa- 
ther or  his  mother;  his  blood  shall  be 
upon  him. 

10  ^ And  ^the  man  that  commit- ‘’^Deut.  22. 
teth  adultery  with  another  man’s  wife,  John  8.  4. 
even  he  that  committeth  adultery  with 

his  neighbour’s  wife,  the  adulterer  and 
the  adulteress  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death. 

11  ^And  the  man  that  lieth  with  ^ chap.  18. 
his  father’s  wife  hath  uncovered  his 
father’s  nakedness : both  of  them  shall 
surely  be  put  to  death;  their  blood 

shall  be  upon  them. 

12  And  if  a man  lie  with  his  daugh- 
ter in  law,  both  of  them  shall  surely 
be  put  to  death  : they  have  wrought 
confusion;  their  blood  shall  be  upon 
them. 

13  -^If  a man  also  lie  with  man-^chap.  18. 
kind,  as  he  lieth  with  a woman,  both 

of  them  have  committed  an  abomina- 
tion : they  shall  surely  be  put  to  death ; 
their  blood  shall  be  upon  them. 

14  And  if  a man  take  a wife  and 
her  mother,  it  is  wickedness : they 
shall  be  burnt  with  fire,  both  he  and 
they;  that  there  be  no  wickedness 
among  you. 

1 5 And  if  a man  lie  with  a beast,  ^ chap.  18. 
he  shall  surely  be  put  to  death : and 

ye  shall  slay  the  beast. 

16  And  if  a woman  approach  unto 


people  as  identified  with  their  Sanctuary.  Cf. 
XV.  31;  Num.  xix.  13,  &c. 

6.  Cf.  T'.  27  and  on  xix.  31. 

7,  8.  Cf.  xi.  45,  xviii.  4,  5,  xix.  2,  xx. 
22 — 26,  &c. 

9.  Ex.  xxi.  17;  Deut.  xxvii.  16;  Matt. 
XV.  4 ; Mark  vii.  10. 

10.  xviii.  20;  Ex.  XX.  14;  Deut.  xxii.  22. 

11.  See  Note  i.  after  chap,  xviii. 

13.  Cf.  xviii.  22;  Deut.  xxiii.  17. 

14.  burnt  with  fire]  Cf.  Gen.  xxxviii.  24. 
It  is  inferred,  on  very  probable  ground,  that 
the  burning  under  the  sentence  of  the  Law  took 
place  after  the  death  of  the  criminal  by  ston- 
ing, or  strangling.  Seethe  case  of  Achan,  Josh, 
vii.  25.  Cf.  Lev.  xxi.  9.  The  Targum  of  Pales- 
tine says  that  the  offenders  in  this  case  were 
destroyed  by  molten  lead  being  poured  down 
their  throats.  But  this  is  utterly  improbable. 
On  the  nature  of  the  offence  see  on  xviii.  17. 

15.  16.  xviii.  28;  Deut.  xxvii.  21. 


6io 


LEVITICUS.  XX.  XXL 


V.  17 1. 


any  beast,  and  lie  down  thereto,  thou 
shalt  kill  the  woman,  and  the  beast : 
they  shall  surely  be  put  to  death; 
their  blood  shall  be  upon  them. 

17  And  if  a man  shall  take  his 
sister,  his  father’s  daughter,  or  his 
mother’s  daughter,  and  see  her  naked- 
ness, and  she  see  his  nakedness ; it  is 
a wicked  thing ; and  they  shall  be  cut 
off  in  the  sight  of  their  people : he 
hath  uncovered  his  sister’s  nakedness ; 
he  shall  bear  his  iniquity, 
chap.  18.  18  ^^And  if  a man  shall  lie  with  a 

woman  having  her  sickness,  and  shall 
t Heb.  uncover  her  nakedness ; he  hath  ^ dis- 
Tced."'''''  covered  her  fountain,  and  she  hath 
uncovered  the  fountain  of  her  blood : 
and  both  of  them  shall  be  cut  off 
from  among  their  people. 

19  And  thou  shalt  not  uncover  the 
nakedness  of  thy  mother’s  sister,  nor 
of  thy  father’s  sister : for  he  uncover- 
eth  his  near  kin : they  shall  bear  their 
iniquity. 

20  And  if  a man  shall  lie  with  his 
uncle’s  wife,  he  hath  uncovered  his 
uncle’s  nakedness : they  shall  bear  their 
sin ; they  shall  die  childless. 

21  And  if  a man  shall  take  his 
t Heb.  brother’s  wife,  it  is  ^ an  unclean  thing : 

he  hath  uncovered  his  brother’s  na- 
kedness ; they  shall  be  childless. 

22  II  Ye  shall  therefore  keep  all 
*chap.  18.  my  "statutes,  and  all  my  judgments, 

and  do  them : that  the  land,  whither 
-fcchap.  18.  I bring  you  to  dwell  therein,  '^’spue 
you  not  out. 


17.  cut  off  in  the  sight  of  their  people\  See 
on  Ex.  xxxi.  14.  But  the  more  full  expression 
here  used  probably  refers  to  some  special  form 
of  public  excommunication,  accompanied,  it 
may  be,  by  expulsion  from  the  camp. 

18.  Cf.  xviii.  19.  Seexii.  2;  xv.  19. 

19.  hear  their  iniquity]  See  on  Ex.  xxviii.  38. 

20.  they  shall  die  childless]  This  may  mean 
either  that  the  offspring  should  not  be  regard- 
ed as  lawfully  theirs,  nor  be  entitled  to  any 
hereditary  privileges  (St  Augustin,  Hesychius, 
Michaelis),  or  that  they  should  have  no  bless- 
ing in  their  children  (see  authorities  quoted  by 
D nisi  us). 

21.  Cf.  on  xviii.  16. 


23  And  ye  shall  not  walk  in  the 
manners  of  the  nation,  which  I cast 
out  before  you:  for  they  committed 

all  these  things,  and  ^therefore  I ab-  ^Oeut. 9. 
horred  them. 

24  But  I have  said  unto  you.  Ye 
shall  inherit  their  land,  and  I will 
give  it  unto  you  to  possess  it,  a land 
that  floweth  with  milk  and  honey : I 
am  the  Lord  your  God,  which  have 
separated  you  from  other  people. 

25  """Ye  shall  therefore  put  differ- ^ chap. n. 
ence  between  clean  beasts  and  un-  ^eut.  14. 
clean,  and  between  unclean  fowls  4- 

and  clean : and  ye  shall  not  make 
your  souls  abominable  by  beast,  or 
by  fowl,  or  by  any  manner  of  living 
thing;  that  "creepeth  on  the  ground, « Or 
which  I have  separated  from  you  as 
unclean. 

25  And  ye  shall  be  holy  unto  me : 

""for  I the  Lord  am  holy,  and  have  ^ 
severed  you  from  other  people,  that  & 20. 7. 

u IJ  U • ^ iPet.  1. 16. 

ye  should  be  mine. 

27  ^ ""A  man  also  or  woman  that Deut.  18. 
hath  a familiar  spirit,  or  that  is  a i Sam.  28. 
wizard,  shall  surely  be  put  to  death : 
they  shall  stone  them  with  stones : 
their  blood  shall  he  upon  them. 

CHAPTER  XXL 

I Of  the  priests'  inoiirning.  6 Of  their  holi- 
ness. 8 Of  their  estimation.  7,  13  Of  their 
niaj'riages.  17  The  priests  that  have  blem- 
ishes must  not  minister  in  the  sanctuary. 

AND  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 

Jf\^  Speak  unto  the  priests  the  sons 


22—26.  The  ground  is  here  again  stated 
on  which  all  these  laws  of  holiness  should  be 
obeyed.  See  on  xviii.  24 — 30* 

24.  Cf.  Ex.  hi.  8,  17,  xiii.  5,  xxxiii.  3,  &c. 

25,  26.  The  distinction  between  clean 
and  unclean  for  the  whole  people,  and  not  for 
any  mere  section  of  it,  was  one  great  typical 
mark  of  “the  kingdom  of  priests,  the  holy 
nation.”  See  Note  after  chap.  xi.  § vii. 

25.  any  manner  of  living  thing  that  creeff 
eth]  Rather,  any  creeping  thing;  that  is, 
any  vermin.  See  on  xi.  20 — 23.  The  refer- 
ence in  this  verse  is  to  dead  animals,  not  to  the 
creatures  when  alive.  See  Note  after  chap.  xi. 
§ III. 

27.  Seeonxix.  31. 


V.  2 6.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXL 


6i  I 


of  Aaron,  and  say  unto  them,  There 
shall  none  be  defiled  for  the  dead 
among  his  people  : 

2 But  for  his  kin,  that  is  near  unto 
him,  that  for  his  mother,  and  for 
his  father,  and  for  his  son,  and  for 
his  daughter,  and  for  his  brother, 
being  an  3 Aiid  for  his  sister  a virgin,  that 
‘7nmifhis  is  nigh’  unto  him,  which  hath  had 
^siiainot  husband;  for  her  may  he  be  de- 

defUehim-  filed. 

wde%c!^  4 But  "he  shall  not  defile  himself. 


a chief  man  among  his  people, 
to  profane  himself. 

5 They,  shall  not  make  baldness 
upon  their  head,  neither  shall  they 
shave  off  the  corner  of  their  beard, 
nor  make  any  cuttings  in  their  flesh. 

6 They  shall  be  holy  unto  their 
God,  and  not  profane  the  name  of 
their  God  ; for  the  offerings  of  the 
Lord  made  by  fire,  aub/  the  bread 
of  their  God,  they  do  offer:  therefore 
they  shall  be  holy. 


The  Laws  of  Holiness  for  the 
Priests. 

' xxi.  I.  xxii.  16. 

Chap.  XXI.  i — 15.  The  priests  were  to 
• maintain  a peculiarly  high  standard  of  legal 
purity  in  their  family  relations  because  it  was 
their  office  to  offer  sacrifices  to  Jehovah,  ‘v‘v. 
6,  8,  15.  The  common  priest  was  not  merely 
required,  like  the  rest  of  the  people,  to  purify 
himself  when  he  had  become  defiled  by  con- 
tact with  the  dead,  but  he  was  to  avoid  such 
defilement  in  all  cases  except  those  of  the 
nearest  relationship,  ‘W.  2,3;  the  High  priest 
was  not  to  incur  it  in  any  case,  ‘v.  ri.  The 
common  priest  was  not  permitted  to  marry  a 
prostitute,  a woman  of  lost  character,  nor  a 
divorced  woman,  ‘v.  7 : the  High  priest  could 
marry  no  one  but  a virgin  of  Hebrew  blood, 
‘V7J.  13,  14.  The  priest’s  family  was  to  be 
a model  of  purity,  and  imchastity  in  a priest’s 
daughter  was  punished  with  marked  severity, 
4 (see  note),  9. 

2 — 3.  Cf.  Ezek.  xliv.  25. — /jss  kin  (Heb. 
sheer ^ see  xviii,  6),  that  is  near  unto  hini\  The 
relations  here  mentioned  are  those  that  would 
make  up  one  household  with  the  priest  him- 
' self  and  his  wife,  in  the  case  of.  his  being  a 

married  man,  see  on  -z;.  4.  The  presence 
of  a corpse  defiled  the  tent,  or  house,  and 
all  those  who  entered  it,  Num.  xix.  14.  On 
the  apparent  approach  of  the  death  of  one 
I of  these  ne^-  relations,  the  common  priest  was 

not  obliged  to  leave  the  house,  but  might  re- 
• main  and  take  part  in  the  funeral.  The  High 

priest,  on  such  an  occasion,  must  have  had 
either  to  leave  the  house,  or  to  remove  the 
sick  person;  see  “z;.  ii. 

^ 4.  The  meaning  of  this  verse  is  doubtful. 

Our  translation  is  supported  by  Onkelos,  Leo 
; Jiida,  Rosenmiiller,  Zunz,  Luzzatto,  Wogue, 

V &c.  The  sense  seems  to  be  that,  owing  to 

, his  position  in  the  nation,  he  is  not  to  defile 

~ himself  in  any  cases  except  those  named  in 

'vnj.  2,  3 ; these  two  verses  may  indeed  be 
read  parenthetically,  omitting  the  interpolated 
|,  '■‘■But'''  in  -v.  4.  Some  understand  that  the 

i priest  was  not  to  mourn  e'ven  for  a ruler  of 


his  people  (Syriac,  Vulgate,  &c.).  The  LXX. 
appear  to  have  followed  a different  reading  of 
the  text  (approved  by  Fiirst)  which  would 
mean,  he  shall  not  defile  himself  for  a moment. 
Some  modern  critics  approve  the  explanation 
in  the  margin  of  our  version ; but  that 
the  priests  were  permitted  to  mourn  for 
their  wives  appears  from  the  prohibition  to 
Ezekiel  on  a special  occasion.  See  Ezek. 
xxiv.  16. 

5.  These  prohibitions  were  also  given  to  the 
people  at  large.  See  xix.  27,  28 ; Deut.  xiv.  i. 
— The  testimonies  which  Knobel  and  several 
of  the  older  commentators  have  collected  to 
show  that  the  priests  of  the  Egyptians,  Greeks, 
Romans  and  other  ancient  nations  avoided 
funerals  and  contact  with  the  dead,  afford  but 
an  imperfect  parallel  to  these  Levitical  laws 
concerning  the  priests.  The  sense  of  the 
uncleanness  of  dead  bodies  was  common  to 
those  nations  and  has  its  origin  in  human 
nature.  See  Note  after  ch.  xv.  Wherever  this 
feeling  was  recognized  in  a ceremonial  usage, 
the  priest,  from  his  office,  would  naturally  be 
expected  to  observe  the  highest  standard  of 
purity.  But  the  laws  which  regulated  the 
priesthood  of  the  chosen  people  had  a deeper 
basis  tkan  this.  They  had  to  administer  a 
Law  of  Life.  See  Notes  after  ch.  xi.  § iii,  and 
after  ch.  xv.  § i.  St  Cyril  truly  obseives  that 
the  Hebrew  priests  were  the  instruments  of 
the  divine  will  for  averting  death,  that  all 
their  sacrifices  were  a type  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  which  swallowed  up  death  in  victory, 
and  that  it  would  therefore  have  been  unsuit- 
able that  they  should  have  the  same  freedom 
as  other  people  to  become  mourners.  ‘Gla- 
phyra’ in  Lev.  p.  430. 

6.  the  offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by  fire., 
and  the  bread  of  their  Cod']  The  word  here 
and  in  'v.  8 rendered  bread,  is  the  same  as  is 
rendered /ooi  iii.  ii,  16,  &c.,  and  meat  in 
xxii.  II.  The  reader  of  the  English  Bible 
should  keep  in  view  that  bread,  meat,  and/W, 
Avere  nearly  equivalent  terms  when  our  trans- 
lation was  made,  and  represent  no  distinctions 
that  exist  in  the  Hebrew.  Cf.  on  ii.  i.  On 


2 


LEVITICUS.  XXL  [v.  7-20. 


7 They  shall  not  take  a wife  that 
is  a whore,  or  profane ; neither  shall 
they^take  a woman  put  away  from  her 
husband:  for  he  is  holy  unto  his  God. 

8 Thou  shalt  sanctify  him  there- 
fore ; for  he  offereth  the  bread  of  thy 
God : he  shall  be  holy  unto  thee : for 
I the  Lord,  which  sanctify  you,  am 
holy. 

9 And  the  daughter  of  any 
priest,  if  she  profane  herself  by  play- 
ing the  whore,  she  profaneth  her  fa- 
ther: she  shall  be  burnt  with  fire. 

10  And  h^  that  is  the  high  priest 
among  his  brethren,  upon  whose  head 
the  anointing  oil  was  poured,  and 
that  is  consecrated  to  put  on  the  gar- 
ments, shall  not  uncover  his  head, 
nor  rend  his  clothes; 

11  Neither  shall  he  go  in  to  any 
dead  body,  nor  defile  himself  for  his 
father,  or  for  his  mother; 

12  Neither  shall  he  go  out  of  the 
sanctuary,  nor  profane  the  sanctuary 
of  his  God  ; for  the  crown  of  the 
anointing  oil  of  his  God  is  upon  him  : 
I aj7i  the  Lord. 


13  And  he  shall  take  a wife  in  her 
virginity. 

14  A widow,  or  a divorced  woman, 
or  profane,  07'  an  harlot,  these  shall 
he  not  take  : but  he  shall  take  a vir- 
gin of  his  own  people  to  wife. 

15  Neither  shall  he  profane  his 
seed  among  his  people : for  I the 
Lord  do  sanctify  him. 

16  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

17  Speak  unto  Aaron,  saying.  Who- 
soever he  be  of  thy  seed  in  their  ge- 
nerations that  hath  any  blemish,  let 

him  not  approach  to  offer  the  " bread  Or,  food. 
of  his  God. 

18  For  whatsoever  man  he  be  that 
hath  a blemish,  he  shall  not  approach  : 
a blind  man,  or  a lame,  or  he  that 
hath  a flat  nose,  or  any  thing  ^ super- 
fluous, 

19  Ora  man  that  is  brokenfooted, 
or  brokenhanded, 

20  Or  crookbackt,  or  "a  dwarf,  or 
that  hath  a blemish  in  his  eye,  or 
be  scurvy,  or  scabbed,  or  hath  his 
stones  broken  ; 


the  expression  “bread  of  their  God,”  see  on 
iii.  16. 

7.  profane]  The  word  probably  means  a 
vroman  who  has  been  seduced,  or,  according 
to  some  Jewish  authorities,  one  of  illegitimate 
birth. — The  wife  of  a common  priest  might 
be  a widow,  or  the  daughter  of  a foreigner, 
if  she  was  not  an  idolater,  and  in  these 
respects  the  in'iests  were  only  under  the  same 
restraint  as  the  people.  li)eut.  vii.  3.  A some- 
what stricter  rule  for  the  priests’  marriages 
was  revealed  to  the  prophet  in  later  times, 
E/.ek.  xliv.  22. 

8.  Thou  shalt  sanctify  ...he  shall  be  holy  unto 
thee]  d'he  people  of  Israel  are  now  addressed. 
They  are  commanded  to  regard  the  priests, 
who  perform  for  them  the  service  of  the  Altar, 
as  holy  in  respect  of  their  office. 

9.  burnt  q.vith  f re]  See  on  xx.  14.  The 
offence  was  forbidden  to  the  laity,  but  not 
visited  with  external  punishment.  See  xix.  29. 

10.  upon  riuhose  head  the  anointing;  oil  ^ivas 
poured]  Cf.  “the  crown  of  the  anointing  oil 
of  his  f}od  is  upon  him,”  t,’.  12.  It  was  the 
distinguishing  mark  of  the  anointing  of  the 
High  priest,  that  the  holy  oil  was  poured  on 
his  head  like  a crown,  viii.  12;  cf.  iv.  3,  x.  7. 
Sec  on  iv.  3. 


unco’ver  his  head]  rather,  let  his  hair  he 
dishevelled.  See  on  x.  6. 

11.  See  on  nsns.  2,  3. 

12.  go  out  of  the  sanctuary]  i.e.  not  for  the 
purpose"  to  which  reference  is  here  made.  The 
words  do  not  mean,  as  some  have  imagined, 
that  his  abode  was  confined  to  the  Sanctuary. 
See  on  Ex.  xxv.  8. 

15.  profane  his  seed]  i.e.  by  a marriage 
which  was  not  in  keeping  with  the  holiness  of 
his  office. 

16.  24.  One  of  the  family  of  Aaron  who 
was  deformed  or  disfigured  in  any  '^y,  though 
he  v^as  not  permitted  to  perform  priestly 
functions,  was  allowed  to  share  the  sacrificial 
meat  and  bread  and  to  dwell  with  his  brethren. 
See  vi.  16.  He  was  not  treated  as  an  out- 
cast, but  enjoyed  his  privileges  as  a son  of 
Aaron,  except  in  regard  to  active  duties. 

17.  in  their  ge7ieratmif\  i.e.  in  future 
generations. 

to  offer  the  bread  of  his  God]  See  on  ns.  6. 

20.  a d-waif]  This  is  the  most  probable 
rendering.  The  LXX.,  Onkelos,  Vulg.,  and 
Saadia,  take  it  for  blear-eyed.  The  etymology 
of  the  word  would  rather  express  one  who  is 
small  and  wasted,  either  short,  as  in  the  text, 


V.  21 6.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXL  XXII. 


613 


21  No  man  that  hath  a blemish  of 
the  seed  of  Aaron  the  priest  shall 
come  nigh  to  offer  the  offerings  of 
the  Lord  made  by  fire  : he  hath  a 
blemish  ; he  shall  not  come  nigh  to 
offer  the  bread  of  his  God. 

22  He  shall  eat  the  bread  of  his 
God,  both  of  the  most  holy,  and  of 
the  holy. 

23  Only  he  shall  not  go  in  unto 
the  vail,  nor  come  nigh  unto  the 
altar,  because  he  hath  a blemish ; that 
he  profane  not  my  sanctuaries  : for  I 
the  Lord  do  sanctify  them. 

24  And  Moses  told  it  unto  Aaron, 
and  to  his  sons,  and  unto  all  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel. 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

I The  priests  in  their  iinclea7i7iess  77i7cst  abstam 
fro77i  the  holy  thhigs.  6 Hovo  they  shall  be 
clea7ised.  10  Who  of  the  priest' s house  77iay  eat 
of  the  holy  thhigs.  17  The  sacrifices  77inst 
be  ivithout  ble7nish.  26  The  age  of  the  saci'i- 
fice.  29  'The  law  of  eat  mg  the  sacrifice  of 
tha7iksgivmg. 

And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
L saying, 

2 Speak  unto  Aaron  and  to  his 


sons,  that  they  separate  themselves 
from  the  holy  things  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  and  that  they  pro- 
fane not  my  holy  name  in  those 
things  which  they  hallow  unto  me  : 

I am  the  Lord. 

3 Say  unto  them.  Whosoever  he  he 
of  all  your  seed  among  your  gene- 
rations, that  goeth  unto  the  holy 
things,  which  the  children  of  Israel 
hallow  unto  the  Lord,  having  his 
uncleanness  upon  him,  that  soul  shall 
be  cut  off  from  my  presence  : I am 
the  Lord. 

4 What  man  soever  of  the  seed  of 
Aaron  is  a leper,  or  hath  a ^ run-  ^ Heb. 
ning  issue ; he  shall  not  eat  of  the  ^o/thT^ 
holy  things,  until  he  be  clean.  And  chap'!'i5.2. 
whoso  toucheth  any  thing  that  is 
unclean  by  the  dead,  or  a man  whose 

seed  goeth  from  him; 

5 Or  whosoever  toucheth  any  creep- 
ing thing,  whereby  he*  may  be  made 
unclean,  or  a man  of  whom  he  may 
take  uncleanness,  whatsoever  unclean- 
ness he  hath; 

6 The  soul  which  hath  touched 


or  slender,  as  in  the  margin.  It  is  hardly 
likely  that  dwarfishness  would  be  overlooked 
in  this  enumeration.  So  the  Syriac  and  most 
critical  authorities. 

scur’vy  or  scabbed']  These  words  most  pro- 
bably include  all  'affected  with  any  skin  disease. 

22.  See  on  ii.  3,  vi.  25. 

23.  sanctuaries]  The  places  peculiarly  holy, 
including  the  Most  holy  place,  the  Holy  place, 
and  the  Altar. 

This  law  is  of  course  to  be  regarded  as  one 
development  of  the  great  principle  that  all  which 
is  devoted  to  the  service  of  God  should  be  as 
perfect  as  possible  of  its  kind.  Respecting  the 
mode  in  which  the  details  of  the  law  were 
expanded  by  the  rabbinists,  see  Selden,  ‘de 
Succ.  in  Pont.’  c,  v. 

Chap.  XXII. 

La<ws  of  holiness  for  the  Priests^  continued. 

I — 16. 

1 — 9.  No  one  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  who 
was  in  any  way  ceremonially  unclean  was  per- 
mitted to  partake  of  the  sacrificial  food,  or 
even  to  touch  it.  The  commonest  form  of 
purification  is  here  repeated. 

2.  “ Speak  unto  Aaron  and  to  his  sons 

that  they  so  abstain  from  touching  the 
holy  things  of  the  children  of  Israel  which 


they  consecrate  unto  me,  that  they  pro- 
fime  not  my  holy  name.”  When  they  are 
to  abstain  is  explained  in  the  following  verses. 

the  holy  things]  i.e.  the  sacrificial  food  of 
all  kinds.  See  xxi.  22. 

I am  the  Lord]  See  on  xviii.  2.  This  law 
related  to  the  daily  life  and  the  ordinary  food 
of  the  priests  (f.  7).  The  occurrence  of  the 
formula  here  is  therefore  no  exception  to 
the  general  rule  that  it  is  for  the  most  part 
introduced  as  a sanction  to  what  relates  to 
common  life  as  distinguished  from  formal  reli- 
gious observances. 

3.  cut  off from  my  presence]  i.e.  excluded 
from  the  Sanctuary..  See  xx.  17. 

4.  until  he  be  clean]  See  xv.  13. 

u'nclean  by  the  dead]  Num.  xix.  22. 

nvhose  seed.,  &c.]  xv.  16. 

5.  creeping  thing.,  thereby  he  may  be  made 
unclean]  i.e.  dead  vermin,  xi.  29,  31,  43,  xx. 
25.  Dead  vermin  seem  to  be  singled  out  in 
this  way,  because  they  are  so  much  more 
liable  to  be  met  with  accidentally  than  the 
dead  bodies  of  other  creatures. 

or  a man  of  <vjhom.,  &c.]  xv.  5,  7,  19. 

6.  The  soul]  Rather,  the  person.  See 
Note  II.  after  chap.  xvii. 


6i4 


LEVITICUS.  XXII. 


[v.  7—18. 


Ezek.  44 


any  such  shall  be  unclean  until  even, 
and  shall  not  eat  of  the  holy  things, 
unless  he  wash  his  flesh  with  water. 

• 7 And  when  the  sun  is  down,  he 
shall  be  clean,  and  shall  afterward 
eat  of  the  holy  things  ; because  it  is 
his  food. 

«Exod.22.  8 "That  which  dieth  of  itself,  or 

is  torn  with  beasts^  he  shall  not  eat 
to  defile  himself  therewith:  I am  the 
Lord. 

9 They  shall  therefore  keep  mine 
ordinance,  lest  they  bear  sin  for  it, 
and  die  therefore,  if  they  profane  it : 
I the  Lord  do  sanctify  them. 

10  There  shall  no  stranger  eat  of 
the  holy  thing:  a sojourner  of  the 
priest,  or  an  hired  servant,  shall  not 
eat  of  the  holy  thing. 

11  But  if  the  priest  buy  any  soul 
^ with  his  money,  he  shall  eat  of  it, 
and  he  that  is  born  in  his  house : 
they  shall  eat  of  his  meat. 

12  If  the  priest’s  daughter  also  be 
married  unto  ^ a stranger,  she  may 
not  eat  of  an  offering  of  the  holy 
things. 

13  But  if  the  priest’s  daughter  be 


t Heb. 
luith  the 
purchase 
of  his 
money. 

t Heb. 
a man  a 
stranger. 


a widow,  or  divorced,  and  have  no 
child,  and  is  returned  unto  her  fa- 
ther’s house,  ^ as  in  her  youth,  she  * chap.  10. 
shall  eat  of  her  father’s  meat : but 
there  shall  no  stranger  eat  thereof. 

14  ^ And  if  a man  eat  of  the  holy 
thing  unwittingly,  then  he  shall  put 
the  fifth  part  thereof  unto  it,  and 
shall  give  it  unto  the  priest  v/ith  the 
holy  thing. 

15  And  they  shall  not  profane  the 
holy  things  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
which  they  offer  unto  the  Lord  ; 

16  Or  "suffer  them  to  bear  the  n Or, 

. . . 1 ...L  .L.  tade  them- 

iniquity  of  trespass,  when  they  eat  sciveswitk 
their  holy  things : for  I the  Lord 
do  sanctify  them.  trespass m 

17  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto  eating. 
Moses,  saying, 

18  Speak  unto  Aaron,  and  to  his 
sons,  and  unto  all  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  say  unto  them.  Whatso- 
ever he  be  of  the  house  of  Israel, 
or  of  the  strangers  in  Israel,  that 
will  offer  his  ^oblation  for  all  his 
vows,  and  for  all  his  freewill  offer- 
ings, which  they  will  offer  unto  the 
Lord  for  a burnt  offering;^ 


unclean  until  en^en']  cf.  xi.  24,  xv.  5. 

8.  The  law  relating  to  the  eating  of  car- 
rion is  here  repeated  with  special  reference  to 
the  priests.  The  pollution  in  them  would  be 
an  aggravated  one,  inasmuch  as  they  would 
have  to  forego  their  sacred  functions.  Cf. 
Ezek.  iv.  14,  xliv.  31.  The  general  prohibi- 
tion occurs  Ex.  xxii.  31;  Lev.  xi.  39,  xvii.  15. 

9.  lest  they  bear  sin  for  if\  The  priests 
whom  Jehovah  sanctified  were  to  observe  his 
commandments,  lest  they  should  call  down 
upon  themselves  a sentence  of  death.  Cf. 
Ex.  xxviii.  35;  Lev.  viii.  35;  Num.  xviii.  32. 
\Vhen  the  Israelite  offended  in  a similar  manner 
by  eating  of  the  Peace-offering  with  his  un- 
cleanness upon  him,  he  was  to  be  “cut  off 
from  amongst  his  people.”  vii.  20. 

10.  stranger']  one  of  another  family ; 
that  is,  not  of  the  family  of  Aaron.  Heb.  %dr. 
See  on  Ex.  xxix.  33. — The  sojourner  was  a 
neighbour,  or  visitor,  who  might  eat  of  or- 
dinary food  as  an  invited  guest. 

11.  d'his  shows  how  completely  a pur- 
chased bondsman  was  incorporated  into  the 
household.  See  on  Ex.  xxi.  2,  20,  21. 

12.  a stranger]  one  of  another  family. 

14.  unnxiittingly]  inadvertently.  The 


same  Hebrew  word  as  is  rendered  “ through 
ignorance.”  See  Note  after  chap.  iv.  The  value 
of  the  holy  thing,  with  the  addition  of  one- 
fifth,  was  given  to  the  priest  according  to  the 
law  of  the  Trespass-offering.  See  on  v.  14. 

15,  16.  These  verses  are  rather  difficult. 
Their  meaning  appears  to  be : — The  holy 
things  of  the  children  of  Israel  nvhich  are  headed 
before  Jehonsah  (see  Introd.  § ix.)  shall  not 
be  profaned;  and  they  shall  incur  a sin  of 
trespass  nvho  eat  of  their  holy  things  (so  as  to 
profane  them].  The  words  may  have  been  in- 
tended either  as  a general  admonition  referring 
to  the  whole  passage,  2 — 14,  or  as  having 

special  reference  to  the  duty  of  the  priests  to 
prevent  the  laity  from  eating  the  sacrificial  food 
to  their  injury,  as  enjoined  in  ns.  14. 

The  choice  of  Victims  for  the  Altar. 

I7--33- 

18.  It  devolved  on  the  priest  to  see  that 
these  rules  were  observed;  but  they  are  here 
addressed  to  the  people  as  well  as  to  the 
priests. 

strangers  in  Israel]  foreigners  dwelling 
in  Israel.  See  on  Ex.  xx.  10;  Lev.  xvi.  29. 

for  all  his  'vo^jjs,  and  for  all  his  freewill 
offerings]  for  any  manner  of  vow,  or 
for  any  manner  of  freewill  offering. 


V.  19—28.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXII. 


19  y'e  shall  offer  at  your  own  will 
a male  without  blemish,  of  the  beeves, 
of  the  sheep,  or  of  the  goats. 
cDeut.  15.  20  But  whatsoever  hath  a blemish, 

& "17. 1,  shall  ye  not  offer : for  it  shall  not 

be  acceptable  for  you. 

21  And  whosoever  offereth  a sa- 
crifice of’  peace  offerings  unto  the 
Lord  to  accomplish  his  vow,  or  a 
freewill  offering  in  beeves  or  ” sheep, 
it  shall  be  perfect  to  be  accepted ; 
there  shall  be  no  blemish  therein. 

22  Blind,  or  broken,  or  maimed^ 
or  having  a wen,  or  scurvy,  or  scab- 
bed, ye  shall  not  offer  these  unto 

• the  Lord,  nor  make  an  offering  by 
fire  of  them  upon  the  altar  unto  the 
Lord. 

11  Or,  kid.  23  Either  a bullock  or  a "lamb  that 

chap.  21.  hath  any  thing  ^superfluous  or  lack- 
ing  in  his  parts,  that  mayest  thou 


offer  for  a freewill  offering ; but  for 
a vow  it  shall  not  be 'accepted. 

24  Ye  shall  not  offer  unto  the  Lord 
that  which  is  bruised,  or  crushed,  or 
broken,  or  cut;  neither  shall  ye  make 
any  offering  thereof  in  your  land. 

25  Neither  from  a stranger’s  hand 
shall  ye  offer  the  bread  of  your  God 
of  any  of  these;  because  their  cor- 
ruption is  in  them,  and  blemishes  be 
in  them:  they  shall  not  be  accepted 
for  you. 

26  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

27  When  a bullock,  or  a sheep,  or 
a goat,  is  brought  forth,  then  it  shall 
be  seven  days  under  the  dam  ; and 
from  the  eighth  day  and  thenceforth 
it  shall  be  accepted  for  an  offering 
made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

28  And  whether  it  be  cow  or  "ewe,  she  goat. 


19.  Te  shall  offer  at  your  own  will  a male'\ 
Rather,  That  it  may  he  accepted  for  you 
it  shall  he  a male.  See  on  i.  3.  The  same 
Hebrew  phrase  occurs  in  ‘v’v.  20,  21,  27, 
where  the  sense  is  correctly  given,  and  in  2;. 
29,  where  the  same  mistake  is  made  as  here. 

21.  sheep\  Rather,  cattle  of  the  flock, 
including  sheep  and  goats.  Introd.  § iv. 

22.  brokeri\  i.e.  broken-limbed,  or  lame. 
Cf.  xxi.  19,  Deut.  XV.  21.  Cf.  xxi.  20. 

23.  Iambi  one  of  the  flock. 

superfluous  or  lacking~\  That  is,  with  a limb 

too  large  or  too  small.  Cf.  xxi.  18.  Accord- 
ing to  several  of  the  ancient  versions  the  latter 
term  means  having  its  ears  or  tail  cropped. — 
On  the  Freewill-  and  Vow-offerings,  see  vii.  16. 

24.  The  reference  here  is  to  animals  emas- 
culated by  different  methods.  Cf.  Aristot. 
‘ H.  N.’  IX.  37,  § 3;  Columella,  Lib.  vii.  ch. 
II,  and  Drusius  in  loc. ; cf.  Deut.  xxiii.  2. 

neither  shall  ye  make  any  offering  thereof  in 
vour  land~\  The  words  supplied  in  our  ver- 
sion in  italics  have  the  authority  of  the  Syriac 
version  and  Saadia,  and  their  sense  is  approved 
by  Knobel  and  others.  But  the  literal  mean- 
ing of  the  passage  is,  and  this  shall  ye  not 
do  in  your  land.  So  the  LXX.,  Tar- 
gums,  Vulgate  and  most  modern  versions.  It 
appears  to  have  been  understood  by  the  Jews 
as  a prohibition  of  the  mutilation  of  animals. 
Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  iv.  8.  § 40;  Drusius  in  loc. 

25.  a strariger's  hand^  The  word  here 
rendered  stranger.,  is  not  the  same  as  that  in 
‘V’v.  10,  18:  it  means  literally,  the  son  of  the 
unknown.  The  question  is  whether  the  resi- 


dent foreigner  {geer;  see  on  Ex.  xx.  10:  Lev, 
xvi.  29,  cf.  Num.  XV.  14)  is  meant,  or  one 
dwelling  in  another  land  who  desired  to  show 
respect  to  the  God  of  Israel.  See  i Kings  viii. 
41.  Wogue  and  the  rabbinists  with  good 
reason  take  the  latter  alternative.  Tl'he  He- 
brew certainly  appears  to  favour  this  interpre- 
tation. So  understood,  the  passage  is  one  of 
those  which  indicate  the  beneficent  breadth 
with  which  the  Law  was  administered.  See 
on  Ex.  XX.  10,  xxiii.  23 ; Lev.  xv.  29,  &c. 

27.  No  victim  was  to  be  offered  in  sacri- 
fice until  it  was  a week  old.  The  meaning  of 
this  law  appears  to  be  that  the  animal  should 
realize  a distinct  existence  in  becoming  less 
dependent  on  its  mother  and  able  to  provide 
for  its  own  wants.  Cf.  Ex.  xxii.  30.  The 
Romans  observed  a rule  of  similar  purport, 
that  a young  pig  should  not  be  pure  for  sacri- 
fice till  the  fifth  day,  a sheep  or  a goat  until 
the  eighth  day,  nor  a calf  till  the  thirtieth  day : 
a great  authority  among  the  priests  said  that 
no  ruminating  animal  should  be  offered  till  it 
had  become  bidens.  See  Plin.  ‘ H.  N.’  vill. 
77.  Whether  the  term  bidens.,  which  occurs 
so  frequently  in  reference  to  the  sacrifices  of  the 
Romans,  denoted  an  animal  in  which  two 
teeth  had  just  developed  themselves,  or  one 
which  had  teeth  in  both  jaws,  has  been  doubt- 
ed, but  the  latter  is  more  probable.  Festus, 
with  the  note  in  Lindemann,  p.  305 ; Faccio- 
lati,  s.  V.  Knobel  supposes  that  bidens  was 
equivalent  to  the  Hebrew,  son  of  his  year;  that 
is,  a lamb  less  than  a year  old,  but  of  which  its 
teeth  were  developed;  see  on  xii.  6.  Regard- 
ing the  limitation  of  the  age  of  victims,  see 
Introd.  § iv. 


6i6 


LEVITICUS.  XXII.  XXIII. 


^ Deut. 
6. 


ychap. 

15- 


i'  diap. 

3- 


[v.  29 — I. 


22.  ye  shall  not  kill  it  ^and  her  young 
both  in  one  day*. 

29  And  when  ye  will  olFer  a sa- 
crifice of  thanksgiving  unto  the  Lord, 
offer  it  at  your  own  will. 

30  On  the  same  day  it  shall  be 
7-  eaten  up ; ye  shall  leave  none  of  it 

until  the  morrow:  I am  the  Lord. 

31  Therefore  shall  ye  keep  my 
commandments,  and  do  them  : I atn 
the  Lord. 

32  Neither  shall  ye  profane  my 
holy  name ; but  ^ I will  be  hallowed 


among  the  children  of  Israel : I am 
the  Lord  which  hallow  vou, 

33  That  brought  you  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,  to  be  your  God;  I 
am  the  Lord. 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 

I The  feasts  of  the  Lord.  3 The  sabbath.  4 
The  passover.  g The  sheaf  of  firstfriiits. 
15  The  feast  of  Pentecost.  22  Gleanings  to  be 
left  for  the  poor.  23  The  feast  of  trumpets. 
26  The  day  of  atonement.  33  The  feast  of 
tabernacles. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying. 


28.  This  law  appears  to  have  been  in- 
tended to  remind  the  Israelites  of  the  sacred- 
ness of  the  relation  between  the  parent  and  its 
offspring.  Of  the  same  nature  would  seem  to 
have  been  the  prohibition  to  take  a bird’s  nest 
containing  the  mother  with  its  young.  Deut. 
xxii.  6,  7.  Some  suppose  that  it  was  on  the 
same  ground  that  it  was  forbidden  to  seethe  a 
kid  in  its  mother’s  milk.  Cf.  on  Ex.  xxiii.  19. 

e^ve]  a female  of  the  flock,  either  a 
sheep  or  a goat,  Introd.  § iv. 

29.  offer  it  at  your  o-wn  ^ui^l~\  offer  it 
so  that  it  maj?'  he  accepted  for  you. 
See  on  v.  19. 

30.  Cf.  vii.  15,  xix.  6. 

31 — 33.  A solemn  conclusion  to  the  whole 
chapter.  Cf.  xviii.  29,  30,  xix,  37, 

32.  Cf.-u.  9,x.  3,  xi.  44,  45,  xviii,  21,  xix.  12. 

33.  xi,  45,  xix.  36,  XXV.  38,  Num.  xv.  41. 

Chap.  XXIII. 

THE  FESTIVALS. 

The  Pentateuch  does  not  contain  any  one 
complete  account  of  the  Festivals.  But  each 
of  the  longer  passages  relating  to  the  subject 
appears  to  have  a method  of  its  own  bearing 
upon  some  particular  object  of  the  Legislator 
at  the  time  it  was  published.  Those  of  them 
which  embrace  the  widest  range  of  informa- 
tion are  this  chapter  of  Leviticus  and*  Chaps, 
xxviii.  xxix.  of  Numbers.  It  may  be  observed 
that  a part  of  this  chapter,  2)2).  39 — 43,  does 
not  fall  immediately  within  the  practical  scope 
of  the  preceding  larger  portion,  nov.  1 — 38, 
relating  to  the  days  of  Holy  Convocation  : 
in  its  form  as  well  as  in  its  matter  it  con- 
stitutes a distinct  section.  But  the  44th  verse 
serves  as  a general  conclusion  to  the  whole 
chapter. 

The  Days  of  Holy  Convocation  and 
THE  Relation  of  the  Annual  Feasts 

TO  THE  Agriculture  of  the  year. 

1—38. 

Preliminary  Note. 

I,  The  specified  times  for  public  worship 
according  to  the  Law  were;  (i)  The  daily 


Morning  and  Evening  sacrifices,  sometimes 
called  “the  continual  Burnt-offering.”*  (2) 
The  weekly  Sabbath.  (3)  The  day  of  the 
New  Moon.  (4)  The  “set  feasts”  (Num. 
xxix.  39)  or  appointed  times  of  annual  ob- 
servance, of  which  there  were  five,  the  Passover, 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  the  feast  of  Trumpets,  the 
day  of  Atonement,  and  the  feast  of  Tabernacles. 
I Chr.  xxiii.  30,  31;  2 Chr.  viii.  13,  xxxi.  3; 
Neh.  X.  33  ; Isaiah  i.  13,  14.  For  each  of 
these  occasions  special  sacrifices  were  appoint- 
ed. The  whole  of  them  are  therefore  men- 
tioned in  the  passage  of  the  Law  which  pre- 
scribes in  detail  the  festival  sacrifices,  Num. 
xxviii.  xxix.  and  in  no  other  single  passage. 
They  are  severally  named,  Num.  xxviii.  3,  9, 
II,  16,  26,  xxix.  I,  7,  12. 

The  weekly  Sabbaths,  and  certain  days  in 
the  appointed  times  of  annual  obseiwance, 
were  distinguished  as  “days  of  holy  convo- 
cation.” To  determine  and  to  classify  the 
days  of  Holy  Convocation,  appears  to  be 
the  main  object  of  this  section  (see  <u.  2).  It 
certainly  is  not,  as  some  have  imagined,  to  be 
regarded  as  “a  calendar”  of  the  Hebrew 
worship.  It  contains  no  mention  of  the  New 
Moons  (which  were  not  days  of  Holy  Convo- 
cation), nor  of  the  Morning  and  Evening  ser- 
vice spoken  of  in  Num.  xxviii. 

The  general  word  rendered  “feasts”  in  our 
version,  -w.  2,  4,  37,  &c.,  is  moadim.^  which 
signifies  literally  appointed  times.  The 
three  festivals,  (often  called  the  Great  Festi- 
vals), Passover,  Pentecost  and  Tabernacles,  to 
which  the  name  ebag.^  i.  e.  a feast  or  rejoicing., 
properly  belongs  {yao.  6,  34,  39,  41),  were 
distinguished  by  the  attendance  of  the  male 
Israelites  at  the  national  Sanctuary.  Hence 
they  are  enumerated  with  the  formula,  “Three 
times  in  the  year  all  thy  males  shall  appear 
before  the  Lord  God,”  Exod.  xxiii,  17,  xxxiv. 
23;  Deut.  xvi.  16.  In  later  times  they 
were  called  by  the  rabbins  “pilgrimage  feasts.” 
It  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  Hebrew  word  is 
identical  with  the  Arabic  haj.,  the  name  of 
the  pilgrimage  to  Mecca,  from  which  comes 
the  well-known  word  for  a pilgrim,  haji. 


V.  5—5-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


617 


2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them,  Concerning 
the  feasts  of  the  Lord,  which  ye 
shall  proclaim  to  he  holy  convoca- 
rtExod.  20.  tions,  even  these  are  my  feasts. 

Seut  5 3 *^^7®  shall  work  be  done: 

13-^^  but  the  seventh  day  is  the  sabbath 
14^  of  rest,  an  holy  convocation;  ye  shall 


do  no  v/ork  therein:  it  is  the  sabbath 
of  the  Lord  in  all  your  dwellings. 

4 ^ These  are  the  feasts  of  the 
Lord,  even  holy  convocations,  which 
ye  shall  proclaim  in  their  seasons. 

5 ^In  the  fourteenth  day  of  the Exod.  12. 
first  month  at  even  is  the  Lord’s  Numb.  28. 
passover. 


Besides  the  order  of  the  days  of  Holy  Con- 
vocation, we  have  in  this  section  an  account 
of  the  peculiar  offerings  of  grain  which  marked 
the  commencement  and  the  termination  of  the 
grain  harvest,  'v-v.  9 — 21.  Taking  account  of 
this  particular,  along  with  the  suspension  of 
labour  commanded  on  the  days  of  Holy  Con- 
vocation, this  section  sets  forth  for  practical 
guidance  the  relation  in  which  the  appointed 
times  of  the  Lord,  weekly  as  well  as  annual, 
stood  to  the  ordinary  occupations  of  the  people. 

II.  There  is  no  explanation  given  in  the  Law 
of  the  meaning  of  the  term  “ holy  convoca- 
tion.” We  can  only  determine  what  it  denoted 
by  inference.  The  most  probable  conclusion 
is  that  the  days  of  Holy  Convocation  were 
occasions  for  sabbatical  rest  for  the  whole^ 
people,  and  that  they  owed  their  name  to 
gatherings  for  religious  edification,  which, 
in  later  times,  yvere  probably  held  in  every 
town  and  village  in  the  Holy  Land.  These 
meetings  might  have  been  like  those  held 
in  the  Synagogues  which  were  established 
after  the  Captivity.  See  Note  on  the  Sabbath 
day  (Exod.  xx.),  § I.  There  were  in  the 
course  of  the  year,  besides  the  weekly  Sab- 
baths, seven  days  of  Holy  Convocation,  the 
first  and  last  days  of  the  Feast  of  Unleavened 
bread,  the  first  day  of  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles and  the  day  following  the  Feast,  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  the  Day  of  Atonement, 
and  the  Feast  of  Trumpets.  Ex.  xii.  16 ; Num. 
xxviii.  18,  25>  26,  xxix.  i,  12,  35.  There 
was  a distinction  between  them  as  regards 
strictness  of  obsei-vance.  On  the  weekly 
Sabbath  and  on  the  Day  of  Atonement  no 
work  of  any  kind  was  to  be  done  (‘V‘v.  3, 
28).  But  on  the  days  of  Holy  Convocation 
in  the  great  festivals  and  on  the  Feast  of 
Trumpets,  “servile  work”  only  was  pro- 
hibited. See  on  “i;.  7.  ‘ 

It  has  been  very  generally  supposed  that  a 
Holy  Convocation  was  a TTavT]yvpi^,  a solemn 
assembly  of  the  people  at  the  national  Sanc- 
tuary, according  to  the  formula  used  in  re- 
ference to  the  three  great  festivals  (Hupfeld, 
Knobel,  Kurtz,  Davidson,  &c.).  But  we 
know  that  there  was  no  central  gathering  of 
the  people  of  this  kind  either  on  the  weekly 
Sabbath,  on  the  Day  of  Atonement,  or  at 
the  feast  of  Trumpets.  It  may  be  added  that 
the  notion  is  obviously  inconsistent  with  the 
command  in  which  the  general  attendances  of 


the  people  at  the  Sanctuary  are  limited  to 
three  occasions  in  the  year.  Ex.  xxiii.  17,  &c.- 

2.  Co}7cerning  the  feasts^  &c.]  The  latter 
part  of  this  verse  might  rather  be  render- 
ed : The  appointed  times  of  Jeho- 
vah which  ye  shall  proclaim  as  Holy 
Convocations,  these  are  my  appointed 
times.  Cf.  •v.  37. 

3.  The  Sabbath  is  in  like  manner  placed 

before  the  annual  appointed  times  in  Ex. 
xxxiv.  21 — 23;  Ex.  xxiii.  12,  14;  and 

Num.  xxtiii.  9 sq.  The  seventh  day  had 
been  consecrated  as  the  Sabhath  of  Jeho- 
vah, figuring  His  own  rest ; it  was  the  ac- 
knowledged sign  of  the  Covenant  between 
God  and  His  people.  See  on  Ex.  xx.  As 
such  it  propel ly  held  its  place  at  the  head  of 
the  days  of  Holy  Convocation. 

in  all  your  d-xue  lungs']  Most  of  the  Jewish 
writers  explain  this  to  mean,  either  in  the  Holy 
Land  or  out  of  it.  The  expression  may  cer- 
tainly be  taken  in  its  broadest  sense.  Cf. 
uj.  14. 

4.  This  verse  might  be  rendered:  These 
appointed  times  of  the  Lord  are  Holy 
Convocations  v/hich  ye  shall  pro- 
claim at  their  appointed  season  : i.e. 
as  the  year  comes  round.  The  recurrence 
of  the  Sabbatical  number  in  the  annual  days  of 
Holy  Convocation — two  at  the  Passover,  two 
at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  with  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  the  feast  of  Trumpets,  and  the 
Day  of  Atonement — should  be  noticed. 

5—8.  In  these  verses,  the  Passover,  or 
Paschal  Supper,  and  the  feast  of  Unleavened 
Bread,  are  plainly  spoken  of  as  distinct  feasts. 
See  Ex.  xii.  6,  15,  17  ; Num.  xxviii.  16,  17. 
Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  iii.  10.  § 5.  The  two  days  of 
Holy  Convocation  strictly  belonged  to  the  lat- 
ter. But  the  two  names,  in  common  usage, 
became  convertible. 

5.  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  first  month  at 
enjeri]  According  to  the  Hebrew  mode  of 
reckoning  the  15th  day  of  the  month  began 
on  the  evening  of  the  14th.  The  paschal 
lamb  was  slain  betxveen  the  txvo  en^enings  (see 
on  Ex.  xii.  6),  an  interval  of  time  in  which  the 
two  days  seem  to  have  been  regarded  as  over- 
lapping each  other.  The  day  of  Holy  Con- 
vocation with  which  the  feast  of  Unleavened 
bread  commenced  fy.  7)  was  the  15th,  and 


6i8 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


[v.  6— II. 


6 And  on  the  fifteenth  day  of 
the  same  month  is  the  feast  of  un- 
leavened bread  unto  the  Lord  : 
seven  days  ye  must  eat  unleavened 
bread. 

7 In  the  first  day  ye  shall  have 
an  holy  convocation  : ye  shall  do  no 
servile  work  therein. 

8 But  ye  shall  offer  an  offering 
made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord  seven 
days  : in  the  seventh  day  is  an  holy 
convocation  : ye  shall  do  no  servile 
work  therein. 


9 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

10  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them.  When  ye 
be  come  into  the  land  which  I give 
unto  you,  and  shall  reap  the  har- 
vest thereof,  then  ye  shall  bring  a 

sheaf  of  the  firstfruits  of  your  bar-  li  or, 
vest  unto  the  priest : 

1 1 And  he  shall  wave  the  sheaf 
before  the  Lord,  to  be  accepted  for 
you  : on  the  morrow  after  the  sab- 
bath the  priest  shall  wave  it. 


that  with  which  it  terminated  was  the  21st. 
Cf.  Num.  xxviii.  16,  17. 

6.  feast]  Heb.  chag.  See  prel.  Note. 

imlea'vened  bread]  See  on  Ex.  xii.  15. 

7.  710  serdde  ^joork]  Literally,  no  work  of 
labour,  no  work  that  belongs  to  onels  worldly 
calling,  such  as  labour  in  agriculture  or  handi- 
craft. A licence  was  permitted  for  the  pre- 
paration of  food,  which  is  fully  expressed  in 
Ex.  xii.  16.  This  licence  was  not  granted  on 
the  weekly  Sabbath,  or  on  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment. On  them  it  was  not  lawful  to  do 
work  of  any  sort,  not  even  to  kindle  a fire. 
Ex.  XX.  10,  XXXV.  3 ; Lev.  xxiii.  28,  30.  For 
all  the  details  of  the  Passover,  see  Notes  on 
Ex.  xii.  xiii. 

8.  ayi  offering  made  by  fre]  The  sacri- 
fices here  meant  are  the  two  young  bullocks, 
the  ram  and  the  seven  sheep,  with  their  Meat- 
ofierings,  and  the  goat  for  a Sin-offering,  which 
were  offered  on  each  of  the  seven  days  of  the , 
feast.  Num.  xxviii.  19 — 24.  See  on  -v.  20  of 
this  chap.  As  there  is  no  mention  made  of 
these  offerings  in  Exodus,  it  has  been  inferred 
that  they  formed  a departure  from  the  original 
simplicity  of  the  primitive  feast  as  described  in 
Ex.  xxiii.,  &c.  (Hupfeld,  Davidson).  But  it 
is  in  accordance  with  analogy  to  suppose  that 
sacrifices  may  have  been  offered,  according  to 
usage,  on  each  day  of  the  feast  before  specific 
directions  for  them  were  actually  written  in 
the  Law. 

9 — 22.  These  verses  contain  a distinct 
command  regarding  the  religious  services  im- 
mediately connected  with  the  grain  harvest, 
given  by  anticipation  against  the  time  when 
the  people  were  to  possess  the  Promised  Land. 

The  First  Sheaf  of  the  Harvest.  9 — 14. 

I'liis  is  the  only  place  in  the  Law  in  which 
the  offering  of  the  First  Sheaf  is  mentioned. 
But  in  Josh,  v,  ii  there  is  a reference  to  the 
prohibition  connected  with  it  which  is  pre- 
scribed in  2;.  14. 

10.  sheaf]  The  original  word,  omer., 
means  either  a sheaf  (Deut.  xxiv.  19;  Ruth 


ii.  7,  15,  &c.),  or  a measure,  the  “tenth  deal” 
of  an  Ephah,  being  something  more  than  four 
fifths  of  a gallon  (Ex.  xvi.  16,  18,  36;  Lev. 
xix.  35,  36).  Our  version  is  probably  right 
in  this  place.  So  LXX.,  Philo  (‘de  Sept.’ 
20),  Vulg.,  Luther,  Gesenius,  Fiirst,  de 
Wette,  &c.  The  offering  which  was  waved 
was  most  likely  a small  sheaf  of  barley,  the 
grain  which  is  first  ripe.  The  first  fruits  of 
the  wheat  harvest  were  offered  seven  weeks 
later  in  the  Loaves  of  Pentecost.  See  w.  15 — 
17.  The  two  offerings  thus  figure  the  very 
commiencement  and  the  completion  of  the 
grain  harvest;  cf.  Ruth  i.  22,  ii.  23.  But 
Josephus,  the  Mishna,  wit4i  the  Rabbi- 
nists  and  most  of  the  recent  Jewish  trans- 
lators, take  the  offering  to  have  been  not  a 
sheaf,  but  a measure  of  the  freshly  ground 
barley  meal.  Josephus  and  the  Mishna  de- 
scribe it  as  a regular  Meat-offering  with  its 
oil  and  its  frankincense  offered  in  the  usual 
way.  Jos.  ‘Ant.’  iii.  10,  § 5;  Mishna,  ‘Me- 
nach.’  X.  2—6;  Buxtorf,  ‘Lex.  Ghald.’  p. 
1628.  If  the  grain  was  ground,  or  mixed 
with  oil  and  frankincense,  and  if  a handful 
was  offered  on  the  Altar  (as  Josephus  says), 
it  seems  unaccountable  that  nothing  of  the 
kind  is  hinted  at  in  this  place,  while  the  Loaves 
of  Pentecost  are  fully  described  in  v.  17. 

11.  <wave  the  sheaf]  See  Introd.  § iv. 

to  be  accepted  for  you]  See  on  i.  3. 

on  the  morroojo  after  the  sabbath]  It  is  most 
probable  that  these  words  denote  the  1 6th  of 
Abib,  the  day  after  the  first  day  of  Holy 
Convocation  (see  on  w.  5 — 8),  and  that  this 
was  called  the  Sabbath  of  the  Passover.,  or, 
the  Sabbatb  of  Unleavened  bread.  The  word 
Sabbath  is  similarly  applied  to  the  Day  of 
Atonement  in  v.  32.  That  the  day  on  which 
the  Sheaf  was  offered  was  the  i6th  of  the 
month,  and  the  “Sabbath”  here  spoken  of 
was  the  15th,  is  in  accordance  with  the  LXX., 
Philo,  Josephus,  the  Mishna,  the  Targums, 
and  the  Rabbinists  in  general.  The  reason  of 
the  offering  being  made  on  this  particular  day 
may  have  been  tliat  the  cutting  of  the  Sheaf 


V.  12 16.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


619 


12  And  ye  shall  offer  that  day 
when  ye  wave  the  sheaf  an  he  lamb 
without  blemish  of  the  first  year  for 
a burnt  offering  unto  the  Lord. 

13  And  the  meat  offering  there- 
of shall  be  two  tenth  deals  of  fine 
flour  mingled  with  oil,  an  offering 
made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord  for  a 
sweet  savour  : and  the  drink  offering 
thereof  shall  be  of  wine,  the  fourth 
part  of  an  hin. 

14  And  ye  shall  eat  neither  bread. 


nor  parched  corn,  nor  green  ears, 
until  the  selfsame  day  that  ye  have 
brought  an  offering  unto  your  God: 
it  shall  be  a statute  for  ever  through- 
out your  generations  in  all  your  dwell- 
ings. 

15  ^ And  ‘^ye  shall  count  unto  you  ^Deut. 
from  the  morrow  after  the  sabbath, 
from  the  day  that  ye  brought  the 
sheaf  of  the  wave  offering ; seven 
sabbaths  shall  be  complete  : 

16  Even  unto  the  morrow  after 


formed  a part  of  the  ceremony ; and,  as  the 
formal  commencement  of  the  practical  work 
of  harvest  (cf.  Deut.  xvi.  9),  it  was  less  suit- 
able for  the  day  of  Holy  Convocation  than 
for  the  first  of  the  days  of  less  solemn  ob- 
servance, on  which,  according  to  Jewish  tra- 
dition, ordinary  work  was  permitted  under 
certain  limitations. — There  has  however  been 
a difference  of  opinion  regarding  the  day 
from  early  times.  The  Karaite  Jews,  and 
the  Sadducees  before  them,  held  that  the  name 
Sabbath  could  denote  nothing  but  the  weekly 
sabbath,  in  this  place  as  well  as  in  *1^.  15 ; see 
note.  They  therefore  held  that  the  day  here 
spoken  of  was  the  weekly  Sabbath  which  hap- 
pened to  fall  within  the  week  of  the  Passover, 
See  Mishna,  ‘Menach.’  x.  3,  with  Maimonides’ 
note;  Lightfoot  on  Luke  vi.  6. — It  has  been 
imagined  in  recent  times  that  the  commence- 
ment of  the  year  and  the  time  of  the  feast 
were  so  arranged  that  the  day  of  the  Paschal 
supper,  the  14th  of  Abib,  and  the  last  day 
of  the  feast,  the  21st,  coincided  with  the 
weekly  Sabbath  (Hitzig,  Hupfeld,  Knobel, 
Kurtz).  On  this  hypothesis,  the  Sheaf  was 
offered  either  on  the  22nd  of  the  month,  after 
the’conclusion  of  the  feast  (Hitzig,  Hupfeld), 
or  on  the  15th,  that  is  the  first  day  of  Holy 
Convocation  (Knobel,  Kurtz).  But  this 
arrangement  would  involve  a disturbance  of 
the  year,  which  would  end  with  a broken 
week,  and  a still  more  serious  dislocation  of 
the  Sabbath-day  by  no  means  consistent  with 
its  peculiar  sanctity,  unless  we  adopt  the  very 
unreasonable  supposition  that  the  Hebrew 
year  consisted  of  twelve  months  of  exactly 
four  weeks. — Wogue  suggests  that  the  day 
of  the  ceremony  was  not  determined  with 
any  fixed  relation  to  the  Passover,  but  that 
it  was  the  day  following  the  Sabbath  whenever 
the  barley  happened  to  be  ripe,  according  as 
the  season  was  later  or  earlier. — The  subject 
of  this  note  derives  interest  from  its  probable 
connection  with  Luke  vi.  i.  See  note  in  loc. 

12 — 13.  These  offerings,  which  expressly 
belonged  to  the  ceremony  of  the  First  sheaf, 
are  not  mentioned  in  Num.  xxviii.  See  on 
njv.  8 and  20. 


13.  /Tuo  tenth  deals']  Two  omers,  or  tenth 
parts  of  an  ephah,  about  a gallon  and  three 
quarters.  See  on  xix.  36.  The  usual  Meat- 
offering to  accompany  a sheep  was  a single 
omer.  Ex.  xxix.  40 ; Num.  xv.  4,  xxviii. 
19 — 21.  A greater  liberality  in  this  respect 
was  appropriate  in  a harvest  feast. 

an  offering  made  by  fire]  Rather,  a sacri- 
fice. The  offering  was  made  in  the  same 
way  as  the  private  Meat-offering  of  fine  flour 
(Lev.  ii.  i),  a handful  being  thrown  on  the 
Altar  and  the  remainder  given  to  the  priests. 

drink  offering]  This  and  'un).  18,  37  are 
the  only  places  in  the  book  of  Leviticus  in 
which  Drink-offerings  are  mentioned.  See 
Gen.  XXXV.  14  ; Dxod.  xxix.  40;  Introd.  § x, 

1 4 . bread . . .parched  corn . . .green  ears]  T hese 
are  the  three  forms  in  which  grain  was  com- 
monly eaten.  We  find  from  Josh.  v.  ii,  that 
this  direction  was  observed  at  Gilgal  in 
the  first  .celebration  of  the  Passover  after 
the  entrance  into  the  Holy  Land.  On  the 
proper  rendering  of  that  verse,  see  note.  The 
offering  before  Jehovah  of  the  Sheaf  marked 
the  first  month  of  which  the  old  name  Abib 
signified  “the  month  of  green  ears,”  The 
produce  of  the  land  for  the  year  was  conse- 
crated to  Jehovah  by  this  act,  and  it  was  now 
given  back  to  His  people  for  their  free  use. 

The  Day  of  Pentecost 15 — 22. 

The  accustomed  introductory  formula  (see 
'u'v.  I,  9)  is  not  repeated  for  Pentecost  owing 
to  the  close  connection  between  Pentecost  and 
the  offering  of  the  Sheaf.  The  latter,  though 
it  was  connected  by  the  time  of  its  observance 
with  the  Passover,  was  more  intimately  re- 
lated in  its  nature  to  Pentecost.  The  meanings 
of  the  Sheaf  and  of  the  Wave  loaves  were 
concentrated  in  the  period  of  the  grain  harvest. 

15.  the  morromj  after  the  sabbath]  See  on 

•V.  II. 

sensen  sabbaths]  More  properly,  seven 
■weeks.  The  sense  answers  to  Deut.  xvi.  9.  The 
term  in  its  plural  form  rendered  “complete” 
could  hardly  be  predicated  of  Sabbath-days  in 
the  computation  of  a series  of  weeks.  The 
word  Sabbath,  in  the  language  of  the  New 


620 


LEVITICUS.  XXIIL 


[v.  17 20. 


the  seventh  sabbath  shall  ye  number 
fifty  days  ; and  ye  shall  ofier  a new 
meat  o&ring  unto  the  LoPvD. 

17  Ye  shall  bring  out  of  your  ha- 
bitations two  wave  loaves  of  two 
tenth  deals : they  shall  be  of  fine 
flour ; they  shall  be  baken  with  leaven ; 
they  are  the  firstfruits  unto  the  Lord. 

18  And  ye  shall  offer  with  the 
bread  seven  lambs  without  blemish 
of  the  first  year,  and  one  young  bul- 
lock, and  two  rams : they  shall  be 
for  a burnt  offering  unto  the  Lord, 


with  their  meat  offering,  and  their 
drink  offerings,  even  an  offering  made 
by  fire,  of  sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord. 

19  Then  ye  shall  sacrifice  one  kid 
of  the  goats  for  a sin  offering,  and 
tv/o  lambs  of  the  first  year  for  a 
sacrifice  of  peace  offerings. 

20  And  the  priest  shall  wave  them 
with  the  bread  of  the  firstfruits  for 
a wave  offering  before  the  Lord, 
with  the  two  lambs : they  shall  be 
holy  to  the  Lord  for  the  priest. 


Testament  as  well  as  the  Old,  is  used,  by  a 
simple  metonymy,  for  ^joeek  (Lev.  xxv.  8 ; 
Matt,  xxviii.  i ; Luke  xviii.  iz,  &c.). 

16.  seventh  sabbat/j]  seventh  week.  The 
morrow  after  the  seventh  week  was  of  course 
the  fiftieth  day  after  the  conclusion  of  a week 
of  weeks.  It  may  be  observed  that  the  day 
has  no  proper  name  given  to  it  in  this  chapter 
of  Leviticus.  It  is  only  spoken  of  as  a day  of 
Holy  Convocation  for  the  offering  of  the  two 
Loaves  with  their  accompanying  sacrifices.  The 
word  “Pentecost”  used  in  the  heading  of  the 
chapter  is  found  only  in  the  Apocrypha  and  the 
New  Testament,  Tobit  ii.  i 7 z ?dacc.  xii.  3Z; 
Acts  ii.  I,  XX.  16  ; i Cor.  xvi.  8.  The  day  is 
called  in  the  Old  Testament,  “the  feast  of 
harvest”  (Ex.  xxiii.  16),  “the  feast  of 
weeks,”  “ the  feast  of  the  first  fruits  of  wheat 
harvest”  (Ex.  xxxiv.  zz ; Deut.  xvi.  10), 
and  “the  day  of  the  first  fruits”  (Num.  xxviii. 
26).  It  was  commonly  called  by  the  Jews  in 
later  times,  ’'atxereth^  a word  which  will  be 
explained  in  the  note  on  v.  34. 

17.  out  of  your  habitations  tvuo  n.vave  loaves, 
&c.]  These  were  loaves  of  leavened  house- 
hold bread,  of  wheat  flour  (Exod.  xxxiv.  zz), 
such  as  were  commonly  eaten.  The  word 
translated  “habitations”  does  not,  however, 
strictly  mean  houses,  but  places  of  abode  in  a 
general  sense.  It  seems  here  to  denote  the 
land  in  which  the  Israelites  were  to  dwell  so 
as  to  express  that  the  flour  was  to  be  of  home 
growth.  But  Calvin  and  a Lapide  supposed 
that  each  householder  had  to  bring  to  the 
Sanctuary  two  loaves.  The  Vulgate  rather 
favours  this  view,  rendering  the  passage, 
“Ex  omnibus  habitaculis  vestris.”  The 
Hebrew  will,  however,  hardly  bear  such  an 
interpretation,  which  is  improbable  in  the 
nature  of  things : it  is  most  unlikely  that 
such  a mass  of  leavened  bread  should  have 
been  j)resented  to  the  priests  at  once.  Each 
loaf  was  to  contain  a “tenth  deal”  (probably 
four-fifths  of  a gallon)  of  fine  flour.  The  two 
Loaves  were  to  be  merely  waved  before  Jeho- 
vah and  then  to  become  the  property  of  the 


priests.  Introd.  § ix.  No  bread  containing  lea- 
ven could  be  offered  on  the  Altar,  Lev.  ii.  ii. 
The  object  of  this  offering  seems  to  have 
been  to  present  to  the  Lord  the  best  produce 
of  the  earth  in  the  actual  condition  in  which 
it  is  most  useful  for  the  support  of  human 
life.  It  thus  represented  in  the  fittest  manner 
the  thanksgiving  which  was  proper  for  the 
season.  The  Loaves  appear  to  be  distinctively 
called  “ the  first  fruits  for  Jekovah.”  Com- 
pare the  language  used  in  reference  to  the  First 
sheaf  in  v.  10.  The  references  to  First  fruits 
in  the  New  Testament,  Rom.  xi.  16  ; i Cor. 
XV.  zo,  Z3  ; James  i.  18;  Rev.  xiv.  4,  &c., 
would  seem  to  be  most  aptly  applied  to  the 
Loaves  of  Pentecost.  As  these  Loaves  offered 
before  Jehovah  sanctified  the  harvest  of  the 
year,  so  has  “ Christ  the  first  fruits  ” sancti- 
fied the  Church,  which,  in  its  union  with  Him 
as  the  First  fruits,  becomes  also  the  Sanctifier 
of  the  world.  See  the  services  for  Whitsun- 
tide, The  references  in  the  margin  of  the 
more  recent  editions  of  our  Bible  to  v.  1 1 of 
this  chapter,  would  seem  to  belong  more 
strictly  to  the  words  first  fruits  for  Jeho- 
vah in  this  17th  verse. 

18.  seven  lambs.., of  the  first year^  More 
properly,  seven  sheep  of  a year  old,  not 
like  the  lamb  in  v.  iz.  Introd.  § iv. 

young  bullocli]  a young  hull,  it  might 
be  from  one  to  three  years  old.  Introd.  § iv. 

their  meat  offering,  and  their  drink  offerings']^ 
Introd.  § X. 

19.  one  kid  of  the  goats]  Properly,  a 
shaggy  he-goat.  See  on  iv.  23. 

tvjo  lambs  of  the  first  year]  two  sheep 
of  a year  old. 

20.  The  meaning  appears  to  be,  “The 
priest  shall  wave  the  two  sheep  (of  the 
Peace-offering)  with  the  bread  of  the  First 
fruits  (the  two  Pentecostal  loaves)  for  a wave- 
offering  to  Jehovah.” — When  living  creatures 
were  voaved  before  Jehovah,  it  is  said  that 
they  were  led  to  and  fro  before  the  Taber- 
nacle according  to  an  established  form, 
Introd.  § ix. 


V.  21 24-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


21  And  ye  shall  proclaim  on  the 
selfsame  day,  that  it  may  be  an  holy 
convocation  unto  you : ye  shall  do 
no  servile  work  therein : it  shall  be 
a statute  for  ever  in  all  your  dwell- 
ings throughout  your  generations, 
rfcnap.  19.  22  ^ And  '^when  ye  reap  the  har- 

9-  vest  of  your  land,  thou  shalt  not 

make  clean  riddance  of  the  corners 
jDeut.  24.  of  thy  field  when  thou  reapest,  ^nei- 
ther  shalt  thou  gather  any  gleaning 


621 

■V 

of  thy  harvest : thou  shalt  leave  them 
unto  the  poor,  and  to  the  stranger : I 
a7n  the  Lord  your  God. 

23  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

24  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, saying.  In  the  seventh  month,  /Numb, 
in  the  first  day  of  the  month,  shall 

ye  have  a sabbath,  a memorial  of 
blowing  of  trumpets,  an  holy  convo- 
cation. 


The  victims  prescribed  in  18,  19  to  be 
offered  “vrith  the  bread,”  differ  from  those 
which  are  prescribed  for  “ the  day  of  the  first- 
fruits”  in  Num.  xxviii.  a6,  27.  In  the  latter 
statement,  there  are  two  young  bulls  and  one 
ram,  instead  of  the  one  young  bull  and  the 
two  rams  here  mentioned.  The  seven  young 
sheep  and  the  one  goat  are  the  same  in  each 
place.  If  (with  Biihr,  Winer,  Ewald,  Kno- 
bel)  we  suppose  the  statements  to  relate  to  the 
same  set  of  sacrifices,  there  is  ah  inexplicable 
discrepancy.  But  most  of  the  Jewish  autho- 
rities, and  many  others,  consider  that  the 
oflerings  in  Num.  were  to  be  offered  - in  ad- 
dition to  those  here  mentioned.  (Mishna, 

‘ Menach.’  iv.  3 ; Josephus,  Kurtz,  Keil, 
&c.)  This  seems  to  be  confirmed  by  a com- 
parison of  the  forms  of  expression  used  in 
n).  18  and  in  Num.  xxviii.  19;  and  still  more 
by  the  statement  of  the  offerings  to  accom- 
pany the  special  rites  of  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment, Lev.  xvi,  II — 25,  compared  with  the 
offerings  of  the  Day  itself,  which  are  distinctly 
connected  with  the  Daily  sacrifice,  Num.  xxix. 
II.  It  would  indeed  seem  that  the  sacrifices 
prescribed  in  Num.  xxviii.  xxix.  were  offered 
as  additions  to  the  continual  Burnt-offering, 
while  all  those  mentioned  in  this  chapter  ac- 
companied the  rites  peculiar  to  each  festival, 
and  formed  more  strictly  essential  parts  of 
them. 

21.  the  selfsame  day\  The  feast  of  Weeks 
was  distinguished  from  the  two  other  great 
annual  feasts  by  its  consisting,  according  to 
the  Law,  of  only  a single  day.  But  in  later 
times  it  is  said  that  during  the  follovvung  six 
days  the  Israelites  used  to ‘bring  their  offer- 
ings to  the  Temple,  and  to  give  the  week 
something  of  a festal  character  in  the  suspen- 
sion of  mourning  for  the  dead.  Mishna, 
‘ Moed  Katan,’  iii.  6,  with  the  notes. 

22.  The  repetition  of  the  Law  given  in 
xix.  9,  10,  and  reiterated  Deut.  xxiv.  19,  is 
appropriately  connected,  as  far  as  grain  is 
concerned,  with  the  thanksgiving  for  the  com- 
pleted grain  harvest.  In  like  manner,  the 
laws  regarding  the  oppression  of  the  poor 
gi/en  in  Lev.  xix.  and  in  Lx.  xxii.  are  repeated 

VOL.  1. 


in  connection  with  the  J ubilee  in  chapter  xxv. 
14—17,  35,  36,  &c. 

poor'\  i.e.  the  poor  Israelite. 

stranger'\  foreigner.  See  xvi.  29. — Cf. 
Deut.  xvi.  10 — 12. 

1 am  the  Lord  your  God]  See  on  xviii.  2. 

The  Feast  of  Trumpets.  23 — 25. 

24.  a sabbath]  This  feast  was  one  of  the 
days  of  Holy  Convocation  of  ordinary  obser- 
vance. See  on  'w.  7,  ii.  The  word  in  this 
verse,  and  also  in  nj.  39,  is  shabbathon.^  net 
shahhdth,\he'^XQ)^^x  Hebrew  form  of  “sabbath.” 
The  same  word  is  used  in  the  phrase  skahbdth 
shabbdthon.,  which  is  rightly  rendered  “sabbath 
of  rest”  n).  32,  xvi.  31,  xxv.  4;  Lx.  xxxi.  15, 
XXXV.  2.  Shabbathon.,  by  itself,  as  in  this  place, 
should  rather  be  rendered  a.  sabbatical 
rest. — In  this  verse  and  in  Num.  xxix.  i, 
the  only  places  in  the  Old  Testament  where 
the  festival  is  named,  the  word  rendered 
“blowing  of  trumpets,”  means  literally  shout- 
ing. There  is  no  mention  of  trumpets  in  the 
Hebrew  text  of  the  Law  in  connection  with 
the  day.  We  know  from  Num.  x.  10,  that  the 
silver  trumpets  of  the  Sanctuary  were  blown 
at  all  the  festivals,  including  the  New  moons, 
and,  as  a matter  of  course,  on  this  occasion, 
which  was  the  chief  festival  of  the  New  moon. 
There  is  however  no  reason  to  doubt  the 
tradition  that  the  day  was  distinguished  by  a 
general  blowing  of  trumpets  throughout  the 
land,  and  that  the  kind  of  trumpet  generally 
used  for  the  purpose  was  the  shophdr  (which 
it  seems  mught  have  been  either  the  horn  of  an 
animal  or  a cornet  of  metal),  such  as  was 
used  at  Sinai  (Lx.  xix.  16),  and  on  the  Day  of 
Jubilee.  See  on  xxv.  9.  It  must  have  differ- 
ed in  this  respect  from  the  ordinary  festival  of 
the  New  moon  when  the  long  straight  trumpet 
of  the  temple  alone  was  blown.  See  on  Num. 
X.  2 ; Lx.  xxv.  23.  In  the  modern  service  of 
the  Synagog.ue,  Psalm  Ixxxi.  is  used  at  the 
feast  of  Trumpets.  It  is  however  doubted  by 
Gesenius  and  others  whether  that  Psalm  does 
not  more  properly  belong  to  one  of  the  feasts 
celebrated  at  the  Full  moon,  either  the  Pass- 
over  or  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  the  word 

R R 


1522 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


[v.  25—35. 


25  Ye  shall  do  no  servile  work 
therein : but  ye  shall  offer  an  offering 
made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

26  4 And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

^■chap.  16.  27  <^Also  on  the  tenth  day  of  this 

Numb.  29.  seventh  month  there  shall  be  a day 
7-  of  atonement : it  shall  be  an  holy 

convocation  unto  you  ; and  ye  shall 
afflict  your  souls,  and  offer  a'n  offer- 
ing made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

28  And  ye  shall  do  no  work  in  that 
same  day  : for  it  is  a day  of  atone- 
ment, to  make  an  atonement  for  you 
before  the  Lord  your  God. 

29  For  whatsoever  soul  it  be  that 
shall  not  be  afflicted  in  that  same 
day,  he  shall  be  cut  off  from  among 
his  people. 

30  And  whatsoever  soul  it  be  that 


doeth  any  work  in  that  same  day, 
the  same  soul  will  I destroy  from 
among  his  people. 

31  Ye  shall  do  no  manner  of 
work  : it  shall  be  a statute  for  ever 
throughout  your  generations  in  all 
your  dwellings. 

32  It  shall  be  unto  you  a sabbath  of 
rest,  and  ye  shall  afflict  your  souls: 
in  the  ninth  day  of  the  month  at 
even,  from  even  unto  even,  shall  ye 
^ celebrate  your  sabbath. 

33  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto"^^^' 
Moses,  saying, 

34  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, saying,  '^^Xhe  fifteenth  day  of Numb, 
this  seventh  month  shall  be  the  feast  john^7. 37. 
of  tabernacles  for  seven  days  unto  the 
Lord. 

35  On  the  first  day  shall  be  an 


rendered  “new  moon”  in  'v.  3 being  of  doubt- 
ful meaning.  See  note  in  loc. 

seventh  month'\  The  festival  was  obseiwed 
on  the  first  day  of  the  Seventh  month,  called 
by  the  Jews  in  later  times  Tisri,  but  in  the 
Old  Testament  Ethanim,  i K.viii.-2.  Accord- 
ing to  the  uniform  voice  of  tradition  it  was 
the  first  day  of  the  Civil  year  (see  Note  at  the 
end  of  chap.)  in  use  before  the  Exodus,  and 
was  obser\'ed  as  the  festival  of  the  New  year. 
Philo,  ‘de  Sept.’  19;  Mishna,  ‘ Rosh  Hash.’ 
I.  I.  The  general  opinion  of  the  Rabbinists 
has  been  that  it  was  a commemoration  of  the 
creation  of  the  world  (see  Buxt.  ‘ Lex.  Talm.’ 
2667),  when  “all  the  sons  of  God  shouted 
for  joy.”  Job  xxxviii.  7.  But  Philo,  with 
some  others,  Jews  as  well  as  Christians,  re- 
garded this  day,  rather  than  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost (see  Note  at  the  end  of  chap.),  as  the 
anniversary  of  the  giving  of  the  Law.  Philo, 
‘de  Sept.’  2Z.  Theodoret,  ‘Quiest.  in  Lev.’  32. 

The  Day  of  Atonement.  26 — 32. 

27.  The  tenth  of  Tisri,  that  is  from  the 
evening  of  the  ninth  day  of  the  month  to  that 
of  the  tenth  (yv.  32),  was  ordained  to  be  the 
great  Day  of  Atonement  which  was  to  be,  like 
the  Sabbath,  a day  of  Holy  Convocation  of 
strictest  observance,  in  which  no  sort  of  work 
was  to  be  done.  On  the  peculiar  rites  of 
the  Day,  see  ch.  xvi. 

Also]  The  Hebrew  word  is  not  merely 
copulative,  but  emphatic.  It  might  rather  be 
rendered,  Surely. 

afflict  your  souls]  See  on  xvi.  29. 
an  offering  made  by  fire]  i.  e.  the  whole  of 
the  appointed  sacrifices. 


31.  in  all  your  dwellings]  See  on  -u.  14; 
also  iii.  17. 

32.  sabbath  of  rest]  See  on  2;.  24. 

celebrate]  The  marginal  rendering  is  more 

correct. 

The  Feast  of  Tabernacles . 33 — 36. 

34.  seven  days]  Like  the  Passover,  the  feast 
of  Tabernacles  commenced  at  the  Full  moon, 
on  the  fifteenth  of  the  month,  and  lasted  for 
seven  days.  The  first  day  only  was  a day  of 
Holy  Convocation.  But  the  week  of  the  feast 
was'  followed  by  an  eighth  day.  forming 
strictly  no  part  of  it  {y.  36,  Num.  xxix.  35; 
Neh.  viii.  18),  which  was  a day  of  Holy  Con- 
vocation, and  appears  to  have  been  generally 
distinguished  by  the  name  ^^atzeretld  in  our 
version,  “ solemn  assembly,”  v.  36.  See  Num. 
xxix.  35  ? 2 Chron.  vii.  9;  Neh.  viii.  18.  The 
same  word  is  applied  to  the  last  day  of 
the  Passover,  Dent.  xvi.  8,  and  to  a religious 
assembly  in  a general  sense,  2 Kings  x.  20 ; 
Is.  i.  13  ; Jer.  ix.  2 ; Joel  i.  14.  The  Jews 
in  later  times  so  called  the  day  of  Pentecost; 
see  on  v.  16.  There  is  a difference  of  opinion 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  word.  From  its 
derivation  it  appears  strictly  to  denote  a closing 
festival,  and  this  rendering  has  the  authority 
of  the  Septuagint,  Buxtorf,  Fiirst,  Wogue 
and  others.  The  term  in  this  sense  might  of 
course  be  applied  with  propriety  to  the  last 
day  of  the  Passover,  as  in  Dent.  xvi.  8,  with 
still  more  fulness  of  meaning  to  the  day  of 
Pentecost  as  the  close  of  the  Pentecostal 
season,  but  with  the  most  perfect  fitness  to 
the  day  after  the  week  of  the  feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, as  the  conclusion  of  the  series  of  yearly 
festivals.  Philo,  ‘ de  Sept.’  24  ; Theodoret, 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


V.  36— 40.] 

holy  convocation : ye  shall  do  no 
servile  work  therein, 

36  Seven  days  ye  shall  offer  an  of- 
fering made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord  : 
on*  the  eighth  day  shall  be  an  holy 
convocation  unto  you;  and  ye  shall 
offer  an  offering  made  by  fire  unto 

tHeb.  the  Lord:  it  is  a Tolemn  assem- 
Uy;  and  ye  shall  do  no  servile  work 
therein. 

37  These  are  the  feasts  of  the 
Lord,  which  ye  shall  proclaim  to  be 
holy  convocations,  to  offer  an  offer- 
ing made  by  lire  unto  the  Lord,  a 
burnt  offering,  and  a meat  offering,  a 
sacrifice,  and  drink  offerings,  every 
thing  upon  his  day  : 

38  Beside  the  sabbaths  of  the 


Lord,  and  beside  your  gifts,  and 
beside  all  your  vows,  and  beside  all 
your  freewill  offerings,  which  ye  give 
unto  the  Lord. 

39  Also  in  the  fifteenth  day  of  the 
seventh  month,  when  ye  have  ga- 
thered in  the  fruit  of  the  land,  ye 
shall  keep  a feast  unto  the  Lord 
seven  days:  on  the  first  day  shall 
be  a sabbath,  and  on  the  eighth  day 
shall  be  a sabbath. 

40  And  ye  shall  take  you  on  the 
first  day  the  ^ boughs  of  goodly  trees,  t Heb 
branches  of  palm  trees,  and  the*^"*"'^' 
boughs  of  thick  trees,  and  willows 

of  the  brook;  and  ye  shall  rejoice 
before  the  Lord  your  God  seven 
days. 


‘ Quasst.  in  Lev.’  32.  We  are  not  told  that 
the  "'at'zereth  was  one  of  the  days  of  Holy 
Convocation  of  strict  observance  ; servile 
work  only  appears  to  have  been  prohibited. 
This  seems  to  furnish  an  objection  to  our 
marginal  rendering  “ day  of  restraint,”  (which 
has  the  support  of  Rosenmuller  and  Herx- 
heimer).  The  rendering  in  the  text  “ solemn 
assembly,”  agrees  with  Onk.,  the  Vulg., 
Gesenius  and  de  Wette.  In  the  Law  the 
word  appears  always  to  hold  its  specific 
meaning.  In  its  general  application  to  solemn 
assemblies  it  is  only  found  in  the  later  Scrip- 
tures. Whether  the  "'atz.ereth  was  “that  great 
day  of  the  feast”  mentioned  John  vii.  37, 
see  note  in  loc. 

36.  • an  offering  made  by  Jii'e"]  See  8. 
The  succession  of  sacrifices  prescribed  in 
Num.  xxix.  12 — 38  (see  on  ‘v.  20),  which 
forms  such  a marked  feature  in  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles,  tends  to  show  the  distinctness  of 
the  ^atzeretb  from  the  festal  week.  On  each 
of  the  eight  days,  including  the  ^at%ereth^  a 
shaggy  he-goat  was  offered  for  a Sin-offering. 
But  on  each  of  the  seven  days  of  the  festival 
itself  the  Burnt-offering  consisted  of  two 
rams,  fourteen  lambs  of  a year  old,  with  a 
number  of  young  bulls,  beginning  with  thir- 
teen on  the  first  day,  but  diminishing  by  one 
on  each  successive  day  till,  on  the  seventh, 
the  number  was  reduced  to  seven.  The  whole 
number  of  bulls  sacrificed  during  the  week 
thus  amounted  to  seventy.  But  on  the  '‘at- 
zereth  the  Burnt-offering  consisted  of  only 
one  bull,  one  ram  and  seven  lambs.  The 
other  particulars  relating  to  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles  will  come  under  our  notice  in 
the  notes  on  'w.  39  sq. 

37,  38.  The  meaning  appears  to  be;  these 
are  the  yearly  appointed  times  on  'which  ye  shall 


hold  Holy  Con'vocations  and  offer  to  Jehovah 
'sacrifices^  in  addition  to  the  Sabbath  offerings 
(Num.  xxviii.  9,  10)  and  to  all  your  voluntary 
offerings.  Cf.  Num.  xxix.  39. 

Further  Instruction's  regarding  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles.  39 — 43. 

39.  Also'\  Rather,  Surely.  See  on  v.  27. 
The  mode  in  which  the  feast  of  Tabernacles 
is  here  reintroduced,  after  the  mention  of  it 
in  vy.  34 — 36,  may  suggest  that  this  passage 
originally  formed  a distinct  document.  The 
feast  is  evidently  spoken  of  as  if  it  had  not 
been  mentioned  before.  If  we  admit  this, 
the  connection  of  the  subject-matter  seems  to 
be  quite  clear.  The  passage  serves  as  a supple- 
ment to  the  previous  notice  of  the  feast,  and 
shows  the  place  which  it  held  in  reference  to 
the  yearly  cycle. 

when  ye  have  gathered  in\  wlien  ye  gather 
in.  See  on  Ex.  xxiii.  16. 

the  fruit  of  the  land^  i.e.  the  produce,  in- 
cluding the  grain,  the  olives,  the  vintage  and 
the  fruits  of  all  kinds.  The  time  of  year  so 
indicated  would  answer  in  the  Holy  Land  to 
the  beginning  of  October. 

a feast]  Heb.  chag.  See  Preliminary  note. 
a sabbath]  In  each  place,  the  Hebrew  is 
shabbdthon^  a sabbatical  rest.  See  on 
'v.  24. 

40.  It  is  doubtful  what  were  “the  boughs 
of  goodly  trees”  and  “the  boughs  of  thick 
trees.”  In  the  first  term,  the  marginal  ren- 
dering fruit  is  certainly  better  than  boughs. 
The_word  rendered  “goodly  trees”  (Heb. 
haddr)  is  so  understood,  in  a generic  sense,  by 
the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Gesenius,  Fiirst,  de  Wette, 
Knobel.  But  Josephus  (‘  Ant’  xiii.  13.  § 5), 
the  Targums  and  the  Rabbinists  in  general, 
treat  the  word  as  denoting  specifically  the 

RR  2 


624 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


[v.  41—44. 


41  And  ye  shall  keep  it  a feast 
unto  the  Lord  seven  days  in  the 
year.  It  shall  be  a statute  for  ever 
in  your  generations:  ye  shall  cele- 
brate it  in  the  seventh  month. 

42  Ye  shall  dwell  in  booths  seven 
days ; all  that  are  Israelites  born  shall 
dwell  in  booths: 


43  That  your  generations  may 
know  that  I made  the  children  of 
Israel  to  dwell  in  booths,  when  I 
brought  them  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt:  I am  the  Lord  yoyr  God.^ 

44  And  Moses  declared  unto  the 
children  of  Israel  the  feasts  of  the 
Lord. 


Citron,  while  most  of  the  recent  Jewish  trans- 
lators, and  Josephus  himself  in  another  place, 
‘Ant.’  III.  10.  § 4,  retain  the  original  word. 
In  the  second  tenm  (Heb.  ’’aboth)  the  render- 
ing “thick  trees”  Ini'S*  the  support  of  the 
LXX.,  Vulg.,  Gesenius,  de  Wette,  Fiirst, 
Knobel,  and  is  favoured  by  the  etymology  of 
Viboth^  according  to  which  it  would  signify  a 
kind,  or  kinds,  of  trees  with  thick,  or 
pleached,  foliage.  The  Targums,  and  those 
who  have  followed  them,  must  evidently  be 
wrong  in  taking  it  for  the  myrtle,  since  the 
myrtle  is  distinctly  named  along  with  these 
same  “thick  trees”  in  Neh.  viii,  15,  The 
modern  Jews  generally  retain  the  original 
word  without  explanation,  as  they  do  hadar. 
There  is  a well-supported  tradition  which 
throws  some  light  on  the  subject,  though  it 
leaves  the  “thick  trees”  in  uncertainty.  It 
is  said  that  every  Israelite  at  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles  carried  in  one  hand  a bundle  of 
branches  (called,  in  rabbinical  Hebrew,  luldh)^ 
and  in  the  other  a citron.  The  lulab  would 
seem  to  have  comprised  the  boughs  of  palm- 
trees,  ‘‘thick  trees,”  and  willows  here  named, 
while  the  fruit  of  the  hcidcir  must  have  been 
the  citron.  Jos.  ‘ Ant.’  ill.  10.  § 4,  xiii.  13. 
15;  2 Macc.  X.  6,  7;  Mishna,  ‘ Succah,’  cap. 
HI.  The  boughs  mentioned  by  Nehemiah,  of 
the  olive,  the  pine  (rather  the  wild  olive),  the 
myrtle,  the  palm  and  the  "‘aboth^  appear  to 
have  been  used  for  covering  the  huts  in  which 
the  Israelites  lived  during  the  festival.  See  on 
'V.  42  ; Neh.  viii.  15,  16. 

42.  Te  shall  Iivell  in  booths  seven  days'] 


NOTES  on 

I.  On  the  Pentecost,  w.  15 — 22. 

The  other  chief  passages  in  the  Law  re- 
lating to  the  feast  of  Weeks  are  Ex.  xxiii. 
16;  Num.  xxviii.  26 — -31;  Deut.  xvi.  9 — 12. 
But  here  only  is  the  offering  of  the  Pente- 
costal loaves  mentioned,  unless  it  is  they  which 
are  designated  “ the  first  of  the  firstfruits,” 
Ex.  xxiii.  19  (see  note);  and  “the  firstfruits,” 
Ex.  xxxiv.  26. 

'Phe  true  connection  between  the  offering  of 
the  First  Sheaf  and  the  Passover  may  perhaps 
be  traced  in  Josh.  v.  10 — 12.  The  Passover 
was  the  great  natitjnal  commemoration  of  the 
deliverance  from  Egypt  which  was  to  lead  on 
to  the  settlement  of  the  Israelites  in  the  Pro- 


The  word  rendered  “booth”  (Heb.  sukkdh') 
denotes  a shed  such  as  is  used  for  cattle  (Gen. 
xxxiii.  17),  a mean  dwelling  (Is.  i.  8;  Job 
xxvii.  18),  a bower  of  branches,  as  in  this 
place  (Job  xxxviii.  40 ; Jonah  iv.  5),  or  the 
huts  of  soldiers  (2  S.  xi.  ii  ; i K.  xx.  12,  16). 
According  to  Jewish  tradition,  what  were  used 
at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  were  strictly  taber- 
nacula^  structures  of  boards,  with  a covering 
of  boughs.  Such  stnictures  are  now  erected 
at  this  festival  by  the  Jews  in  some  parts  cf 
Europe.  Certain  conditions  for  their  con- 
struction are  laid  down  in  the  Mishna,  but 
their  forms  might  vary  considerably.  ‘ Suc- 
cah,’ I.  II.  ; Stauben,  ‘ La  Vie  Juive  en  Al- 
sace,’ p.  170.  It  should  be  noticed  that  the 
huts  were  inhabited  only  during  the  seven 
days  of  the  festival,  not  on  the  'atzereih.  In 
later  times  it  appears  they  were  set  up  in 
such  parts  of  Jerusalem  as  afforded  conve- 
nient space  for  them.  Neh.  viii.  16.  See  Note 
at  the  end  of  the  Chapter. 

all  that  are  Israelites  born]  The  omission 
of  the  foreigners  in  this  command  is  remark- 
able. Perhaps  the  intention  was  that  on  this 
joyous  occasion  they  were  to  be  hospitably 
entertained  as  guests.  Cf.  Deut.  xvi.  14. 

43.  that  I made  the  children  of  Israel  to 
dwell  in  booths^  when  I brought  them  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt]  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the 
Chapter. 

44.  feasts]  appointed  times.  See  on 
V.  2.  This  verse  is  a conclusion  to  the  whole 
chapter.  See  Prel.  Note. 


Chap,  xxiii. 

mised  Land  as  its  crowning  result.  The  first 
offering  of  the  Sheaf  seems  to  be  implied  in 
the  narration  of  what  occurred  at  Gilgal, 
when  the  people  ate  of  the  “ corn  of  the  land 
on  the  morrow  after  the  Passover.”  See  on 
2;.  14.  From  this  time,  the  complete  festi- 
val, including  the  Paschal  Lamb,  the  Un- 
leavened Bread,  and  the  First  Sheaf,  was  to 
remind  them  how  they  had  been  set  free 
and  preserved  in  the  Wilderness  until  they 
could  cat  of  the  produce  of  the  Land  which 
Jehovah  had  given  to  them.  But  the  con- 
nection between  the  First  Sheaf  and  the 
feast  of  Weeks,  as  marking  the  beginning  and 
the  end  of  the  grain  harvest,  is  of  a more 
obvious  kind.  The  two  observances  sancti- 


LEVITICUS.  XXIIL 


Red  the  interval  between  them,  the  whole 
period  of  harvest,  “the  Pentecostal  season.” 
Jewish  tradition  has  preserved  some  curious 
traces  of  the  general  recognition  of  this  by 
the  Hebrew  race.  Buxtorf,  ‘Syn.  Jud.’  p. 
440 ; Stauben,  ‘ Vie  Juive  en  Alsace,’  p.  124  ; 
Mills,  ‘The  Modern  Jews,’  p.  207.  Philo 
calls  the  otFering  of  the  First  Sheaf  “ the  pre- 
lude to  a greater  festival,”  i.e.  Pentecost. 
The  Rabbinists  called  the  Day  of  Pentecost 
''atzereth  (see  on  nj.  35),  as  the  last  day  of 
Holy  Convocation  of  the  Pentecostal  season. 
Mishna,  ‘ Rosh  Hash.’  i.  2 ; ‘ Chag,’  ii. 
45  Joseph.  ‘Ant.’  III.  10,  § 6.  The  two 
loaves  of  the  Day  of  Pentecost  bore  to  the 
people  the  same  message  regarding  Jehovah 
as  the  words  of  the  Psalmist,  “ He  maketh 
peace  in  thy  borders.  He  filleth  thee  with  the 
finest  of  the  wheat,”  Ps.  cxlvii.  14.  Theo- 
doret  speaks  of  Pentecost  as  a memorial  of 
the  promise  of  the  possession  of  the  Holy 
Land.  ‘ Quaest.  in  Lev.’  32. 

The  tradition  that  the  feast  of  Weeks  was 
intended  to  commemorate  the  giving  of  the 
Law  on  Mount  Sinai  appears  first  in  the 
Fathers  of  the  fourth  century.  When  it  had 
been  inferred  from  Ex.  xix.  that  the  day  must 
have  nearly  coincided  with  the  fiftieth  day 
after  the  Exodus,  the  day  on  which  the  gift 
of  the  Law  marked  Israel  as  an  organized 
nation  might  have  been  easily  connected  with 
the  day  on  which  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
united  the  believers  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth  into 
a Church.  S.  Jerom.  Ep.  ad  Fabiolam  M. 
XII. ; S.  Aug.  ‘ Contr.  Faust.’  xxxii.  12.  It  is, 
however,  most  probable  that  a Jewish  tradi- 
tion to  the  same  effect  existed  before  the  fourth 
century.  The  general  acceptance  of  the  no- 
tion by  the  Jews  of  later  ages  (Maimon.  ‘ More 
Nev.’iii.  41 ; Buxt.‘Syn.  Jud.’  p.  438;  Schoett- 
gen,  ‘ Hor.  Heb.’  Act.  Ii.  i)  cannot  easily  be 
reconciled  with  the  supposition  that  it  origi- 
nated with  the  Fathers  of  the  Church. 

We  ipay  perhaps  be  allowed  to  conjecture 
that  it  was  because  the  day  of  Pentecost  was 
regarded  as,  in  a sense,  the  birth-day  of  the 
Church,  that  St  Paul  was  so  careful  to  keep 
it  after  his  conversion.  Acts  xx.  16;  i Cor. 
xvi.  8.  The  entire  Pentecostal  season,  the 
period  between  Easter  and  Whitsuntide,  be- 
came in  an  early  age  the  ordinary  time  for  the 
baptism  of  converts  (Hessey,  ‘Bampton  Lec- 
tures,’ p.  88),  as  the  harvest  season  of  the 
Church,  answering  to  the  haiwest  season  of 
the  Land  according  to  the  old  Law. 

II.  On  the  Civil  Year.  -u.  24- 

There  is  no  direct  reference  to  the  months 
in  the  Old  Testament  which,  by  itself,  would 
lead  us  to  suppose  that  the  Israelites  used 
any  other  year  than  that  beginning  with  the 
month  Abib  (Ex.  xiii.  4,  cf.  xii.  2;  Deut.  xvi. 
i),  which,  after  the  Captivity,  was  called 
Nisan  (Neh.  ii.  i ; Est.  iii.  7).  Hence-  the 
existence  of  a Civil  year,  as  distinct  from  the 


Sacred  year,  has  been  sometimes  treated  as  a 
modern  fiction.  Smith’s  ‘ Diet.’ i.  p.  3 79.  But 
the  form  of  expression  in  Ex.  xii.  2,  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Sabbatical  and  Jubilee  years 
in  the  month  Ethanim,  or  Tisri,  the  tradi- 
tions of  both  the  rabbinical  and  Alexandrian 
Jews,  and  the  fact  that  the  New  moon  festival 
of  Tisri  is  the  only  one — not  excepting  that 
of  Nisan — which  is  distinguished  by  peculiar 
observance,  seem  to  bear  sufficient  testimony 
to  a more  ancient  computation  of  time  than 
that  instituted  by  Moses  in  connection  with 
the  Passover.  Another  argument  is  furnished 
by  Ex.  xxiii.  16.  See  note. 

Keeping  in  view  the  enumeration  of  the 
holy  days  in  this  chapter  of  Leviticus  (ynj. 
4—27),  and  that  in  the  law  of  festival  sacri- 
fices in  Numbers  (xxviii.  xxix.),  we  may 
perceive  a simple  arrangement  which  appears 
to  connect  the  yearly  observances  at  once 
with  the  order  of  the  natural  year  and  with 
the  Sabbatical  idea.  It  was  the  Hebrew  cus- 
tom to  speak  of  the  year  as  divided  into  two 
seasons.  Summer  and  Winter  (Gen.  viii.  22; 
Ps.  Ixxiv.  17;  Zech.  xiv.  8),  and  to  designate 
the  produce  of  the  earth  in  general  as  the 
fruits  of  Summer  (Jer.  viii.  20,  xl.  ro — 12; 
Mic.  vii.  i).  The  only  months  specified  in 
this  enumeration  of  the  festivals  are  the  first 
of  the  sacred  year,  Abib,  “the  month  of 
green  ears,”  the  commencement  of  Summer, 
and  the  seventh,  Ethanim,  “the  month  of 
flowing  streams”  (Gesenius),  the  first  month 
of  Winter.  Under  these  months  the  set 
times  are  arranged  in  two  groups.  In  the 
Summer  half-year  we  find  the  Passover  linked 
on  by  the  offering  of  the  First  sheaf  followed 
by  the  Week  of  weeks  to  the  feast  of  per- 
fected First  fruits  at  Pentecost;  in  the  half- 
year  of  Winter,  grouped  within  a single 
month,  are  the  feast  of  Trumpets,  the  Day 
of  Atonement,  and  the  feast  of  Tabernacles, 
with  the  ’’atzereth^  or  “concluding  festival” 
of  the  year.  See  on  2;.  34.  Thus  each  season 
was  consecrated  by  its  appropriate  observ- 
ances. That  the  Seventh  month  should  have 
come  to  be  regarded  by  the  Jews  with  pecu- 
liar respect  as  “the  Sabbatical  month,”  appears 
to  be  natural  from  the  place  which  it  holds  as 
the  seventh  in  the  Sacred  year,  from  its  lunar 
cycle  commencing  with  an  extraordinary  New 
moon  festival,  and  from  its  comprising  such  a 
large  proportion  of  holy  days,  especially  the 
Day  of  Atonement,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
ancient  dignity  which  probably  belonged  to  it 
as  the  First  month  in  the  patriarchal  year. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  both  the  Spring 
feast  in  Abib  and  the  Autumn  feast  in  Etha- 
nim appropriately  commenced  at  the  F ullmoon 
in  their  respective  months. 

HI.  On  the  Meaning  of  the  Feast 
OF  Tabernacles,  'v.  43. 

Objection  is  made  to  the  statement  in  2;. 
43  on  the  ground  that  the  kind  of  habitation 


626 


LEVITICUS.  XXIII. 


used  by  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  is 
never  called  in  the  history  sukkah^  a booth 
(see  on  xxiii.  42),  but  always  ohel^  that  is,  a 
tent  of  skins  or  cloth.  See  Ex.  xvi.  16,  xxxiii.  8, 

10  ; Lev.  xiv.  8 ; Num.  xi.  10,  xvi.  26,  xix. 
18;  Deut.  V.  30,  xi.  6,  &c.,  &c.  This  cir- 
cumstance seems  to  show  that  the  primary 
object  of  the  booths  could  not  have  been  to 
remind  the  Israelites  of  the  tents  in  which 
their  fathers  had  encamped  in  the  Wilderness. 
It  is  indeed  alleged  that  some  of  the  dwellers 
in  the  Wilderness  at  this  day  shelter  them- 
selves in  huts  or  bowers,  and  that  the  Is- 
raelites may  have  done  so  in  some  part  of 
their  wanderings.  But  neither  this,  nor  the 
fact  that  siikkah  is  sometimes  used  for  the  hut 
or  tent  of  a soldier  in  an  encampment  (2  S.  xi. 

11  ; I K.  XX.  12,  16),  can  bring  the  title  of 
the  feast  into  direct  agreement  with  the  course 
'of  the  historical  narrative.  The  people  were 
accustomed  to  hear  of  their  fathers  dwelling 
in  tents,  not  in  booths,  and  all  the  Hebrew 
words  used  in  reference  to  moving  the  camp  in 
the  Wilderness  strictly  belong  to  tents  (Hup- 
feld).  It  is  not  therefore  likely  that  the  Law- 
giver would  call  the  festival  “the  festival  of 
Booths  ” if  it  had  been  first  instituted  to  keep 
the  Israelites  in  mind  of  the  camp  in  the  Wil- 
derness.— Once  indeed,  in  later  times,  the  term 
dbel  is  connected  with  the  feast  of  Tabernacles 
(Hos.  xii.  9). 

The  original  idea  of  the  festival  plainly 
appears  to  be  expressed  in  the  name  applied 
to  it  in  Exodus,  “the  feast  of  Ingathering,” 
the  celebration  of  harvest-home,  when  the 
fruits  of  the  earth  were  gathered  in.  See  on 
Ex.  xxiii.  16 ; cf.  xxxiv.  22.  As  the  feast  of  In- 
gathering the  festival  may  have  been  observed 
in  the  land  of  Goshen,  and  it  may  there  have 
been  the  custom  for  the  parties  keeping  holi- 
day to  meet  in  bowers  set  up  for  the  occasion, 
such  as  were  used  in  the  Summer  and  Autumn 
festivals  of  other  nations.  (See  Ovid  ‘ Fast.’ 
III.  523  ; Tibullus,  I.  ‘ Eleg.’  i.  24  ; ‘ Festus’ 
s.  umbra;?)  The  practice  is  familiar  in  the 
East,  and  it  is  one  which  might  naturally 
arise  anywhere.  But  the  feast  of  Tabernacles 
was  solemnly  recognized  by  the  Law  as  one 
of  the  three  great  festivals  at  which  every 
male  Israelite  was  to  present  himself  before 
Jehovah  at  the  Sanctuary.  Ex.  xxiii.  16, 
xxxiv.  22,  23.  It  was  in  its  nature  a joyous 
occasion,  the  most  joyous  of  all  the  feasts,  the 
one  which  was  named  par  excellence^  “ the 
feast.”  See  Deut.  xvi.  13— 15  ; i K.  viii.  2,  65  ; 
Ezek.  xlv,  25  ; Zech.  xiv.  16.  In  the  wandering 
life  in  the  Wilderness  its  proper  significance 
as  the  feast  of  Ingathering  must  have  been 
rather  in  })rosj)ect  and  retrospect  than  in  the 
actual  present ; but  its  jubilant  character  may 
have  been  kept  up.  Now  the  in  which 

the  Israelite  kejit  the  feast,  and  the  dbel  which 
was  his  ordinary  abode  in  the  wilderness,  had 
this  in  common— they  were  temporary  places 
of  sojourn,  they  belonged  to  camp-life.  The 


seven  days  of  abode  in  the  booths  of  the  festi- 
val was  thus  a fair  symbol  of  the  forty  years 
of  abode  in  tents  in  the  Wilderness.  The 
feast  might  well  become  the  appointed  memo- 
rial of  this  period  of  their  history  for  the  ages 
to  come,  and  Hosea,  in  the  passage  to  which 
reference  has  been  made,  might  easily  use  the 
word  tent^  immediately  suggesting  the  his- 
torical connection,  rather  than  bootb^  the  one 
strictly  belonging  to  the  feast. — In  like  manner 
the  feast  of  Weeks  was  endowed  with  a mean- 
ing certainly  not  immediately  connected  with 
its  original  institution,  being  recognized  as  a 
memorial  of  the  bondage  of  Egypt.  See  Deut. 
xvi.  II,  12.  This  may  possibly  have  had 
reference  to  the  hard  toil  of  harvest  which 
was  past,  and  now  rewarded  with  the  bless- 
ing of  a store  of  provision.  There  is  a still 
nearer  parallel  in  the  case  of  the  -weekly  Sab- 
bath being  appointed  to  remind  the  people 
of  their  deliverance  from  Egypt.  See  Note 
on  the  Sabbath-day,  § v..  Ex.  xx. — A kindred 
connection  between  the  year  of  Release  with 
the  Exodus  is  indicated,  Deut.  xv.  15. 

The  substance  of  the  lesson  of  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles  as  expressed  in  this  verse  may 
however  have  had  a deeper  ground  than  any 
mere  material  resemblance  existing  between  the 
sukkab  and  the  dbel.  No  time  in  the  year 
could  be  so  suitable  for  the  Israelites  to  be 
reminded  of  the  wonderful  providence  which 
had  fed  and  sheltered  them  in  the  Wilderness, 
where  they  had  no  land  to  call  their  own , and 
where  there  was  neither  harvest  nor  gathering 
into  barns  nor  vintage,  as  the  season  in  which 
they  offered  thanksgiving  to  Jehovah  for  the 
fruits  of  the  ground  and  consecrated  the  crops 
newly  stored  in.  In  this  way  the  transition 
from  nomadic  to  agricultural  life,  which  took 
place  when  the  people  settled  in  the  Holy  Land, 
must  have  tended  to  fulfil  the  meaning  of  the 
feast  of  Tabernacles.  From  that  time  the 
festival  called  to  mind  their  long  and  weary 
wanderings  in  contrast  with  the  plenty  and 
comfort  of  settled  possession.  The  parallel 
between  this  change  in  the  condition  of  the 
people  and  the  transferring  of  the  centre  of 
national  worship  from  the  Tabernacle  to  the 
Temple,  may  have  been  the  reason  of  the  con- 
nection of  the  Dedication  of  the  first  and 
second  Temples,  and  of  the  Encienia  of  the 
Maccabees,  with  the  feast  of  Tabernacles. 
See  I K.  viii.  2,  65  ; Jos.  ‘ Ant.’  viii.  4.  § 5 ; 
Neh.  viii.  13 — 18;  2 Macc.  x.  5 — 8. 

The  popular  character  of  the  festival,  and 
its  connection  with  the  Dedication  of  the 
Temple  of  Solomon,  were  probably  what  in- 
duced Jeroboam  to  set  up  an  imitation  of  it 
in  the  inauguration  of  the  false  worship  at 
Bethel,  i K.  xii.  32,  33. 

On  the  reading  of  portions  of  the  Law 
during  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  in  the  Sab- 
batical year,  see  Deut.  xxxi.  10 — 13 ; and  on  the 
references  to  the  festival  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, see  John  vii.  37,  viii.  12. 


V.  I— 7-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXIV. 


627 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

I The  oil  for  th4  lamps.  5 The  sheiubread. 

1 o Shcloviitlis  sofi  blasphemeth.  \ 3 The  law 
of blasphe}ny . Of  nmrder.  Of  datnage. 
1 3 The  blasphemer  is  stoned. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 Command  the  children  of  Israel, 
that  they  bring  unto  thee  pure  oil 

tHeb.  olive  beaten  for  the  light,  'to  cause 
^ascTnd.  lamps  to  burn  continually. 

3 Without  the  vail  of  the  testi- 
mony, in  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, shall  Aaron  order  it  from 
the  evening  unto  the  morning  be- 
fore the  Lord  contmually : it  shall 


Chap.  XXIV. 

The  Oil  for  the  Lamps— The 

SlIEWBREAD. 

1—9. 

As  setting  forth  a part  of  the  duty  of  the 
laity  in  the  maintenance  of  public  worship, 
this  section  may  have  a connection  with  the 
preceding  chapter.  The  oil  for  the  lamps  of 
the  Tabernacle  and  the  meal  for  the  Sbew- 
bread  were  to  be  offerings  from  the  Congrega- 
tion, like  the  meal  for  the  Pentecostal  Loaves, 
xxiii.  17.  The  instructions  regarding  the  oil 
Qvv.  2,  3)  are  almost  a verbal  repetition  of 
Ex.  xxvii.  20,  21,  except  that  “ Aaron  and  his 
sons”  are  mentioned  in  Exodus,  and  in  this 
place  (*1;.  3)  only  Aaron.  It  appears  that  the 
responsibility  of  keeping  up  the  lights  rested 
on  the  High-priest,  but  the  actual  service 
might  be  performed,  on  ordinary  occasions, 
by  the  common  priests.  Cf.  on  xvi.  4. 

2.  to  cause  the  lamps  to  burn'\  See  on  i.  9. 

4.  the  pure  candlestick  See  Ex.  xxv.  31 — 
39,  xxxi.  8. 

5 — 9.  The  Shewbread  is  mentioned  Ex. 
xxv.  30,  XXXV.  13,  xxxix.  36;  2 Chron.  xiii. 
II,  &c.  It  is  not  in  this  place  designated  by 
its  peculiar  name.  The  purpose  of  the  pas- 
sage is  to  give  instructions  for  its  preparation 
and  treatment.  Our  translators  have  followed 
Luther  in  their  use  of  the  name  Shewbread. 
Wickliffe,  following  the  LXX.  and  Vulg., 
has  “Bread  of  the  Proposition;”  that  is,  the 
Bread  mohich  is  set  forth.  The  Hebrew  name 
might  fairly  be  rendered  Bread  of  tlie 
presence. 

5.  t^o  tenth  deals  shall  be  in  one  cake'\ 
Each  cake  or  loaf  was  to  contain  two  tenths 
of  an  ephah,  about  six  pounds  and  a quarter 
(see  on  Ex.  xxix.  40;  Lev.  xix.  36)  of  fine 
flour.  The  material  was  the  same,  both  in 
quality  and  in  quantity,  with  that  of  each  one 
of  the  Wave-loaves  of  Pentecost  (xxiii.  17), 


he  a statute  for  ever  in  your  gene- 
rations. 

4 He  shall  order  the  lamps  upon 

"the  pure  candlestick  before  the  Lord  ^Exod.  31. 
continually. 

5 ^ And  thou  shalt  take  fine  flour, 

and  bake  twelve  ^ cakes  thereof:  two Exod.  25. 
tenth  deals  shall  be  in  one  cake. 

6 And  thou  shalt  set  them  in  two 
rov^,  six  on  a row,  upon  the  pure 
table  before  the  Lord. 

7 And  thou  shalt  put  pure  frank- 
incense upon  each  row,  that  it  may 
be  on  the  bread  for  a memorial,  even 
an  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the 
Lord. 


The  word  rendered  cake  is  the  same  as  occurs 
ii.  4,  vii.  12,  viii.  26,  &c.,  and  appears  to  be 
regularly  applied  to  loaves  of  unleavened 
bread.*  Some  imagine  the  Shewbread  to  have 
been  leavened,  like  the  Pentecostal  loaves 
(Knobel,  &c.).  But  Jewish  tradition  (see 
Joseph.  ‘Ant.’  ill.  6.  § 6 — 10,  § 7;  Mishna, 
“ Menach.’V.  i)  and  most  authorities  of  all  ages 
take  the  opposite  view.  Since  the  bread  was 
brought  into  the  Holy  place  (which  was  not 
the  case  with  the  Pentecostal  bread)  it  almost 
certainly  came  under  the  general  law  of  the 
Meat-offerings,  which  excluded  the  use  of 
leaven  (ii.  ii).  In  the  service  cf  the  Temple 
the  preparation  and  arrangement  of  the  cakes 
were  committed  to  the  Levites  (i  Chron.  ix. 
32,  xxiii.  29;  2 Chron.  xiii.  ii.). 

6.  t^o  7'0'uv,  six  in  a row]  Rather,  two 
piles,  six  in  a pile.  The  Hebrev/  word 
might  denote  either  row  or  pile.  But  the 
measure  of  the  Table,  two  cubits  long  by  one 
broad,  in  connection  with  the  bulk  of  the 
loaves,  and  the  testimony  of  Josephus  who 
must  have  known  the  usage  in  the  second 
Temple  (‘Ant.’  ill.  6,  § 6),  favour  the  notion 
that  the  bread  stood  in  two  piles. — On  the 
Table,  see  Ex.  xxv.  23 — 30. 

7.  pure  frankincense~\  The  LXX.  adds 
salt.,  which  probably  represents  the  true  read- 
ing and  accords  with  the  Law  that  no  Meat- 
offering  was  to  be  offered  without  salt  (ii.  13). 

for  a memorial'\  Our  version  here  gives 
what  appears  to  be  the  true  sense  of  the 
Hebrew,  in  opposition  to  the  most  ancient 
versions  and  some  modern  authorities,  which 
apply  the  words  for  a memorial  to  the  Shew- 
bread itself,  not  to  the  frankincense.  The 
frankincense  as  a memorial,  or  azkdrdh  (like 
the  handful  of  the  Meat-ofering,  ii.  2),  was 
most  likely  cast  upon  the  Altar-fire  as  “an 
offering  made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord,”  when 
the  bread  was  removed  from,  the  Table  on  the 
Sabbath-day  (pv.  8;  i S.  xxi.  6;  cf.  Mishna, 


628 


LEVITICUS.  XXIV. 


[v.  8 — 12. 


8 Every  sabbath  he  shall  set  it  in 
order  before  the  Lord  continually, 
being  taken  from  the  children  of  Is- 
rael by  an  everlasting  covenant. 

9 And  it  shall  be  Aaron’s  and  his 

fExod.  29.  gQj^s’;  ^and  they  shall  eat  it  in  the 
chap.  8. 31.  holy  place : for  it  is  most  holy  unto 
Matt.  12.  offerings  of  the  Lord 

made  by  fire  by  a perpetual  statutl. 

10  ^ And  the  son  of  an  Israelitish 
woman,  whose  father  was  an  Egyp- 
tian, went  out  among  the  children 


of  Israel : and  this  son^of  the  Israel- 
itish vjoman  and  a man  of  Israel 
strove  together  in  the  camp; 

1 1 And  the  Israelitish  woman’s  son 

blasphemed  the  name  of  the  Lord^ 
and  cursed.  And  they. brought  him 
unto  Moses:  (and  his  mother’s  name 
was  Shelomith,  the  daughter  of  Dibri,  1^34. 
of  the  tribe  of  Dan  :)  toexfwid 

12  And  they  “^put  him  in  ward,  '"‘TJdh’i 
t that  the  mind  of  the  Lord  might  to  the 

month  of 

be  shewed  them.  the  lord. 


‘Menach.’  xi.  7).  The  frankincense  was  puk 
into  small  gold  cups,  one  of  which  was  placed 
upon  each  pile  of  bread.  (See  on  Ex.  xxv. 

23—30-) 

8.  being  taken  from  the  children  of  Israel'] 
Each  cake  represented  the  offering  of  a Tribe. 

9.  See  on  ii.  3.  It  could  have  been  only 
by  a stretch  of  the  Law  that  Ahimelech  gave 
a portion  of  the  Shewbread  to  David  and  his 
men,  on  the  ground  that  they  were  free  from 
ceremonial  defilement,  i Sam.  xxi.  4 — 6; 
Matt.  xii.  4. 

Nothing  is  said  in  Scripture  that  throws 
any  direct  light  upon  the  specific  meaning  of 
the  Shewbread.  But  there  seems  no  reason- 
able doubt  that  it  was  a true  Meat-offering, 
with  its  frankincense,  its  Drink-oftering  (see 
on  Ex.  xxv.  29),  and  its  salt  (see  on  -u.  7).  The 
peculiar  form  in  which  it  was  offered,  espe- 
cially in  its  being  brougdit  into  the  Tabernacle 
and  in  its  consisting  of  Twelve  loaves,  distin- 
guish it  as  an  offering  made  on  behalf  of  the 
nation.  See  on  Ex.  xxv.  30. — Biihr  has  in- 
geniously carried  out  the  theory  that  the  loaves 
were  intended  for  a symbolical  manifestation 
of  the  Holy  One  in  His  Sanctuary  as  the 
Bread  of  Life,  as  the  supporter  both  of  the 
spiritual  and  the  bodily  life  of  His  faithful 
people.  John  vi.  47 — 51;  Matt.  iv.  4;  Deut. 
viii.  3;  see  ‘ Symbolik,’  I.  p.  425.  But  suf- 
ficient objection  to  this  view  seems  to  be  fur- 
nished by  the  facts  that  the  loaves  were  taken 
“ from  the  children  of  Israel,”  not  in  any  way 
presented  to  them  ; and,  that  the  symbolism 
on  which  it  is  based  would  be  better  ex- 
pressed by  One  loaf  than  by  Twelve  loaves. 
See  I Cor.  x.  17.— Spencer  and  other  critics 
of  his  school  have  actually  supposed  that 
the  setting  forth  of  the  Shewbread  Table  was 
a symbolical  meal  offered  to  Jehovah,  like  the 
Lectistermum  of  the  Romans,  in  which  food 
used  to  be  placed'  before  the  statues  of  the  gods. 

The  Blasphemer — The  Law  of  Blas- 

IMIEMY  AND  OTHER  PENAL  LAWS  ENACT- 
ED. 10 — 23. 

This  section  appears  to  stand  by  itself.  The 
place  it  holds  may  have  been  determined  by 


the  mere  time  of  the  incident  related  in  it. 
The  Legislator  had,  it  seems,  just  completed  a 
topic  : the  incident,  with  the  law  suggested  by 
it,  was  probably  recorded  at  once  and  suffered 
to  keep  its  place,  as  not  severing  any  import- 
ant connection. 

The  blasphemer  was  the  son  of  a Hebrew 
woman  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  by  an  Egyptian 
father.  He  had  come  out  of  Egypt  with  the 
children  of  Israel,  and  must  have  been  under 
the  ordinary  conditions  of  a resident  foreigner. 
See  xvi.  29.  He  happened  to  have  a quarrel 
with  an  Israelite,  and  in  the  course  of  alter- 
cation he  used  some  blasphemous  expression. 
See  on  ai.  16.  It  was  revealed  to  Moses  that 
blasphemy  was  to  be  punished  by  stoning,  and 
that  this  and  all  penal  laws  were  to  be  car- 
ried out  not  only  against  Israelites,  but  against 
resident  foreigners  (y.  22).  The  laws  against 
murder  and  violence  appear  to  be  here  intro- 
duced in  the  vray  of  illustration.  The  pur- 
pose of  17—22  would  thus  be  to  ratify 
with  the  utmost  distinctness  the  maxim  of  the 
Law  which  rendered  foreigners  amenable  to 
all  penalties  and  restrictions.  Cf.  Ex.  xii. 
49;  Num.  ix.  14,  XV.  15,  16:  notes  on  Ex. 
XX.'  10;  Lev.  xvi.  29.— The  rabbinists  have 
filled  out  this  narrative  of  the  son  of  Shelo- 
mith in  a curious  manner.  They  say  that  the 
father  of  the  young  man  was  the  Egyptian 
slain  by  Moses  (Ex.  ii.  ii),  that  he  was  the 
taskmaster  under  whom  the  husband  of  She- 
lomith worked,  and  that  Moses  found  him 
smiting  the  man  whom  he  had  injured  and 
put  to  shame.  It  is  added  that  the  ciuarrel 
in  which  the  young  man  was  engaged  arose 
out  of  a claim  set  up  by  him  to  have  his 
abode  in  the  camp  of  the  Danites  [see  Num. 
ii.  2],  not  being  content  to  remain  in  the 
quarters  appropriated  to  foreigners  (Targum 
of  Palestine  and  authorities  quoted  by  Selden, 

‘ de  Syned.’  li.  c.  i.  § 2). 

11.  blasphemed  the  name  of  the  Lord.,  and 
cursed]  See  on  v.  16. 

12.  Selden  {u.  s.)  supposes  that  the  offender 
had  already  been  pronounced  guilty  by  the 
rulers  [see  Ex.  xviii.  21,  22],  and  that  the  case 


V.  13— 23-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXIV. 


629 


13  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 

14  Bring  forth  him  that  hath  curs- 
ed without  the  camp ; and  let  all  that 

fDeut.  13.  heard  him  ^lay  their  hands  upon  his 
head,  and  let  all  the  congregation 
stone  him. 

15  And  thou  shalt  speak  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  saying,  Whoso- 
ever curseth  his  God  shall  bear  his 
sin. 

16  And  he  that  blasphemeth  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  he  shall  surely 
be  put  to  death,  and  all  the  congre- 
gation shall  certainly  stone  him : as 
well  the  stranger,  as  he  that  is  born 
in  the  land,  when  he  blasphemeth 
the  name  of  the  Lord^  shall  be  put 
to  death. 


17  ^ -^Wnd  he  that  Tilleth  any  ^'Exod.  21. 
man  shall  surely  be  put  to  death.  Deut.  19. 

18  And  he  that  killeth  a beast  shall 

make  it  p-ood  ; ^ beast  for  beast.  smiteth 

A T LI  • L the  life  oj 

19  And  ir  a man  cause  a blemish  « 
in  his  neighbour;  as  -^he  hath  done, 

so  shall  it  be  done  to  him;  i-^xod  21 

20  Breach  for  breach,  eye  for  eye,  24. 
tooth  for  tooth : as  he  hath  caused 

a blemish  in  a man,  so  shall  it  be  s- 
done  to  him  again. 

21  And  he  that  killeth  a beast,  he 
shall  restore  it:  and  he  that  killeth 
a man,  he  shall  be  put  to  death.  . 

22  Ye  shall  have  ^'one  mxanner  of-^'Exod. 
law,  as  well  for  the  stranger,  as  for 

one  of  your  own  country : for  I am 
the  Lord  your  God. 

23  ^ And  Moses  spake  to  the  chil- 


was  referred  to  Moses  in  order  that  the  punish- 
ment might  be  awarded  by  the  divine  decree. 
No  law  had  as  yet  been  enacted  against  blas- 
phemy except  by  implication.  See  Ex.  xxi. 
17,  xxii.  28. 

14.  lay  their  hands  upon  his  headl]  The 
simplest  view  seems  to  be  that  the  witnesses, 
by  this  act,  were  to  protest  against  the  impiety 
of  the  criminal,  symbolically  laying  the  guilt 
upon  his  head.  The  two  elders  in  the  story 
of  Susanna  are  said  to  do  the  same,  not  after 
condemnation,  but  in  bringing  their  charge 
against  the  accused  before  the  people,  v.  34. 
Cf.  the  washing  of  hands,  Deut.  xxi.  6 ; 
Matt,  xxvii.  24.  The  act  has  been,  certainly 
with  no  good  reason,  connected  with  the  sa- 
crificial imposition  of  hands,  and  understood 
to  be  a solemn  dedication  of  the  offender  to 
death  by  his  accusers.  Kurtz,  ‘S.  W.’  § 47; 
cf.  on  xxvii.  28. 

let  all  the  congregation  stone  hini\  See  on 
XX.  2. 

16.  he  that  blasphemeth  the  name  of  the 
Lord]  It  should  be  observed  that  the  words 
“ of  THE  Lord,”  are  here  translated  from  the 
original,  not,  aS  in  <z;.  ii,  and  in  the  latter  part 
of  this  verse,  inserted  by  the  translators.  The 
verb,  according  to  all  the  best  critical  authori- 
ties, denotes  to  resile:  but  Jewish  interpreters 
in  general,  with  the  countenance  of  the  LXX. 
and  the  Targums,  understand  it  to  mean  no 
more  than  to  utter  distinctly.  Hence  the  rab- 
binists  based  on  this  verse  the  notion  that  it 
is  not  lawful  to  speak  the  name  which  appears 
in  some  places  in  our  version  as  Jehovah, 
but  is,  for  the  most  part,  rendered  “the 
Lord.”  On  the  mode  in  which  the  Jews 
have  evaded  the  use  of  the  name,  see  Bux- 


torf,  ‘ Lex.  Talmud.’  p.  2432.  Its  true  pro- 
nunciation is  irretrievably  lost,  owing  to  its 
vowel  points  having  been  shifted.  Most  is  per- 
haps to  be  said  in  favour  of  the  uncouth  form 
Jahve.  See  Martineau’s  preface  to  Ewald’s 
‘ History,’  p.  xviii.  When  the  name  is  re- 
ferred to  in  rabbinical  writings,  it  generally 
stands  as  simply  “the  name,”  or  “the  name 
of  four  letters”  {tetragrammaton^.^  “ the  great 
and  terrible  name,”  &c.  It  is  remarkable  that 
this  habit  has  practically  kept  its  hold  upon 
most  modern  versions  of  the  Bible,  Christian 
as  well  as  Jewish.  The  Septuagint  render 
the  name  by  d Kfpto?,  the  Vulgate,  by  Domi- 
nus.,  and  nearly  all  English  translators,  by 
“the  Lord,”  distinguished  by  capital  letters. 
Luther,  the  Italian  translators,  and  some  of 
the  French,  use  words  with  the  same  mean- 
ing. Others  of  the  French  versions,  and  the 
modern  Jewish  versions  in  general,  have  “the 
Eternal,”  or  some  equivalent  word.  Jehovah 
is  retained  by  Junius  and  Tremellius,  Schott, 
de  Wette,  &c. 

stranger]  i.e  foreigner.  See  on  xvi.  29. 

17.  Cf.  ne.  21.  See  Ex.  xxi.  12;  Num. 
XXXV.  30,  31;  Deut.  xix.  ii,  12. 

18.  Cf.  v.  21.  See  Ex.  xxi.  33,  34.  The 
law  expressed  in  this  verse  is  more  broadly 
given  than  in  Exodus. 

19.  20.  See  on  Ex.  xxi.  22 — 25. 

cause  a blemish]  i.  e.  inflict  a bodily  injury. 

21.  An  emphatic  repetition  of  none.  17,  18. 

22.  one  manner  of  lanxo]  The  Hebrew 
word  rendered  “law”  is  mishpat.^  i.q.  judicial 
lanu. 

stranger]  foreigner. 

1 am  the  Lord]  See  on  xviii.  2. 


630 


LEVITICUS.  XXV. 


[v.  1—9. 


dren  of  Israel,  that  they  should  bring 
forth  him  that  had  cursed  out  of  the 
camp,  and  stone  him  with  stones. 
And  the  children  of  Israel  did  as  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses. 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

I The  sabbath  of  the  seventh  year.  8 The  jii- 
bile  in  the  fiftieth  year.  14  Of  oppression. 
18  A blessing  of  obedience.  23  The  redemp- 
tion of  land.  29  Of  houses.  35  Coryipassion 
of  the  poor.  39  The  visage  of  bondmen.  47 
The  redemption  of  servants. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
Jf\,  in  mount  Sinai,  saying, 

2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them,  When  ye 
come  into  the  land  which  I give  you, 

tHeb.  then  shall  the  land  ^keep  "a  sabbath 
rEMd.23.  tmto  the  Lord. 

3 Six  years  thou  shalt  sow  thy 
field,  and  six  years  thou  shalt  prune 
thy  vineyard,  and  gather  in  the  fruit 
thereof  \ 

4 But  in  the  seventh  year  shall  be 
a sabbath  of  rest  unto  the  land,  a 


sabbath  for  the  Lord  : thou  shalt 
neither  sow  thy  held,  nor  prune  thy 
vineyard. 

5 That  which  groweth  of  its  own 
accord  of  thy  harvest  thou  shalt  not 
reap,  neither  gather  the  grapes  ^ofiHeb. 
thy  vine  undressed : for  it  is  a year 

of  rest  unto  the  land. 

6 And  the  sabbath  of  the  land  shall 
be  meat  for  you;  for  thee,  and  for 
thy  servant,  and  for  thy  maid,  and 
for  thy  hired  servant,  and  for  thy 
stranger  that  sojourneth  with  thee, 

7 And  for  thy  cattle,  and  for  the 
beast  that  are  in  thy  land,  shall  all 
the  increase  thereof  be  meat. 

8 ^ And  thou  shalt  number  seven 
sabbaths  of  years  unto  thee,  seven 
times  seven  years;  and  the  space  of 
the  seven  sabbaths  of  years  shall  be 
unto  thee  forty  and  nine  years. 

9 Then  shalt  thou  cause  the  trum- 
pet ^of  the  jubile  to  sound  on  the^Heb 
tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month,  in  sound. 


Chapter  XXV. 

The  Sabbatical  Year  and  the  Year 
CF  Jubilee,  i — 55. 

Preliminary  Note. 

The  Sabbatical  year  and  the  year  of  Jubilee 
belong  to  that  great  Sabbatical  system  which 
runs  through  the  religious  observances  of  the 
Law.  They  were  solemnly  connected  with 
the  sacred  Covenant.  But  it  is  important  to 
observe  that  they  were  distinguished  by  no 
religious  ceremonies,  they  were  accompanied 
by  no  act  of  religious  worship.  There  were 
no  sacrifices,  nor  Holy  Convocations,  belong- 
ing to  them.  In  their  distinctive  aspect  they 
may  be  said  to  rest  upon  moral  rather  than 
upon  formally  religious  ground.  It  is  not 
therefore  without  reason  that  they  are  here 
set  apaij  from  the  set  times  which  fell  strictly 
within  the  sphere  of  religious  observances. 

The  Sabbatical  year,  i — 7. 

2.  keep  a sabbath  unto  the  Lord']  See  on 
Ex.  xxiii.  II. 

3.  'Vineyard]  Rather,  fruit-garden.  The 
Hebrew  word  is  a general  one  for  a plantation 
of  fruit-trees.  See  on  Lev.  ix.  10. 

4.  a sabbath  of  rest]  Heb.  shabbath  shab- 
bdton.  See  on  xxiii.  3. 

neither  sovj  thy  field]  The  express  prohibi- 
tion of  sowing  and  reaping,  and  of  pruning 
and  gathering,  affords  a presumption  in  favour 
of  the  Sabbatical  year  beginning,  like  the  year 


of  Jubilee  (gv.  9),  in  the  first  month  of  the 
Civil  year,  the  seventh  of  the  Sacred  year, 
when  the  land  was  cleared  of  the  crops  of  the 
preceding  year.  See  on  Ex.  xxiii.  16,  and  Note 
‘ On  the  Civil  year’  after  chap,  xxiii. 

5.  thy  ‘Vine  undressed]  That  is,  unpruned ; 
literally,  thy  Nazarite  'vine.,  the  figure  being 
taken  from  the  unshorn  locks  of  the  Nazarite. 
Num.  vi.  5;  cf.  Tibullus,  i.  ‘ El.’.vii.  34. 

6.  the  sabbath  of  the  land  shall  be  meat  for 
you]  That  is,  the  produce  of  the  untilled 
land  (its  “increase”  ‘v.  7)  shall  be  food  for 
the  whole  of  you  in  common,  rich  and  poor 
without  distinction.  Ex.  xxfii.  ii. 

the  stranger  that  sojourneth  with  thee]  the 
foreigner  who  dwelleth  with  thee. 

7.  the  beast]  the  living  creature. 

The  year  of  Jubilee.  8 — 5 5 . 

8 — 13.  The  Land  was  to  be  divided  by 
lot  among  tlie  families  of  the  Israelites  when 
the  possession  of  it  was  obtained.  Num.  xxv. 
52 — 56,  xxxiii.  54,  &c.  At  the  end  of  every 
seventh  sabbatical  cycle  of  years,  in  the  year 
of  Jubilee,  each  field  or  estate  that  might  have 
been  alienated  was  to  be  restored  to  the  family 
to  which  it  had  been  originally  allotted. 

8 . se'ven  sabbaths  of  years]  seven  weeks 
of  years. 

9.  cause  the  trumpet  of  the  jubile  to  sound] 
Rather,  cause  the  sound  of  the  cornet 
to  go  through  (the  land).  The  word 


V.  10,  II.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXV. 


the  day  of  atonement  shall  ye  make 
the  trumpet  sound  throughout  all 
your  land. 

10  And  ye  shall  hallow  the  fiftieth 
year,  and  proclaim  liberty  through- 
out all  the  land  unto  all  the  in- 


habitants thereof:  it  shall  be  a jubile 
unto  you;  and  ye  shall  return  every 
man  unto  his  possession,  and  ye  shall 
return  every  man  unto  his  family. 

II  A jubile  shall  that  fiftieth  year 
be  unto  you : ye  shall  not  sow,  nei- 


Jubllee  does  not  occur  in  this  verse  in  the 
Hebrew.  The  trumpet  is  the  sbophar,  i.e.  the 
cornet,  buccina^  either  the  horn  of  some  ani- 
mal or  a tube  of  metal  shaped  like  one.  The 
Mishna  says  that  the  horn  of  the  chamois  or 
wild  goat  was  used  on  this  occasion.  ‘ Rosh 
Hash.’  III.  5.  See  on  xxiii.  24;  cf.  Num.  x.  2. 
Keil  has  well  remarked  that  as  the  sound  of 
the  cornet  (see  on  10)  was  the  signal  of 
the  descent  of  Jehovah  when  He  came  down 
upon  Sinai  to  take  Israel  into  Covenant  with 
Himself  (Ex.  xix.  13,  16,  19,  xx.  18),  so  the 
same  sound  announced,  at  the  close  of  the 
great  Day  of  Atonement,  the  year  which  re- 
stored each  Israelite  to  the  freedom  and  the 
blessings  of  the  Covenant. — The  word  shophar 
is  rendered  “shawm”  in  the  Prayer-Book 
version  of  Ps.  xcviii.  7. 

the  tenth  day  of  the  se-venth  month ^ in  the  day 
of  atonement]  It  seems  most  likely  that  the 
blast  of  the  cornets  took  place  in  the  evening, 
after  the  Evening  sacrifice,  when  the  solemn 
rites  of  Atonement  were  concluded.  The 
contrast  between  the  humbling  quiet  of  the 
day  and  the  sudden  outpouring  of  the  sound 
which  proclaimed  the  year  of  freedom,  must 
have  been  very  impressive.  Nothing,  hovs^- 
ever,  could  be  more  appropriate  than  that 
freedom  should  be  declared  just  after  the 
great  national  act  of  humiliation  and  recon- 
cilement with  Jehovah.  It  has  been  con- 
jectured that  the  cornets  were  blown  in  every 
priest’s  city,  or  wherever  a priest  might  be 
living  (Bahr),  but  according  to  tradition  they 
were  blown  by  any  of  the  people  “through- 
out all  the  land.” 

10.  the  fiftieth  year].  If  this  means  the 
fiftieth  year,  beginning  to  reckon  from  the 
first  year  after  the  preceding  Jubilee,  since 
the  forty-ninth  year  must  have  been  a Sab- 
batical year,  two  fallow  years  must  have 
come  together  (see  ii).  This  seems 
unlikely.  But  it  is  probable  that  the  Jubilee 
coincided  with  each  seventh  Sabbatical  year. 
It  might,  in  this  case,  have  been  called  the 
fiftieth,  reckoning  it  as  the  last  of  a series  of 
which  the  first  was  the  preceding  Jubilee. 
A tendency  may  be  traced  in  many  languages 
in  reference  to  periods  of  time  to  include  the 
starting  point  as  the  first  unit  in  the  sei'ies. 
It  may  be  seen  in  the  mode  in  which  such 
words  and  phrases  are  used  as  Trez/raerT^piy, 
TpL€Tr]pts,  quinquennalia,  nundinee^  huitaine^ 
quin'zaine^  or  quinzejours^  quindici  giornl^  acht 
Tage,  the  octave  of  a festival  (cf.  Luke  ix.  28; 


Joh.  XX.  26),  &c.,  &c.  AVith  this  agree 
some  early  Jewish  traditions,  and  the  opinions, 
of  Scaliger,  Usher,  Petavius,  Rosenmilller 
and  others.  Cf.  notes  on  vv.  ii,  18 — 22. — 
It  must,  however,  be  admitted  that  the  ques- 
tion is  a difficult  one,  and  the  greater  number 
of  Jewish  authorities,  as  well  as  of  the  more 
recent  critics,  are  in  favour  of  the  fiftieth  year, 
taking  the  expression  in  the  sense  with  which 
we  are  more  familiar. 

it  shall  be  a jubile  unto  you]  Except  in  the^ 
English  Bible  the  word  is  commonly  spelt 
jubilee.  Like  the  jubil^eus  of  the  Vulgate,  it 
was  intended  to  represent  the  Hebrew,  jdbeel. 
The  form  found  in  Cranmer’s  Bible,  “jubelye,” 
must  have  been  derived  from  jubiheus.  But 
our  translators,  with  the  Genevan,  probably 
meant  “jubile,”  to  come  more  closely  to  the 
Hebrew,  and  to  be  pronounced  as  a dissylla- 
ble, as  if  spelt  jubil. — The  word  jdbeel  was 
taken  by  several  early  authorities  (Josephus, 
S.  Jerome,  Theodoret,  with  some  support 
from  the  Septuagint)  to  mean  liberty.,  or, 
the  act  of  setting  free.  But  the  word  first 
occurs  Ex.  xix.  13,  where  it  certainly  cannot 
have  any  such  meaning,  and  where  it  is  render- 
ed in  our  version,  “trumpet,”  marg.  “cornet.” 
It  most  probably  denotes  the  sound  of  the 
cornet,  not  the  cornet  itself.  Cf.  Josh.  vi.  5. 
Various  opinions  have  been  formed  regarding 
its  derivation.  Some  of  the  Rabbinists  imagined 
it  to  be  identical  with  a word  said  to  exist  in 
old  Arabic,  signifying  a ram,  or  a ram’s  horn. 
It  has  been  regarded  as  an  onomatoptsetic 
word,  like  the  Latin  jubil  are.,  to  shout  for 
help,  and  jubilum.,  an  outcry  (Gesenius).  It 
is  worth  while  to  observe  that  our  word,  jubi^ 
lant.,  though  derived  from  the  Latin  verb, 
rather  takes  its  meaning  from  the  Hebrew 
substantive.  But  a very  probable  conjecture, 
approved  by  the  best  authorities,  connects 
jobeel  with  the  root  jdbal.,  to  flow  abundantly, 
which  by  a familiar  metaphor  might  be  applied 
to  sound.  The  word  has  been  discussed  at 
length  by  Bochart  (‘  Hieroz.’  i.  c.  43),  Carpzov 
(‘ App.  Crit.’  p.  447),  Gesenius  (‘Thes.’  p. 
561),  and  Kranold  (‘ De  Jubil.’  p.  ii). 

11.  See  on  v.  10.  Hupfeld  and  othem 
have  so  estimated  the  improbability  of  one 
fallow  year  succeeding  another  that  they  have 
been  disposed  to  reject  this  verse  as  spurious. 
They  imagine  that  tillage  did  not  cease  in  the 
Jubilee.  But  the  difficulty  disappears  if  we 
suppose. the  Jubilee  to  have  coincided  with  the 
seventh  Sabbatical  year.  Cf.  on  vv.  18 — 22. 


632  LEVITICUS.  XXV.  [v.  12-26. 


ther  reap  that  which  groweth  of  itself 
in  it,  nor  gather  the  grapes  in  it  of 
thy  vine  undressed. 

12  For  it  is  the  jubile;  it  shall  be 
holy  unto  you : ye  shall  eat  the  in- 
crease thereof  out  of  the  held. 

13  In  the  year  of  this  jubile  ye 
shall  return  every  man  unto  his  pos- 

, session. 

14  And  if  thou  sell  ought  unto 
thy  neighbour,  or  buyest  ought  of 
thy  neighbour’s  hand,  ye  shall  not 
oppress  one  another : 

1 5 According  to  the  number  of 
years  after  the  jubile  thou  shalt  buy 
of  thy  neighbour,  and  according  unto 
the  number  of  years  of  the  fruits  he 
shall  sell  unto  thee : 

16  According  to  the  multitude  of 
years  thou  shalt  increase  the  price 
thereof,  and  according  to  the  few- 
ness of  years  thou  shalt  diminish  the 
price  of  it:  for  according  to  the  num- 
ber of  the  years  of  the  fruits  doth  he 
sell  unto  thee. 

17  Ye  shall  not  therefore  oppress 
one  another;  but  thou  shalt  fear  thy 
God : for  I ajn  the  Lord  your  God. 

18  Wherefore  ye  shall  do  my 
statutes,  and  keep  my  judgments. 


.and  do  them;  and  ye  shall  dwell  in 
the  land  in  safety. 

19  And  the  land  shall  yield  her 
fruit,  and  ye  shall  eat  your  fill,  and 
dwell  therein  in  safety. 

20  And  if  ye  shall  say.  What  shall 
we  eat  the  seventh  year?  behold,  we 
shall  not  sow,  nor  gather  in  our  in- 
crease : 

2 1 Then  I will  command  my  bless- 
ing upon  you  in  the  sixth  year,  and 
it  shall  bring  forth  fruit  for  three 
years. 

22  And  ye  shall  sow  the  eighth 
year,  and  eat  yet  of  old  fruit  until  the 
ninth  year;  until  her  fruits  come  in 
ye  shall  eat  of  the  old  store. 

23  ^ The  land  shall  not  be  sold 

II  for  ever : for  the  land  is  mine ; for  n T’ 

, . ..  to  be  quite 

ye  are  strangers  and  sojourners  with  cutoff. 

Heb. 

' for  cutting 

24  And  in  all  the  land  of  your  pos- 
session  ye  shall  grant  a redemption 
for  the  land. 

25  If  thy  brother  be  waxen 
poor,  and  hath  sold  away  some  of 
his  possession,  and  if  any  of  his  kin 
come  to  redeem  it,  then  shall  he  re- 
deem that  which  his  brother  sold. 

26  And  if  the  man  have  none  to 


’Vint  undressed]  See  on  -z;.  5. 

14 — 17.  The  principle  on  which  the  law 
of  Jubilee,  as  it  regards  the  land,  was  based, 
is  expressed  in  ’V’v.  23,  24.  The  land  be- 
longed to  Jehovah,  and  it  was  He  who  allot- 
ted it  amongst  the  families  of  Israel  for  their 
use.  No  estate  could  therefore  be  alienated 
in  perpetuity,  by  any  human  authority,  from 
the  family  to  whose  lot  it  might  fall.  But 
the  usufruct,  or  lease,  of  a portion  might  be 
sold  at  any  time  for  a period  extending  to  the 
next  Jubilee. 

14.  ,sell  ought]  That  is,  any  piece  of 
ground. 

oppress  one  another]  Rather,  overreach 
one  another. 

15,  16.  the  number  of  years  of  the  fruits] 
i.  e.  according  to  the  number  of  harvests.  Tlie 
average  value  of  a yearly  crop- might  of  course 
be  estimated,  and  the  Sabbatical  years  were 
to  be  deducted  from  the  series. 

17.  oppress  one  another]  See  on  'v.  14. 

18  — 22.  It  has  been  conjectured  that 
these  verses  are  out  of  their  proper  place,  that 
they  relate  to  the  Sabbatical  year,  not  to  the 


year  of  Jubilee,  and  that  they  should  be  read 
immediately  after  the  seventh  verse  (Ewald, 
Hupfeld,  Knobel,  Davidson).  But  if  the 
Jubilee  coincided  with  the  seventh  Sabbati- 
cal year,  the  conjecture  is  needless.  See  on 

’V’V.  IC,  TI. 

18,  19.  in  safety]  That  is,  secure  from 
famine,  xxvi.  5. 

23,  24.  See  on  14 — 17. 

23.  sold  for  e’ver]  '■'■for  cutting  off 

or,  to  be  quite  cut  offf  in  modern  phrase,  sold 
in  .perpetuity. 

strangers]  foreigners,  who  had  become 
residents.  See  on  Ex.  xx.  12;  Lev.  xvi.  29. 

24.  grant  a redemption  for  the  land]  i.  e. 
grant  power  to  recover  the  land  to  the  origi- 
nal holder  who  had  parted  with  it. 

25.  If  thy  brother  be  ^Maxen  poor]  It  would 
seem  that  the  Israelites  were  expected  never 
to  part  with  their  land  except  under  the  pres- 
sure of  poverty.  The  answer  of  Naboth  to 
Ahab  expressed  the  feelings  which  must  have 
been  thus  fostered,  “The  Lord  forbid  it  me 
that  I should  give  the  inheritance  of  my 
fathers  to  thee.”  i K.  xxi.  3. 


V-  27—35-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXV. 


633 


t Heb.  redeem  it,  and  ^himself  be  able  to 

his  hand  j 

hath  at-  redeem  n; 

^undZ^t}-  ^7  count  the  years 

ficiency.  of  the  Sale  thereof,  and  restore  the 
overplus  unto  the  man  to  whom  he 
sold  it;  that  he  may  return  unto  his 
possession. 

28  But  if  he  be  not  able  to  restore 
zV  to  him,  then  that  which  is  sold 
shall  remain  in  the  hand  of  him 
that  hath  bought  it  until  the  year 
of  jubile:  and  in  the  jubile  it  shall 
go  out,  and  he  shall  return  unto  his 
possession. 

29  And  if  a man  sell  a dwelling 
house  in  a walled  city,  then  he  may 
redeem  it  within  a whole  year  after 
it  is  sold:  within  a full  year  may 
he  redeem  it. 

30  And  if  it  be  not  redeemed  v/ith- 
in  the  space  of  a full  year,  then  th3 
house  that  is  in  the  walled  city  shall 
be  established  for  ever  to  him  that 
bought  it  throughout  his  generations: 
it  shall  not  go  out  in  the  jubile. 


31  But  the  houses  of  the  villages 

which  have  no  wall  round  about 
them  shall  be  counted  as  the  fields 
of  the  country:  ^they.  may  be  re- 
deemed,  and  they  shall  go  out  in  the 
jubile.  rmioit. 

32  Notwithstanding  the  cities  of 
the  Levites,  and  the  houses  of  the 
cities  of  their  possession,  may  the 
Levites  redeem  at  any  time. 

33  And  if  "a  man  purchase  of  the 

T ^ one  of  the 

Levites,  then  the  house  that  yN2.'s,  Levites re- 
sold,  and  the  city  of  his  possession,  them, 
shall  go  out  in  the  year  ^jubile: 
for  the  houses  of  the  cities  of  the 
Levites  are  their  possession  among 
the  children  of  Israel. 

34  But  the  held  of  the  suburbs  of 
their  cities  may  not  be  sold ; for  it  is 
their  perpetual  possession. 

35  ^ And  if  thy  brother  be  waxen 
poor,  and  ^fallen  in  decay  with  thee;  ^Heb. 

, , 11  + 1-  ^ 1 • tns  hand 

then  thou  shalt  ^relieve  him:  yea^/aiieth. 
though  he  he  a stranger,  or  a sojourn-  \^eugth- 
er;  that  he  may  live  with  thee. 


28.  in  the  jubile  it  shall  go  out\  i.  e.  it 
shall  be  set  free  in  the  Jubilee. 

30.  not  go  out']  The  reason  of  this  law 
may  have  been  that  most  of  the  houses  in 
cities  were  occupied  by  artificers  and  traders 
whose  wealth  did  not  consist  in  lands,  many 
of  whom  were  foreigners  who  could  not  hold 
land  in  the  country  (Bahr). 

32  — 34.  The  purchaser  of  a Levite’s 
house  was  in  fact  only  in  the  condition  of  a 
tenant  at  will,  while  the  fields  attached  to  the 
Levitical  cities  could  never  be  alienated,  even 
for  a time. 

32.  Notwithstanding  the  cities Rather, 
And  concerning  the  cities  of  the  Le- 
vites, the  houses,  &c.  See  Num.  xxxv.  2; 
Josh.  xxi.  2 sq. 

33.  if  a man  purchase  of  the  Levites] 
More  properly,  If  one  of  the  Levites  re- 
deems a house  in  the  city,  &c.  See  next 
note.  The  meaning  appears  to  be,  if  a Levite 
(in  accordance  with  the  law  in  v.  25)  redeems 
a house  which  has  been  sold  to  a person  of  a 
different  tribe  by  another  Levite,  it  is  to  revert 
in  the  Jubilee  to  the  latter  Levite  as  its  original 
possessor.  (So  Rosenmiiller,  De  Wette,  Kra- 
nold,  Herxheimer,  &c.)  The  verse  thus  se- 
cures the  original  tenure  to  each  individual 
Levite. — Our  version  follows  the  Targums, 
Saadia,  and  several  other  Jewish  authorities. 


and  has  some  support  from  the  LXX.  and 
the  Syriac. — The  Vulgate  inserts  a negative, 
“ Si  redemptas  (sc.  aedes)  non  fuerint.”  This 
of  course  involves  a different  reading  of  the 
Hebrew  text : it  is  preferred  by  Ewald  and 
Knobel. 

the  house... and  the  city  of  his  possession] 
These  words  seem  to  be  a hendiadys  for  the 
house  in  the  city  of  his  possession. 
So  LXX.,  Kranold,  de  Wette,  &c. 

Regarding  the  application  of  the  law  of 
Jubilee  to  lands  dedicated  to  the  service  of 
the  Sanctuary,  see  xxvii.  16 — 25. 

The  law  of  Servitude.  35 — 55. 

In  connection  with  the  bearing  of  the  Jubilee 
on  personal  freedom,  the  general  law  regard- 
ing servants  is  here  set  forth.  The  principle 
which  was  to  limit  and  modify  the  servitude 
of  Hebrew  servants  is  expressed  and  repeated 
vv.  38,  42,  55- 

35.  This  verse  might  rather  be  rendered. 
And  if  thy  brother  (an  Israelite)  becomes 
poor  and  falls  into  decay  with  thee, 
thou  shalt  assist  him  and  let  him  live 
with  thee  like  a resident  foreigner.  So 
the  LXX,  the  Targums,  the  Vulgate,  Saadia, 
Luther,  Knobel,  Luzzatto,  &c.  Though  he 
had  parted  with  his  land  he  was  not  to  be 
reprded  as  an  outcast,  but  was  to  be  treated 
with  the  same  respect  and  consideration  as  a 
resident  foreigner  who,  like  him,  could  pos- 


634 


LEVITICUS.  XXV. 


V.  36—48.] 


f>  Exod. 
22.  25. 
Deut.  23. 
19. 

Prov.  28. 
8. 

Ezek.  18. 

8. 

& 22.  12, 


c Exod.  21. 

2. 

Deut.  15. 


Jer.  34.  14. 
T Heb. 
serz>e  thy- 
self with 
him  with 
the  service, 
&^c. 


tHeb. 
with  the 
sale  of  a 
bondman. 


36  ^Take  thou  no  usury  of  him, 
or  increase:  but  fear  thy  God;  that 
thy  brother  may  live  with  thee. 

37  Thou  shalt  not  give  him  thy 
money  upon  usury,  nor  lend  him  thy 
victuals  for  increase. 

38  I am  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  forth  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,  to  give  you  the  land 
of  Canaan,  and  to  be  your  God. 

39  ^ And  ^if  thy  brother  that 
dwelleth  by  thee  be  waxen  poor,  and 
be  sold  unto  thee;  thou  shalt  not 
^ compel  him  to  serve  as  a bondservant : 

40  But  as  an  hired  servant,  and  as 
a sojourner,  he  shall  be  with  thee, 
and  shall  serve  thee  unto  the  year  of 
jubile ; 

41  And  then  shall  he  depart  from 
thee,  both  he  and  his  children  with 
him,  and  shall  return  unto  his  own 
family,  and  unto  the  possession  of  his 
fathers  shall  he  return. 

42  For  they  are  my  servants, 
which  I brought  forth  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt:  they  shall  not  be  sold  ^as 
bondmen. 


. 43  ‘^Thou  shalt  not  rule  over  him  ‘^Ephes.6. 
with  rigour ; but  shalt  fear  thy  God.  Coi.  4.  i. 

44  Both  thy  bondmen,  and  thy 
bondmaids,  which  thou  shalt  have, 
shall  be  of  the  heathen  that  are  round 
about  you ; of  them  shall  ye  buy 
bondmen  and  bondmaids. 

45  Moreover  of  the  children  of  the 
strangers  that  do  sojourn  among  you, 
of  them  shall  ye  buy,  and  of  their  fa- 
milies that  are  with  you,  which  they 
begat  in  your  land : and  they  shall  be 
your  possession. 

46  And  ye  shall  take  them  as  an 
inheritance  for  your  children  after 
you,  to  inherit  them  for  a possession ; 

^ they  shall  be  your  bondmen  for  ever : ^ 
but  over  your  brethren  the  children  serve 
of  Israel,  ye  shall  not  rule  one  over^^JF/iS 
another  v/ith  rigour. 

4.7  ^ And  if  a sojourner  or  stranger 
^wax  rich  by  thee,  and  thy  brother  t Heb. 
that  dwelleth  by  him  v/ax  poor,  and  ^obtaiff 
sell  himself  unto  the  stranger  or  so- 
journer  by  thee,  or  to  the  stock  of 
the  stranger’s  family : 

48  After  that  he  is  sold  he  may  be 


sess  no  land,  but  could  accumulate  property 
and  live  in  comfort  as  a free  man.  See  on 
fix.  XX.  10;  Lev.  xvi.  29.  In  -on).  39,  40  the 
same  rule  is  addressed  to  masters  in  reference 
to  Hebrews  who  had  become  their  bond- 
servants.  Cf.  xix.  10,  xxiii.  22,  xxiv.  22; 
Neh.  V.  I — 13. 

37.  lend  him  thy  nnctuah  for  increase']  i.e. 
supply  him  with  food  for  thy  own  profit. 

39,  40.  The  law  had  already  provided 
that  no  Israelite  who  had  become  bound  to 
serve  another  could  be  forced  to  continue 
more  tlian  six  years  in  servitude.  Ex.  xxi.  2. 
But  in  the  year  of  Jubilee  every  Hebrew  ser- 
vant could  claim  liberty  for  himself  and  his 
family,  without  respect  to  his  period  of  ser- 
vice, at  the  same  time  that  he  recovered  his 
share  in  the  land  {ns.  41).  See  on  Ex.  xxi.  5,  6. 
The  law  appears  harmoniously  to  supplement 
the  earlier  one  in  Exodus.  It  was  another 
check  applied  periodically  to  the  tyranny  of 
the  rich.  Cf.  Jer.  xxxiv.  8 — 17.  Ewald 
gratuitously  considers  that  the  earlier  law  had 
become  obsolete  before  the  law  of  Jubilee  was 
promulgated.  ‘Altert.’  p.  421. 

43.  fear  thy  God]  Jehovah  was  the  Lord 
and  .Master  of  H is  people.  T o treat  a Hebrew 
as  a slave  was  therefore  to  interfere  with  the 
rights  of  Jehovah.  Cf.  Rom.  xiv.  4. 


44 — 46.  Property  in  foreign  slaves,  who 
might  be  handed  down  from  father  to  son, 
is  here  distinctly  permitted.  It  was  a pa- 
triarchal custom.  See  Gen.  xvii.  12.  Such 
slaves  might  be  captives  taken  in  war  (Num. 
xxxi.  6sq.;  Deut.  xx.  14),  those  consigned  to 
slavery  for  their  crimes,  or  those  purchased  of 
foreign  slave-dealers.  The  price  of  a slave  is 
supposed  to  have  varied  from  thirty  to  fifty 
shekels.  See  Ex.  xxi.  32;  Lev.  xxvii.  3,  4; 
Zech.  xi.  12,  13;  Matt.  xxvi.  15.  It  was  the 
object  of  Moses,  not  at  once  to  do  away  with 
slavery,  but  to  discourage  and  to  mitigate  it. 
Kidnapping  was  punished  with  death  (Ex. 
xxi.  16).  The  slave  was  encouraged  to  be- 
come a proselyte  (Ex.  xii.  44).  He  might  be 
set  free  (Ex.  xxi.  26,  27).  Special  ntles  were 
laid  down  for  the  security  of  his  life  and 
limbs  (Ex.  xxi.  20,  21,  26,  27).  The  Law 
would  not  suffer  it  to  be  forgotten  that  the 
slave  is  a man,  and  protected  him  in  every 
way  that  was  possible  at  the  time  against  the 
injustice  or  cruelty  of  his  master.  See  notes 
on  Ex.  xxi. 

46.  your  bondmen  for  enser]  i.e.  they  were 
not  necessarily  to  be  released  in  the  Sabbatical 
year  nor  the  Jubilee. 

47 — 54.  a sojourner  or  stranger]  Rather, 
a foreigner  who  has  settled  among 


V.  49—55-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXV. 


635 


redeemed  again ; one  of  his  brethren 
may  redeem  him: 

49  Either  his  uncle,  or  his  uncle’s 
son,  may  redeem  him,  or  any  that  is 
nigh  of  kin  unto  him  of  his  family 
may  redeem  him ; or  if  he  be  able,  he 
may  redeem  himself. 

50  And  he  shall  reckon  with  him 
that  bought  him  from  the  year  that 
he  was  sold  to  him  unto  the  year  of 
jubile : and  the  price  of  his  sale  shall 
be  according  unto  the  number  of 
years,  according  to  the  time  of  an 
hired  servant  shall  it  be  with  him. 

51  If  there  he  yet  many  years  be- 
hind^ according  unto  them  he  shall  give 
again  the  price  of  his  redemption  out 
of  the  money  that  he  was  bought  for. 


52  And  if  there  remain  but  few 
years  unto  the  year  of  jubile,  then  he 
shall  count  with  him,  and  according 
unto  his  years  shall  he  give  him  again 
the  price  of  his  redemption. 

53  And  as  a yearly  hired  servant 
shall  he  be  with  him : and  the  other 
shall  not  rule  with  rigour  over  him 
in  thy  sight. 

54  And  if  he  be  not  redeemed  " in  n Or, 
these  years^  then  he  shall  go  out  in  mean^ 
the  year  of  jubile,  both  he,  and  his 
children  Vv^ith  him. 

55  For  unto  me  the  children  of 
Israel  are  servants ; they  are  my  ser- 
vants whom  I brought  forth  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt:  I am  the  Lord 
your  God. 


you.  Ex.  XX.  10;  Lev.  xvi.  29.  So  Knobel,  54.  in  these  years'^  More  properly,  by 
Wogue,  &c.  The  extreme  period  of  servitude  one  of  these  means, 
in  this  case  was  probably  six  years,  as  when 

the  master  was  a Hebrew  (Ex.  xxi.  2).  55.  Cf.  w.  38,  42. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xxv. 


I.  On  the  Sabbatical  Year. 

•vn).  I — 7. 

In  Exodus,  the  Sabbatical  year  is  called 
“the  seventh  year”  (xxiii.  10),  and  in  Deu- 
teronomy, “the  year  of  release”  (xxxi.  10,  cf. 
XV.  i).  In  this  passage  and  in  Exodus  it  is 
represented  merely  as  a period  of  rest  for  the 
land,  during  which  the  ownership  of  the  soil 
was  practically  in  abeyance  and  the  chance 
produce  (which  in  the  climate  of  the  Holy 
Land  must  have  been  very  considerable)  was 
at  the  service  of  all  comers.  There  was  to  be 
neither  sowing  nor  reaping,  neither  planting, 
pruning,  nor  gathering.  What  Day  and 
Night  are  to  man  and  beast,  that  Summer  and 
Winter  are  to  the  soil ; and  hence  as  man  had 
his  Sabbath  every  seventh  day,  so  the  land 
was  to  lifive  its  Sabbath  every  seventh  year. 
See  on  Ex.  xxiii.  ii.  But  we  are  informed  in 
Deuteronomy  xv.  that  all  debtors  were  to  be 
released  from  their  obligation.  Whether 
their  debts  were  wholly  cancelled,  or  the 
claims  upon  them  were  only  suspended  during 
the  year,  see  notes  in  loc. 

The  rest  is  here  spoken  of  simply  as  a rest 
of  the  land.  It  must  have  debarred  a great 
part  of  the  people  from  their  accustomed  oc- 
cupations. But  there  appears  to  be  no  suffi- 
cient reason  to  suppose,  as  some  have  done, 
that  the  rest,  or  the  recreation,  of  the  people 
formed  any  essential  part  of  the  design  of  the 
Legislator.  One  effect  of  the  institution  may 


indeed  have  been  to  keep  alive  and  encourage 
occupations  which  were  not  purely  agricultu- 
ral, such  as  trade,  various  kinds  of  handicraft, 
the  chase  and  the  care  of  cattle.  It  is  also  (as 
Carpzov  and  Ewald  have  conjectured)  not 
improbable  that  schools,  and  instruction  of  all 
kinds  both  for  young  and  old,  were  carried  on 
during  the  year  with  more  than  ordinary 
energy  and  system.  The  reading  of  the  Law 
at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  in  every  Sabbatical 
year  may  have  been  connected  with  this. 
See  Deut.  xxxi.  10 — 13. 

But  the  great  material  advantage  of  the  in- 
stitution must  have  been  the  increased  fertility 
of  the  soil  from  its  lying  fallow  one  year  out 
of  seven,  at  a time  when  neither  the  rotation 
of  crops  nor  the  art  of  manuring  were  under- 
stood. It  must  also  have  kept  up  a salutary 
habit  of  economy  in  the  storing  of  corn.  Cf. 
Gen.  xli.  48 — 56.  Its  great  Spiritual  lesson 
was  that  there  was  no  such  thing  as  absolute 
ownership  in  the  land  vested  in  any  man,  that 
the  soil  was  the  property  of  Jehovah,  that  it 
was  to  be  held  in  trust  for  Him,  and  not  to  be 
abused  by  overworking,  but  to  be  made  the 
most  of  for  the  good  of  every  creature  which 
dwelt  upon  it  Theodoret,  ‘Qu£est.’35.  The 
land  was  Jehovah’s  (y.  23),  and  the  declared 
purpose  of  the  law  is  explained  in  the  words 
that  it  should  “ rest  and  lie  still,  that  the  poor 
of  the  people  may  eat,  and  what  they  leave 
the  beasts  of  the  field  shall  eat.”  Ex.  xxiii. 
II.  The  weekly  Sabbath  bore  witness  to  the 


LEVITICUS.  XXV. 


equality  of  the  people  in  regard  to  the  Covenant 
with  Jehovah,  of  which  the  whole  Sabbatical 
institution  was  the  symbol  (see  Note  on  the 
Sabbath-day,  Ex.  xx.  § vi.) : the  restored  dis- 
tribution of  the  Land  in  the  year  of  Jubilee 
testified  that  every  Israelite  had  originally  an 
equal  claim  to  the  possession  of  the  Land  of 
Promise  (see  the  following  Note)  : but  the 
Sabbatical  rest  of  the  soil  bore  even  a broader 
meaning ; it  declared  that  every  dweller  in 
the  land,  the  hired  servant,  the  foreigner,  the 
cattle,  even  the  wild  animals,  had  an  ac- 
knowledged claim  of  their  own  on  its  pro- 
duce. The  different  Sabbatical  observances  of 
the  L.aw  thus  concur  in  pointing  to  that  state 
of  things  which  would  have  followed  the  first 
Sabbath  of  Creation,  had  not  sin  and  its  con- 
sequences brought  disorder  amongst  the  crea- 
tures of  God.  Gen.  i.  31. 

It  would  appear  from  % Chr.  xxxvi.  20, 
21,  that  the  Sabbatical  year  was  neglected 
during  seventy  sabbatical  cycles,  490  years, 
which  must  have  included  the  period  of  the 
Monarchy.  Cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  34,  35,  43,  where 
the  obligation  to  maintain  the  institution  is 
made  the  subject  of  solemn  admonition. 
But  after  the  Captivity,  there  are  found 
several  historical  notices  which  imply  its  ob- 
servance. The  Jews  were  exempted  from 
tribute  in  the  Sabbatical  year  by  Alexander 
the  Great  (Jos.  ‘ Ant.’  xi.  8.  § 6),  and  by 
Julius  Caesar  (Jos.  ‘ Ant.’  xiv.  10.  § 6).  The 
inhabitants  of  Bethsura  could  not  stand  out 
when  besieged  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  be- 
cause they  had  no  store  of  provisions  owing 
to  the  Sabbatical  year  (i  Macc.  vi.  49),  and 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  suffered  from 
the  like  cause  when  they  were  besieged  by 
Herod  (Jos.  ‘ Ant.’  xiv.  16.  § 2,  xv.  i.  § 2). 

The  originality  of  the  Sabbatical  year,  as 
well  as  of  the  year  of  Jubilee,  is  very  striking. 
There  seems  to  be  nothing  like  either  of  them 
to  be  fairly  traced  in  any  ancient  legislation. 
See  the  following  Note. 

11.  On  the  Jubilee. 

'V'V.  8 — 33. 

Josephus  (‘Ant.’  xni.  2.  § 3)  says  that 
debts  were  remitted  in  the  Jubilee  as  they 
were  in  the  year  of  Release.  Deut,  xv.  2. 
But  there  is  no  hint  of  this  in  the  Law.  Some 
of  the  Rabbinists  expressly  deny  it. 

There  is  no  direct  historical  statement  of 
the  observance  of  the  Jubilee  on  any  one 
occasion,  either  in  the  Old  Testament  or  else- 
where. The  only  mention  of  it  in  the  Law, 
except  in  this  chapter  and  in  xxvii.  16 — 25,  is 
in  the  narrative  regarding  the  daughters  of 
Zclophehad,  Num.  xxxvi,  4.  See  note.  There 
appears  to  be  reference  to  its  operation  in 
Ruth  iv.  3 sq.  But  in  the  deficiency  of 
more  direct  testimony,  some  critics  have 
doubted  (Michaelis,  Winer),  and  others  have 
denied  (Kranold,  Hupfcld;,  that  it  was  ever 


actually  observed.  The  Rabbinists  however, 
and  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  iii.  12.  § 3),  affirm  that 
it  was  observed  up  to  the  Captivity,  and  some 
of  them  say  that  it  was  restored  after  the 
return.  The  statement  of  Diodorus  Siculus 
that  the  Jews  could  not  sell  their  estates 
(Tom,  11.  p.  544),  has  been  quoted  to  prove 
that  it  was  maintained  in  operation  in  his 
time.  Ewald  and  others  have  urged  that  no- 
thing is  proved  by  the  absence  of  any  distinct 
statement  regarding  its  obsei*vance,  and  that 
the  allusions  to  it  in  the  Prophets  are  suffi- 
ciently clear  and  numerous  to  show  that  the 
people  were  practically  familiar  with  its  opera- 
tion. See  Isa.  Ixi.  i,  2 ; cf.  v.  7 — I'o;  Ezek.  xlvi. 
17;  Jer.  xi.  23,  xxiii.  12,  xlviii,  44.  In  these 
passages  in  Jeremiah  it  is  assumed,  on  what 
seems  to  be  probable  ground,  that  the  “year  of 
visitation”  means  the  law  of  the  Jubilee  en- 
forced in  the  restoration  of  ill-gotten  gains  to 
those  from  whom  they  had  been  taken.  In 
Jer,  xxxii.  6 — 12,  Ewald  traces  the  restored 
working  of  the  law  which  had  taken  place  in 
the  reign  of  Josiah.  ‘ Alterthumer,’  p.  424.  If 
there  is  any  reference  to  the  Jubilee  in  Neh. 
V.  I — 13  (especially  compare  -u-u.  3,  4 with 
•V.  ii),  the  institution  must  have  been  recog- 
nized and  partially  reestablished  immediately 
after  the  return  from  the  Captivity, 

There  appears  to  be  no  trace  of  anything 
like  the  restoration  of  family  estates  in  the 
J ubilce  in  the  customs  of  other  ancient  nations. 
Strabo’s  statement  regarding  the  Dalmatians 
(to  which  some  have  referred)  is  merely  that 
they  redistributed  their  lands  every  eighth 
year  (lib.  vii,  p.  315).  Regarding  the  state- 
ment of  Plutarch,  that  Lycurgus  made  an 
equal  division  of  the  land  amongst  the  Spar- 
tans, Mr  Grote  seems  to  prove  clearly  that 
it  was  a mistake.  ‘Llistory  of  Greece,’  Vol. 
II.  p.  530.  Taking  it  as  a whole,  the  Jubi- 
lee as  instituted  by  Moses  appears  to  be  with- 
out parallel  in  the  history  of  the  world. 

Looking  at  the  law  of  the  Jubilee  from  a 
simply  practical  point  of  view,  its  operation 
must  have  tended  to  remedy  those  evils  which 
are  always  growing  up  in  the  ordinary  con- 
ditions of  human  society.  It  prevented  the 
permanent  accumulation  of  land  in  the  hands 
of  a few,  and  periodically  raised  those  whom 
fault  or  misfortune  had  sunk  into  poverty  to 
a position  of  competency.  It  must  also  have 
tended  to  keep  alive  family  feeling,«^nd  helped 
to  preserve  the  family  genealogies.  It  has 
been  conjectured  that  the  public  tables  of 
genealogy  were  corrected  in  each  Jubilee  year, 
in  order  to  meet  the  dying  out  of  some 
families  and  the  multiplication  of  others 
(Michaelis,  Ewald). 

But  in  its  more  special  character,  as  a law 
given  by  Jehovah  to  His  peculiar  people,  it 
was  a standing  lesson  to  those  who  would 
rightly  regard  it,  on  the  terms  upon  which 
the  enjoyment  of  the  Land  of  Promise  had 
been  conferred  upon  them.  All  the  land 


LEVITICUS.  XXVI. 


V.  r— 5-] 

belonged  to  Jehovah*  as  its  supreme  Lord, 
every  Israelite  as  His  vassal  belonged  to  Him. 
The  voice  of  the  Jubilee  horns,  twice  in  every 
century,  must  have  proclaimed  the  equitable 
and  beneficent  social  order  appointed  for  the 
people,  as  the  silver  trumpets  of  the  Sanctuary 
Lad  ten  days  before  (if  we  may  trust  the  tra- 
dition; see  on  xxiii.  24),  called  to  mind  the 
perfect  physical  order  of  the  world  on  the 
eve  of  the  first  Sabbath,  when  “God  saw 
everything  that  he  had  made,  and  behold  it 


was  very  good.”  ’ They  who  saw  that  all 
physical  and  social  order  must  be  the  reflec- 
tion of  spiritual  realities,  who  waited  for  “the 
consolation  of  Israel,”  were  so  led  to  look  for 
that  acceptable  year  of  Jehovah  which  was  to 
bring  comfort  to  all  that  mourned,  in  which 
the  slavery  of  sin  was  to  be  abolished  and  the 
true  liberty  of  God's  children  was  to  be  pro- 
claimed. Luke  ii.  25;  Isa.  Ixi.  2;  Luke  iv. 
19;  Actsiii.  21;  Rom.  viii.  19 — 23;  i Pet.  i. 
3,  4. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

I Of  idolatry.  2 ReUgloitsness.  3 A blessing 
to  them  that  keep  the  commandments.  14  A 
« I''xod.  20.  curse  to  those  that  break  them.  40  God  pro- 

4-  iniseth  to  remember  them  that  repent. 

Deut.  5-  8. 

& t6.  22.  ^ 7E  shall  make  you  "no  idols  nor 

Psal.  97.  7-  w • • 1 

II  Or,  X graven  image,  neither  rear  you 

up  a “standing  image,  neither  shall 
jisnred  yg  II  image  of  stone  in 

sfove.  J f J O • r 

Heb.  your  land,  to  bow  down  unto  it:  for 

‘pkZre^'^  I am  the  Lord  your  God. 


2 *i[  “^Ye  shall  keep  my  sabbaths, chap.  19. 
and  reverence  my  sanctuary  : I am 
the  Lord. 

* 3 ye  walk  in  my  statutes,  ^ 28. 

and  keep  my  commandments,  and  do 
them ; 

4 Then  I will  give  you  rain  in 
due  season,  and  the  land  shall  yield 
her  increase,  and  the  trees  of  the  field 
shall  yield  their  fruit. 

5 And  your  threshing  shall  reach 


Chapter  XXVI. 

This  chapter  appears  to  contain  a formal 
conclusion  of  the  Book  of  Leviticus,  the 
twenty- seventh  chapter  being  a distinct  Ap- 
pendix. 

Command  to  maintain  the  Public 
Worship  of  Jehovah. 

According  to  the  Jewish  arrangement,  in 
both  the  Hebrew  text  and  the  Targums,  these 
two  verses  form  part  of  the  preceding  chapter. 
Their  connection  either  with  chap.  xxv.  or 
with  chap.  xxvi.  is  not  very  close.  They 
might  form  a section  by  themselves. 

1.  ido/sl  Literally,  things  of  nought,  xix. 
4 ; Heb.  elcelim.  There  appears  to  have  been 
a play  on  the  similarity  in  sound  of  this  word 
to  Elohim.  Cf.  i Cor.  viii.  4. 

gra/ven  image'\  See  on  Exod.  xx.  4. 

standing  image~\  Either  an  upright  statue,  or 
a pillar,  such  as  an  obelisk  or  a Celtic  menhir. 
'I'he  same  word  denotes  simply  a memorial 
stone.  Gen.  xxviii.  18,  xxxv.  14  ; Ex.  xxiv.  4. 
But  here  and  elsewhere  it  expresses  a stone  set 
up  for  an  idolatrous  purpose.  Ex.  xxiii.  24, 
xxxiv.  13  ; Deut.  vii.  5,  xvi.  22;  2 K.  iii.  2, 
&c. 

image  of  stone\  The  phrase  is  not  found 
elsewhere.- — Other  names  for  objects  of  false 
worship  occur  in  ao.  30. 

2.  Repeated  from  xix.  30.  The  public 
worship  of  Jehovah  required,  first,  the  exclu- 
sion of  all  visible  symbols  of  deity  as  well  as 
of  all  idolatrous  objects,  and  next,  the  keeping 
holy  of  the  times  and  the  place  appointed  by 
the  Law  for  His  formal  service.  The  word 

VoL.  1. 


Sabbaths  must  here  include  the  whole  of  the 
set  times.  See  xxiii.  3.  Note  on  the  Sab- 
bath-day, § VI.  Ex.  XX.  This  and  the  previous 
verse  include  the  substance  of  the  first  four 
commandments  of  the  Decalogue. 

Promises  and  Threatenings.  3 — 45. 

As  “ the  Book  of  the  Covenant”  (Ex.  xx. 
22 — xxiii.  33)  concludes  with  promises  and 
warnings  (Ex.  xxiii.  20 — 33),  so  does  this 
collection  of  laws  contained  in  the  Book  of 
Leviticus.  But  the  former  passage  relates  to 
the  conquest  of  the  Land  of  Promise,  this 
one  to  the  subsequent  history  of  the  nation. 
The  longer  similar  passage  in  Deuteronomy 
(xxvii. — XXX.)  is  marked  by  broader  and 
deeper  promises  and  denunciations  having 
immediate  reference  not  only  to  outward 
consequences,  but  to  the  spiritual  death  in- 
curred by  transgressing  the  Divine  will. 

Promises  for  Obedience.  3 — 13, 

4.  rain  in  due  seaso7i]  The  periodical  rains,, 
on  which  the  fertility  of  the  Holy  Land  so  much 
depends,  are  here  spoken  of.  There  are  two 
wet  seasons,  called  in  Scripture  the  former 
and  the  latter  rain.  Deut.  xi.  14;  Jer.  v.  24; 
Joel  ii.  23;  Hos.  vi.  3;  Jam.  v.  7.  The  for- 
mer or  Autumn  rain  commences  after  the  au- 
tumnal equinox  and  falls  in  heavy  showers  in 
November  and  December.  Then  generally 
follows  a period  with  occasional  light  showers,, 
and  in  March  the  latter  or  Spring  rain  comes 
on,  which  is  precarious  in  quantity  and  dura- 
tion, and  rarely  lasts  more  than  two  days.. 
Job  xxix.  23  ; Prov.  xvi.  15  ; Robinson,  ‘Phy- 

S S 


T 


EVITICUS.  XXVI. 


[v.  6 — 1 6. 


638 

unto  the  vintage,  and  the  vintage 
shall  reach  unto  the  sowing  time : and 
ye  shall  eat  your  bread  to  the  full, 
rtjobii.  and  ^dv/ell  in  your  land  safely. 

. 6 And  I v/ili  give  peace  in  the 

^ Job  II.  land,  and  ^ye  shall  lie  down,  and  none 
I’lieb.  shall  make  jou  afraid:  and  I will  Aid 
ccaff/'’  evil  beasts  out  of  the  land,  neither 
shall  the  sword  go  through  your  land. 

7 And  ye  shall  chase  your  ene- 
mies, and  they  shall  fall  before  you 
by  the  sv.mrd. 

/■Josh.  23.  8 And-^hve  of  you  shall  chase  an 

hundred,  and  an  hundred  of  you  shajj 
put  ten  thousand  to  flight : and  your 
enemies  shall  fall  before  you  by  the 
sword. 

9 For  I will  have  respect  unto 
you,  and  make  you  fruitful,  and  mul- 
tiply you,  and  establish  my  covenant 
with  you. 

10  And  ye  shall  eat  old  store,  and 
bring  forth  the  old  because  of  the 
new. 


11  And  I will  set  my  tabernacle  i'Ezek.  37. 
among  you : and  my  soul  shall  not 
abhor  you. 

12  ^'And  I will  walk  among  you,  2 Cor.  6. 
and  will  be  your  God,  and  ye  shall 

be  my  people. 

13  I am  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  forth  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,  that  ye  should  not  be 
their  bondmen;  and  I have  broken 
the  bands  of  your  yoke,  and  made 
you  go  upright. 

14  ^But  if  ye  will  not  hearken  2 Deut.  28. 

unto  me,  and  will  not  do  all  these  Lim  2 
commandments  ; 17.^^  ^ ^ 

15  And  if  ye  shall  despise  my  sta- 
tutes, or  if  your  soul  abhor  my  judg- 
ments, so  that  ye  will  not  do  all  my 
commandments,  but  that  ye  break  my 
covenant : 

16  I also  v/ill  do  this  unto  you;  I 
will  even  appoint  ^ over  you  terror, 
consumption,  and  the  burning  ague, 
that  shall  consume  the  eyes,  and 


sical  Gcog.  of  the  H.  L.’  p.  263  ; Tristrain, 

‘ Kat.  Hist.’  p.  30  sq. 

5.  Cf.  XXV.  21,  22;  Amos  ix.  13. 
jqfd/j']  That  is,  in  security  from  famine, 

XXV.  19;  Joel  ii.  19,  26. 

6.  Cf.  Job  xi.  18,  19 ; Ps.  cxlvii.  14 ; Ezek. 
xxxiv.  25 — 28. 

lie  douvri]  i.e.  repose  in  comfort. 
t-^'il  beasts']  i.  e.  beasts  of  prey  and  destruc- 
tive vermin.  Cf.  Isa.  xxxv.  9 ; Ezek.  v.  17, 
xiv.  15. 

s-ioord]  Ezek.  xiv.  17,  xxi.  3,  4. 

8.  /I've  of  you  shall  chase]  A prover- 
bial mode  of  expression  h)r  superiority  in  war- 
like prowess.  Deut.  xxxii.  30;  Josh,  xxiii.  10; 
Isa.  XXX.  17. 

9.  establish  my  co'venant]  All  material  bless- 
ings were  to  be  regarded  in  the  light  of  seals 
of  the  “everlasting  covenant.”  Gen.  xvii. 
4—8. 

10.  bring  forth  the  old  because  of  the  nczv] 
Rather,  clear  avza3''  the  old  before  the 
new;  that  is,  in  order  to  make  room  for 
the  latter.  Cf.  xxv.  22. 

11.  7ny  tabernacle]  A more  suitable  ren- 
dering here  would  be  my  abode.  Heb. 
mishkdn.  See  on  Ex.  xxvi.  i. 

12.  13.  Ch.  xxv.  38;  Ex.  vi.6 — 8,  xxix.  45, 

46. 

13.  yoke]  Jer.  ii.  20;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  27. 


The  Fh'e  TVamings  for  Disobedience.  14 — 32. 

16,  17.  The  ministers  of  chastisement 
which  Jehovah  threatens  to  appoint  over  his 
people  if  they  break  the  covenant  are  (i) 
Disease,  (2)  Famine,  (3)  Defeat. 

16.  terror]  Literally,  trembling.  The 
same  Hebrew  word  is  rendered  trouble.,  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  33;  Isa.  Ixv.  23.  It  can  hardly  be 
here,  as  Knobel  and  Keil  take  it,  a general 
word  for  the  objects  of  terror,  specified  in  the 
words  that  follow  it.  It  seems  rather  to  de- 
note that  terrible  affliction,  an  anxious  tempe- 
rament, the  mental  state  ever  at  war  with 
Faith  and  Hope.  This  might  well  be  placed  at 
the  head  of  the  visitations  on  a backslider  who 
had  broken  the  Covenant  with  his  God.  “ The 
wicked  flee  when  no  man  pursueth : but  the 
righteous  are  bold  as  a lion.”  Prov.  xxviii.  1 ; 
cf.  ‘7^.  17  ; Job  xxiv.  17  ; Ps.  xxiii.  4. 

consumption,  and  the  burning  ague]  The 
Hebrew  words  here  used  occur  nowhere  else 
except  Deut.  xxviii.  22.  The  first  comes  from 
a root  signifying  to  ^vaste  a^vay;  the  latter, 
from  one  signifying  to  kindle  a fire.  Con- 
sumption is  common  in  Egypt  and  some  parts 
of  Asia  Minar,  but  it  is  more  rare  in  Syria. 
Fevers  of  different  kinds  are  the  commonest 
of  all  diseases  in  Syria  and  all  the  neighbouring 
countries.  I'he  terms  are  probably  to  be 
taken  in  a general  sense  for  any  wasting  dis- 
ease and  any  inflammatory  disease.  Fever 
(as  in  Deut.  xxviii.  22)  would  be  better  than 
burning  ague,  being  less  specific.  The  oppo- 


V.  17—2  7-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXVI. 


639 


cause  sorrow  of  heart:  and  ye  shall 
sow  your  seed  in  vain,  for  your  ene- 
mies shall  eat  it. 

17  And  I will  set  my  face  against 
you,  and  ye  shall  be  slain  before 
your  enemies : they  that  hate  you 

-ftProv.  28.  shall  reign  over  you  \ and  “^ye  shall  flee 
when  none  pursueth  you. 

18  And  if  ye  will  not  yet  for  all 
this  hearken  unto  me,  then  I will 
punish  you  seven  times  more  for  your 

’ sins. 

19  And  I will  break  the  pride  of 
your  power;  and  I will  make  your 
heaven  as  iron,  and  your  earth  as 
brass : 

20  And  your  strength  shall  be 
spent  in  vain : for  your  land  shall  not 
vield  her  increase,  neither  shall  the 
trees  of  the  land  yield  their  fruits. 

nor,'  21  f And  if  ye  walk  "contrary 

vlntlrfs'  unto  me,  and  will  not  hearken  unto 
with  me,  j brino;  scven  times  more 

24-  plagues  upon  you  according  to  your 
sins. 

22  I will  also  send  wild  beasts 


site  promise  to  the  threat  contained  in  this 
verse  is  given  Ex.  xv.  26,  xxiii.  25. 

consume  the  eyes'\  See  i Sam.  ii.  33;  Jobxi. 

2C. 

cause  sorrow  of  heart]  Literally,  cause  the 
soul  to  pine’' away. 

your  enemies  shall  eat  it]  Cf.  Dent,  xxviii. 
33,  51 ; Job  xxxi.  8;  Jer.  v.  17,  &c. 

17.  they  that  hate  you.,  &c.]  Gf.  Ps.  cvi.  41. 
ye  shall  flee  when  none  pursueth  you]  This 
I may  be  connected  with  “the  terror”  in  t;.  16 ; 

[ see  note:  cf.  Prov.  xxviii.  i. 

I 18 — 43.  Four  further  stages  of  severity 

L are  mentioned  in  succession  in  these  verses 

P which  were  to  be  reserved.  Cf.  nsnj.  18,  21, 

24,  28.  . 

i|  18.  for  all  this]  i.e.  for  all  the  afflictions 

H ' in  ‘V‘v.  16,  17. 

Istrven  times]  The  sabbatical  number  is  here 
proverbially  used  to  remind  the  people  of  the 
Covenant.  Cf.  Gen.  iv.  15,  24;  Ps.  Ixxix. 
12;  Prov.  xxiv.  16;  Luke  xvii.  4. 

19,  20.  The  second  warning  is  utter 
*.  sterility  of  the  soil.  Cf.  Ezek.  xxxiii.  28, 

■;  xxxvi.  34,  35. 

21,  22.  The  third  warning  is  the 
multiplication  of  destructive  animals,  &c.  Cf. 
I Ezek.  V.  17,  xiv.  15;  Judg.  v.  6,  7;  Isa. 

xxxiii.  8. 


among  you,  which  shall  rob  you  of 
your  children,  and  destroy  your  cat- 
tle, and  make  you  few  in  number; 
and  your  high  ways  shall  be  desolate. 

23  And  if  ye  will  not  be  reformed 
by  me  by  these  things,  but  will  walk 
contrary  unto  me; 

24  ^Then  will  I also  walk  con- -^2  Sam. 
trary  unto  you,  and  will  punish  you  psai/is 
yet  seven  times  for  your  sins. 

25  And  I will  bring  a sword  upon 
you,  that  shall  avenge  the  quarrel 
of  my  covenant : and  when  ye  are  ga- 
thered together  within  your  cities,  I 
will  send  the  pestilence  among  you ; 
and  ye  shall  be  delivered  into  the 
hand  of  the  enemy. 

26  And  when  I have  broken  the 
staff*  of  your  bread,  ten  women  shall 
bake  your  bread  in  one  oven,  and 
they  shall  deliver  you  your  bread  again 
by  weight : and  ye  shall  eat,  and  not 
be  satisfied. 

27  And  if  ye  will  not  for  all  this 
hearken  unto  me,  but  walk  contrary 
unto  me; 


22.  which  shall  rob  you  of  your  children] 
Literally,  make  you  childless. 

23 — 26.  The  fourth  warning.  Je- 
hovah now  places  Himself  as  it  were  in  a 
hostile  position  towards  His  rebellious  people. 
He  will  avenge  the  outraged  cause  of  His 
Covenant,  by  the  sword,  pestilence,  famine 
and  captivity. 

26.  And  when  I hanse  broken.,  &c.]  Our 
translators  should  not  have  inserted  the  copu- 
lative here,  and  the  preceding  verse  should 
terminate  only  with  a semicolon,  so  as  to  be 
more  closely  connected  with  this  one. — “To 
break  the  staff  of  bread,”  was  a proverbial 
expression  for  cutting  off  the  supply  of  bread, 
the  staff  of  life.  Ps.  cv.  16 ; Ezek.  iv.  16,  v.  16, 
xiv.  13,  cf.  Isa.  iii.  i.  The  supply  was  to  be 
so  reduced  that  one  oven  would  suffice  for 
baking  the  bread  made  by  ten  women*  for  ten 
families,  and  when  made  it  was  to  be  dealt 
out  in  sparing  rations  by  weight.  See  2 K. 
vi.  25;  Isa.  iii.  i;  Jer.  xiv.  18;  Lam.  iv.  9; 
Ezek.  iv.  16,  v.  12;  Hos.  iv.  10;  Mic.  vi. 
14. 

27—33.  The  fifth  warning.  If 
they  should  still  persist  in  their  sinful  course 
they  should  be  so  reduced  by  famine  that  they 
should  eat  the  flesh  of  their  children,  "v.  29. 
See  2 K.  vi.  28,  29;  Jer.  xix.  8,  9;  Lam.  ii. 

S S 2 


640 


LEVITICUS.  XXVI. 


[v.  28—38. 


28  Then  I will  walk  contrary  unto 
you  also  in  fury;  and  I,  even  I,  will 
chastise  you  seven  times  for  your  sins. 
«Deut.  29  ^"And  ye  shall  eat  the  flesh  of 
your  sons,  and  the  flesh  of  your 
daughters  shall  ye  eat. 

30  And  I will  destroy  your  high 
«2Chron.  places,  and  ’’^cut  down  your  images, 

and  cast  your  carcases  upon  the  car- 
cases of  your  idols,  and  my  soul  shall 
abhor  you. 

31  And  I will  make  your  cities 
waste,  and  bring  your  sanctuaries  un- 
to desolation,  and  I will  not  smell  the 
savour  of  your  sweet  odours. 

32  And  I will  bring  the  land  into 
desolation : and  your  enemies  which 
dwell  therein  shall  be  astonished  at 
it. 

33  And  I will  scatter  you  among 
the  heathen,  and  will  draw  out  a 
sword  after  you : and  your  land  shall 
be  desolate,  and  your  cities  waste. 


34  Then  shall  the  land  enjoy  her 
sabbaths,  as  long  as  it  lieth  desolate, 
and  ye  be  in  your  enemies’  land ; even 
then  shall  the  land  rest,  and  enjoy  her 
sabbaths. 

35  As  long  as  it  lieth  desolate  it 
shall  rest;  because  it  did  not  rest  in 
your  sabbaths,  when  ye  dwelt  upon  it. 

36  And  upon  them  that  are  left 
a/ive  of  you  I will  send  a faintness 
into  their  hearts  in  the  lands  of  their 
enemies;  and  the  sound  of  a ^shaken  ti-ieb. 
leaf  shall  chase  them ; and  they  shall 
flee,  as  fleeing  from  a sword ; and  they 
shall  fall  when  none  pursueth. 

37  And  they  shall  fall  one  upon 
another,  as  it  were  before  a sword, 
when  none  pursueth  : and  ye  shall 
have  no  power  to  stand  before  your 
eiieraies. 

38  And  ye  shall  perish  among  the 
heathen,  and  the  land  of  your  ene- 
mies shall  eat  you  up. 


20,  iv.  10;  Ezek.  v.  10;  Joseph.  ‘B,  J.’  v.  10. 
§3;  cf.  Deut.  xxviii.  53: — the  abominations 
of  idolatry  were  to  be  destroyed  in  the  land, 
and  the  carcases  of  their  worshippers  should 
be  cast  upon  them,  v.  30;  see  2 K.  xxiii.  16; 
Ezek.  vi.  4 : — their  cities  should  be  laid  waste, 
the  Sanctuary  itself  with  its  sacred  contents 
should  be  destroyed  and  the  savour  of  their 
sacrifices  would  be  rejected,  i’.  31;  see 
2 K.  XXV.  9 ; Ps.  Ixxiv.  6,  7 : — the  land  should 
be  brought  to  such  entire  desolation,  that 
their  enemies  themselves  should  be  astonished 
at  it,  wondering  at  the  great  effect  of  their 
own  hostile  efforts,  and  the  people  themselves 
should  be  scattered  among  the  heathen,  w. 
32,  33;  see  Ps.  xliv.  ii;  Jer.  ix.  16  sq. ; 
kzek.  V.  I — 17;  cf.  Deut.  iv.  27;  xxviii.  37, 
64. 

27.  for  all  this~\  See  v.  18. 

30.  high  places']  See  Note  at  the  end  of 
the  chapter. 

your  images]  The  original  word  (chamma~ 
nini)  is  derived  from  one  of  the  names  of  the 
sun,  and  in  the  margin  of  our  Bible  it  is  ren- 
dered sun  images^  2 Chro.  xiv.  5 ; Isa.  xvii.  8 ; 
Ezek.  vi.  4,  &c.  It  was  rightly  thus  taken 
by  the  older  commentators  to  denote  monu- 
ments of.  some  kind  dedicated  to  the  sun. 
Gesenius  (‘Thes.’  p.  489)  seems  to  prove  satis- 
factorily from  Phoenician  inscriptions  that  the 
word  was  commonly  applied  to  images  of 
Baal  and  Astarte,  the  god  of  the  sun  and  the 
goddess  of  the  moon.  This  exactly  explains 
2 Chro.  xxxiv.  4 sq. 


idols]  Heb.  word  (^gilluUni)  literally  means 
things  which  could  be  rolled  about,  such  as  a 
block  of  wood  or  a lump  of  dirt.  It  was  no 
doubt  a name  given  in  derision.  Cf.  Isa.  xl. 
20,  xliv.  19;  2 K.  i.  2.  The  word  idol,  like 
image,  is  used  by  our  translators  to  render 
several  different  Hebrew  words  with  distinct 
meanings.  See  2;.  i ; Deut.  xxix.  17 ; i K.  xv. 
12;  2 Chro.  XV.  8;  Zech.  x.  2,  &c.^ 

31.  sanctuaries]  The  holy  places  in  the 
Tabernacle  and  the  Temple.  Ps.  Ixviii.  35. 
Cf.  Ps.  Ixxiv.  7. 

I qvill  not  smell  the  sa-vour^  &c.]  See  i.  9. 
Cf.  Isa.  i.  13. 

Results  of  the  Visitations  upon  the  Land  and 
the  People.  33 — 38. 

33 — 38.  One  immediate  consequence  of 
the  scattering  of  the  people  among  the  heathen 
would  be  that  the  land  would  be  left  to  rest, 
and  so  far  would  expiate  the  long-continued 
breach  of  the  Sabbatical  law,  to  which  the 
Legislator  looked  forward,  -w.  34,  35.  See 
on  XXV.  6.  Cf.  2 Chro.  xxxvi.  21. — A con- 
nection may  possibly  here  be  traced  with  -v.  2 
of  this  chapter. 

35.  More  literally;  All  the  days  of 
its  desolation  shall  it  rest  that  time 
which  it  rested  not  in  your  Sabbaths 
while  ye  dwelt  upon  it.  That  is,  the 
periods  of  rest  of  which  the  land  had  been 
deprived  would  be  made  up  to  it. 

38.  the  land  of  your  enemies  shall  eat  you 
up]  Num.  -xiii.  32  ; Ezek.  xxxvi.  13. 


V.  39—46.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXVL 


641 


39  And  they  that  are  left  of  you 
shall  pine  away  in  their  iniquity  in 
your  enemies’  lands ; and  also  in  the 
iniquities  of  their  fathers  shall  they 
pine  away  w'ith  them. 

40  If  they  shall  confess  their  ini- 
quity, and  the  iniquity  of  their"  fa- 
thers, with  their  trespass  which  they 
trespassed  against  me,  and  that  also 
they  have  walked  contrary  unto  me ; 

41  And  that  I also  have  v/alked 
contrary  unto  them,  and  have  brought 
them  into  the  land  of  their  enemies  ; 
if  then  their  uncircumcised  hearts  be 
humbled,  and  they  then  accept  of  the 
punishment  of  their  iniquity  : 

42  Then  will  I remember  my  cove- 
nant with  Jacob,  and  also  my  cove- 
nant with  Isaac,  and  also  my  covenant 
with  Abraham  will  I remember;  and 
I will  remember  the  land. 

43  The  land  also  shall  be  left  of 
them,  and  shall  enjoy  her  sabbaths. 


while  she  lieth  desolate  v/ithout  them  : 
and  they  shall  accept  of  the  punish- 
ment of  their  iniquity:  because,  even 
because  they  despised  my  judgments, 
and  because  their  soul  abhorred  my 
statutes. 

44  And  yet  for  all  that,  when  they 
be  in  the  land  of  their  enemies,  will 

not  cast  them  away,  neither  will  I Rom.  i 
abhor  them,  to  destroy  them  utterly, 
and  to  break  my  covenant  with  them : 
for  I am  the  Lord  their  God. 

45  But  I will  for  their  sakes  re- 
member the  covenant  of  their  ances- 
tors, whom  I brought  forth  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt  in  the  sight  of  the 
heathen,  that  I might  be  their  God : 

I am  the  Lord. 

46  These  are  the  statutes  and 
judgments  and  laws,  which  the  Lord 
made  between  him  and  the  children 
of  Israel  in  mount  Sinai  by  the  hand 
of  Moses. 


The  Co'venant  may  still  be  restored. 

39— 45- 

39.  iniquity']  The  Hebrew  word  is  ren- 
dered “iniquity*’  here,  in  n).  40,  v.  i,  17,  xvi. 
22,  &c. ; “punishment  of  iniquity,”  in  'v’v. 
41,  43;  and  “punishment”  in  Gen.  \y.  13, 
&c.  The  meaning  here  is,  in  the  punish- 
ment of  their  iniquity,  and,  in  the  next 
clause,  in  the  punishment  of  the  ini- 
quity of  their  fathers.  In  the  next  verse 
the  same  Heb.  word  is  properly  represented 
by  “ iniquity.”  Our  translators  have  in  several 
places  put  one  of  the  English  words  in  the 
text  and  the  other  in  the  margin.  Gen.  iv.  13, 
xix.  15;  2 K.  vii.  9;  Ps.  Ixix.  27,  &c.  ^ The 
primary  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  is  ini- 
quity, but  the  language  of  Scripture  does  not 
make  that  trenchant  division  between  sin  and 
punishment  which  we  are  accustomed  to  do. 
Sin  is  its  own  punishment,  having  in  itself, 
from  its  very  commencement,  the  germ  of 
death.  “Sin,  when  it  is  finished,  bringeth 
forth  death.”  Jam.  i.  15  ; Rom.  ii.  5,  v.  12. 
See  on  'v.  41. 

iniquities  of  their  fathers]  See  on  Ex.  xx.  5. 

40.  trespass]  The  Hebrew  word  {nia^al, 
see  on  v.  15)  signifies  an  injury  inflicted  on 
the  rights  of  a person,  as  distinguished  from 
a sin  or  iniquity  regarded  as  an  outrage  of 
the  Divine  law.  Every  wrong  act  is  of  course 
both  a sin  and  a trespass  against  God.  In 
this  place  Jehovah  takes  the  breadi  of  the 
Covenant  as  a personal  trespass. 


41.  uncircumcised  hearts]  The  outward 
sign  of  the  Covenant  might  be  preserved,  but 
the  answering  grace  in  the  heart  would  be 
wanting.  Acts  vii.  51;  Rom.  ii.  28,  29;  Jer. 
vi.  10,  ix.  26;  cf.  Col.  ii.  ii. 

accept  of  the  punisbme^it  of  their  iniquity] 
Literally,  enjoy  their  iniquity.  The  figure  is  a 
bold  one,  but  not  difficult  ^f  explanation,  if 
we  keep  in  view  the  full  sense  of  the  Hebrew 
word  for  iniquity.  See  on  2'.  39.  The  word 
here  and  in  nj.  43  rendered  “accept”  in  this 
phrase,  is  the  same  as  is  rendered  “enjoy”  in 
the  expression,  “the  land  shall  enjoy  her 
sabbaths.”  The  antithesis  in  -v.  43  is  this:  ‘ , 
The  land  shall  enjoy  her  sabbaths — and  they  shall 
enjoy  the  punishment  of  their  iniquity.  The  mean- 
ing is,  that  the  land  being  desolate  shall  have 
the  blessing  of  rest,  and  they  having  repented 
shall  have  the  blessing  of  chastisement.  So 
the  LXX  and  Syriac.  The  feelings  of  a de- 
vout captive  Israelite  are  beautifully  express- 
ed in  Tobit  xiii.  i— 18. 

44,  45.  Cf.  Jer.  xxx.  ic — 24. 

46.  These  words  are  generally  taken  as 
concluding  the  Book  of  Leviticus.  See  pre- 
liminary note.  It  has,  however,  been  doubt- 
ed whether  this  verse  does  not,  in  a stricter 
sense,  answer  to  xxv.  i,  so  as  to  indicate  that 
chapters  xxv.  and  xxvi.  form  a section  by 
themselves.  Some  suppose  that  this  may  add 
point  to  the  fact  that  the  neglect  of  the  Sab- 
batical year  is  the  most  prominent  subject  of 
admonition  in  this  chapter,  while  the  rules  for 
its  observance  are  a chief  topic  in  ch.  xxv. 


642 


LEVITICUS.  XXVI. 

NOTFS  on  Chap.  xxvi. 


I.  ' Ox  THE  High  Places. 

‘V.  30. 

The  name  “High  places”  exactly  repre- 
sents the  Hebrew  word  (nVDi?  bamoth')  ac- 
cording to  its  etymology,  and  agrees  with  the 
Vulgate  and  the  Targums.  But  the  LXX. 
and  the  old  Italic  here  and  elsewhere  in  the 
Pentateuch  have  o-r^Aai  and  tituli  (monu- 
ments). In  the  Historical  Books,  however,  the 
LXX.  use  ra  v\J/r)\d  or  rd  and  in  the 

Prophets,  j3o)iJ,ol.  The  other  ancient  ver- 
sions generally  have  words  answering  to  altars, 
or  fanes.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  word 
here  denotes  elevated  spots  dedicated  to  false 
worship  (see  Deut.  xii.  2),  and  especially,  it 
would  seem,  to  that  of  Baal  (Num.  xxii.  41; 
Josh.  xiii.  17).  Such  spots  were  however 
employed  and  approved  for  the  worship  of 
Jehovah,  not  only  before  the  building  of  the 
Temple,  but  afterwards.  Judg.  vi.  25,  26, 
xiii.  16 — Z3 ; i S.  vii.  10,  xvi.  5 ; i K.  iii.  2, 
xviii.  30;  2 K.  xii.  3;  i Chro.  xxi.  26,  &c. 
There  seems  to  have  been  a widely  spread 
tendency  in  early  times  to  select  hills  as 
places  for  public  devotion.  Xen.  ‘ Memorab,’ 
III.  8.  § 10;  cf.  Herodot.  I.  131.  The  spots 
which  have  the  oldest  religious  association  in 
most  regions  are  on  elevated  ground.  The 
Acropolis  and  the  Capitol  are  examples. 
Most  druidical  monuments  are  similarly  situ- 
ated. The  three  altars  built  by  Abraham  at 
Shechem,  between  Bethel  and  Ai,  and  at 
Mamre,  appear  to  have  been  on  heights,  and 
so  was  the  Temple.  It  must  be  evident  that 
the  High  places  which  were  denounced  in 
the  Law  were  tiose  which  had  idolatrous  or 
superstitious  associations. 

We  may  see  how  superstitious  notions  may 
be  connected  by  those  who  profess  a higher 
faith  with  spots  once  devoted  to  idolatry  in 
such  peoples  as  the  Bretons  in  reference  to 
their  dolmens  and  menhirs.  It  is  likely  that 
the  Israelites  were  in  like  manner  led  astray 
in  reference  to  the  places  which  had  been  de- 
dicated by  the  old  inhabitants  of  the  Holy 
Land  to  heathen  worship.  See  on  xx.  2,  and 
Note  on  the  Groves,  Ex.  xxxiv.  13. 

I'he  High  places  in  the  Holy  Land  may  thus 
have  been  divided  into  those  dedicated  to  the 
worship  of  Jehovah,  and  those  which  had  been 
dedicated  to  idols.  It  was  of  course  contrary 
to  the  letter  of  the  Law  that  sacrihee  should 
be  ohered  at  any  place  except  the  national 
Sanctuary,  whether  it  was  the  Tabernacle  at 
Shiloh  or  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  But  the 
restraint  took  effect  only  by  degrees.  The 
public  worshij)  of  Jehovah  was  still  permitted 
at  the  High  places  even  by  Kings  who  desired 
to  serve  Him.  2 K.  xiv.  4,  xv.  35;  2 Chro. 
XV.  17.  &c.  It  would  seem  as  if  there  was 
a constant  struggle  going  on.  The  High 
places  polluted  by  idol  worship  were  of  course 


to  be  wholly  condemned.  They  were  probably 
resorted  to  only  to  gratify  a degraded  super- 
stition. See  on  xix.  31,  xx.  2—5.  The  others 
might  have  been  innocently  used  for  prayer 
and  religious  teaching  as  the  Synagogues  were 
in  a later  age.  But  the  temptation  appeal’s  to 
have  been  too  great  for  tlie  temper  of  the  peo- 
ple. They  offered  sacrifice  and  burnt  incense 
on  them;  and  hence  thorough  refoi*mers  of 
the  national  religion,  such  as  Hezekiah  and 
Josiah,  removed  the  High  places  altogether. 
2 K.  xviii.  4,  xxiii.  5. 

11.  Ox  THE  Mosaic  Origix  of  Chap. 
XXVI. 

i.  Objections  on  the  score  of  Style  j ii.  and  of  Sub- 
ject matter,  iii.  Conjectural  dates,  iv.  In 
'^vhat  sense  a Prophecy,  v.  Distinguishing 
character  of  the  Mosaic  Legislation. 

i.  The  late  origin  of  this  twenty-sixth  chapter 
has  been  strongly  urged,  on  the  grounds  of 
both  its  style  and  its  subject-matter.  That  the 
style  differs  from  that  of  the  great  part  of  the 
Book  of  Leviticus  is  obvious.  But,  without 
going  into  details,  it  may  be  asked  whether  its 
mode  of  expression,  in  its  main  features,  does 
not  resemble  that  Prophetic  style  which  ap- 
pears to  have  been  common  to  all  ages  of  He- 
brew literature:  and  whether  the  two  styles 
in  Leviticus  are  more  dissimilar  than  the  dif- 
ferent styles  of  many  a writer,  in  various 
languages,  who  has  had  to  write  under  dif- 
ferent impulses  and  with  different  objects. 

ii.  As  regards  the  argument  from  the  sub- 
ject-matter, it  is  mainly  based  upon  ‘w.  34, 
35,  4\3,  in  which  it  is  declared  that  the  land 
shall  enjoy  her  Sabbaths,  while  the  people  are 
scattered  among  the  heathen.  It  is  assumed 
that  Moses  could  not  have  foreseen  that  the 
Sabbatical  year  would  be  neglected,  and  that 
the  passages  in  question  could  have  been 
written  only  by  one  who  had  actually  wit- 
nessed the  shortcomings  of  the  Israelites  in 
this  particular.  It  is  urged  that  this  is,  of 
itself,  sufficient  to  give  to  the  entire  paragraph 
(Lev.  xxvi.  3 — 45)  the  stamp  of  a period 
much  later  than  the  Mosaic. 

iii.  A late  writer  considers  that  a clue  is 
furnished  to  the  date  of  the  composition  by  a 
comparison  of  v.  30  with  2 K.  xxiii.  14,  16. 
In  the  former  Ave  read,  “And  I will  cast  your 
carcases  upon  the  carcases  of  your  idols;”  and 
in^the  latter  it  is  said  that  Josiah  “brake  in 
pieces  the  images,  and  cut  down  the  groves, 
and  filled  their  places  with  the  bones  of  men,” 
and  also  that  “ he  took  the  bones  out  of  the 
sepulchres  and  burned  them  upon  the  altar, 
and  polluted  it,”  'Phis  “novel  mode  of  pollu- 
tion” is  suppossd  to  have  originated  from 
reading  the  book  found  in  the  Temple  by 
Hilkiah,  2 K.  xxii.  8,  which  must  have  been 
the  Pentateuch,  d'he  critic  is  therefore  wil- 
ling to  admit  that  the  chapter  in  question  must 


V.  I,  2.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXVIL 


643 


have  been  written  before  the  reign  of  Josiah: 
while  from  arguments  derived  mainly  from 
the  style,  he  would  ascribe  it  to  a writer  who 
is  supposed  to  have  lived  about  A.c.  880. 

But  if  the  argument  which  has  been  stated 
is  worth  anything,  it  surely  proves  that  the 
passage  in  Leviticus  must  have  been  written 
before  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  (a.c.  976 — 955), 
when  the  man  of  God  uttered  the  prediction 
that  the  altar  in  Bethel  should  be  polluted 
in  the  very  manner  fulfilled  by  Josiah,  i K. 
xiii.  2. 

Ewald  is  inclined  to  place  its  date  consi- 
derably lower,  towards  the  end  of  the  eighth 
or  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century,  but 
still  long  before  the  Captivity.  (‘ Geschichte,’ 
I.  p.  156.) 

All  the  reasoning  advanced  to  prove  the 
late  date  of  the  composition  of  this  chapter 
assumes  that  the  writer  knew  as  matter  of 
fact  that  the  law  of  the  Sabbatical  year  h^ 
been  neglected,  and  that  he  put  forth  his  ad- 
monition to  the  people  in  the  guise  of  old 
threatenings  and  promises  by  the  Legislator. 

Now  if  we  take  the  references  to  the  neglect 
of  the  Sabbatical  year  as  necessarily  based 
upon  existing  fact,  it  must  be  fair  that  we 
should  take  in  the  same  way  the  references 
to  the  scattering  among  the  heathen  njn).  32, 
41,  44.  It  is  not  easy  to  see  how  any  solid 
foundation  can  be  obtained  for  the  main  argu- 
ment for  the  lateness  of  the  composition,  unless 
we  bring  it  down  below  the  reign  of  Josiah  to 
the  period  of  the  Captivity,  A.c.  606.  Neither 
of  the  dates  which  have  been  conjectured  ap- 
pears to  be  late  enough  to  be  in  harmony  with 
the  theory  upon  which  they  are  chiefly  based. 

iv.  But  the  chapter  is  not  to  be  taken  as 
a foretelling,  either  real  or  pretended,  of  special 
facts.  It  is  indeed  an  inspired  Prophecy,  in 
the  true  sense  of  the  word,  an  utterance  of  the 
Spirit  regarding  the  present  and  the  future. 
But  there  seems  to  be  no  one  point  which 
renders  it  necessary  for  us  to  suppose  that  dis- 
tinct occurrences  of  actual  fact,  either  present 
or  to  come,  were  in  the  mind  of  the  writer. 
The  succession  of  visitations  spoken  of  18 
— 43  is  (as  Keil  has  observed)  not  to  be  re- 
garded in  a historical  fight,  as  setting  forth 
occurrences  in  their  ordU  of  time.  Its  object 
is  rather  to  furnish  illustrations  of  the  idea  of 
the  Divine  judgments  unfolding  themselves  in  a 
way  naturally  answering  to  the  progressive  de- 
velopment of  sin.  We  know  from  the  history 
that  the  disobedience  of  the  nation  did  not  go 
on  without  intermission.  Periods  of  recovery 


CHAPTER  XXVIL 

1 He  that  maketh  a sing-ular  vena  must  be  the 
Lord's.  2 The  estimation  of  the  person.  9 
Of  a beast  given  by  vow.  14  Of  a house. 
16  Of  a field.,  and  the  rede7nption  thereof. 
28  N'o  devoted  thing  may  be  redee/?ied.  32 
The  tithe  may  not  be  changed. 


intervened,  so  that  renewed  blessings  alternated 
from  time  to  time  with  fulfilled  threatenings. 
But  the  Covenant  was  outraged  more  and  more 
flagrantly,  as  each  sinful  period  took  its  turn, 
until  at  last  ungodliness  gained  the  upper 
hand,  and  the  full  measure  of  punishment  was 
poured  out  upon  the  reprobate  race. 

V.  Moses  knew  the  human  heart,  and  he  was 
acquainted  with  the  temper  and  disposition  of 
his  own  people.  Like  our  Saviour  Himself  in 
delivering  the  Sermon  on  the  mount,  the  Le- 
gislator knew  that  his  words  would  be  but 
imperfectly  obeyed.  He  could  not  have  been 
blind  in  this  matter.  Insight  will  always  beget 
foresight.  He  knew  that  such  a law  as  that  of 
the  Sabbatical  year  would  run  counter  to  the 
selfishness  and  avarice  of  the  people.  He  ex- 
pected the  result  which  later  writers  had  to  re- 
cord in  history.  He  was  not  so  ignorant  of  the 
position  which  the  nation  would  hold,  after 
his  own  work  was  done,  in  reference  to  the 
natural  features  of  the  Promised  Land  and  in 
relation  to  the  great  neighbouring  states,  as  to 
fail  to  foresee,  in  such  outline  as  is  here  given, 
the  manner  in  which  their  disobedience  and 
degradation  would  be  punished.  Gf.  on  Ex. 
xxiii.  II,  20,  31. 

The  highest  laws  are  not  to  be  regarded  as 
useless  because  they  are  certain  to  be  generally 
neglected.  The  Hebrew  Law  in  regard  to 
sacrifices,  attendances  at  the  Temple  and  the 
Holy  Convocations,  was  perhaps,  even  in  ordi- 
nary times,  as  much  neglected  as  the  rules  of 
the  Christian  Church  are  in  our  day.  The 
proportion  of  Israelites  who  failed  to  maintain 
a strict  observance  of  religious  rites  may  have 
been  as  small  as  the  proportion  of  baptized 
Christians  who  partake  of  the  Holy  Commu- 
nion. The  obligation  in  each  case  has  the 
same  sanction ; the  heart  of  man  was  not  more 
amenable  to  it  then  than  it  is  now.  But  the 
Law  was  not  foiled  of  its  purpose.  It  was 
intended  to  represent  human  duty  in  its  rela- 
tion to  divine  holiness,  to  show  forth  and 
reprove  human  weakness,  not  to  stoop  to  it 
(Rom.  vii.  10 — 14).  Its  requirements  were 
not  lowered  to  the  probabilities  of  man’s  con- 
duct. It  was  not,  like  the  legislation  of  ordi- 
nary states,  intended  primarily  to  meet  the 
exigencies  of  existing  facts  and  to  keep  of- 
fenders in  order.  Its  purpose  was  to  help  and 
instruct  the  best  of  the  people,  not  merely  to 
chastise  the  worst.  Other  legislators  have 
taken  their  starting  points  from  human  facts: 
Moses  took  his  from  the  character  and  pur- 
pose of  God. 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
]f\  saying, 

2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
and  say  unto  them.  When  a man  shall 
make  a singular  vow,  the  persons  shall 
be  for  the  Lord  by  thy  estimation. 


644 


LEVITICUS.  XXVIl. 


[v.  3—10. 


3 And  thy  estimation  shall  be  of 
the  male  from  twenty  years  old  even 
unto  sixty  years  old,  even  thy  estima- 
tion shall  be  hfty  shekels  of  silver, 
after  the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary. 

4 And  if  it  be  a female,  then  thy 
estimation  shall  be  thirty  shekels. 

5 And  if  it  be  from  five  years  old 
even  unto  twenty  years  old,  then  thy 
estimation  shall  be  of  the  male  twenty 
shekels,  and  for  the  female  ten  shekels. 

6 And  if  it  be  from  a month  old 
even  unto  five  years  old,  then  thy 
estimation  shall  be  of  the  male  five 
shekels  of  silver,  and  for  the  female 
thy  estimation  shall  be  three  shekels 
of  silver. 


7 And  if  it  be  from  sixty  years  old 
and  above;  if  it  be  a male,  then  thy 
estimation  shall  be  fifteen  shekels,  and 
for  the  female  ten  shekels. 

8 But  if  he  be  poorer  than  thy  es- 
timation, then  he  shall  present  him- 
self before  the  priest,  and  the  priest 
shall  value  him ; according  to  his 
ability  that  vowed  shall  the  priest 
value  him. 

9 And  if  it  be  a beast,  whereof  men 
bring  an  offering  unto  the  Lord,  all 
that  any  ?nan  giveth  of  such  unto  the 
Lord  shall  be  holy. 

10  He  shall  not  alter  it,  nor  change 
it,  a good  for  a bad,  or  a bad  for  a 
^ood : and  if  he  shall  at  all  change 


Chap.  XXVII. 

Of  the  Commutation  of  Vows  and 
Dues, 

The  position  which  this  chapter  holds  after 
the  formal  conclusion,  xxvi.  46,  suggests  that 
it  is  of  a supplementary  character.  There 
seems  however  no  reason  to  doubt  its  Mosaic 
origin. 

The  nature  of  a Vow  is  set  forth  Deut.  xxiii. 
21,  22:  it  was  an  obligation  to  Jehovah  vo- 
luntarily incurred,  Cf.  Num.  xxx.  2;  Ps.  xv. 
4;  Prov.  XX.  25;  Eccles.  v.  4,  5.  A broken 
Vow  required  a Sin-offering,  Lev.  v.  4 — 6. 
— The  law  for  Vows  made  by  women  is  given 
Num.  xxx.  2 — 16. 

The  Commutation  of  Fows. 

2—25. 

Things  of  any  kind  which  a man,  under 
the  impulse  of  religious  feeling,  either  in  the 
way  of  thankfulness  for  blessings  received,  or 
of  supplication  for  something  desired,  had 
vowed  to  dedicate  to  the  service  of  the  Sanc- 
tuary, in  the  ordinary  way,  might  be  redeemed 
according  to  a fixed  mode  of  valuation. 

2 — 3.  The  meaning  of  the  latter  part  of 
the  second  verse  and  the  beginning  of  the 
third  appears  to  be.  When  a man  makes 
a special  vow  which  concerns  thy 
valuation  of  persons  to  Jehovah,  if 
thy  estimation  shall  be  of  the  male. 
See.  The  expression  “ thy  estimation  ” is  ad- 
dressed cither  to  Moses  or  to  the  priest  (-i;.  12) : 
it  denoted  a legal  valuation.  See  next  note, 

2 8.  The  vow  of  a Person  was  perhaps 

most  frecjuently  made  in  cases  of  illness  or 
dangcr.  A man  might  dedicate  himself,  his 
wife,  his  child,  or  his  bondservant,  on  condi- 
tion of  recovery  or  deliverance.  This  might 
have  been  an  old  custom;  but  the  Law  or- 
dained that  he  who  had  taken  such  a vow 


should  pay  a sum  of  money  to  the  Sanctuary, 
determined  according  to  the  age  and  sex  of 
the  person.  That  the  redemption  of  the 
person  in  money  was  what  the  Law  reck- 
oned on  in  the  kind  of  vow  here  spoken 
of,  appears  from  the  form  of  the  expression 
Qv.  2),  and  from  the  reduction  of  the  ran- 
som-money permitted  to  meet  the  circum- 
stances of  a poor  man  (2,’.  8).  If  the  actual 
service  of  the  individual  had  been  contemplat- 
ed, the  poor  man  who  had  been  dedicated 
would  simply  have  had  to  do  his  work  for  the 
Sanctuary. — It  would  hence  seem  that  there 
can  be  no  reference  here  to  such  vows  as 
Hannah’s  regarding  her  offspring  (i  S,  i.  ii), 
or  as  that  which  Absalom  pretended  to  have 
taken  (2  S.  xv.  8).  It  would,  moreover,  be 
contrary  to  the  spirit  of  these,  as  well  as  of 
the  Nazarite  vow  described  Num,  vi.,  that  the 
option  of  commuting  them  should  be  allowed. 

3 — 7.  The  relative  values  of  the  persons 
appear  to  be  regulated  according  to  an  esti- 
mate of  the  probable  value  of  their  future 
work  : — 

Male.  Female. 

From  a month  to  five  years  5 3 shekels. 

From  five  years  to  twenty  20  10  ,, 

From  forty  years  to  sixty  50  30  ,, 

Sixty  years  and  more  15  10  ,, 

Regarding  the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary,  see 
Ex,  xxxviii.  24. 

8.  if  he  be  poorer  than  thy  estimation']  too 
poor  (to  pay)  thy  valuation.  Cf.  v. 
7,  II. 

9—13.  A clean  animal  which  had  been 
vowed  was  “holy”  (2>.  10),  and  could  only 
be  sacrificed.  It  could  neither  be  redeemed 
nor  changed.  But  an  unclean  animal,  such 
as  a camel  or  an  ass,  was  either  sold  for  the 
value  which  the  priest  set  on  it,  or  could  be 


V.  II — 22.] 


LEVITICUS.  XXVII. 


645 


beast  for  beast,  then  it  and  the  ex- 
change thereof  shall  be  holy. 

1 1 And  if  it  he  any  unclean  beast, 
of  which  they  do  not  offer  a sacri- 
fice unto  the  Lor.d,  then  he  shall  pre- 
sent the  beast  before  the  priest: 

12  And  the  priest  shall  value  it, 
whether  it  be  good  or  bad : ^ as  thou 

to  thy  eta-  valuest  it,  who  art  the  priest,  so  shall 

inatiofi,  1 

priest, &^c.  It  De. 


I 


SOr. 

ihe  land  of 
an  homer, 
d'-’c. 


13  But  if  he  will  at  all  redeem  it, 

then  he  shall  add  a fifth  part  thereof 
unto  thy  estimation.  a 

14  And  when  a man  shall  saiTC- 
tify  his  house  to  he  holy  unto  the 
Lord,  then  the  priest  shall  estimate 
it,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad : as 
the  priest  shall  estimate  it,  so  shall 
it  stand. 

15  And  if  he  that  sanctified  it  will 
redeem  his  house,  then  he  shall  add 
the  fifth  part  of  the  money  of  thy 
estimation  unto  it,  and  it  shall  be 
his. 

16  And  if  a man  shall  sanctify  unto 
the  Lord  some  part  of  a field  of  his 
possession,  then  thy  estimatioij  shall 
be  according  to  the  seed  thereof : " an 


homer  of  barley  seed  shall  he  valued 
at  fifty  shekels  of  silver. 

17  If  he  sanctify  his  field  from  the 
year  of  jubile,  according  to  thy  esti- 
mation it  shall  stand. 

18  But  if  he  sanctify  his  field  after 
the  jubile,  then  the  priest  shall  reckon 
unto  him  the  money  according  to  the 
years  that  remain,  even  unto  the  year 
of  the  jubile,  and  it  shall  be  abated 
from  thy  estimation. 

19  And  if  he  that  sanctified  the 
field  will  in  any  wise  redeem  it,  then 
he  shall  add  the  fifth  part  of  the  money 
of  thy  estimation  unto  it,  and  it  shall 
be  assured  to  him. 

20  And  if  he  will  not  redeem  the 
field,  or  if  he  have  sold  the  field  to 
another  man,  it  shall  not  be  redeemed 
any  more. 

21  But  the  field,  when  it  goeth 
out  in  the  jubile,  shall  be  holy  unto 
the  Lord,  as  a field  devoted  \ the  pos- 
session thereof  shall  be  the  priest’s. 

22  And  if  a man  sanctify  unto  the 
Lord  a field  which  he  hath  bought, 
v/hich  is  not  of  the  fields  of  his  pos- 
session; 


redeemed  for  its  value  with  one-fifth  added, 
Cf.  V.  16,  vi.  5. — The  apostrophe  to  the  priest 
in  -z;.  12  is  worthy  of  note. 

14,  15.  The  law  respecting  the  vow  of  a 
house  was  the  same  as  that  of  an  unclean 
animal.  It  is  most  likely  that  this  relates  to 
houses  in  the  country  (xxv.  31),  which  were 
under  the  same  general  law  as  the  land  itself, 
with  a right  of  redemption  for  the  inheritor 
till  the  next  Jubilee.  See  on  'vn).  17 — 19. 
For  houses  in  walled  towns  the  right  of  re- 
demption lasted  for  only  one  year,  xxv.  29. 

14.  sanctify\  t.  e.  vow  to  devote. 

16.  some  part  of  a f.elcl  of  his  possessiori] 
Rather,  a part  of  the  land  of  his  inhe- 
ritance. 

the  seed  thereof^  i.  e.  the  quantity  of  seed 
required  to  sow  it  properly.  This  was  the 
mode  in  which  the  value  of  a certain  area  was 
to  be  estimated. 

a homer']  The  Homer  was  ten  Ephahs 
(Ezek.  xlv.  ii);  it  must  therefore  have  been 
something  above  bushels.  See  Lev,  xix.  36. 

17 — 19.  If  the  possession  was  surrendered 
from  one  Jubilee  to  the  next,  for  a field 
which  required  a homer  of  barley  to  sow  it, 
fifty  shekels  (probably  y^6.  9.1.  2d. ; see  on  Ex. 


xxxviii.  24),  with  the  addition  of  one-fifth, 
made  up  the  price  of  redemption. 

20,  21.  If  the  field  was  not  redeemed  be- 
fore the  next  Jubilee,  it  lapsed  to  the  priests  in 
perpetuity.  On  the  word  “ devoted”  {cheremf 
see  on  2).  28. — The  meaning  of  the  words, 
“ or  if  he  have  sold  the  field  to  another  man,” 
is  not  clear.  They  may  refer  to  a case  in  which 
a man  might  have  fraudulently  sold  his  in- 
terest in  a field  and  appropriated  the  price 
after  having  vowed  it  to  the  Sanctuary  (Kno- 
bel)  ; or  to  one  in  which  a man  retained  the 
use  of  the  field,  fulfilled  his  vow  by  paying 
as  a yearly  rent  a due  proportion  of  the  re- 
demption money  (see  on  22 — 24),  and  then 
parted  with  his  interest  to  another  for  the  sake 
of  acquiring  some  ready  money  (Keil). 

22 — 24.  If  a man  vowed  the  worth  of 
his  interest  in  a field  which  he  had  purchased, 
the  transaction  was  a simple  one.  He  had  to 
pay  down  at  once  (“in  that  day,”  ^v.  23)  the 
calculated  value  to  the  next  Jubilee.  In  this 
case,  the  field  reverted  at  the  Jubilee  to  the 
original  owner,  who,  it  is  likely,  had  the  same 
right  of  redeeming  it  from  the  priests  during 
the  interval,  as  he  had  previously  had  of  I'e- 
deeming  it  from  the  man  to  whom  he  had 
sold  it,  in  accordance  with  xxv.  23 — 28.  The 


646 


LEVITICUS.  XXVIL 


[v.  23  -31. 


23  Then  the  priest  shall  reckon 
unto  him  the  worth  of  thy  estima- 
tion, even  unto  the  year  of  the  jubile: 
and  he  shall  give  thine  estimation  in 
that  day,  as  a holy  thing  unto  the 
Lord. 

24  In  the  year  of  the  jubile  the 
field  shall  return  unto  him  of  whom 
it  was  bought,  even  to  him  to  whom 
the  possession  of  the  land  did  belong. 

25  And  all  thy  estimations  shall  be 
accordins:  to  the  shekel  of  the  sane- 

« Exod.30.  tuary : "twenty  gerahs  shall  be  the 
Numb.  3.  shekel. 

Kzek.  45.  26  ^ Only  the  Tirstling  of  the 

?Heb  beasts,  which  should  be  the  Lord’s 
firstborn,  firstling,  no  man  shall  sanctify  it ; 
whether  it  be  ox,  or  sheep : it  is  the 
Lord’s. 

27  And  if  it  be  of  an  unclean  beast, 
then  he  shall  redeem  it  according  to 


thine  estimation,  and  shall  add  a fifth 
part  of  it  thereto : or  if  it  be  not  re- 
deemed, then  it  shall  be  sold  accord- 
ing to  thy  estimation. 

28  ^Notwithstanding  no  devoted  ^Josh. 
thing,  that  a man  shall  devote  unto 

the  Lord  of  all  that  he  hath,  both  of 
man  and  beast,  and  of  the  field  of  his 
possession,  shall  be  sold  or  redeemed : 
every  devoted  thing  is  most  holy  unto 
the  Lord. 

29  None  devoted,  which  shall  be 
devoted  of  men,  shall  be  redeemed; 

^t  shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

30  And  all  the  tithe  of  the  land, 
whether  of  the  seed  of  the  land,  or  of 
the  fruit  of  the  tree,  is  the  Lord’s  : 
it  is  holy  unto  the  Lord. 

31  And  if  a man  will  at  all  redeem 
ought  of  his  tithes,  he  shall  add  there- 
to the  fifth  part  thereof. 


regulation  for  the  payment  of  the  exact  sum 
to  be  made  in  this  case  in  ready  money  is 
supposed  to  furnish  ground  for  inference  that, 
in  redeeming  an  inherited  held,  the  money  was 
paid  to  the  priests  year  by  year,  and  hence 
the  fairness  of  the  addition  of  one-hfth  to 
the  total  sum  as  interest  (i’.  19). 

25.  On  the  Shekel  and  the  Gerah,  see  Ex. 
XXX.  13,  xxxviii.  24. 

The  Redeeming  of  Firstlings.  26,  27. 

The  firstborn  of  oxen  and  sheep  already 
belonged  to  Jehovah  (Ex.  xiii.  2,  xxii.  30), 
and  could  not  therefore  be  made  the  objects 
of  vows.  But  the  firstling  of  an  unclean 
animal,  such  as  an  ass  or  a camel,  could  be  re- 
deemed according  to  the  ordinary  rate  (‘z-'u. 
II,  13),  or  sold  for  its  value.  Cf.  Num. 
xviii.  15,  18.  It  might  seem  that  the  earlier 
law  in  Exodus  (xiii.  13,  xxxiv.  20),  which 
retpiired  that  the  firstborn  of  an  ass  was  to 
be  either  redeemed  with  a sheep  or  put  to 
death,  is  here  modified  for  the  advantage  of 
the  Sanctuary.  A change  of  circumstances 
may  have  rendered  this  alteration  expedient. 
'J'he  priesthood  and  the  regular  service  of  the 
d'abernacle  were  now  established  and  needed 
support.  There  was  nothing  in  the  change 
at  variance  with  the  spirit  of  the  older  law. 

26.  sheep']  one  of  the  flock.  Introd. 

§ iv. 

27.  shall  redeem  it]  Rather,  shall  de- 
liver it.  The  Hebrew  word  is  different 
from  that  in  the  second  jiart  of  the  verse, 
and  appears  to  have  a less  special  meaning. 
See  t".  29. 


Of  things  Devoted  under  a Ban.  28,  29. 

28,  29.  But  nothing  of  his  possessions 
that  a man  might  devote  to  Jehovah  under 
a ban  (see  next  note),  whether  it  was  a human 
creature,  or  beast,  or  land,  could  be  either 
redeeiffed  or  sold.  Whatever  was  devoted 
under  ban  was  to  be  regarded  as  entirely  con- 
secrated to  Jehovah.  Any  live  creature  so 
devoted  was  to  be  put  to  death, 

28.  The  word  rendered  “ devoted  thing  ” 
is  cherem,  as  in  v.  21.  The  primary  meaning 
is  something  cut  off,  or  shut  up.  Its  specific 
meaning  in  the  Law  is,  that  which  is  cut  off 
from  common  use  and  given  up  in  some  sense 
to  Jehovah,  without  the  right  of  recal  or 
commutation.  It  is  applied  to  a field  wholly 
appropriated  to  the  Sanctuary  in  -u.  21,  and  to 
whatever  was  doomed  to  destruction,  i S. 
XV.  21;  I K.  XX.  42.  The  phrase,  “most 
holy  unto  the  Lord,”  is  here  predicated  of 
whatever  is  devoted  under  a ban,  but  it  more 
commonly  and  strictly  belongs  to  the  holiest 
class  of  offerings  for  the  Altar  and  the  Sanc- 
tuary, See  on  ii.  3.  Our  translators  have  ofUn 
rendered  the  word  by  “cursed,” or  “a curse,” 
which  in  some  places  may  convey  the  right 
sense,  but  it  should  be  remembered  that  the 
terms  are  not  identical  in  their  compass  of 
meaning.  Dent.  vii.  26;  Josh,  vi.  17,  18, 
vii.  i;  Isa.  xxxiv.  5,  xliii.  28,  &c.  Cf.  Gal. 
iii.  13. 

of  man  and  beast]  See  Note  at  the  end  of 
this  chapter. 

29.  redeemed]  Rather,  delivered.  See 
on  V.  27. 


V.  32—34-] 


LEVITICUS.  XXVII. 


647 


32  And  concerning  the  tithe  of  the 
herd,  or  of  the  flock,  even  of  whatso- 
ever passeth  under  the  rod,  the  tenth 
shall  be  hol^  unto  the  Lord. 

33  He  shall  not  search  whether 
it  be  good  or  bad,  neither  shall  he 
change  it : and  if  he  change  it  at  all, 


then  both  it  and  the  chano;e  thereof 
shall  be  holy ; it  shall  not  be  re- 
deemed. 

34  These  are  the  commandments, 
which  the  Lord  commanded  Moses 
for  the  children  of  Israel  in  mount 
Sinai. 


T^he  Commutation  of  Tithes.  30,  33. 

30,  31.  Cf.  13,  27. 

32,  33.  The  tenth  of  sheep  and  oxen, 
like  the  frstling,  ns.  26,  was  neither  to  be  re- 
deemed nor  changed,  according  to  the  same 
rale  as  was  laid  down  for  the  clean  animal 
that  had  been  vowed,  u.  10. 

32.  nvhatsoe'ver  passeth  under  the  rod'\ 
According  to  rabbinical  tradition,  the  animals 


to  be  tithed  were  enclosed  in  a pen,  and  a 
they  went  out  one  by  one  at  the  opening, 
every  tenth  animal  was  touched  with  a rod 
dipped  in  vermilion.  Cf.  Jer.  xxxiii.  13  ; 
Ezek.  XX.  37. 

For  a more  full  explanation  of  what  relates 
to  tithes,  see  on  Gen.  xiv.  20,  xxviii.  22  ; 
Num.  xviii.  20 — 32  ; Deut.  xiv.  22,  28. 

34.  The  Conclusion.  Cf.  xxvi.  46. 


NOTE  on  Chap,  xxvii.  28. 


Ox  THE  Devoted  Thing. 

i.  This  passage  has  often  been  alleged  in 
proof  that  the  Law  of  Moses  permitted  human 
sacrifices.  It  has  been  applied  in  this  way  to 
the  case  of  Jephthah  and  his  daughter.  (See 
on  Judg.  xi.  30.)  But  such  an  inference  is 
at  once  precluded  by  the  exact  limitation  of 
the  beasts  which  were  to  be  offered  in  sacrifice. 
The  right  rendering  of  Lev.  i,  2 is,  “ If  any 
man  of  you  bring  an  offering  to  Jehovah  from 
the  beasts,  from  the  Herd  or  from  the  Flock 
shall  ye  bring  your  offering.”  There  is  more- 
over a clear  recognition  of  man  as  one  of  the 
creatures  which  were  not  to  be  offered  in  sa- 
crifice in  Ex.  xiii.  13,  xxxiv.  20;  Num.  xviii. 
iJ:. 

ii.  The  word  cherem  (D'ln)  has  been  explain- 
ed in  the  note  under  the  text.  There  is  no  good 
reason  to  doubt  that  its  application  to  man  is 
made  exclusively  in  reference  to  one  rightly 
doomed  to  death  and,  in  that  sense  alone, 
given  up  to  Jehovah.  The  feeling  of  the  sa- 
credness of  Life  has  its  seat  in  the  depth  of  the 
human'  heart.  This  feeling  may  work  blindly, 
and  exhibit  itself  in  diverse  ways.  But  in  an 
enlightened  mind  it  becomes  a clear  con- 
viction that  all  Life  belongs  to  God,  and  is 
claimed  by  Him,  Every  animal  sacrifice  is  an 
expression  of  this  truth.  The  Law  of  Moses 
recognizes  it  in  a marked  manner  in  the  regula- 
tion for  the  slaughter  of  animals  for  food.  Lev. 
xvii.  When  human  life  is  in  question,  the 
impression  is  beyond  comparison  stronger  and 
more  distinct.  To  destroy  a life  is  in  fact  to 
give  it  back  to  God.  The  putting  to  death 
either  of  a criminal  or  an  enemy,  if  it  is  any- 
thing more  than  an  indulgence  of  vengeance, 
is  to  be  regarded  in  this  light.  The  man  who, 
in  a right  spirit,  either  carries  out  a sentence 


of  just  doom  on  an  offender,  or  who,  with  a 
single  eye  to  duty,  slays  an  enemy  in  battle, 
must  regard  himself  as  God’s  servant  render- 
ing up  a life  to  the  claim  of  the  Divine  justice. 
Rom.  xiii.  4.  It  was  in  this  way  that  Israel 
was  required  to  destroy  the  Canaanites  at 
Hormah  (Num.  xxi.  2,  3 ; cf.  Deut.  xiii.  12 
— 18),  and  that  Samuel  hewed  Agag  in  pieces 
before  the  Lord  (i  S.  xv.  33).  In  all  such 
instances  a moral  obligation  rests  upon  him 
whose  office  it  is  to  take  the  life.  He  has  to 
look  upon  the  object  of  his  stroke  as  under  a 
ban  to  the  Lord.  Cf,  Deut.  xx.  4;  Gal.  iii. 
13.  This  is  the  only  ground  on  which  the 
destruction  of  human  life  is  to  be  justified. 
When  this  ground  is  clearly  ascertained,  the 
duty  of  him  who  is  called  to  act  refers  to  the 
forfeit  of  the  individual  life.  There  can  there- 
fore be  neither  redemption  nor  commutation. 

iii.  It  is  evident  that  the  righteousness  of  this 
law  is  not  involved  in  the  sin  of  rash  or  foolish 
vows,  such  as  Saul’s  (i  S.  xiv.  24)  or  Jeph- 
thah’s  (Judg.  xi.  30).  A man  through  wilful- 
ness or  blindness  may  be  betrayed  into  a di- 
lemma in  which  he  has  to  choose  between 
breaking  his  vow,  or  breaking  the  Divine  law 
in  some  other  way.  Such  a difficulty  is  radi- 
cally the  same  in  all  ages  and  circumstances, 
and  has  to  be  met  under  the  same  sort  of 
moral  conditions,  of  whatever  kind  the  oath 
may  be. 

iv.  It  seems  hardly  needful  to  add  that  sacri- 
fice, as  it  is  represented  both  in  the  Law  and 
in  the  usage  of  the  Patriarchs,  is  something 
very  different  from  consecration  under  a ban, 
though  a thing  to  be  sacrificed  might  come  un- 
der the  designation  of  cherem  in  its  wider  sense. 
See  on  xxvii,  28.  The  sacrifice  was  always  the 
offering  up  of  the  innocent  life  of  a creature 
chosen  and  approved  without  spot  or  blemish. 


LEVITICUS.  XXVII. 


648 

The  offering  was  made,  not  by  any  constraint 
involved  in  the  nature  of  things,  but  as  a free 
act  of  worship.  In  either  case,  indeed,  a life 
was  given  up  to  God.  But  the  mode,  the  pur- 
pose, and  the  meaning  were  as  distinct  as  pos- 
sible. In  heathen  systems  the  two  ideas  were 
often  confounded.  Criminals  or  captives  were 
the  most  frequent  human  victims  offered  on 
the  altar.  Rut  the  teaching  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament on  this  head  is  perfectly  clear.  There 
was  no  trace  of  this  confusion  even  in  the  mind 


of  Abraham,  when  he  was  preparing  to  make 
his  great  sacrifice.  He  had  been  led  on  to  offer 
Isaac  to  the  Lord  as  his  best  and  most  perfect 
possession.  But  the  voice  from  heaven  saved 
him  from  carrying  out  his  purpose  at  the  cost 
of  other  principles  of  righteousness  on  which 
he  needed  to  be  instructed.  See  Introd.  § xii. 

The  subject  of  this  note  is  elaborately  treat- 
ed by  Selden,  ‘de  Jure  Gent.’  Lib.  iv.  cap. 
vi. — xi.  See  also  Waterland,  ‘Scripture  Vin- 
dicated,’ Works,  Vol.  IV.  p.  226  sq. 


NUMBERS 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 

§ I 649 

Contoits^  § a . , , . . ib. 

§ I.  Title. 

The  title  commonly  given  to  this 
Book  (LXX.  ’AptO/xoL,  Vulg.  Niimeri) 
is  evidently  suggested  by  the  two  number- 
ings of  the  people  recorded  in  it  in  chap- 
ters i.  and  xxvi.  The  Jews  sometimes  de- 
signate it  after  their  ordinary  mode  by  its 
first  word  Vayedabber,  or  more  frequently 
by  its  first  distinctive  word  Bemidba)'. 

' § 2.  Conietits. 

The  book  narrates  the  history  of  the 
Israelites  during  their  sojourn  in  the  wil- 
derness from  the  completion  of  the  law- 
giving at  Sinai,  Lev.  xxvii.  34,  to  their 
mustering  in  the  Plains  of  Moab  for 
actual  entry  into  the  Land  of  Promise. 
Its  contents  may  be  divided  into  four 
parts: — 

(i)  Preparations  for  the  break  up 
of  the  encampment  at  Sinai,  and  for 
marching  on  Canaan;  i.  i — x.  10. 

(2)  The  march  from  Sinai  to  the 
borders  of  Canaan,  and  repulse  by  the 
Canaanites;  x.  ii — xiv.  45. 

(3)  A notice  of  various  occurrences 
and  enactments  belonging  to  the  thirty- 
eight  years  of  penal  wandering  in  the 
desert;  xv.  i — xix.  22. 

(4)  The  history  of  the  last  year 
spent  in  the  wilderness,  the  fortieth  after 
the  Exodus;  xx.  i — xxxvi.  13. 

The  incidents  are  generally  given  in 
their  chronological  order,  except  in  the 


PAGE 

Chronology,  § 3 . . . _ . .649 

Authorship  and  Date  of  Composition,  § 4 650 

third  part.  The  five  chapters  comprised 
in  this  part  deal  with  a long  period,  from 
which  only  isolated  episodes  are  given; 
and  of  these  the  dates  can  only  be  con- 
jectured; see  introductory  notes  to  xv. 
and  xvi.,  and  note  on  xx.  i.  In  this  and 
other  parts  of  the  book  several  ordi- 
nances are  added  to  the  Sinaitic  code, 
and  these  are  apparently  introduced  in 
their  historical  connexion  with  the  cir- 
cumstances which  gave  occasion  for 
them. 

§ 3.  Chronohgy. 

(1)  The  narrative  commences  with 
“ the  first  day  of  the  second  month  of 
the  second  year  after  they  were  come 
out  of  Egypt,”  i.  i;  and  the  death  of 
Aaron  at  the  first  encampment  during  the 
final  march  on  Canaan  (xx.  22)  took 
place  in  the  first  day  of  the  fifth  month 
of  the  fortieth  year  (xxxiii.  38). 

(2)  Between  these  two  dates  there- 
fore intervene  no  less  than  thirty-eight 
years  and  three  months  (cf  Deut.  ii.  14), 
the  long  and  dreary  period  of  tarrying 
in  the  wilderness  till  the  disobedient 
generation  had  wasted  away.  Cf  xiv. 
27 — 35.  On  the  history  of  these  years, 
see  notes  on  xx.  i ; *and  on  xxxiii.  1 9. 

(3)  The  solemn  rehearsal  of  the  Law 
contained  in  Deuteronomy  was  com- 
menced by  Moses  after  the  overthrow  of 
Sihon  and  Og,  in  the  beginning  of  the 


650 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


eleventh  month  of  the  fortieth  year 
(Deut.  i.  3,  4)- 

(4)  We  have  consequently  from  the 
death  of  Aaron  to  the  opening  of  Deut. 
a space  of  exactly  six  months,  in  which 
all  the  events  narrated  in  the  fourth 
part  of  the  Book  of  Numbers,  from  xx.  i 
to  the  end,  would  seem  to  have  occurred, 
with  the  probable  exception  of  the  de- 
feat of  the  king  of  Arad  mentioned 
below. 

(5)  Those  events  are  many  and  re- 
markable. After  the  tedious  years  of 
suspense  were  once  passed  the  history 
of  the  chosen  j^eople  hurries  on,  not 
without  a sort  of  dramatic  propriety,  to 
a crisis.  Crowded  as  this  space  is,  it 
yet  has  room  enough  for  the  incidents 
which  are  here  assigned  to  it. 

(6)  The  first  month  of  the  six  was 
passed  at  the  foot  of  mount  Hor  in 
mourning  for  Aaron  (xx.  29).  But  it  is 
likely  that  during  this  month  a part  of 
the  host  was  engaged  in  revenging  upon 
the  king  of  Arad  the  molestation  in- 
flicted by  him  on  the  Israelites  during 
their  journey  from  Kadesh  to  Mount 
Blor;  see  introductory  note  to  xx.  and 
on  xxi.  I. 

(7)  Next  ensued  the  journey  “from 
hlount  Hor  by  the  way  of  the  Red  Sea 
to  compass  the  land  of  Edom,”  xxi.  4; 
and  this  being  about  220  miles  to  the 
brook  Zered  (cf.  on  xxi.  12)  would  be 
accomplished  within  four  weeks. 

(8j  The  appearance  of  the  host  in 
the  plains  of  Moab  brought  them  into 
the  neighbourhood  of  Sihon,  king  of 
the  Amorites.  The  policy  pursued  by 
him  of  resisting  the  progress  of  Israel 
with  all  his  forces  (xxi.  23)  caused  his 
overthrow  to  be  speedy  and  total;  as 
was  also  for  like  reasons  that  of  Og  king 
of  Bashan.  The  two  battles  at  Jahaz 
and  Edrei  probably  took  place  both 
within  a fortnight;  i.e.  towards  the  mid- 
dle of  the  third  of  the  six  months  in 
question. 

(9)  The  issue  of  the  conflict  with 
the  Amorite  kings  determined  Balak  to 
send  for  Balaam  (xxii.  2).  The  distance 
from  Moab  to  the  nearest  point  of  the 
Eu])hratcs  is  about  350  miles,  and 
Bethor  (cf  on  xxii.  5)  may  have  been 
yet  more  distant.  Ihit  as  Balak  was 
urgent  in  the  matter  (cf  xxii.  16),  and 


could  of  course  command  all  facilities 
for  travelling,  two  months  would  amply 
suffice  for  his  ambassadors  to  go  and 
return  twice  over;  and  for  the  delivery 
by  Balaam  of  his  prophecies  (xxii — xxiv). 
No  doubt  during  these  weeks  the  Israel- 
ites were  engaged  in  completing  and 
consolidating  their  conquest  of  Gilead 
and  Bashan. 

(10)  We  have  thus  a margin  of  at 
least  six  weeks  left,  during  which  oc- 
curred the  seduction  of  Israel  by  the 
wiles  of  the  Midianites,  and  the  conse- 
quent plague  (xxv.);  the  second  num- 
bering of  the  people  in  the  plains  of 
Moab  (xrxvi.);  and  the  war  upon  the 
Midianites  (xxxi.). 

(ri)  It  is  accordingly  in  full  con- 
sistency that  the  death  of  Moses  is 
spoken  of  xxxi.  2,  in  connexion  with  the 
Midianitish  war,  and  as  following  close 
upon  it ; and  that  Balaam  after  quitting 
Balak  had  not  yet  returned  home  when 
that  war  occurred,  and  was  taken  cap- 
tive amongst  the  Midianites;  see  on 
xxxi.  8. 

(12)  There  is  no  weight  in  the  alle- 
gation that  Moses  in  Deut.  iii.  4 — 14 
speaks  of  the  conquest  of  Gilead  and 
Bashan  as  long  past.  See  notes  on  that 
place. 

§ 4.  Authorship  and  Date  of  Compo-^ 
sition. 

These  two  points  are  of  course  close- 
ly connected;  and  a determination  of 
the  former  brings  the  question  about 
the  latter  within  narrow  limits. 

In  common  with  the  preceding  books 
and  Deuteronomy,  Numbers  has  usually 
and  from  the  most  ancient  times  been 
regarded  as  in  substance  at  least  the 
work  of  Moses.  The  grounds  for  still 
maintaining  this  opinion  as  regards  the 
Pentateuch  generally  have  been  stated 
and  discussed  in  the  Introduction  to 
this  volume.  It  remains  only  to  inquire 
here  whether  the  Book  of  Numbers, 
particularly  considered,  contributes  any 
items  to  the  argument  on  the  one  side 
or  the  other,  and  what  value  is  to  be 
attached  to  them. 

(i)  The  catalogue  of  the  stations 
or  encampments  during  the  journeyings 
from  Egypt  to  the  plains  of  Moab  (xxxiii.) 
is  specially  assigned  to  Moses  in  the 


THE  BOOK  OF  NUMBERS. 


text,  Moses  wrote  it  by  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord,”  v.  2.  The  great  an- 
tiquity of  this  catalogue  is  universally  ad- 
mitted Bleek,  e.g.  (‘  Einleitung,’  pp.  225, 
227)  esteems  it  “perhaps  the  earliest 
record  relating  to  the  journey  of  the 
Israelites  through  the  wilderness;”  and 
as  “ a list  which  may  very  well  have 
been  written  down  'by  an  actor  in  the 
events.”  But  to  admit  thus  much  of 
one  important  chapter,  so  minute  in 
details,  and  so  intimately  connected  with 
the  general  story,  establishes  a strong 
probability  that  other  portions  of  the 
book  are  of  the  same  age  and  author- 
ship. 

(2)  The  intermixture  in  this  book 
of  narrative  and  legislative  matter  is  one 
of  its  characteristic  features.  The  enact- 
ments too  follow  in  most  cases  hard 
upon  acts  or  emergencies  which  evi- 
dently led  up  to  them.  See*  ^.g.  intro- 
ductory notes  to  V.  ix.  xix.  xxx.  and 
xxxvi. ; and  notes  on  xv.  22,  24,  32. 
The  legislation  of  Sinai  was  completed 
in  Leviticus,  but  the  prolonged  exclu- 
sion of  the  people  from  their  future 
homes  involved  some  regulations  not 
originally  provided  (e.  g.  those  respecting 
purification  “ when  a man  dieth  in  a tent” 
xix.  14);  and  further  experience  sug- 
gested some  others  of  a supplementary  or 
explanatory  character  (e.g.  those  of  xv.  4 
sqq.;  xxx.  i — 16;  and  xxxvi.  i — 13,  on 
which  see  notes).  These  are  almost  al- 
ways in  this  book  recorded  in  a living 
connexion  ^yith  incidents  from  which  it  is 
wholly  impossible  to  sever  them,  from 
which  they  draw  their  occasion  and  their 
meaning.  Evidently  the  alternations  of 
historical  and  legislative  portions  reflect 
the  order  of  actual  transaction.  This 
feature  is  exactly  one  which  belongs  to 
the  work  of  a contemporary  annalist. 

(3)  The  argument  stated  in  the  In- 
trod.  to  the  Pentateuch,  p.  15,  that  the 
author  had  an  intimate  acquaintance 
with  Egypt,  maybe  strikingly  illustrated 
from  Numbers.  The  purifications  of  the 
priests  (viii.  7 sqq.),  the  trial  of  jea- 
lousy (v.  II — 35),  the  ordinance  of  the 
red  heifer  (xix.  i — 10),  are  all  adapta- 
tions from  Egyptian  rites;  the  language 
of  the  people  in  xi.  5,  6 bespeaks  a per- 
sonal relish  of  Egyptian  dainties;  the 
antiquarian  note  about  Hebron,  xiii.  22, 


651 

indicates  a knowledge  of  Egyptian  his- 
tory. References  to  the  exodus  from 
Egypt  and  the  circumstances  of  it  are 
frequent ; d’.  iii.  13,  xiv.  19,  xv.  4i,&:c. 

(4)  The  statements  of  this  book 
abound  in  evidences  (cf.  Introd.  to 
Pent.,  p.  17),  that  the  writer  and  those 
with  whom  he  lived  were  still  in  the 
desert.  One  direct  illustration  (in  xix. 
14)  has  been  referred  to  above.  The  regu- 
lations for  encamping  and  marching  (ii., 
ix.  16  sqq.,  x.  i — 28),  and  especially  the 
solemn  invocation  of  Moses  contained 
in  X.  35,  36,  on  the  occasion  of  the  re- 
moving and  resting  of  the  Ark,  should  be 
also  noted.  The  directions  respecting  the 
transport  of  the  Tabernacle  in  iii.  and  iv. 
belong  to  the  nomadic  life  of  the  desert, 
and  were  consequently  but  of  a tempo- 
rary obligation.  It  is  thus  that  an  ap- 
parent inconsistency  as  to  the  age  and 
service  of  the  Levites  between  viii.  24 — 
26  and  iv.  3,  23  is  to  be  explained; 
see  the  note  on  the  former  passage. 

It  is  obvious  also  that  proximity  to  the 
Tabernacle  is  tacitly  assumed  through- 
out such  laws  as  those  of  vi.  and  xix., 
as  it  is  in  many  of  those  given  in  Leviti- 
cus. This  proximity  existed  only  whilst 
the  people  w'ere  in  the  wilderness.  The 
presence  of  the  Ark  in  the  Tabernacle 
too  is  presupposed  throughout  the  book ; 
but  the  Ark,  after  its  capture  by  the 
Philistines  in  the  days  of  Eli  (i  S-.  iv.), 
never  again  had  a place  within  the  Ta- 
bernacle. It  is  obviously  to  be  inferred 
that  Numbers  w'as  written  before  that 
capture. 

(5)  There  are  topographical  state- 
ments in  the  book  wFich  cannot  have 
been  wTitten  after  the  days  of  Moses. 
Such  is  the  notice  xxi.  13,  that  “ Arnon 
is  the  border  of  Moab,  between  Moab 
and  the  Amorites.”  The  Amorites  had 
clearly  not  been  dispossessed  by  the  two 
tribes  and  a half  (xxxii.)  when  this  remark  • 
w^as  made.  So  too  the  settlements  of 
those  tribes  in  the  Amorite  territory 
w^ere  not  in  fact  adjusted  in  all  respects 
as  originally  designed  by  Moses  and 
described  in  xxxii.  34  sqq.  See  note 
there,  and  cf.  on  Joshua  xiii.  15  sqq. 

A later  narrator  would  surely  not  gratui- 
tously vary  in  such  details  from  the  facts 
before  him.  In  the  delineation  (xxxiv.) 
of  the  boundaries  of  the  Promised  Land 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


652 

far  more  territory  is  assigned  to  the 
Israelites  than  they  ever  permanently 
occupied,  and  less  than  they  occasionally 
ruled  over.  A historian  of  later  times 
would  hardly  ascribe  to  his  people  with- 
out explanation  or  qualification  districts 
which  in  fact  they  did  not  possess;  a 
romancer  of  such  times,  drawing  an 
imaginary  frontier,  would  certainly  not 
have  left  out  of  it  the  renowned  city  of 
Damascus,  especially  after  carrying  his 
border-line  almost  round  this  district  (see 
on  xxxiv.  7 sqq.),  and  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  the  city  and  its  territory  were  in  the 
dominions  of  David  and  Solomon  and 
afterwards  of  Jeroboam  II. 

(6)  The  various  communications  pur- 
porting to  be  from  God  to  Moses  are  so 
worded  and  often  of  such  a nature  (cf. 
e.  g.  xiv.  II — 26),  that  unless  we  go  the 
length  of  denying  their  historical  cha- 
racter altogether,  we  must  admit  them 
to  have  been  recorded  by  the  very  per- 
son who  received  them.  They  are  also 
so  interwoven  with  the  historical  and 
legislative  elements  of  the  book  that  the 
whole  composition  must  in  reason  be 
accepted  or  rejected  together. 

(7)  No  other  person  than  Moses 
has  been  or  can  be  named  with  any- 
thing like  probability,  or  even  plausi- 
bility, as  the  author.  Various  conjec- 
tures have  indeed  been  hazarded  by 
rationalist  critics,  but  all  of  them  are 
devoid  of  evidence,  and  some  of  them 
particularly  unlikely,  such  is  e.g.  the 
suggestion  that  Samuel  wrote  this  book, 
which  includes  amongst  its  most  striking 
features  the  rebellion  of  Korah.  Now 
Samuel  was  descended  from  Korah  (see 
on  xxvi.  ii),  and  it  is  incredible,  espe- 
cially v/hen  we  remember  how  keenly 
the  Jew  appropriates  the  acts  of  his 
ancestors,  that  Samuel,  if  we  could  sup- 
])ose  him  to  invent  a story  at  all,  would 
devise  one  which  represents  his  own  fore- 
fathers and  their  kinsmen  as  flagrant 
rebels  against  God  and  against  the  great 
national  hero,  God’s  prophet,  and  as  mi- 
raculously destroyed  for  their  sin. 

d'hus  the  notes  of  time,  the  tenor  of 
the  contents,  no  less  than  the  direct 
assertions  of  the  text  itself,  converge 
upon  the  conclusion  that  Moses  is  pro- 
perly s{)okcn  of  as  the  writer  of  the 
Took  of  Numbers. 


It  may  however  be  quite  consistently 
allowed  that  Moses  availed  himself  in 
sorhe  cases  of  pre-existing  materials, 
whether  documentary  or  traditional,  and 
combined  in  his  narrative  the  results 
of  information  obtained  from  others  (cf. 
Introd.  to  Genesis,  p.  21);  and  this  fact 
is  a sufficient  explanation  of  the  use  in 
certain  passages  of  words  or  groups  of 
words,  and  grammatical  forms,  which  are 
not  found  or  found  but  rarely,  in  other 
parts  of  the  book.  Nor  is  there  any 
reason  to  believe  that  Moses  wrote  at 
one  time  the  whole  of  what  he  may  have 
himself  contributed  to  this  book.  On  the 
contrary  it  seems  in  parts  to  be  composed 
out  of  memoranda,  originally  made  at 
intervals  ranging  over  thirty-eight  years. 
If  then  the  style  and  diction  are  found 
to  vary  in  different  parts  of  the  book, 
this  by  no  means  disproves  the  unity  of 
its  authorship.  The  same  writer  may 
write  very  differently  at  different  dates. 
The  phenomena  of  this  kind  in  Numbers 
are  not  however  of  great  importance, 
and  have  been  in  principle  sufficiently 
discussed  in  the  Introd.  to  the  Penta- 
teuch. It  is  manifest  indeed  that  we 
have  in  xxi.  14,  17,  27  an  incorporation 
of  matter  not  of  the  writer’s  own  pro- 
duction; and  the  long  and  deeply  inter- 
esting episode  of  Balaam  (xxii — xxiv)  is 
a yet  more  important  example.  Whether 
that  prophet  spoke  in  Hebrew  or  Ara- 
maic cannot  be  determined.  Some  critics 
have  detected  an  Aramaic  cast  in  parts 
of  his  “parables;”  but  there  is  at  any 
rate  no  improbability  in  the  supposition 
that  a man  of  his  attainments  could 
speak  any  or  all  of  the  dialects,  and  these 
were  only  dialects  of  the  same  great 
tongue,  then  current  between  tlie  penin- 
sula of  Sinai  and  the  Euphrates ; and 
Hebrew  would  certainly  be  understood 
by  the  Moabites,  to  whom  he  directly 
addressed  himself.  The  Moabite  stone 
of  course  belongs  to  a date  from  five  to 
six  centuries  later  than  that  of  Numbers, 
but  it  proves,  if  proof  were  needed,  that 
the  vernacular  tongue  of  Moab  was  sub- 
stantially the  same  with  that  of  Israel  nine 
hundred  years  before  the  Christian  era, 
as  it  doubtless  had  been  from  the  most 
ancient  times.  On  the  mode  in  which 
his  prophecies  probably  became  known 
to  Moses,  see  on  xxiv.  25,  and  xxxi.  8. 


THE  BOOK  OF  NUMBERS. 


653 


It  is  likely  indeed  that  this  book,  as 
others,  underwent  after  it  left  the  hands 
of  its  composer  a revision,  or  per- 
haps more  than  one  revision,  in  which 
here  and  there  later  elements  were  in- 
troduced. These  indeed  cannot  have 
been  of  any  great  bulk,  and  some  pas- 
sages have  been  quoted  as  instances 
which  may  well  be  otherwise  explained. 
On  the  parenthetic  verse  xii.  3 (e.g.) 
a Lapide  observes:  “ videntur  haec  post 
Mosen  ab  aliquo  alio  scriptore  hagiogra- 
pho,  qui  haec  ejus  diaria  digessit,  esse 
addita  et  intexta;”  but  see  note  on  the 
verse. 

The  indications  of  interpolation  in  xiii. 
xiv.  and  xvi.  are  of  another  kind,  and 
more  convincing.  It  seems  apparent  that 
xiv.  39  connects  itself  not  with  v.  38  but 
with  27.  25  of  that  chapter;  and  we  notice 
in  certain  groups  of  verses  included  in 
the  chapters  xiii.  and  xiv.  that  Caleb 
only  is  named  as  labouring  to  still  the 
people,  i.e.  in  xiii.  3osqq.,  xiv.  ii — 25; 
whilst  in  other  groups  Joshua  is  com- 
bined with  him,  i.e.  in  xiv.  6 — 10,  26 — 39. 
In  the  former,  too,  Caleb  is  mentioned 
without  the  addition  of  his  father’s  name; 
in  the  latter  we  have  always  “ Caleb 
the  son  of  Jephunneh,”  as  well  as 
Joshua  the  son  of  Nun.”  These  facts, 
as  well  as  the  repetitions  and  want  of 
consecutiveness  apparent  in  the  chapters 
as  they  stand,  render  it  likely  that  a later 
and  independent,  but  not  inconsistent 
account,  has  been  interwoven  with  the 
earlier  one.  The  passages  introducing 
the  name  of  Joshua  would  seem  to  be 
the  inserted  ones,  and  they  were  added 
perhaps  for  the  purpose  of  putting  on 
express  record  what  would  seem  to  have 
been  tacitly  assumed  in  the  original  nar- 
rative, namely,  that  Joshua,  Moses’  cho- 
sen attendant  and  successor,  was  not 
one  of  the  murmurers.  Chapter  xxxii. 
presents  some  similar  characteristics  to 
xiii.  and  xiv.  The  vv.  31,  32  in  it  repeat 
vv.  25 — 27,  and  vv.  9 — 15  may  be  com- 
pared with  xiv.  6 — 10,  and  v.  30.  But 
the  alleged  traces  of  interpolation  here 
are  not  demonstrative. 

On  the  tokens  of  supplementary  in- 
sertion in  xvi.,  see  note  at  end  of  that 
chapter. 

The  objections  which  have  been 
based  upon  particular  passages,  and  urged 
VoL.  I. 


against  ascribing  the  book  to  Moses,  are 
insignificant  both  in  number  and  weight. 
Some  of  them  will  be  found  sufficiently 
dealt  with  in  the  notes  on  the  passages 
themselves;  see  e.g.  notes  on  xii.  3,  xv. 
32.  Great  stress  has  been  laid  upon 
the  citation,  in  xxi.  14,  of  “ the  book  of 
the  wars  of  the  Lord.”  Critics  have  pro- 
nounced it  incredible  that  such  a work 
should  be  extant  in  the  days  of  Moses, 
and  have  alleged  further  that  the  chapter 
quotes  it  as  belonging  to  bygone  times. 
But  in  the  months  which  closed  Moses’ 
life,  when  great  events  succeeded  each 
other  rapidly,  and  scenes  and  circum- 
stances were  ever  changing,  the  songs 
commemorative  of  Israel’s  triumphs 
would  soon  become  historical.  More- 
over “ the  book  of  the  wars  of  the  Lord” 
would  probably  commence  with  His  no- 
ble works  done  in  Egypt  for  the  fathers 
of  those  who  vanquished  Sihon  and  Og. 

Again,  it  has  been  urged  that  the 
occurrence  of  the  word  prophet  and 
its  cognate  verb  in  this  book  {e.g.  xi. 
29,  xii.  6)  is  a sign  of  a later  date  than 
that  of  Moses,  because  we  are  told 
in  I S.  ix.  9,  “ He  that  is  now  called  a 
Prophet  was  beforetime  called  a Seer.” 
It  is  hence  inferred  that  Numbers  must, 
have  been  written  at  a period  later  than 
that  indicated  by  the  “now”  of  the 
Book  of  Samuel,  since  the  term  “pro- 
phet” is  evidently  familiar  to  the  writer. 
But  this  argument  is  based  upon  a mis- 
apprehension of  the  passage  in  i Sam. 
It  is  not  asserted  there  that  the  word 
“ prophet”  {nabhi)  was  unknown  in  ear- 
lier times,  but  simply  that  the  personage 
consulted  by  the  people  in  their  emer- 
gencies was,  after  the  days  of  Samuel, 
known  as  “ the  prophet,”  whereas  for- 
merly he  was  called  “ the  seer”  {roe/i). 
The  sense  of  the  passage  comes  out  more 
clearly  in  the  LXX.,  rov  7rpo(pT]Tr]v  Iko.- 
Act  o Aaos  ejiTTpocrOev,  d /^Acttcov.  The 
LXJjl.  apparently  read  haiain  for  ha-yom; 
and  probably  this  is  the  true  reading 
(see  note  in  i Sam.  1.  c.).  The  reason 
why  the  term  “prophet”  was  disused  in 
the  days  of  the  later  Judges  may  be 
inferred  from  what  is  said  i S.  iii.  i : 

“ the  word  of  the  Lord  was  precious  in 
those  days.”  In  other  words  there  was 
no  “prophet”  properly  so  called;  no 
one  who  spoke  under  direct  inspiration 

T T 


654  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  NUMBERS. 


and  supernatural  impulse;,  nor  appa- 
rently had  there  been  any  such  since 
Deborah,  i.e.  for  about  a century  and  a 
half.  Hence  the  people  naturally  ceased 
to  speak  of  “ the  prophet,”  and  called 
those  to  whom  they  resorted  for  advice 
by  the  nam.e  of  “ seer,”  which  does  not 
imply  any  miraculous  gift,  but  simply  su- 
perior penetration  and  intelligence.  (See 
the  analysis  of  the  use  and  meaning 
of  the  words  nabhi^  roeh^  and  of  chozeh^ 
which  also  is  important  in  this  con- 
nexion, by  Professor  R.  Payne  Smith, 

‘ Bampton  Lectures’  for  1869,  pp.  46 
sqq.).  With  Samuel  the  prophetical  order 
was  restored,  and  perpetuated  through 
“ the  Schools  of  the  Prophets.”  And 
the  members  of  this  higher  and  more 
gifted  order  often,  probably  generally, 
discharged  in  addition  to  their  proper 
functions  those  also  which  previously  had 
devolved  upon  “ the  seer.”  Hence  the 
latter,  both  in  name  and  person,  ceased 
to  occupy  the  prominent  position  he  had 
long  enjoyed,  and  was  accordingly  less 
frequently  mentioned.  In  fact,  after  the 
days  of  Samuel,  the  word  “seer”  (roeh) 
occurs  only  twice,  viz.  in  2 S.  xv.  27; 
2 Chron.  xvi.  7,  10.  The  term  “pro- 
phet,” on  the  contrary,  became  common 
and  colloquial.  But  it  was  not  now  first 
coined.  It  only  regained  the  currency 
which  it  had  had  in  the  days  of  Moses 
(cf  Ex.  vii.  i),  and  even  in  earlier  times 
(cf  Gen.  XX.  7).  The  fact  then  that  the 
word  “prophet”  is  found  in  Numbers 
cannot  prove  that  the  book  was  written 
after  the  times  of  the  Judges.  Clericus  on 
Gen.  XX.  7 has  summed  up  the  facts  as 
regards  this  word  very  neatly:  “Htecvox 
ternporibus  Mosis  usitata  erat,  Judicum 
tempore  desiit,  inde  iterum  renata  est.” 

APe  conclude  then  with  confidence 
that  nothing  has  been  as  yet  alleged 
which  disturbs  the  generally  accepted 
views  respecting  the  authorship  of  this 
book.  It  is  in  substance  the  wqrk  of 
Moses;  and  whilst  many  portions  of  it 


were  probably  committed  to  writing  for 
years  before  the  v/hole  was  completed, 
yet  the  concluding  chapters  were  not 
written  until  towards  the  close  of  the 
fortieth  year  after  the  exodus. 


The  Book  of  Numbers  was  allotted 
in  the  early  arrangements  for  this  Com- 
mentary to  the  Rev.  J.  F.  Thrupp,  M.A. 
Vicar  of  Barrington,  and  late  Fellow  of 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge.  Mr  Thrupp 
was  one  of  the  first  to  send  to  the  edi- 
tor the  results  of  his  labours,  but  died  in 
1867,  before  his  work  could  be  revised 
and  adjusted  with  that  of  his  colleagues. 
His  papers  on  this  book  were  most  con- 
siderately placed  by  his  representatives 
at  the  disposal  of  the  editor,  and  were 
by  him  intrusted  to  the  Rev.  T.  E. 
Espin  to  be  prepared  for  the  press.  As 
the  work  proceeded  it  was  found  neces- 
sary to  change  and  remodel  the  notes 
as  left  by  Mr  Thrupp  far  more  than 
was  originally  proposed,  and  ultimately 
to  re-write  the  most  of  them.  The 
scale  eventually  adopted  for  the  foot- 
notes was  much  smaller  than  that  on 
which  Mr  Thrupp  had  worked ; and 
the  conclusions  finally  reached  were 
upon  several  controverted  points  {e.g. 
the  site  of  Kadesh,  see  note  at  end  of 
chapter  xiii.)  different  from  those  which 
had  recommended  themselves  to  Mr 
Thrupp  five  or  six  years  ago.  The  Rev. 
T.  E.  Espin  must  therefore  with  the  edi- 
tor be  regarded  as  responsible  for  the 
notes  on  Numbers  contained  in  this 
volume,  though  in  writing  them  he  has 
had  throughout  important  aid  from  Mr 
Thrupp’s  copious  and  learned  annota- 
tions. The  chief  portions  which  now 
remain  as  Mr  Thrupp  penned  them  are 
portions  of  the  foot-notes  to  chapters 
xxii. — XXV.,  and  many  of  the  geographi- 
cal and  topographical  remarks  and  il- 
lustrations, especially  those  in  chapter 
xxxiv. 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES, 


CALLED 

NUMBER  S. 


Exod. 
30.  12, 


CHAPTER  I. 

I God  comviandeth  Moses  to  number  the  people. 
5 The  princes  of  the  tribes.  17  Tlie  number 
of  every  tribe.  47  The  Levites  are  exempted 
for  the  seinjice  of  the  Lord. 

And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
^ in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai,  in  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  on  the 
first  day  of  the  second  month,  in  the 
second  year  after  they  were  come  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt,  saying’, 

2  "Take  ye  the  sum  of  all  the  con- 
gregation^ of  the  children  of  Israel, 
after  their  families,  by  the  house  of 
their  fathers,  with  the  number  of  their 
names,  every  male  by  their  polls ; 

3  From  twenty  years  old  and  up- 
ward, all  that  are  able  to  go  forth  to 
war  in  Israel : thou  and  Aaron  shall 
number  them  by  their  armies. 

4  And  with  you  there  shall  be  a 
man  of  every  tribe;  every  one  head 
of  the  house  of  his  fathers. 

5  ^ And  these  are  the  names  of  the 
men  that  shall  stand  with  you : of  the 


tribe  of  Reuben;  Elizur  the  son  of 
Shedeur. 

6 Of  Simeon;  Shelumiel  the  son 
of  Zurishaddai. 

7 Of  Judah;  Nahshon  the  son  of 
Amminadab. 

8 Ofissachar;  Nethaneel  the  son 
of  Zuar. 

9 Of  Zebulun;  Eliab  the  son  of 
Helon. 

10  Of  the  children  of  Joseph:  of 
Ephraim;  Elishama  the  son  of  Am- 
mihud  : of  Manasseh ; Gamaliel  the 
son  of  Pedahzur. 

11  Of  Benjamin;  Abidan  the  son 
of  Gideoni. 

12  Of  Dan;  Ahiezer  the  son  of 
Ammishaddai. 

I3^0f  Ash-er;  Pao;iel  the  son  of 
Ocr^. 

14  Of  Gad;  Eliasaph  the  son  of 
Deuel. 

15  OfNaphtali;  Ahira  the  son  of 
Enan. 


Chap.  I.  1 — 4.  A month  had  passed 
away  since  the  setting  up  of  the  tabernacle 
(Ex.  xl.  a,  17);  and  the  Sinaitic  legislation 
was  now  corsplete  (cf.  Lev.  xxvii,  34). 

The  labour  involved  in  taking  the  census 
had  already  'been  partially  anticipated.  An 
order  had  been  issued  some  months  before, 
that,  whenever  the  sum  of  the  Israelites  was 
taken,  every  person  numbered  should  offer  an 
atonement-money  of  half-a-shekel,  to  be  ap- 
plied for  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex. 
XXX.  II  sqq.).  Before  the  construction  of  the 
tabernacle  was  complete,  such  a poll-offer- 
ing had  been  actually  received  (Ex.  xxxviii. 
25 — 28).  The  accordance  of  numerical  re- 
sults shows  that  the  present  census  was  based, 
not  upon  any  fresh  registration  of  individuals, 
but  upon  that  which  necessarily  accompanied 
the  previous  collection  of  the  offerings.  From 
the  round  numbers  in  which  the  results  are 
given,  we  may  infer  that  the  offerings  had  been 
tendered  by  the  people  in  groups,  and  these 
probably  determined  by  kindred.  If  certifi- 


cates of  registration  were  furnished  to  such 
groups,  the  new  census  might  be  easily  carried 
out  by  means  of  these  documents,  and  got 
through,  as  seems  suggested  by  -u.  18,  in  a sin- 
gle day.  But  while,  for  the  purpose  of  the 
poll-offering,  it  ^sufficed  to  note  merely  the 
number  of  persons,  it  was  now  required  to  en- 
rol them  “ after  their  families,  by  the  house  of 
their  fathers.”  The  former  registration  too 
had  been  superintended  by  the  Levites  (see  Ex. 
xxxviii.  2 1 and  note) ; but  now  (yv.  4)  an  as- 
sessor is  to  be  named  for  each  tribe  to  act  in 
the  business  with  Moses  and  Aaron ; for  the 
purpose  now  in  view  was  not  religious  only. 
The  census  now  taken  would  serve  as  a basis 
for  various  civil  and  military  arrangements. 

5 — 16.  The  selection  of  the  Princes  of 
the  Tribes  appears  from  -u.  4 to  have  been 
made  under  divine  direction ; but  probably,  as 
v.  16  seems  to  suggest,  they  were  for  the  most 
pa't  the  same  persons  as  those  chosen  a few 
months  previously  at  the  counsel  of  Jethro, 
Ex.  xviii.  21 — 26.  Of  those  here  named  Nah- 

T T 2 


656 


NUMBERS.  I. 


[v.  1 6 — 30. 


16  These  were  the  renowned  of 
the  congregation,  princes  of  the  tribes 
of  their  fathers,  heads  of  thousands  in 
Israel. 

17  ^ And  Moses  and  Aaron  took 
these  men  which  are  expressed  by 
their  names: 

18  And  they  assembled  all  the  con- 
gregation together  on  the  first  day  of 
the  second  month,  and  they  declared 
their  pedigrees  after  their  families,  by 
the  house  of  their  fathers,  according 
to  the  number  of  the  names,  from 
twenty  years  old  and  upward,  by  their 
polls. 

19  As  the  Lord  commanded  Mo- 
ses, so  he  numbered  them  in  the 
wilderness  of  Sinai. 

20  And  the  children  of  Reuben, 
Israel’s  eldest  son,  by  their  genera- 
tions, after  their  families,  by  the  house 
of  their  fathers,  according  to  the  num- 
ber of  the  names,  by  their  polls,  every 
male  from  twenty  years  old  and  up- 
ward, all  that  were  able  to  go  forth  to 
war ; 

21  ITose  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  R#iben, 
were  forty  and  six  thousand  and  five 
hundred. 

22  ^ Of  the  children  of  Simeon,  by 
their  generations,  after  their  families, 
by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  those 
that  were  numbered  of  them,  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  names,  by 
their  polls,  every  male  from  twenty 
years  old  and  upward,  all  that  were 
able  to  go  forth  to  warj 


23  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon, 
were  fifty  and  nine  thousand  and 
three  hundred. 

24  Of  the  children  of  Gad,  by 
their  generations,  after  their  families, 
by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  names,  from 
twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all  that 
were  able  to  go  forth  to  war; 

25  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Gad,  were 
forty  and  five  thousand  six  hundred 
and  fifty. 

26  ^ Of  the  children  of  Judah,  by 
their  generations,  after  their  families, 
by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  names,  from 
twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all  that 
were  able  to  go  forth  to  war; 

27  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  were 
threescore  and  fourteen  thousand  and 
six  hundred. 

28  ^ Of  the  children  of  Issachar, 
by  their  generations,  after  their  fami- 
lies, by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  the  names, 
from  twenty  years  old  and  upward, 
all  that  were  able  to  go  forth  to  war; 

29  Those  that  v/ere  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar, 
were  fifty  and  four  thousand  and  four 
hundred. 

30  ^ Of  the  children  of  Zebulun, 
by  their  generations,  after  their  fami- 
lies, by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  the  names. 


shon,  prince  of  Judah,  was  brother-in-law  of 
Aaron  (Ex.  vi.  23^,  and  ancestor  of  King  Da- 
vid. Elishama,  prince  of  Ephraim,  was  g-rand- 
father  of  Joshua  (i  Chron.  vii.  26,  27).  The 
peers  of  men  like  these,  though  nothing  has 
been  in  fact  presened  to  us  respecting  them, 
were  no  doubt  intitled,  amongst  their  fellows, 
to  the  epithet  “renowned,”  ‘v.  16. 

17  19.  See  on  'w.  i — 4. 

20 — 46.  In  eleven  tribes  the  number 
enrolled  consists  of  complete  hundreds,  d'his 
is  in  all  likelihood  to  be  explained  by  the 
fact  that  the  census  was  taken  principally  for 
military  purposes  (cf.  n^'v.  3,  20).  Hence  the 
enrolment  would  naturally  be  arranged  by 
hundreds,  fifties,  6cc.  (cf.  2 K.  i.  9,  ii,  13). 


Supernumerary  units  would  in  such  a calcula- 
tion be  left  to  balance  the  losses  from  physical 
iinhtness  for  sei-vice,  and  from  casualties  of  va- 
rious kinds ; and  the  general  result  would  thus 
fairly  exhibit  the  available  military  strength  of 
the  nation.  It  is  not  a little  remarkable  how- 
ever that  here  the  tribe  of  Gad,  t.  25,  ar  d 
(xxvi.  7)  at  the  later  census,  the  tribe  of  Reuben, 
yield  odd  decades  over  their  hundreds.  Can 
this  be  accounted  for  by  the  pastoral,  and  con- 
sequently nomadic,  habits  of  these  tribes?  This 
cause  might  render  it  difficult  to  bring  all  their 
members  together  at  once  for  a census.  Judah 
already  takes  precedence  of  his  brethren  in  point 
of  numbers  (cf.  Gen.  xlix.  8);  and  Ephraim 
of  Manasseh  (cf.  Gen.  xlviii.  19,  20). 


NUMBERS.  I. 


657 


V.  31—48.] 

from  twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all 
that  were  able  to  go  forth  to  war ; 

31  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun, 
were  fifty  and  seven  thousand  and  four 
hundred. 

32  ^ Of  the  children  of  Joseph, 
namely^  of  the  children  of  Ephraim, 
by  their  generations,  after  their  fami- 
lies, by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  the  names, 
from  twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all 
that  were  able  to  go  forth  to  war ; 

33  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim, 
were  forty  thousand  and  five  hundred. 

34  ^ Of  the  children  of  Manasseh, 
by  their  generations,  after  their  fami- 
lies, by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  the  names, 
from  twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all 
that  were  able  to  go  forth  to  war ; 

35  Those  that  were -numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh, 
were  thirty  and  two  thousand  and  two 
hundred. 

36  ^ Of  the  children  of  Benjamin, 
by  their  generations,  after  their  fami- 
lies, by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  ac- 
cording to  the  number  of  the  names, 
from  twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all 
that  were  able  to  go  forth  to  war; 

37  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
were  thirty  and  five  thousand  and  four 
hundred. 

38  ^ Of  the  children  of  Dan,  by 
their  generations,  after  their  families, 
by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  names,  from 
twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all  that 
were  able  to  go  forth  to  war ; 

39  Those  that  were  numbered  of 


them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  were 
threescore  and  two  thousand  and  seven 
hundred. 

40  ^ Of  the  children  of  Asher,  by 
their  generations,  after  their  families, 
by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  names,  from 
twenty  years  old  and  upward,  all  that 
were  able  to  go  forth  to  war; 

41  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Asher,  were 
forty  and  one  thousand  and  live  hun- 
dred. 

42  ^ Of  the  children  of  Naphtali, 
throughout  their  generations,  after 
their  families,  by  the  house  of  their 
fathers,  according  to  the  number  of 
the  names,  from  twenty  years  old 
and  upward,  all  that  were  able  to  go 
forth  to  war ; 

43  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  even  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali, 
were  fifty  and  three  thousand  and  four 
hundred. 

44  These  are  those  that  were  num- 
bered, which  Moses  and  Aaron  num- 
bered, and  the  princes  of  Israel,  being 
twelve  men : each  one  was  for  the 
house  of  his  fathers. 

45  So  were  all  those  that  were  num- 
bered of  the  children  of  Israel,  by  the 
house  of  their  fathers,  from  twenty 
years  old  and  upward,  all  that  were 
able  to  go  forth  to  war  in  Israel ; 

46  Even  all  they  that  were  num- 
bered were  six  hundred  thousand  and 
three  thousand  and  five  hundred  and 
fifty. 

47  f[  But  the  Levites  after  the  tribe 
of  their  fathers  were  not  numbered 
amono;  them. 

48  Eor  the  Lord  had  spoken  unto 
Moses,  saying. 


47 — 54.  The  Levites  were  appointed  to  the 
charge  of  the  Tabernacle,  and  were  therefore 
not  entered  on  the  general  fnuster  rolls.  Hence 
when  a census  of  this  tribe  takes  place,  iii.  15, 
xxvi.  62,  all  the  males  are  counted  from  a 
month  old  and  upward,  and  not,  as  in  the 
other  tribes,  those  only  who  were  of  age  for 
service  in  the  field. 

48.  had  spoken~\  Render  spake,  for  the 
formal  appointment  is  only  now  made.  The  Le- 


vites had  indeed  already  acted  as  assistants  to  the 
Priests  (cf.  Ex.  xxxviii.  21),  being  the  tribes- 
men of  Moses  and  Aaron.  Their  zeal  against 
the  worshippers  of  the  golden  calf  (Ex.  xxxii. 
26 — 29;  Deut.  xxxiii.  8 sqq.)  gave  them  a 
distinct  position,  and  led  to  their  receiving  as 
their  reward  the  dignity  to  which  they  are  now 
first  expressly  named,  though  reference  to  their 
future  office  appears  previously  in  Lev.  xxv. 
32  sqq. 


658 


NUMBERS.  I.  II. 


[v.  49—8. 


49  Only  thou  shalt  not  number 
the  tribe  of  Levi,  neither  take  the 
sum  of  them  among  the  children  of 
Israel  : 

50  But  thou  shalt  appoint  the  Le- 
vites  over  the  tabernacle  of  testimony, 
and  over  all  the  vessels  thereof,  and 
over  all  things  that  belong  to  it : they 
shall  bear  the  tabernacle,  and  all  the 
vessels  thereof;  and  they  shall  minis- 
ter unto  it,  and  shall  encamp  round 
about  the  tabernacle. 

51  And  when  the  tabernacle  set- 
teth  forward,  the  Levites  shall  take  it 
down : and  when  the  tabernacle  is  to 
be  pitched,  the  Levites  shall  set  it  up : 
and  the  strano-er  that  cometh  nigh 

to  to 

shall  be  put  to  death. 

52  And  the  children  of  Israel  shall 
pitch  their  tents,  every  man  by  his 
own  camp,  and  every  man  by  his  own 
standard,  throughout  their  hosts. 

53  But  the  Levites  shall  pitch 
round  about  the  tabernacle  of  testi- 
mony, that  there  be  no  wrath  upon 
the  congregation  of  the  children  of 
Israel : and  the  Levites  shall  keep 
the  charge  of  the  tabernacle  of  tes- 
timony. 

54  And  the  children  of  Israel  did 
according  to  all  that  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses,  so  did  they. 


CHAPTER  11. 

The  order  of  the  tribes  in  their  tents. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

2 Every  man  of  the  children  of 
Israel  shall  pitch  by  his  own  stand- 
ard, with  the  ensign  of  their  father’s 
house:  Tar  off  about  the  tabernacle  t Heb. 
of  the  congregation  shall  they  pitch,  "’against. 

3 And  on  the  east  side  toward  the 
rising  of  the  sun  shall  they  of  the 
standard  of  the  camp  of  Judah  pitch 
throughout  their  armies:  and  Nah- 
shon  the  son  of  Amminadab  shall  be 
captain  of  the  children  of  Judah.  . 

4 And  his  host,  and  those  that  were 
numbered  of  them,  were  threescore 
and  fourteen  thousand  and  six  hun- 
dred. 

5 And  those  that  do  pitch  next 
unto  him  shall  be  the  tribe  of  Issa- 
char:  .and  Nethaneel  the  son  of  Zuar 
shall  be  captain  of  the  children  of  Is- 
sachar. 

6 And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  thereof,  were  fifty  and 
four  thousand  and  four  hundred. 

7 Then  the  tribe  of  Zebulun:  and 
Eliab  the  son  of  Helon  shall  be  cap- 
tain of  the  children  of  Zebulun. 

8 And  his  host,  and  those  that  were 


Chap.  II.  1 — 34.  Order  of  the  tribes  in 
their  tents,  and  on  the  march. 

2.  by  his  o^n  standard.^  <^vith  the  ensign 
of  their  fathers  house']  The  “standard”  {cie- 
gel)  marked  the  division,  or  camp  (cf.  njv.  9, 
16,  24,  31);  the  “ensign”  {oth)  the  family. 
There  would  thus  be  four  “standards”  only, 
one  for  each  “camp”  of  three  tribes.  We 
have  no  certain  information  what  was  the 
structure  and  what  the  devices  of  the  “stand- 
ards.” The  word  is  derived  from  a root 
signifying  “to  glitter,”  or  “lighten  afar” 
(Rosenm.,  Fiirst,  &c.) ; and  probably  points 
to  a solid  figure  or  emblem  mounted  on  a 
p(jle,  such  as  the  Egyptians  used  (see  Wilkin- 
son, ‘Ancient  Egyptians,’  I.  294  sqq.).  Tra- 
dition appropriates  the  four  cherubic  forms 
(E'/ek.  i.  26,  X.  i;  Rev.  iv.  4 sqq.),  the  lion, 
man,  ox,  and  eagle,  to  the  camps  of  Judah, 
Reuben,  Ephraim,  and  Dan  respectively;  and 
this,  as  to  the  first,  has  a certain  support  from 
Gen.  xlix.  9 (cf.  Rev.  v.  5),  and  as  to  the 
third,  from  ii)eut.  xxxiii.  17. 


far  off]  Rather  as  the  word  may  be  and 
often  is  rendered  elsewhere,  over  against; 
i.e.  facing  the  tabernacle  on  every  side.  The 
distance  was  perhaps  2coo  cubits;  cf.  Josh, 
iii.  4. 

3 — 9.  on  the  east  side]  The  post  of  ho- 
nour, in  front  of  the  curtain  of  the  Taberna- 
cle, and  corresponding  to  the  position  occupied 
by  Moses,  Aaron,  and  the  Priests  in  the  Levites’ 
camp,  is  assigned  to  Judah,  with  Issachar  and 
Zebulun,  also  descendants  of  Leah.  Judah, 
as  the  strongest  tribe  in  point  of  numbers,  is 
appointed  also  to  lead  the  van  on  the  march. 

3.  Nahshon  the  son  of  Amminadab  shall 
be  captain  of  the  children  of  Judah]  Cf. 
I Chron.  xxvii,  16 — 22,  where  the  “princes” 
or  “rulers”  of  the  Twelve  Tribes  at  a far 
later  date  are  again  named.  Each  tribe  had 
thus  an  organization  complete  for  certain 
purposes  in  itself.  Accordingly  we  sometimes 
read  of  wars  waged  by  separate  tribes  or 
groups  of  tribes;  e.g.  Josh.  xvii.  15  sqq.; 
Judg.  iv.  10. 


V.  9 — 26.] 


NUMBERS.  II. 


659 


numbered  thereof,  were  fifty  and  seven 
thousand  and  four  hundred. 

9 All  that  were  numbered  in  the 
camp  of  Judah  were  an  hundred  thou- 
sand and  fourscore  thousand  and  six 
thousand  and  four  hundred,  through- 
out their  armies.  These  shall  first 
set  forth. 

10  ^ On  the  south  side  shall  be  the 
standard  of  the  camp  of  Reuben  ac- 
cording to  their  armies  : and  the  cap- 
tain of  the  children  of  Reuben  shall  be 
Elizur  the  son  of  Shedeur. 

1 1 And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  thereof,  were  forty  and 
six  thousand  and  five  hundred. 

12  And  those  which  pitch  by  him 
shall  be  the  tribe  of  Simeon : and  the 
captain  of  the  children  of  Simeon  shall 
be  Shelumiel  the  son  of  Zurishaddai. 

13  And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  of  them,  were  fifty  and 
nine  thousand  and  three  hundred. 

14  Then  the  tribe  of  Gad:  and  the 
captain  of  the  sons  of  Gad  shall  be  Eli- 
asaph  the  son  of  Reuel. 

15  And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  of. them,  were  forty 
and  five  thousand  and  six  hundred 
and  fifty. 

16  All  that  were  numbered  in  the 
camp  of  Reuben  were  an  hundred 
thousand  and  fifty  and  one  thousand 
and  four  hundred  and  fifty,  through- 
out their  armies.  And  they  shall  set 
forth  in  the  second  rank. 

17  ^ Then  the  tabernjicle  of  the 
congregation  shall  set  forward  with 


the  camp  of  the  Levites  in  the  midst 
of  the  camp  : as  they  encamp,  so  shall 
they  set  forward,  every  man  in  his 
place  by  their  standards. 

18  ^ On  the  west  side  shall  be  the 
standard  of  the  camp  of  Ephraim  ac- 
cording to  their  armies : and  the  cap- 
tain of  the  sons  of  Ephraim  shall  be 
Elishama  the  son  of  Ammihud. 

19  And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  of  them,  were  forty 
thousand  and  five  hundred. 

20  And  by  him  shall  be  the  tribe 
of  Manasseh  : and  the  captain  of  the 
children  of  Manasseh  shall  be  Gama- 
liel the  son  of  Pedahzur. 

21  And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  of  them,  were  thirty 
and  two  thousand  and  two  hundred. 

22  Then  the  tribe  of  Benjamin : 
and  the  captain  of  the  sons  of  Ben- 
jamin shall  be  Abidan  the  son  of  Gi- 
deoni. 

23  And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  of  them,  were  thirty 
and  five  thousand  and  four  hundred. 

24  All  that  were  numbered  of  the 
camp  of  Ephraim  were  an  hundred 
thousand  and  eight  thousand  and  an 
hundred,  throughout  their  armies. 
And  they  shall  go  forward  in  the 
third  rank. 

25  ^ The  standard  of  the  camp  of 
Dan  shall  be  on  the  north  side  by 
their  armies : and  the  captain  of  the 
children  of  Dan  shall  be  Ahiezer  the 
son  of  Ammishaddai. 

26  And  his  host,  and  those  that 


10—16.  Next  in  order,  and  south  of 
the  Tabernacle,  comes  the  tribe  that  bore  the 
name  of  Reuben,  Leah’s  eldest  son ; and  asso- 
ciated therewith  Simeon,  the  second  of  the  de- 
scendants of  Leah,  and  Gad,  the  eldest  of  the 
descendants  of  Leah’s  handmaid  Zilpah. 

14.  Reuel]  Doubtless  an  error  of  trans- 
cription for  the  Deuel  of  i.  14,  which  in  fact 
is  read  here  in  several  MSS.  and  Versions. 

17.  See  on  hi.  14 — 39,  x.  17. 

18 — 24.  The  third  camp,  which  had 
its  place  westward  of  the  Tabernacle,  con- 
sists of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  with  the  kindred 
tribes  of  Manasseh  and  Benjamin,  all  descend- 
ed from  Rachel.  These  three  tribes  all  obtain- 
ed adjoining  allotments  when  Canaan  was  di- 


vided, and  are  accordingly  spoken  of  as  asso- 
ciated, Ps.  Ixxx.  2,  “Before  Ephraim,  Benja- 
min, and  Manasseh,  stir  up  thy  strength.” 

25 — 31.  The  fourth  division,  which  en- 
camped north  of  the  Tabernacle,  is  named 
after  Dan,  the  eldest  of  Jacob’s  children  by 
the  handmaids.  This  powerful  tribe,  the  se- 
cond of  all  in  number,  brought  up  the  rear  on 
the  march.  With  it  are  joined  the  remaining 
tribes,  Asher  and  Naphtali,  sprung  from  the 
handmaids  Zilpah  and  Bilhah. 

The  following  plan  shows  the  entire  arrange- 
ment of  the  camp  as  gathered  from  this  and 
the  next  chapter.  Some  place  the  four  leading 
tribes  in  the  centre  each  of  its  own  side ; but 
the  scheme  here  given  seems  more  probable 


66o 


NUMBERS.  II. 


[v.  27—34. 


were  numbered  of  them,  were  three- 
score and  two  thousand  and  seven 
hundred. 

27  And  those  that  encamp  by  him 
shall  be  the  tribe  of  Asher:  and  the 
captain  of  the  children  of  Asher  shall 
be  Pagiel  the  son  of  Ocran. 

28  And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  of  them,  were  forty 
and  one  thousand  and  fiv^e  hundred. 

29  ^ Then  the  tribe  of  Naphtali: 
and  the  captain  of  the  children  of 
Naphtali  shall  be  Ahira  the  son  of 
Enan. 

30  And  his  host,  and  those  that 
were  numbered  of  them,  zvere  fifty 
and  three  thousand  and  four  hundred. 

31  All  they  that  were  numbered 
in  the  camp  of  Dan  were  an  hundred 


thousand  and  fifty  and  seven  thousand 
and  six  hundred.  They  shall  go  hind- 
most with  their  standards. 

32  f These  are  those  which  were 
numbered  of  the  children  of  Israel 
by  the  house  of  their  fathers  : all  those 
that  were  numbered  of  the  camps 
throughout  their  hosts  were  six  hun- 
dred  thousand  and  three  thousand  and 
five  hundred  and  fifty. 

33  But  the  Levites  were  not  num- 
bered among  the  children  of  Israel  j 
as  the  Lord  commanded  Moses. 

34  And  the  children  of  Israel  did 
according  to  all  that  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses:  so  they  pitched  by 
their  standards,  and  so  they  set  for- 
ward, every  one  after  their  families, 
according  to  the  house  of  their  fathers. 


from  the  order  in  which  the  tribes  were  to  set 
out  on  the  march. 


32 — 34.  Such  was  the  ideal  form  of 
the  encampment  in  the  wilderness ; a form  re- 
produced in  the  square  court  with  which  the 
Temple  v/as  eventually  surrounded,  and  in  the 
vision  of  the  heavenly  city  as  seen  by  Ezek. 
xlviii.  20;  and  by  St  John,  Rev.  xxi.  16;  cf. 
Rev.  XX.  9.  Thus  the  camp  of  God’s  earthly 
people  was  divinely  ordered  so  as  to  set  forth 
the  completeness  of  His  Church ; and  to  illus- 
trate by  its  whole  arrangement,  which  was 
determined  by  the  Tabernacle  in  the  centre, 
both  the  dependance  of  all  on  God,  and  the 
access  which  all  enjoyed  to  God. 

It  is  to  be  obsei-ved  however  that  the  collo- 
cation of  the  tribes  is  only  prescribed  in  gene- 
ral terms.  The  actual  foiTn  of  the  encamp- 
ment would  no  doubt,  whilst  obsei*ving  this 
arrangement  generally,  vary  in  different  places 
according  to  local  exigencies.  At  Sinai  itself, 
e.g.  the  granite  cliffs  which  hemmed  in  the 
host  on  every  side  would  render  it  impossible 
for  the  tents  to  be  pitched  on  any  symmetiical 
plan;  whilst  in  the  Plains  of  Moab,  where 
a long  halt  was  made,  the  camp  might  on 
the  other  hand  lie  “four-square,”  or  nearly 
so;  for  the  line  of  encampment  from  Beth- 
Jesimoth  to  Abel  Shittim  (cf.  xxii.  i,  and 
note)  would  extend  nearly  five  miles. 

The  area  of  the  camp  might  be  about  three 
square  miles.  Polybius  ( vi.  2 7),  describing  the 
camps  of  the  Roman  armies,  tells  us  that  a space 
of  about  one-sixth  of  a square  mile  sufficed  foi 
twenty  thousand  men,  and  allowed  ample  room 
for  streets,  officers’  quarters,  accommodation 
for  horses,  &c.,  with  a vacant  space  of  two 
hundred  feet  behind  the  rampart  all  round. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  the  two  million 
Israelites  were  living  together  in  families,  and 
therefore  would  not  occupy  so  much  ground 
as  a like  number  of  warriors. 


V.  I— 13-] 


NUMBERS.  III. 


66 1 


CHAPTER  III. 

1 The  sons  of  Aaro7t.  5 The  Levites  are  given 
to  the  priests  for  the  sci'vice  of  the  tabernacle, 
II  instead  of  the  firstborji.  14  The  Lmites 
are  nnmbered  by  their  families.  21  The 
families,  number,  and  charge  of  the  Gershoji- 
ites,  27  oftheKohathiies,  of  the  Merarites. 

58  The  place  and  change  of  Moses  and  Aa- 
ron. 40  The  firstborn  arc  freed  by  the  Levites. 
44.  The  overplus  are  redeemed. 

These  also  are  the  generations 
of  Aaron  and  Moses  in  the  day 
that  the  Lord  spake  with  Moses  in 
mount  Sinai. 

2 And  these  are  the  names  of  the 
« Fxod.  sons  of  Aaron ; Nadab  the  "firstborn, 
and  Abihu,  P^leazar,  and  Ithamar. 

3 These  are  the  names  of  the  sons 
of  Aaron,  the  priests  which  were 
tHeb.  anointed,  Hvhom  he  consecrated  to 
)ut;idiic  minister  in  the  priest’s  ofiice. 

■^Lev  10  ^ ^And  Nadab  and  Abihu  died  be- 

1.  fore  the  Lord,  when  they  offered 
chap.  26.  before  the  Lord,  in  the 

i^chron.  wildemess  of  Sinai,  and  they  had  no 
children:  and  Eleazar  and  Ithamar 
ministered  in  the  priest’s  office  in  the 
sight  of  Aaron  their  father. 

5 ^1  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

6  Bring  the  tribe  of  Levi  near,  and 
present  them  before  Aaron  the  priest, 
that  they  may  minister  unto  him. 


7 And  they  shall  keep  his  charge, 
and  the  charge  of  the  whole  congre- 
gation before  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  to  do  the  service  of  the 
tabernacle. 

8 And  they  shall  keep  all  the  in- 
struments of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  and  the  charge  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  to  do  the  service  of 
the  tabernacle. 

9 And  thou  shalt  give  the  Levites 
unto  Aaron  and  to  his  sons : they  are 
wholly  given  unto  him  out  of  the 
children  of  Israel. 

10  And  thou  shalt  appoint  Aaron 
and  his  sons,  and  they  shall  wait  on 
their  priest’s  office : and  the  stranger 
that  cometh  nigh  shall  be  put  to 
death. 

1 1 And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 

12  And  I,  behold,  I have  taken 
the  Levites  from  among  the  children 
of  Israel  instead  of  all  the  firstborn 
that  openeth  the  matrix  among  the 
children  of  Israel : therefore  the  Le- 
vites shall  be  mine ; 

13  Because*^  all  the  firstborn  are 
mine ; ybr  on  the  day  that  I smote  Lev.  27. 
all  the  firstborn  in  the  land  of  Egypt  ?hap.  s.  is. 
I hallowed  unto  me  all  the  firstborn 


Chap.  III.  1.  These  also  are  the  generations 
of  Aaron  and  Hoses']  The  term  “generations” 
is  strictly  a technical  word  (cf.  note  on  Gen. 
ii,  4;  and  Gen.  v.  i,  vi.  9,  &c.;  Ruth  iv.  18). 
It  does  not  point  to  birth  and  origin  so  much 
as  to  downward  history  and  development. 
Hence  the  “generations”  of  a person  are  com- 
monly introduced,  as  in  the  text,  at  a crisis, 
when  either  a signal  and  accomplished  fulfil- 
ment of  the  Divine  counsels  is  to  be  indicated ; 
or  a stage  has  been  reached  which  establishes  a 
basis  for  a fulfilment  to  be  nai:rated  at  large  in 
the  sequel.  Hence  it  is  that  the  “ generations” 
now  given,  though  entitled  those  of  Aaron  and 
Moses  (Aaron  standing  first  as  the  elder  bro- 
ther), turn  out  really  to  be  those  of  Aaron 
only.  The  personal  dignity  of  Moses,  though 
it  gave  him  rank  as  at  the  head  of  his  tribe, 
was  not  hereditary.  He  had,  and  desired  to 
have  (Ex.  xxxii.  10;  Num.  xiv.  12),  no  suc- 
cessor in  his  office  but  the  distant  Prophet  like 
unto  himself  (Deut.  xviii.  18).  Aaron  how- 
ever was,  as  this  chapter  shows,  the  ancestor 
of  a regular  succession  of  Priests. 


3.  'whom  he  consecrated]  i.e.  whom  Moses 
consecrated,  or  literally  as  marg.,  whose  “hand 
he  filled,”  by  conferring  their  office  upon 
them:  Lev.  viii.  i sqq. 

5 — 13.  Actual  dedication  of  the  Levites 
for  the  functions  already  assigned,  i.  47 — 50  ; 
and  that  in  lieu  of  the  firstborn  (yv’v.ii — 13); 
who,  although  originally  designated  accord- 
ing to  patriarchal  precedent  for  the  more  espe- 
cial sei-vice  of  God,  and  having  perhaps  (cf. 
Ex.  XX iv.  5 and  note)  even  actually  officiated 
therein,  could  from  the  first  be  redeemed 
by  an  equivalent  (cf.  Ex.  xiii.  2,  12,  13). 

The  concluding  words  of  o).  13  are  better 
thus  expressed:  Mine  shall  they  be,  mine, 
the  Lord’s.  So  also  at  212;.  41,  45. 

7.  keep  his  charge,  and  the  charge  of  the 
whole  congregation]  i.  e.  so  assist  him  that  the 
obligations  incumbent  on  him  and  on  the  con- 
gregation may  be  fulfilled. 

12,  13.  On  the  subject  of  the  firstborn 
see  notes  on  002).  40 — 43  and  on  2121.  44 — 51. 


662 


NUMBERS.  III. 


[v.  14—34- 


in  Israel,  both  man  and  beast : mine 
shall  they  be : I am  the  Lord. 

14  fl  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai, 
saying, 

15  Number  the  children  of  Levi 
after  the  house  of  their  fathers,  by 
their  families : every  male  from  a 
month  old  and  upward  shalt  thou 
number  them. 

16  And  Moses  numbered  them  ac- 
cording to  the  Word  of  the  Lord,  as 
he  was  commanded. 

Gen.  46.  jy  ^And  these  were  the  sons  of 
Exod.6.  Levi  by  their  names;  Gershon,  and 
diap.  26.  Kohath,  and  Merari. 
iChron.  6.  these  avc  the  names  of 

^Heb  Gershon  by  their  fami- 

month.  lies;  Libni,  and  Shimei. 

19-  And  the  sons  of  Kohath  by 
their  families;  Amram,  and  Izehar, 
Hebron,  and  Uzziel. 

20  And  the  sons  of  Merari  by  their 
families;  Mahli,  and  Mushi.  These 
are  the  families  of  the  Levites  accord- 
ing to  the  house  of  their  fathers. 

21  Of  Gershon  was  the  family  of 
the  Libnites,  and  the  family  of  the 
Shimites : these  are  the  families  of  the 
Gershonites. 

22  Those  that  were  numbered  of 
them,  according  to  the  number  of  all 
the  males,  from  a month  old  and  up- 
ward, even  those  that  were  numbered 
of  them  were  seven  thousand  and  live 
hundred. 

23  The  families  of  the  Gershon- 
ites shall  pitch  behind  the  tabernacle 
westward. 

24  And  the  chief  of  the  house  of 
the  father  of  the  Gershonites  shall  he 
Lliasaph  the  son  of  Lael. 

25  And  the  charge  of  the  sons  of 
Gershon  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation shall  be  the  tabernacle,  and 


the  tent,  the  covering  thereof,  and 
the  hanging  for  the  door  of  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation, 

26  And  the  hangings  of  the  court, 
and  the  curtain  for  the  door  of  the 
court,  which  is  by  the  tabernacle,  and 
by  the  altar  round  about,  and  the  cords 
of  it  for  all  the  service  thereof. 

27  ^ And  of  Kohath  was  the  fa- 
mily of  the  Amramites,  and  the  family 
of  the  Izeharites,  and  the  family  of  the 
Hebronites,  and  the  family  of  the  Uz- 
zielites ; these  are  the  families  of  the 
Kohathites. 

28  In  the  number  of  all  the  males, 
from  a month  old  and  upward,  were 
eight  thousand  and  six  hundred,  keep- 
ing the  charge  of  the  sanctuary. 

29  The  families  of  the  sons  of  Ko- 
hath shall  pitch  on  the  side  of  the 
tabernacle  southward. 

30  And  the  chief  of  the  house  of 
the  father  of  the  families  of  the  Ko- 
hathites shall  be  Elizaphan  the  son  of 
Uzziel. 

31  And  their  charge  shall  be  the 
ark,  and  the  table,  and  the  candle- 
stick, and  the  altars,  and  the  vessels 
of  the  sanctuary  wherewith  they  mi- 
nister, and  the  hanging,  and  all  the 
service  thereof. 

32  And  Eleazar  the  son  of  Aaron 
the  priest  shall  be  chief  over  the  chief 
of  the  Levites,  and  have  the  oversight 
of  them  that  keep  the  charge  of  the 
sanctuary. 

33  ^ Of  Merari  was  the  family  of 
the  Mahlites,  and  the  family  of  the 
Mushites : these  are  the  families  of 
Merari. 

34  And  those  that  were  numbered 
of  them,  according  to  the  number  of 
all  the  males,  from  a month  old  and 
upward,  were  six  thousand  and  two 
hundred. 


14 — 39.  Enumeration  of  the  Levites 
after  their  three  families,  and  allotment  to  each 
family  of  its  special  station  and  duty.  Of 
these,  the  Kohathites  {'w.  — 3 2),  the  kinsmen 

of  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  the  most  numerous, 
have  the  most  impc.rtant  charge  confided  to 
them,  that  of  the  Ark,  the  Altars,  and  the 
more  especially  sacred  furniture  generally. 


26.  the  cords  of  /7]  i.e.  of  the  Taber- 
nacle, not  of  the  hangings  of  the  Court;  for 
these,  with  their  cords  and  other  fittings,  be- 
longed to  the  charge  of  the  Merarites.  So  too 
the  expression  the  ser'vice  thereof  refers  to  the 
Tabernacle,  of  which  more  particularly  the 
Gershonites  have  the  care. 


V.  35— 43-J 


NUMBERS.  III. 


663 


I Heb. 
the  office 
oj  the 
chars;e 


35  And  the  chief  of  the  house  of 
the  father  of  the  families  of  Merari 
Z(/as  Zuriel  the  son  of  Abihail:  these 
shall  pitch  on  the  side  of  the  taber- 
nacle northward. 

36  And  ^ under  the  custody  and 
charge  of  the  sons  of  Merari  shall  be 
the  boards  of  the  tabernacle,  and  the 
bars  thereof,  and  the  pillars  thereof, 
and  the  sockets  thereof,  and  all  the 
vessels  thereof,  and  all  that  serveth 
thereto, 

37  And  the  pillars  of  the  court 
round  about,  and  their  sockets,  and 
their  pins,  and  their  cords. 

38  But  those  that  encamp  before 
the  tabernacle  toward  the  east,  even 
before  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation  eastward,  shall  be  Aloses,  and 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  keeping  the 
charge  of  the  sanctuary  for  the  charge 
of  the  children  of  Israel ; and  the 
stranger  that  cometh  nigh  shall  be 
put  to  death. 

39  All  that  were  numbered  of  the 
Levites,  which  Moses  and  Aaron  num- 


bered at  the  commandment  of  the 
Lord,  throughout  their  families,  all 
the  males  from  a month  old  and  up- 
ward,' were  twenty  and  two  thou- 
sand. 

40  H And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Number  all  the  firstborn  of  the 
males  of  the  children  of  Israel  from  a 
month  old  and  upward,  and  take  the 
number  of  their  names. 

41  And  thou  shalt  take  the  Le- 
vites for  me  (I  am  the  Lord)  in- 
stead of  all  the  firstborn  among  the 
children  of  Israel;  and  the  cattle  of 
the  Levites  instead  of  all  the  firstlings 
among  the  cattle  of  the  children  of 
Israel. 

42  And  Adoses  numbered,  as  the 
Lord  commanded  him,  all  the  first- 
born among  the  children  of  Israel. 

43  And  all  the  firstborn  males  by 
the  number  of  names,  from  a month 
old  and  upward,  of  those  that  were 
numbered  of  them,  were  twenty  and 
two  thousand  two  hundred  and  three- 
score and  thirteen. 


39.  tvjenty  and  t^o  thousand?^  The 
aggregate  of  the  three  families  makes  the  total 
zz,3oo:  thus 

Gershonites . . . 7500:  nj.  22. 

Kohathites  ...  8600:  nj.  28. 

Merari tes 6200:  ’v.  34. 

22300 

It  is  apparent  however  that  the  number  22,000 
is  the  basis  on  which  the  commutation  with 
the  First-born  of  the  Twelve  Tribes  is  in  fact 
made  to  depend  {yn).  43 — 46).  The  actual 
total  of  the  male  Levites  (22,300)  seems  there- 
fore to  be  tacitly  corrected  by  the  subtraction 
of  300  from  it.  The  Talmud,  followed  by 
the  Jewish  Commentators  generally,  and  by 
Havern.,  Bp.  Wordsw.,  &c.  regards  these  300 
as  representing  those  who,  being  first-born 
themselves  in  the  Tribe  of  Levi,  could  not  be 
available  to  redeem  the  first-born  in  other  tribes. 
They  will  be  of  course  the  first-bom  of  Levi 
within  the  year  which  had  elapsed  since  the 
command  was  issued;  see  on  ‘yu.  40 — 43- 
Cf.  n}.  13,  and  Ex.  xiii,  i,  2.  The  fact  that 
the  deduction  is  made  without  remark  is  per- 
haps explained  by  the  observation  of  Baum- 
garten  (in  loc.),  that  the  purport  of  the  pas- 
sage is  to  point  out  the  relation  between  the 
tribe  of  Levi  and  the  other  tribes,  and  not  to 
give  prominence  to  restrictions  or  qualifica- 


tions in  the  redemptive  virtue  assigned  to  the 
Levites.  It  is  enough  for  the  writer  in  this 
context  to  note  that  22,000  is  the  numerical 
factor  furnished  by  the  tribe  for  the  reckoning. 
Modern  commentators  generally  (Mich., 
Knob.,  Kurtz,  Keil,  &c.)  have  assumed  an 
error  in  the  Hebrew  text.  And  to  insert  a 
single  letter  (reading  in  -u.  28  for 

would  exhibit  the  number  of  the  Kohathites 
as  8300,  instead  of  8600,  and  remove  the  dif- 
ficulty. Other  slight  alterations  of  a similar 
kind  have  been  suggested ; but  there  is  no  war- 
rant in  ancient  MSS.,  or  Versions,  for  any 
emendation  of  the  text  in  this  place. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  tribe  of  Levi  is 
shown  by  this  census  to  have  been  by  far  the 
smallest  of  any  of  the  thirteen  of  the  other 
tribes.  The  least  numerous,  Manasseh,  contain- 
ed 32,200  fighting  men;  whilst  all^he  males  of 
the  Levites,  from  a month  old  and  upwards, 
did  not  reach  that  total  within  ten  thousand. 
No  doubt,  however,  many  of  those  reckoned 
amongst  the  other  tribes  were  servants  or  de- 
pendants, and  not  pure  Israelites;  whilst  none 
but  actual  descendants  of  Levi  would  be  dedi- 
cated to  the  service  of  the  Tabernacle. 

40 — 43.  Numbering  of  the  first-born 
males  throughout  the  Twelve  Tribes  in  order  to 
effect  the  exchange  commanded,  21.  12. 

The  result  (y.  43)  shows  a total  of  22,273. 


664 


NUMBERS.  III.  IV. 


[v.  44—51 


44  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unt® 
Moses,  saying, 

45  Take  the  Levites  instead  of  all 
the  Hrstborn  among  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  the  cattle  of  the  Levites 
instead  of  their  cattle;  and  the  Le- 
vites shall  be  mine:  I am  the  Lord. 

46  And  for  those  that  are  to  be  re- 
deemed of  the  two  hundred  and  three- 
score and  thirteen  of  the  firstborn  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  which  are  more 
than  the  Levites ; 

47  Thou  shalt  even  take  five  she- 
kels apiece  by  the  poll,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary  shalt  thou  take 

<’Exod. 30.  them:  (^the  shekel  is  twenty  gerahs:) 
Liv.  27.  48  And  thou  shalt  give  the  money, 

Sap.  18.  wherewith  the  odd  number  of  them 
, is  to  be  redeemed,  unto  Aaron  and 
12.  to  his  sons. 

49  And  Moses  took  the  redemp- 


tion money  of  them  that  were  over 
and  above  them  that  were  redeemed 
by  the  Levites : 

50  Of  the  firstborn  of  the  children 
of  IsraM  took  he  the  money ; a thou- 
sand three  hundred  and  threescore  and 
five  shekels^  after  the  shekel  of  the 
sanctuary : 

51  And  Moses  gave  the  money  of 
them  that  were  redeemed  unto  Aaron 
and  to  his  sons,  according  to  the  word 
of  the  Lord,  as  the  Lord  command- 
ed Moses. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

I The  a^e  and  thne  of  the  Levites'  service.  4 
The  carriage  of  the  ICohathitcs,  when  the 
priests  have  taken  down  the  tabernacle.  16 
The  charge  of  Eleazar.  1 7 The  office  of  the 
priests.  2 i The  carriage  of  the  Gershonites. 
29  The  carriage  of  the  A/erarites.  34  The 
nnijtber  of  the  ILohathites,  of  the  Ga'shon- 
ites,  42  and  of  the  Aleraritcs. 


This  when  compared  with  the  number  of  male 
adults  (603,  550,  cf.  ii.  32)  is  disproportion- 
ately small,  the  usual  proportion  of  first-born 
sons  to  a total  male  population  being  about 
one  in  four.  The  explanation  is  that  the  law 
of  Ex.  xiii.  I,  2,  prescribed  a dedication  of 
those  only  who  should  be  first-bom  thencefor- 
rward.  (So  Vitringa,  Scott,  Keil,  Bp.  Wordsw., 
Pierxheimer,  See.')  This  seems  implied  in  the 
very  language  used,  “Sanctify  unto  Me  the 
first-born,  whatsoever  openeth  (not  hath  open- 
ed) the  womb,”  Ex.  xiii.  2,  ii,  12:  by  the 
ground  which  God  is  pleased  to  assign  (iii.  13, 
viii.  17)  for  making  this  claim:  by  the  fact 
that  the  special  duties  of  the  first-born  had 
reference  to  a ritual  which,  at  the  time  of  the 
Exodus,  had  yet  to  be  revealed:  and  by  the 
inclusion  in  the  command  of  the  first-born  of 
cattle,  which  obviously  must  mean  those  there- 
after first-bom,  for  we  cannot  imagine  that  an 
inquisition  amongst  the  flocks  and  herds  was 
made  at  the  exodus  to  discover  for  immediate 
sacrifice  the  first-born  already  in  existence. 

Hence  the  real  difficulty  is  to  explain  how 
the  first-born  sons,  amongst  two  millions  of 
persons  in  a single  year,  could  have  been  so 
many  as  is  stated  in  the  text ; and  it  must  be 
admitted,  notwithstanding  the  well-known  and 
often  very  remarkable  fluctuations  in  statistics 
of  this  sort,  that  some  unusual  causes  must 
have  been  concerned.  Such,  not  to  mention 
the  Divine  Blessing,  may  be  found  in  the  sud- 
den development  of  national  energies  which 
would  immediately  ensue  on  the  exodus.  Be- 
fore that  event,  the  miserable  estate  of  the 
^)eople  during  their  bondage,  and  especially 
the  inhuman  order  for  the  destruction  of  their 


first-bom,  would  check  very  seriously  the 
ratio  of  marriages  and  births;  and  this  ratio 
would  naturally,  when  the  check  was  removed, 
exhibit  a sudden  and  striking  increase.  Com- 
mentators adduce  some  auxiliary  arguments: 
e.g.  Keil,  from  statistics  argues,  that  amongst 
the  Jews  the  proportion  of  male  births  is  usu- 
ally very  large.  In  truth,  however,  we  have 
no  sufficient  data  for  entering  into  statistical 
discussions  upon  the  subject;  and  it  is  obvious 
that  inferences  drawn  from  the  statistics  of  or- 
dinary and  settled  communities  are  not  alto- 
gether relevant  to  a case  so  peculiar  in  many 
ways  as  that  laid  before  us  in  the  Penta- 
teuch. 

44 — 51.  The  excess  in  the  number  of 
first-born  males  found  amongst  the  twelve 
tribes  is  redeemed  by  money  at  a rate  which 
henceforth  became  the  fixed  one  (xviii.  16; 
Lev.  xxvii.  6)  for  such  redemption. 

This  redemption  money  would  perhaps  be 
exacted  from  the  parents  of  the  youngest  chil- 
dren of  the  22,273,  Ibey  being  in  the  case 
most  nearly  approaching  that  of  those  who 
would  pay  the  tax  for  the  redemption  of  the 
first-born  in  future.  The  cattle  of  the  Levites 
was  doubtless  taken  in  the  gross  as  an  equiva- 
lent for  the  first-born  cattle  of  the  other  tribes, 
which  of  course,  no  less  than  the  first-bom  of 
men,  belonged  to  the  Lord ; and  in  future  would 
have  to  be  redeemed  (xviii.  15  ; Deut.  xv.  19). 

Chap.  IV.  Particulars  of  the  service  of 
the  Levites  according  to  their  three  families, 
n^-v.  I — 33  ; and  numbering  of  the  men  between 
30  and  50  years  of  age  of  each  family  seve- 
rally {yw.  34—49). 


V.  I— IS-] 


NUMBERS.  IV. 


665 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
X \ and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

2 Take  the  sum  of  the  sons  of  Ko- 
hath  from  among  the  sons  of  Levi, 
after  their  families,  by  the  house  of 
their  fathers, 

3 From  thirty  years  old  and  upward 
even  until  fifty  years  old,  all  that 
enter  into  the  host,  to  do  the  work  in 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

4 This  shall  be  the  service  of  the 
sons  of  Kohath  in  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation,  about  the  most  holy 
things : 

5 ^ And  when  the  camp  setteth 
forward,  Aaron  shall  come,  and  his 
sons,  and  they  shall  take  down  the 
covering  vail,  and  cover  the  ark  of 
testimony  with  it : 

6 And  shall  put  thereon  the  cover- 
ing  of  badgers’  skins,  and  shall  spread 
over  it  a cloth  wholly  of  blue,  and 
shall  put  in  the  staves  thereof. 

7 And  upon  the  ^ table  of  shew- 
bread  they  shall  spread  a cloth  of 
blue,  and  put  thereon  the  dishes,  and 
the  spoons,  and  the  bowls,  and  covers 
to  " cover  withal : and  the  continual 
bread  shall  be  thereon : 

8 And  they  shall  spread  upon  them 
a cloth  of  scarlet,  and  cover  the  same 
with  a covering  of  badgers’  skins,  and 
shall  put  in  the  staves  thereof. 

9 And  they  shall  take  a cloth  of 
^Exod. 25.  blue,  and  cover  the  ‘^candlestick  of 

the  light,  and  his  lamps,  and  his  tongs, 
^Exod.  25.  snulFdishes,  and  all  the  oil 


" Exod.  25. 

30- 


SOr, 

pottr  out 
wiihal. 


vessels  thereof,  wherewith  they  mi- 
nister unto  it : 

10  And  they  shall  put  it  and  all 
the  vessels  thereof  within  a covering 
of  badgers’  skins,  and  shall  put  it  upon 
a bar. 

1 1 And  upon  the  golden  altar  they 
shall  spread  a cloth  of  blue,  and  cover 
it  with  a covering  of  badgers’  skins, 
and  shall  put  to  the  staves  thereof : 

12  And  they  shall  take  all  the  in- 
struments of  ministry,  wherewith  they 
minister  in  the  sanctuary,  and  put 
them  in  a cloth  of  blue,  and  cover 
them  with  a covering  of  badgers’  skins, 
and  shall  put  them  on  a bar: 

13  And  they  shall  take  away  the 
ashes  from  the  altar,  and  spread  a pur- 
ple cloth  thereon : 

14  And  they  shall  put  upon  it  all 
the  vessels  thereof,  wherewith  they 
minister  about  it,  even  the  censers, 
the  fleshhooks,  and  the  shovels,  and 
the  " basons,  all  the  vessels  of  the  altar ; 
and  they  shall  spread  upon  it  a cover- 
ing of  badgers’  skins,  and  put  to  the 
staves  of  it. 

15  And  when  Aaron  and  his  sons 
have  made  an  end  of  covering  the 
sanctuary,  and  all  the  vessels  of  the 
sanctuary,  as  the  camp  is  to  set  for- 
ward ; after  that,  the  sons  of  Kohath 
shall  come  to  bear  it:  but  they  shall 
not  touch  any  holy  thing,  lest  they 
die.  These  things  are  the  burden  of 
the  sons  of  Kohath  in  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation. 


1 — 20.  Service  of  the  Kohathites,  who  take 
precedence  because  they  take  charge  of  “the 
most  holy  things.” 

4.  about  the  most  holy  things^  Omit  the 
word  “about,”  which  is  unnecessarily  sup- 
plied. The  sense  is,  “this  is  the  charge  of  the 
sons  of  Kohath,  the  most  holy  things;”  i.e. 
the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  the  Table  of  Shew- 
bread,  the  Candlestick,  and  the  Golden  Altar, 
as  appears  from  the  verses  following,  together 
with  the  furniture  pertaining  thereto.  Parti- 
cular directions  are  laid  down  as  to  the  prepara- 
tion of  these  for  being  transported  when  the  camp 
set  forward,  and  strict  injunction  given  that 
none  but  the  Priests  were  to  take  part  in  that 
duty.  After  the  Priests  had  covered  the  most 
holy  things  and  made  them  ready  according  to 
the  rules  here  prescribed,  then  only  were  the 


Kohathites  to  lift  their  burden  (-u.  15).  It 
appears,  from  a comparison  of  njns.  16,  28,  and 
33,  that  the  ministry  of  the  Kohathites  was 
superintended  by  Eleazar,  the  elder  of  the  two 
surviving  sons  of  Aaron;  as  was  that  of  the 
two  other  families  by  Ithamar. 

6.  <wholly  of  blue.']  Cf.  on  Ex.  xxv.  4. 
The  third  and  external  covering  of  the  Ark 
only  was  to  be  of  this  colour.  The  Table  of 
shew-bread  had  (yv.  8)  an  outer  wrapping  of 
scarlet;  the  Altar  (yv.  13)  one  of  purple. 

put  in  the  starves]  Rather  probably  “put  the 
staves  thereof  in  order.”  These  were  never 
taken  out  of  the  golden  rings  by  which  the 
Ark  was  to  be  borne  (see  Ex.  xxv.  14,  15),  but 
would  need  adjustment  after  the  process  de- 
scribed in  'vn),  5 and  6,  which  would  be  likely 
to  disturb  them. 


666 


NUMBERS.  IV.  [v.  16-32. 


16  ^ And  to  the  office  of  Eleazar 
the  son  of  Aaron  the  priest  pertaineth 

^Exod.  30.  the  oil  for  the  light,  and  the  ^ sweet 
34-  incense,  and  the  daily  meat  offering, 

<^Exod.  30  and  the  ^anointing  oil,  and  the  over- 
sight  of  all  the  tabernacle,  and  of  all 
that  therein  /V,  in  the  sanctuary,  and 
in  the  vessels  thereof. 

17  H And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

18  Cut  ye  not  off  the  tribe  of  the 
families  of  the  Kohathites  from  among 
the  Levites : 

19  But  thus  do  unto  them,  that 
they  may  live,  and  not  die,  when 
they  approach  unto  the  most  holy 
things ; Aaron  and  his  sons  shall  go 
in,  and  appoint  them  every  one  to  his 
service  and  to  his  burden: 

20  But  they  shall  not  go  in  to  see 
when  the  holy  things  are  covered, 
lest  they  die. 

21  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

22  Take  also  the  sum  of  the  sons 
ot  Gershon,  throughout  the  houses 
of  their  fathers,  by  their  families; 

23  From  thirty  years  old  and  up- 
ward until  fifty  years  old  shalt  thou 

titeb.  number  them;  all  that  enter  in  ^to 
1^'nraie  perform  the  service,  to  do  the  work 
U'.xrjaie.  tabemacle  of  the  congregation. 

24  ff'his  IS  the  service  of  the  fami- 
lies of  the  Gershonites,  to  serve,  and 
for  "burdens: 

25  And  they  shall  bear  the  cur- 
tains of  the  tabernacle,  and  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation,  his  cover- 
ing, and  the  covering  of  the  badgers’ 
skins  that  is  above  upon  it,  and  the 


B Or, 
carriage. 


hanging  for  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation, 

26  And  the  hangings  of  the  court, 
and  the  hanging  for  the  door  of  the 
gate  of  the  court,  which  is  by  the 
tabernacle  and  by  the  altar  round 
about,  and  their  cords,  and  all  the  in- 
struments of  their  service,  and  all 
that  is  made  for  them:  so  shall  they 
serve. 

27  At  the  ^appointment  of  Aaron  tHeb. 
and  his  sons  shall  be  all  the  service  of 

the  sons  of  the  Gershonites,  in  all 
their  burdens,  and  in  all  their  service: 
and  ye  shall  appoint  unto  them  in 
charge  all  their  burdens. 

28  This  is  the  service  of  the  fami- 
lies of  the  sons  of  Gershon  in  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation : and 
their  charge  shall  be  under  the  hand 
of  Ithamar  the  son  of  Aaron  the 
priest. 

29  ^ As  for  the  sons  of  Merari,* 
thou  shalt  number  them  after  their  fa- 
milies, by  the  house  of  their  fathers; 

30  From  thirty  years  old  and  up- 
ward even  unto  fifty  years  old  shalt 
thou  number  them,  every  one  that 
entereth  into  the  ^service,  to  do  theiiieb. 
work  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation. 

31  And  this  is  the  charge  of  their 
burden,  according  to  all  their  service 
in  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  ; 

-^the  boards  of  the  tabernacle,  and  the^Exod. 
bars  thereof,  and  the  pillars  thereof, 

and  sockets  thereof, 

32  And  the  pillars  of  the  court 
round  about,  and  their  sockets,  and 
their  pins,  and  their  cords,  with  all 


20.  to  see  <iuhen  the  holy  things  are 
co‘vered~\  Render:  to  seethe  holy  things 
for  an  instant.  The  expression  means 
literally  “as  a gulp,”  i.e.  for  the  instant  it 
takes  to  swallow.  Cf.  Job  vii.  19. 

21 — 28.  To  the  Gershonites  is  consigned 
the  transport  of  all  the  hangings,  curtains, 
and  coverings  of  the  tabernacle.  They  are 
superintend(‘d  by  Ithamar,  Aaron’s  younger 
son,  who  had  already  had  the  oversight  of  the 
Tabemacle  in  its  construction  (Kx.  xxxviii. 
21).  'I'hus  readily  do  the  permanent  offices 
of  the  leaders  of  the  Israelite  community  spring 


out  of  the  duties  which,  under  the  emergencies 
of  the  first  year  of  the  Exodus,  they  had  been 
led,  from  time  to  time,  to  undertake. 

23.  enter  in  to  perform  the  sernjice'\ 
Lit.  as  marg.  “ to  war  the  warfare,”  or,  as  the 
same  phrase  in  part  is  rendered,  -v.  3,  “enter 
into  the  host  to  seiwe.”  The  language  is  mili- 
tary. The  service  of  God  is  a sacred  warfare 
(viii.  24,  25)- 

29 — 33.  The  Merarites  are  also  placed 
under  the  orders  of  Ithamar;  and  to  them 
the  transport  of  the  pillars,  boards,  and  more 
solid  parts  of  the  tabernacle  is  consigned. 


V.  33—48.] 


NUMBERS.  IV. 


667 


their  instruments,  and  with  all  their 
service : and  by  name  ye  shall  reckon 
the  instruments  of  the  charge  of  their 
burden. 

33  This  is  the  service  of  the  fami- 
lies of  the  sons  of  Merari,  according 
to  all  their  service,  in  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation,  under  the  hand 
of  Ithamar  the  son  of  Aaron  the 
priest. 

34  ^ And  Moses  and  Aaron  and 
the  chief  of  the  congregation  num- 
bered the  sons  of  the  Kohathites  after 
their  families,  and  after  the  house  of 
their  fathers, 

35  From  thirty  years  old  and  up- 
ward even  unto  fifty  years  old,  every 
one  that  entereth  into  the  service,  for 
the  work  in  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation : 

36  And  those  that  were  numbered 
of  them  by  their  families  were  two 
thousand  seven  hundred  and  fifty. 

37  These  were  they  that  were 
numbered  of  the  families  of  the  Ko- 
hathites, all  that  might  do  service  in 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
which  Moses  and  Aaron  did  number 
according  to  the  commandment  of 
the  Lord  by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

38  And  those  that  were  numbered 
of  the  sons  of  Gershon,  throughout 
their  families,  and  by  the  house  of 
their  fathers, 

39  From  thirty  years  old  and  up- 
ward even  unto  fifty  years  old,  every 
one  that  entereth  into  the  service,  for 
the  work  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, 

40  Even  those  that  were  number- 


ed of  them,  throughout  their  families, 
by  the  house  of  their  fathers,  were 
two  thousand  and  six  hundred  and 
thirty. 

41  These  are  they  that  were  num- 
bered of  the  families  of  the  sons  of 
Gershon,  of  all  that  might  do  service 
in  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
whom  Moses  and  Aaron  did  number 
according  to  the  commandment  of 
the  Lord. 

42  ^ And  those  that  were  num- 
bered of  the  families  of  the  sons  of 
Merari,  throughout  their  families,  by 
the  house  of  their  fathers, 

43  From  thirty  years  old  and  up- 
ward even  unto  fifty  years  old,  every 
one  that  entereth  into  the  service,  for 
the  work  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, 

44  Even  those  that  were  number- 
ed of  them  after  their  families,  were 
three  thousand  and  two  hundred. 

45  These  be  those  that  were  num- 
bered of  the  families  of  the  sons  of 
Merari,  whom  Moses  and  Aaron  num- 
bered according  to  the  word  of  the 
Lord  by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

46  All  those  that  were  numbered 
of  the  Levites,  whom  Moses  and 
Aaron  and  the  chief  of  Israel  num- 
bered, after  their  families,  and  after 
the  house  of  their  fathers, 

47  From  thirty  years  old  and  up- 
ward even  unto  fifty  years  old,  every 
one  that  came  to  do  the  service  of  the 
ministry,  and  the  service  of  the  bur- 
den in  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, 

48  Even  those  that  were  number- 


32.  by  name  ye  shall  reckon  the  Instru- 
ments']^ This  direction,  which  occurs  only  in 
reference  to  the  charge  of  the  Merarites,  im- 
ports apparently  that  “ the  instruments”  were' 
to  be  assigned,  no  doubt,  by  Ithamar  and  his 
immediate  assistants,  to  their  bearers  singly, 
and  nominatim.  These  “instruments”  com- 
prised the  heavier  parts  of  the  Tabernacle;  and 
the  order  seems  intended  to  prevent  individual 
Merarites  choosing  their  own  burden,  and  so 
throwing  more  than  the  -proper  share  on 
others. 

34 — 49.  Numbering  of  the  Levites  after 
their  families  according  to  the  command  of 


‘U'u.  I — 3.  This  numbering  exhibits  of  males 
between  30  and  50  years  of  age: 

Family  of  Kohath 2750 

Family  of  Gershon  ...  2630 

Family  of  Merari 3200 

8580 

This  number  corresponds  well  with  the  total 
of  22,000,  which  the  whole  tribe  reaches,  hi. 
39:  but  the  number  of  Merarites  available  for 
the  sacred  service  bears  an  unusually  large 
proportion  to  the  total  number  of  males  of 
that  family,  which  is  (iii.  34)  6200. 


668 


NUMBERS.  IV.  V.  [v.  49-11- 


eel  of  them,  were  eight  thousand  and 
five  hundred  and  fourscore. 

49  According  to  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord  they  were  num- 
bered by  the  hand  of  Moses,  every 
one  according  to  his  service,  and  ac- 
cording to  his  burden : thus  were 
they  numbered  of  him,  as  the  Lord 
commanded  Moses. 

CHAPTER  V. 

I The  imcleaii  are  removed  out  of  the  camp. 

5 Restitution  is  to  be  made  in  trespasses.  1 1 

The  trial  of  jealousy. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 Command  the  children  of  Israel, 
that  they  put  out  of  the  camp  every 

Lev.  13.  « leper,  and  every  one  that  hath  an 
Lev.  15.  issue,  and  whosoever  is  defiled  by 
Lev.  21.  “^dead: 

3 Both  male  and  female  shall  ye 
put  out,  without  the  camp  shall  ye 
put  them;  that  they  defile  not  their 
camps,  in  the  midst  whereof  I dwell. 

4 And  the  children  of  Israel  did 
so,  and  put  them  out  without  the 
camp : as  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, so  did  the  children  of  Israel. 


5 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

6 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, "^When  a man  or  woman  shall^Lev.e. 
commit  any  sin  that  men  commit,  to 

do  a trespass  against  the  Lord,  and 
that  person  be  guilty; 

7 Then  they  shall  confess  their  sin 
which  they  have  done:  and  he  shall 
recompense  his  trespass  ^with  the  ^ Lev.  6. 
principal  thereof,  and  add  unto  it  the 

fifth  part  thereof,  and  give  it  unto 
him  against  whom  he  hath  trespassed. 

8 But  if  the  man  have  no  kinsman 
to  recompense  the  trespass  unto,  let 
the  trespass  be  recompensed  unto  the 
Lord,  even  to  the  priest;  beside  the 
ram  of  the  atonement,  whereby  an 
atonement  shall  be  made  for  him. 

9 And  every  " offering  of  all  the  n Or, 
holy  things  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
v/hich  they  bring  unto  the  priest, 
shall  be  his. 

10  And  every  man’s  hallowed 
things  shall  be  his : whatsoever  any 

man  giveth  the  priest,  it  shall  be -^h is. Lev.  lo., 

11  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying. 


Chap.  V.  Now  that  the  nation  was  regu- 
larly organized,  the  sacred  tribe  dedicated,  and 
the  sanctuary  with  the  tokens  of  God's  more 
immediate  Presence  provided  with  its  proper 
place  and  attendants  in  the  camp,  it  remained  to 
attest  and  to  vindicate,  by  modes  in  harmony 
with  the  spirit  of  the  theocratical  law,  the 
sanctity  of  the  people  of  God.  This  accord- 
ingly is  the  general  purpose  of  the  directions 
given  in  this  and  the  next  chapter.  Thus  the 
congregation  of  Israel  was  made  to  typify 
the  Church  of  God,  within  which,  in  its  per- 
fection, nothing  that  offends  can  be  allowed  to 
remain  (cf.  St  Matt.  viii.  az;  Rev.  xxi.  27). 

1 — 4.  Removal  of  unclean  persons  out  of 
the  camp.  The  precepts  respecting  ceremo- 
nial delilements  had  been  already  laid  down. 
Lev.  xiii.  and  xv.,  excepting  that  arising- from 
contact  with  a corpse,  which  occurs  in  Num. 
xix.  (cf.  however  Lev.  xi.  24,  and  xxi.  i). 
They  are  now  first  fully  carried  out;  and 
hardly  could  have  been  so  earlier,  during  the 
hurry  and  confusion  which  must  have  attended 
the  march  out  of  Lgypt,  and  the  encampments 
which  next  followed. 

5 — 10.  Law  of  restitution.  In  case  of 
wrong  against  another  recompense  is  pre- 
scribed, and  the  rule  is  based  on  the  principle 


that  such  wrong  doing  is  also  “a  trespass 
against  the  Lord,”  and  so  an  infringement  of 
the  sanctity  of  the  congregation : cf.  Lev.  v.  5 
sqq.,  vi.  5 sqq.,  to  which  passages  this  appears 
supplementary. 

6.  commit  any  sin  that  men  commit^ 
Lit.  “commit  one  of  all  the  transgressions  of 
man.”  The  A.  V.  however  probably  gives 
the  sense  correctly,  though  some  (Luth., 
Patrick,  Rosenm.,  See.)  render  “sins  against 
men.” 

7.  recompe7ise  his  trespass~\  make  resti- 
tution to  the  person  whom  he  has  injured. 

8.  thereby  an  atonejnent  shall  he  made 
for  hin{\  Lit.  “which  shall  clear  him  of  guilt 
as  to  it,”  i.e.  as  to  the  trespass. 

10.  And  enoery  man's  hallo'wed  things 
shall  be  Ids']  i.e.  the  priest’s.  The  heave  offer- 
ings (-i;.  9)  and  dedicatory  offerings  {e.g.  first- 
fruits)  were  to  be  the  perquisite  of  the  offi- 
ciating priests. 

11—  31.  The  trial  of  jealousy.  Along 
with  other  ordinances  intended  at  once  to  in- 
dicate and  to  secure  the  sanctity  of  God’s  peo- 
ple, is  now  given  an  ordeal  which  should 
remove  the  very  suspicion  of  adultery  from 
amongst  them.  As  this  crime  is  peculiarly 
defiling,  and  destructive  of  the  very  founda- 


V.  12—23.] 


NUMBERS.  V. 


669 


12  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them,  If  any  man’s 
wife  go  aside,  and  commit  a trespass 
against  him, 

13  And  a man  lie  with  her  car- 
nally, and  it  be  hid  from,  the  eyes  of 
her  husband,  and  be  kept  close,  and 
she  be  defiled,  and  there  be  no  witness 
against  her,  neither  she  be  taken  with 
the  manner', 

14  And  the  spirit  of  jealousy  come 
upon  him,  and  he  be  jealous  of  his 
wife,  and  she  be  defiled;  or  if  the 
spirit  of  jealousy  come  upon  him,  and 
he  be  jealous  of  his  wife,  and  she  be 
not  dehled : 

15  Then  shall  the  man  bring  his 
wife  unto  the  priest,  and  he  shall 
bring  her  offering  for  her,  the  tenth 
part  of  an  ephah  of  barley  meal ; he 
shall  pour  no  oil  upon  it,  nor  put  frank- 
incense thereon ; for  it  is  an  offering 
of  jealousy,  an  offering  of  memorial, 
bringing  iniquity  to  remembrance. 

16  And  the  priest  shall  bring  her 
near,  and  set  her  before  the  Lord  ; 

17  And  the  priest  shall  take  holy 
water  in  an  earthen  vessel  j and  of 
the  dust  that  is  in  the  floor  of  the 
tabernacle  the  priest  shall  take,  and 
put  it  into  the  water : 

18  And  the  priest  shall  set  the  v/o- 


man  before  the  Lord,  and  uncover 
the  woman’s  head,  and  put  the  offer- 
ing of  memorial  in  her  hands,  which 
is  the  jealousy  offering:  and  the  priest 
shall  have  in  his  hand  the  bitter  water 
that  causeth  the  curse: 

19  And  the  priest  shall  charge  her 
by  an  oath,  and  say  unto  the  woman. 

If  no  man  have  lain  with  thee,  and  if 
thou  hast  not  gone  aside  to  unclean- 
ness '^‘^with  another  instead  of  thynor, 
husband,  be  thou  free  from  this  bitter 
water  that  causeth  the  curse : i 

20  But  if  thou  hast  gone  aside  f^tneb. ‘ ’ 
another  instead  of  thy  husband,  and  xilmsbau,?' 
thou  be  defiled,  and  some  man  have 

lain  with  thee  beside  thine  husband: 

21  Then  the  priest  shall  charge 
the  woman  with  an  oath  of  cursing, 
and  the  priest  shall  say  unto  the  v/o- 
man.  The  Lord  make  thee  a curse 
and  an  oath  among  thy  people,  when 
the  Lord  doth  make  thy  thigh  to 

^ rot,  and  thy  belly  to  swell ; yi// 

22  And  this  water  that  causeth 
the  curse  shall  go  into  thy  bowels,  to 
make  thy  belly  to  swell,  and  thy  thigh 
to  rot:  And  the  woman  shall  say, 

Amen,  amen. 

23  And  the  priest  shall  write  these 
curses  in  a book,  and  he  shall  blot 
them  out  with  the  bitter  water ; 


tions  of  social  order,  the  whole  subject  is  dealt 
with  at  a length  proportionate  to  its  import- 
ance. The  process  prescribed  has  been  lately 
strikingly  illustrated  from  the  Egyptian  ‘ Ro- 
mance of  Setnau,’  translated  by  Brugsch,  which 
though  itself  comparatively  modern  (of  the  third 
century  B.C.),  yet  refers  to  the  time  of  Rame- 
ses  the  Great,  and  may  therefore  well  serve  to 
illustrate  the  manners  and  customs  of  the  Mo- 
saic times.  “In  the  story,  Ptahneferka  takes 
a leaf  of  papyrus,  and  on  it  copies  out  every 
word  of  a certain  magical  formula.  He  then 
dissolves  the  writing  in  water,  drinks  the  de- 
coction, and  knows  in  consequence  all  that  it 
contained.”  See  Smith,  ‘Pent.’  i.  297,  298; 
‘ Revue  Archeol.’  Sept.  1867,  pp.  161  sqq. 
This  then,  like  several  other  ordinances,  was 
adopted  by  Moses  from  existing  and  probably 
very  ancient  and  widely  spread  institutions. 

15.  The  details  given  here  are  signifi- 
cant. The  offering  was  to  be  of  the  fruits  of 
the  earth,  but  of  the  cheapest  and  coarsest 
kind,  barley  (cf.  2 K.  vii.  i,  16,  18)  re- 
presenting the  abased  condition  of  the  suspected 
VOL.  I. 


woman.  It  was,  like  the  sin-offering  (Lev.  v. 
ii),  to  be  made  without  oil  and  frankincense, 
the  symbols  of  grace  and  acceptableness.  The 
woman  herself  stood  whilst  making  her  offer- 
ing with  head  uncovered,  in  token  of  her 
shame. 

17.  holy  rjuater]  No  doubt  from  the 
laver  which  stood  near  the  altar.  Ex.  xxx.  18 
sqq. 

the  dust  that  is  in  the  floor  of  the  tabernacle'] 
To  set  forth  the  fact  that  the  water  was  in- 
dued with  extraordinary  power  by  Him  that 
dwelt  in  the  Tabernacle.  Dust  is  an  emblem 
of  a state  of  condemnation  (Gen.  hi.  14;  Mi- 
cah  vii.  17). 

19.  gone  aside  to  uncleanness  <u)ith  an- 
other instead  of  thy  husband]  Render,  been 
faithless  to,  literally  “gone  astray  from” 
tliy  husband  by  uncleanness;  cf.  Hos. 
iv.  12. 

23.  blot  them  out  <voith  the  bitter  nvater] 
Rather,  wash  them  into  the  bitter 
water;  in  order  to  transfer  the  curses  into 

U U 


NUMBERS.  V.  VI. 


[V.  24—1. 


24  And  he  shall  cause  the  woman 
to  drink  the  bitter  water  that  causeth 
the  curse : and  the  water  that  causeth 
the  curse  shall  enter  into  her,  and  be- 
come bitter. 

25  Then  the  priest  shall  take  the 
jealousy  offering  out  of  the  woman’s 
hand,  and  shall  wave  the  offering  before 
the  Lord,  and  offer  it  upon  the  altar: 

26  And  the  priest  shall  take  an 
handful  of  the  offering,  even  the  me- 
morial thereof,  and  burn  it  upon  the 
altar,  and  afterward  shall  cause  the 
woman  to  drink  the  water. 

27  And  when  he  hath  made  her  to 
drink  the  water,  then  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  that^  if  she  be  dehled,  and  have 
done  trespass  against  her  husband, 
that  the  v/ater  that  causeth  the  curse 
shall  enter  into  her,  and  become  bitter, 
and  her  belly  shall  swell,  and  her 


the  water.  The  action  was  in  this  case  purely 
symbolical,  but  travellers  speak  of  the  natives 
of  Africa  as  still  habitually  seeking  to  obtain 
the  full  force  of  a written  charm  by  drinking 
the  water  into  which  they  have  washed  it. 

24.  shall  cause  the  q^voman  to  drink'] 
Thus  was  symbolized  both  her  full  acceptance 
of  the  hypothetical  curse  (cf.  Ezek.  iii.  i — 3 ; 
Jer.  XV.  16;  Rev.  x.  9),  and  its  actual  opera- 
tion upon  her  if  she  should  be  guilty  (cf.  Ps. 
cix.  18).  The  direction  in  this  verse  is  antici- 
patory; for  the  woman's  offering  was  taken 
from  her,  and  offered,  before  the  water  was 
actually  given  her  to  drink,  'v'v.  25,  26. 

26.  the  memorial  thereof]  The  part 
of  the  offering  burnt,  as  in  Lev.  ii.  2,  &c. 
The  Hebrew  for  it  is  not  that  which  is  trans- 
lated “memorial”  in  2;.  15. 

27.  it  shall  come  to  pass]  The  solem- 
nity of  the  oath,  and  the  awe-inspiring  ritual 
which  accompanied  it,  might  of  themselves 
suffice  to  deter  a woman  from  taking  it,  unless 
she  were  supported  by  the  consciousness  of 
innocence.  But  the  ingredients  of  the  drink 
given  to  her  were  not  in  themselves  noxious; 
and  could  only  produce  the  effects  here  de- 
scribed by  a special  interposition  of  God, 
such  as  is  promised  so  continually  as  the  ulti- 
mate sanction  of  all  the  precepts  of  Moses. 
We  do  not  read  of  any  instance  in  which  this 
ordeal  was  resorted  to : a fact  which  may  l>e 
explained  either  (with  the  Jews)  as  a proof  of 
its  efficacy,  since  the  guilty  could  not  be 
brought  to  face  its  terrors  at  all,  and  avoided 
them  by  confession ; or  more  probably  by  the 
license  of  divorce  tolerated  by  the  law  of  Mo- 
ses. Since  a husband  could  put  away  his  wife 


thigh  shall  rot:  and  the  woman  shall 
be  a curse  among  her  people. 

28  And  if  the  woman  be  not  de- 
filed, but  be  clean ; then  she  shall  be 
free,  and  shall  conceive  seed. 

29  This  is  the  law  of  jealousies, 
v/hen  a wife  goeth  aside  to  another  in- 
stead of  her  husband,  and  is  defiled ; 

30  Or  when  the  spirit  of  jealousy 
cometh  upon  him,  and  he  be  jealous 
over  his  wife,  and  shall  set  the  wo- 
man before  the  Lord,  and  the  priest 
shall  execute  upon  her  all  this  law. 

31  Then  shall  the  man  be  guiltless 
from  iniquity,  and  this  woman  shall 
bear  her  iniquity. 

CFIAPTER  VI. 

I The  lazu  of  the  Nazar ites.  22  The  form  of 
blessing  the  people. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
f\,  saying. 


at  pleasure,  a jealous  man  would  naturally 
prefer  to  take  this  course  with  a suspected  wife 
rather  than  to  call  public  attention  to  his  own 
shame  by  having  recourse  to  the  trial  of  jea- 
lousy. The  Talmud*  states  that  the -trial  lapsed 
into  disuse  forty  years  before  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem;  and  that  because  the  crime  of 
adultery  was  so  common  amongst  men  that 
God  would  no  longer  inflict  the  curses  here 
named  upon  women  (cf.  Hos.  iv.  14). 

The  trial  by  Red  Water,  which  bears  a ge- 
neral resemblance  to  that  here  prescribed  by 
Moses,  is  still  in  use  amongst  the  tribes  of 
Western  Africa.  (See  Kitto’s  ‘ EncycL’  ed. 
Alexander,  Art.  Adultery,  and  reff.  to  travel- 
lers therein.)  There  is  no  evidence  to  show 
whether  this  usage  sprang  from  imitation 
of  the  law  of  Moses,  or  whether  Moses  him- 
self, in  this  as  in  other  things,  engrafted  his 
ordinance  upon  a previously  existing  custom. 
There  is  no  doubt  however  that  the  managers 
of  the  ordeal  in  Africa  prepare  the  Red  Water 
so  as  to  secure  the  result  which  they  may  de- 
sire from  the  experiment. 

Chap.  VI.  1 — 21.  Law  of  the  Naza- 
rite.  The  previous  chapter  has  provided  for 
the  exclusion  from  the  pale  of  God's  people  of 
certain  forms  of  guilt  and  defilement.  The 
present  one  offers  an  opening  to  that  zeal  for 
God  which,  not  content  with  observing  what 
is  obligatory,  seeks  for  higher  and  stricter 
modes  of  self-dedication.  Thus  the  law  of  the 
Nazarite  is  appropriately  added  to  other  enact- 
ments which  concern  the  sanctity  of  the  holy 
nation.  That  sanctity  found  its  highest  ex- 
pression in  the  Nazarite  vow,  which  was  the 
voluntary  adoption  for  a time  of  obligations 


NUMBERS.  VI. 


671 


V.  2—9.] 

2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
and  say  unto  them,  When  either  man 

II  Or,  or  woman  shall  " separate  themselves  to 
themselves  VOW  a VOW  of  a Nazai'ite,  to  separate 
Nazarites.  fhemselves  unto  the  Lord  : 

3 He  shall  separate  himself  from 
wine  and  strong  drink,  and  shall  drink 
no  vinegar  of  wine,  or  vinegar  of 
strong  drink,  neither  shall  he  drink 
any  liquor  of  grapes,  nor  eat  moist 
grapes,  or  dried. 

nor,  ^ All  the  days  of  his  "separation 

gj^2.11  he  eat  nothing  that  is  made  of 
i/ze  ^vine  tree,  from  the  kernels  even 
«judg  I”  husk. 

5.  ' 5 All  the  days  of  the  vow  of  his 

1 Sam.  I.  there  shall  no  "rasor  come 


upon  his  head : until  the  days  be  ful- 
filled, in  the  which  he  separateth  him~ 
self  unto  the  Lord,  he  shall  be  holy, 
and  shall  let  the  locks  of  the  hair  of 
his  head  grow. 

6 All  the  days  that  he  separateth 
himself  unto  the  Lord  he  shall  come 
at  no  dead  body. 

7 He  shall  not  make  himself  un- 

clean for  his  father,  or  for  his  mother, 
for  his  brother,  or  for  his  sister,  when 
they  die:  because  the  ^consecration  . 

U-  J • U-  U J separation. 

nis  Lrod  IS  upon  his  head. 

8 All  the  days  of  his  separation  he 
is  holy  unto  the  Lord. 

9 And  if  any  man  die  very  sud- 
denly by  him,  and  he  hath  defiled  the 


resembling,  and  indeed  in  some  particulars  ex- 
ceeding, those  under  which  the  Priests  were 
placed.  It  is  obvious,  from  the  manner  in 
which  the  subject  is  introduced  in  no.  2,  that 
the  present  enactments  do  not  institute  a new 
kind  of  observance,  but  only  regulate  one  al- 
ready familiar  to  the  Israelites.  The  illustra- 
tions of  the  subject  which  have  been  adduced 
from  Egyptian  and  other  heathen  customs  (cf. 
Bilmar,  in  ‘Stud,  und  Kritik.’  1864)  must 
however  be  admitted  to  be  vague  and  partial. 

2.  separate  t hems  closes  to  osoov  a oso-iv 
of  a Nazarite.,  to  separate  themsel-ues~\  Rather 
probably,  “shall  solemnly  vow  a vow,”  as 
LXX.,  ixeyaXcos  ev^rjTai  ev-fjv.  Two  different 
Hebrew  words  are  in  the  A.  V.  rendered  by 
“separate;”  and  the  former  of  them,  as  in 
Judg.  xiii.  19,  is  probably  meant  only  to 
qualify  the  word  next  following. 

a Na%arite'\  This  term  signifies  “sepa- 
rated,” i.e.  as  the  words  following  show,  “ un- 
to God”  (cf.  Judg.  xiii.  5).  It  is  used  in  a 
general  sense,  Gen.  xlix.  26;  Lev.  xxv.  5,  ii; 
Deut.  xxxiii.  16;  Lam.  iv.  7;  but  became,  as 
it  is  used  in  A.  V.,  a technical  term  at  an  early 
date;  cf.  Judg.  xiii,  5,  7,  xvi.  17.  It  should  in 
strictness  be  written  Nazirite,  The  accepted 
spelling  has  no  doubt  pi'evailed  amongst  Chris- 
tians from  its  being  supposed  that  this  vow  is 
referred  to  in  St  Matt.  ii.  23. 

3.  liquor  of  grapes']  i.e.  a drink  made 
of  grape-skins  macerated  in  vVater. 

4.  from  the  kernels  eosen  to  the  husk] 
A sour  drink  was  made  from,  the  stones  of 
unripe  grapes;  and  cakes  v/ere  also  made  of 
the  husks.  These  latter  appear  from  Hos.  iii. 
I (see  note  there)  to  have  been  regarded  as  a 
delicacy.  These  regulations  forbid  the  Naza- 
rite  using  wine  or  any  other  product  into 

■ which  the  vine  or  its  fruit  enters.  The  Priests 
were  also  forbidden  to  taste  wine  whilst  en- 


gaged in  the  sacred  functions  (Lev.  x.  9 — ii). 
This  interdict  figures  that  separation  from  the 
general  society  of  men  to  which  the  Nazarite 
for  the  time  was  consecrated.  The  Flamen 
Dialis  amongst  the  Romans  was  forbidden  to 
touch  a vine,  or  even  to  walk  under  one. 

5.  The  second  rule  prohibits  the  Naza- 
rite  from  cutting  his  hair  during  the  period  of 
his  vow.  The  hair  is  to  be  regarded  as  the 
symbol  of  the  vital  power  at  its  full  natural 
development.  Generally  amongst  the  Jews 
the  abundance  of  the  hair  was  considered  to 
betoken  physical  strength  and  perfection  (cf. 
2 S.  xiv.  25,  26),  and  baldness  was  regarded 
as  a grave  blemish,  which  exposed  a man  to 
ridicule,  and  even  disqualified  him  for  ad- 
mission to  priestly  functions  (cf.  Lev.  xxi.  20 
note,  xiii.  40  sqq.;  2 K.  ii.  23;  Is.  iii.  24). 
Thus  the  free  'growth  of  the  hair  on  the  head 
of  the  Nazarite  represented  the  dedication  of 
the  man  with  all  his  strength  and  powers  to 
the  service  of  God. 

6 — 8.  The  third  rule  of  the  Nazarite  in- 
terdicted him  from  contracting  any  ceremo- 
nial defilement  even  under  circumstances  which 
excused  such  defilement  in  others:  cf.  especi- 
ally Lev.  xxi.  I — 3,  where  the  discharge  of  the 
last  duties  to  deceased  kinsmen  is  permitted  to 
the  ordinary  priests  under  specified  conditions, 
though  forbidden  hereto  Nazarites  as  it  was  to 
the  High  Priest,  Lev.  xxi.  10,  ii.  On  the  un- 
cleanness caused  by  contact  with  a corpse,  cf. 
xix.  II  sqq.;  Lev.  v.  2;  xi.  24  sqq.  It  is  of 
course  assumed  that  all  other  ceremonial  defile- 
ments were  to  be  shunned  by  the  Nazarites:  cf 
the  directions  given  to  Samson’s  mother,  Judg 
xiii.  4 sqq. 

7.  the  consecration  of  his  God]  i.e.  the 
unshorn  locks:  cf.  Lev.  xxv.  5,  ii,  where  the 
vine,  left  during  the  Sabbatical  year  untouched 
by  the  hand  of  man,  either  for  pruning  or 
for  vintage,  is  called  simply  a “ Nazarite.” 

U U 2 


672 


NUMBERS.  VI. 


[v.  10 — 17. 


t Heb. 
fall. 


head  of  his  consecr  ation ; then  he 
shalh  shave  his  head  in  the  day  of  his 
cleansing,  on  the  seventh  day  shall  he 
shave  it. 

10  And  on  the  eighth  day  he  shall 
bring  two  turtles,  or  two  young 
pigeons,  to  the  priest,  to  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation : 

11  And  the  priest  shall  offer  the 
one  for  a sin  offering,  and  the  other 
for  a burnt  offering,  and  make  an 
atonement  for  him,  for  that  he  sin- 
ned by  the  dead,  and  shall  hallow  his 
head  that  same  day. 

12  And  he  shall  consecrate  unto 
the  Lord  the  days  of  his  separation, 
and  shall  bring  a lamb  of  the  first 
year  for  a trespass  offering:  but  the 
days  that  were  before  shall  ^be  lost, 
because  his  separation  was  defiled. 

13  ^ And  this  is  the  law  of  the 
Nazarite,  v/hen  the  davs  of  his  sepa- 


ration are  fulfilled  : he  shall  be  brought 
unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation : 

14.  And  he  shall  offer  his  offering 
unto  the  Lord,  one  he  lamb  of  the 
first  year  without  blemish  for  a burnt 
offering,  and  one  ewe  lamb  of  the 
first  year  without  blemish  for  a sin 
offering,  and  one  ram  without  blemish 
for  peace  offerings,  • 

15  And  a basket  of  unleavened 
bread,  cakes  of  fine  flour  mingled 
with  oil,  and  wafers  of  unleavened 
bread  anointed  with  oil,  and  their 
meat  offering,  and  their  drink  offer- 
ings. 

16  And  the  priest  shall  bring  them 
before  the  Lord,  and  shall  offer  his 
sin  offering,  and  his  burnt  offering: 

17  And  he  shall  offer  the  ram  for 
a sacrifice  of  peace  offerings  unto  the 
Lord,  with  the  basket  of  unleavened 


9 — 12.  Prescriptions  to  meet  the  case  of 
involuntary  defilement  contracted  by  a Naza- 
rite. In  case  of  a sudden  death  taking  place 
“by  him”  {i.e.  in  his  presence),  the  Nazarite 
had  to  undergo  the  ordinary  process  of  purifi- 
cation commanded  for  others  (cf.  xix.  ii,  12, 
and  Lev.  v.  6 sqq.),  and  also  besides  to  offer  a 
trespass  offering  as  “ having  sinned  in  the  holy 
things  of  the  Lord”  (cf.  Lev.  v.  15  sqq.)  ; and 
that  of  a kind  peculiar  to  this  case.  Moreover 
his  hair  was  to  be  shaved,  and  the  days  of  his 
dedication  to  be  recommenced,  those  that  had 
been  obsen'ed  previously  to  his  defilement 
being  regarded  as  lost. 

13—21.  Ceremonies  on  the  completion  of 
the  Nazarite  vow. 

13.  ^vhen  the  days  of  his  separation  are 
fulfilled']  I'he  tenor  of  these  words  seems  to 
imply  that  perpetual  Nazariteship  was  un- 
known in  the  days  of  Moses.  On  the  other 
hand,  however,  Moses  does  not  expressly  re- 
quire that  limits  should  be  assigned  to  the 
vow;  and  the  examples  of- Samson,  Samuel, 
and  John  the  Baptist,  show  that  it  was  in 
later  times  undertaken  for  life,  and  that  pa- 
rents could  even  devote  their  future  children 
to  it  (1  S.  i.  Ti).  The  Jewish  doctors  recog- 
nize two  classes  of  perpetual  Nazarites,  the 
“Samson  Nazarites”  who  were  not  bound  by 
the  rules  laid  down  in  'w.  9 — ii,  and  the  “or- 
dinary perpetual  Nazarites,”  who  were  allowed 
to  poll  their  hair  when  too  heavy.  The  ex- 
emption of  the  Samson  Nazarite  is  inferred 
from  Judg.  xv.  16,  where  Samson  wields  the 
jawbone  of  the  dead  ass,  yet  is  not  recorded 
to  have  brought  any  sacrifice  afterwards. 


These  dispensations  have  no  countenance  from 
the  chapter  before  us.  Another  rule  imposed 
by  the  administrators  of  the  law,  that  no  Na- 
zarite vow  should  be  taken  for  less  than  thirty 
days,  is  reasonable.  To  permit  the  vow  to  be 
taken  for  very  short  -periods  would  diminish 
its  solemnity  and  estimation. 

14.  his  offering]  i.e.  the  offering  of  which 
particulars  follow  immediately.  From  the 
rationale  of  these  sacrifices  (cf.  Lev.  viii.,  ix.) 
it  would  seem  that  the  sin-offering  (cf.  Lev, 
iv.  32  sqq.),  though  named  second,  was  in 
practice  offered  first,  being  intended  to  ex- 
piate involuntary  sins  committed  during  the 
period  of  separation.  The  burnt-offering 
(Lev.  i.  10  sqq.)  denoted  the  self-surrender  on 
which  alone  all  acceptableness  in  the  Nazarite 
before  God  must  rest ; the  peace-offerings 
(Lev.  iii.  12  sqq.)  expressed  thankfulness  to 
God  by  whose  grace  the  vow  had  been  ful- 
filled. 

15.  their  meat  offering.,  and  their  drink 
offerings]  i.e.  the  ordinary  meat  and  drink- 
offerings  which  were  subsidiary  to  the  other 
offerings  required  in  2^.  14  (cf.  Ex.  xxix.  40, 
41;  Num.  xxviii.^9  sqq.;  Lev.  ii.  4,  vii.  12 
sqq.);  and  additional  to  the  basket  of  unlea- 
vened bread,  the  cakes  and  the  wafers  specially 
prescribed  in  the  beginning  of  this  verse  to  be 
brought  by  the  Nazarite.  The  offerings  re- 
quired on  the  completion  of  the  Nazarite  vow 
thus  involved  considerable  expense,  and  it  was 
regarded  as  a pious  work  to  provide  the  poor 
with  the  means  of  making  them  (cf.  Acts  xxi. 
23  sqq.;  Joseph.  ‘ Antiq.’  xix.  6.  i ; i Macc. 

iii.  49)- 


NUMBERS.  VI. 


673 


V.  18—23.] 


bread;  the  priest  shall  offer  also  his 
meat  offering,  and  his  drink  offering, 
f Acts  21.  18  '^And  the  Nazarite  shall  shave 

the  head  of  his  separation  at  the  door 
of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
and  shall  take  the  hair  of  the  head  of 
his  separation,  and  put  it  in  the  fire 
which  is  under  the  sacrifice  of  the 
peace  offerings. 

19  And  the  priest  shall  take  the 
sodden  shoulder  of  the  ram,  and  one 
unleavened  cake  out  of  the  basket, 
and  one  unleavened  wafer,  and  shall 
put  them  upon  the  hands  of  the  Na- 
zarite, after  the  hair  ^his  separation 
is  shaven : 


20  And  the  priest  shall  wave  them 
for  a wave  offering  before  the  Lord  : 

this  is  holy  for  the  priest,  with  the  29- 
wave  breast  and  heave  shoulder : and 
after  that  the  Nazarite  may  drink 
wine. 

21  This  is  the  law  of  the  Nazarite 
who  hath  vowed,  and  of  his  offering 
unto  the  Lord  for  his  separation,  be- 
side that  that  his  hand  shall  get:  ac-  ’ 
cording  to  the  vow  which  he  vowed, 
so  he  must  do  after  the  law  of  his 
separation. 

22  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

23  Speak  unto  Aaron  and  unto  his 


18.  sha’ve  the  head'\  As  the  Na>^rite  had 
during  hiS  vow  worn  his  hair  unshorn  in 
honour  of  God,  so  when  the  time  was  com- 
plete it  was  natural  that  the  hair,  the  symbol 
of  his  vow,  should  be  cut  olf,  and  offered  to 
God  at  the  sanctuary.  The  burning  of  the 
hair  “in  the  fire  under  the  sacrifice  of  the 
peace  offering,”  represented  the  eucharistic 
communion  with  God  obtained  by  those  who 
realized  the  ideal  which  the  Nazarite  set  forth. 
The  Nazarite  vow  is  only  one  of  many  illus- 
trations of  the  religious  significance  associated 
with  the  hair  in  ancient  times  and  in  very  di- 
verse countries.  * St  Paul  is  said  to  have 
“shorn  (the  word  should  rather  be  ‘polled’) 
his  head  in  Cenchrea  because  he  had  a vow,” 
Acts  xviii.  18;  where  the  “vow”  can  hardly 
be  that  of  a Nazarite,  though  that  mentioned. 
Acts  xxi.  23  sqq.  (see  notes  on  these  places), 
no  doubt  was  so.  The  many  and  various 
observances  connected  with  the  hair  may  be 
traced  back  to  the  estimation  attached  to  a 
profuse  growth*  of  it.  Peleus  (‘II.’  xxiii.  142 
sqq.)  dedicates  a lock  of  Achilles’  hair  and 
vows  to  shear  it  on  the  safe  return  of  his  son 
from  the  Trojan  war.  Achilles  after  the  death 
of  Patroclus  cuts  off  this  sacred  lock,  and  in 
course  of  the  funeral  rites  places  it  in  the  hand 
of  his  dead  friend.  Other  like  observances 
may  be  noticed,  Afsch.  ‘ Choeph.’  7 ; Eurip. 

‘ Bacchse,’  494.  Similar  customs  were  known 
to  the  Romans;  cf.  Suet.  ‘Nero,’  12;  Martial, 
IX.  17,  3;  Seneca,  ‘Here.  Fur.’  855;  Lucan, 
‘Pharsal.’  v.  6,  3.  Examples  are  found  of 
vows  symbolized  by  particular  modes  of  crop- 
ping or  partially  shaving  off  the  hair,  as 
amongst  the  Egyptians,  Herod,  ii.  65.  The 
casting  of  hair  from  the  forehead  of  victims 
into  the  flame  as  an  earnest  of  the  sacrifice 
about  to  be  offered  is  mentioned,  ‘II.’  xix. 
254;  Virgil,  ‘^Tn.’  vi.  245.  Very  apposite 
to  the  text  is  Koran,  ii.  192,  “Perform  the 
pilgrimage,  and  shave  not  your  heads  until 


your  offering  reaches  the  place  of  sacrifice;” 
and  Morier,  ‘Second  Journey  into  Persia,’ 
p.  1 1 7,  “ After  the  birth  of  a son,  if  the  parent 

be  in  distress,  or  the  child  be  sick the 

mother  makes  a vow  that  no  razor  shall  come 
upon  the  child’s  head  for  a certain  time,  or 
for  life,  cf.  i Sam.  i.  ii.  If  the  child  recovers, 
and  the  vow  be  but  for  a time,  so  that 
the  mother’s  vow  be  fulfilled,  then  she  shaves 
his  head  at  the  end  of  the  time  prescribed, 
makes  an  entertainment,  collects  money  and 
other  things  from  her  relations,  which  are  sent 
as  Nezers  (offerings)  to  the  mosque.”  Further 
illustrations  are  given  by  Winer,  ‘ Realw.’  Art. 
‘ Nasiriier.’ 

20.  the  priest  shall  ^wa’ve  them]  i.e.  by 
placing  his  hands  under  those  of  the  Nazarite; 
cf.  on  Lev.  vii.  28  sqq. 

21.  beside  that  that  his  hand  shall  get] 
Lit.  “his  hand  grasps.”  The  Nazarite,  in 
addition  to  the  offerings  prescribed  above,  was 
to  present  free-will  offerings  according  to  his 
means. 

22 — 27.  The  priestly  blessing:  cf.  Ecclus. 
xxxvi.  17.  The  blessing  gives  as  it  were  the 
crown  and  seal  to  the  whole  sacred  order, 
by  which  Israel  was  now  fully  organized,  as 
the  people  of  God,  for  the  march  to  the  Holy 
Land.  It  is  appointed  as  a solemn  form 
to  be  used  by  the  priests  exclusively,  and 
in  this  function  their  office  as  it  were  culmi- 
nates (cf.  Lev.  ix.  22).  The  duties  thus  far 
assigned  to  them  and  their  assistants  have  had 
reference  to  the  purity,  order,  and  sanctity  of 
the  nation.  This  whole  set  of  regulations  is 
most  suitably  and  emphatically  closed  by  the 
solemn  w'ords  of  benediction,  in  which  God 
vouchsafes  to  survey  as  it  were  (cf.  Gen.  i 
31)  the  whole  theocratic  system  created  by 
Himself  for  man’s  benefit,  and  pronounces  it  very 
good.  Accordingly  a formula  is  provided  by 
God  Himself,  through  which  from  time  to  time, 


674 


NUMBERS.  VI.  VII. 


[v.  24—1. 


sons,  saying,  On  this  wise  ye  shall 
bless  the  children  of  Israel,  saying 
unto  them, 

24  The  Lord  bless  thee,  and  keep 
thee : 

25  The  Lord  make  his  face  shine 
upon  thee,  and  be  gracious  unto  thee : 

26  The  Lord  lift  up  his  counte- 
nance upon  thee,  and  give  thee  peace. 

27  And  they  shall  put  my  name 
upon  the  children  of  Israel ; and  I 
will  bless  them. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


1 The  offering  of  the  princes  at  the  dedication  of 
the  tabe7'nacle.  10  Their  several  offerings  at 
the  dedicatio7t  of  the  altar.  89  God  speakcth 
to  Moses  fro77t  the  77iercy  seat. 


And  i't  came  to  pass  on  the  day 
^ that  Moses  had  fully  "set  up 
the  tabernacle,  and  had  anointed  it, 
and  sanctified  it,  and  all  the  instru- 
ments thereof,  both  the  altar  and  all 
the  vessels  thereof,  and  had  anointed 
them,  and  sanctified  them; 


Exod.  40, 
18. 


as  His  people  by  obedience  place  themselves  in 
true  and  right  relationship  to  Him,  the  autho- 
rized mediators  may  pronounce  and  commu- 
nicate His  special  blessing  to  them.  The  Jew- 
ish tradition  therefore  that  this  blessing  was 
given  at  the  close  of  the  daily  sacrifice  is  at 
least  in  accordance  with  its  character  and 
tenor.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  text  does 
not  appoint  the  occasion  on  which  it  is  to  be 
used. 

The  structure  of  the  blessing  is  remarkable. 
It  is  rhythmical;  consists  of  three  distinct 
parts,  in  each  of  which  the  Most  Holy  Name 
stands  as  nominative;  it  contains  altogether 
twelve  words,  excluding  the  Sacred  Name  it- 
self; and  mounts  by  gradual  stages  to  that 
Peace  which  forms  the  last  and  most  consum- 
mate gift  which  God  can  give  His  people. 

From  a Christian  point  of  view,  and  com- 
paring the  counterpart  Benediction  of  2 Cor. 
xiii.  14  (cf.  Is.  vi.  3;  Matt,  xxviii.  19),  it  is 
impossible  not  to  see  shadowed  forth  the  Doc- 
trine of  the  Holy  Trinity.  And  the  three  se- 
veral sets  of  terms  correspond  fittingly  to  the 
office  of  the  Persons  in  their  gracious  work 
in  the  redemption  of  man. 

24.  The  Lord  bless  thee.,  a7id  keep  thee~\ 
The  second  clause  here,  as  in  the  other  three 
verses,  defines  more  closely  the  general  tenor 
of  the  preceding  one.  The  singular  number, 
which  is  obsen-ed  throughout,  indicates  that 
the  blessing  is  conferred  on  Israel  collecti-vely . 

25.  777ake  his  face  shine']  This  is  an 
enhancement  of  the  preceding  benediction. 
“ The  face  of  God”  imports  not  merely  God's 
good  will  in  general,  but  His  active  and  spe- 
cial regard.  With  the  “ face”  or  “ eye  of  the 
Lord”  accordingly  is  connected  alike  the  ju- 
dicial visitation  of  the  wicked  (cf.  Ps.  xxxiv. 
17),  and  His  mercies  to  the  righteous  (Ps. 
iv.  6). 

26.  lift  up  his  countenance  upon  thee']  i.e. 
specially  direct  His  thought  and  care  towards 
thee:  cf.  2 K.  ix.  32,  and  similar  phrases 
Gen.  xliii.  29,  xliv.  21.  Through  such  loving 
providence  alone  could  the  peace  of  God  in 
which  the  blessing  closes  be  given. 


27.  put  TTiy  naTne  upon  the  childi'en  of 
Israel]  i.  e.  pronounce  my  Sacred  Name  over 
them  in  blessing  them.  Maimonides  states 
that  the  Sacred  Name  has  never  been  used  even 
in  the  solemn  benediction  of  the  sanctuary 
since  th^  death  of  Simon  the  Just. 

and  I <will  bless  theTn]  i.e.  the  children  of 
Israel,  not,  as  some,  the  Priests.  The  words 
import  that  God  will  give  effect  to  the  bene- 
diction pronounced  by  the  Priests. 

Chap.  VII.  This  and  the  two  next  chap- 
ters narrate  the  closing  events  which  happened 
during  the  stay  at  Sinai. 

The  present  chapter  describes  the  presenta- 
tion of  gifts  by  the  Princes  of  the  Tribes  at 
the  dedication  of  the  Tabernacle. 

1.  on  the  day  that]  i.e.  “at  the  time  that,” 
cf.  Gen.  ii.  4.  The  presentation  of  the  gifts 
in  fact  occupied  twelve  days,  as  the  sequel 
shows.  The  “Prmces”  were  apparently  first 
elevated  to  official  dignity  in  connexion  with 
the  numbering  of  the  people  (cf.  i.  i — 16). 
Their  offering  of  gifts  then  was  made  after 
that  census,  and  of  course  before  the  breaking 
up  of  the  encampment  at  Sinai,  i.e.  between 
the  first  and  the  twentieth  days  of  the  second 
month  in  the  second  year:  cf.  i.  i.  The  anoint- 
ing of  the  Tabernacle  here  referred  to  had  no 
doubt  taken  place  in  the  course  of  the  first 
month.  Ex.  xl.  17,  Lev.  viii.  10  sqq.,  and  had 
occupied  eight  days  of  that  month.  Lev.  viii.  33. 
The  enactments  set  forth  in  the  Chapters  from 
Lev.  X.  to  Numb.  vi.  inclusive,  were  doubtless 
promulgated  at  various  times  between  the  con- 
secration of  the  Tabemacle  and  the  departure 
from  Sinai,  but  are  for  convenience  set  out  con- 
nectedly. The  contents  of  the  present  chapter 
are  accordingly  placed  after  them;  and  all  the 
more  properly,  since  part  of  the  gifts  consisted 
of  the  wagons  and  oxen  by  which  the  Ta- 
bernacle and  its  furniture  could  be  conveyed 
in  the  ensuing  marches.  The  order  pursued 
throughout  is  justly  noted  as  one  which  would 
naturally  suggest  itself  to  a narrator  who  was 
contemporary  with  the  events. 


V.  2 20.] 


NUMBERS.  VII. 


675 


2 That  the  princes  of  Israel,  heads 
of  the  house  of  their  fathers,  who 

tHeb.  were  the  princes  of  the  tribes,  ^and 

vjko  stood.  A j 

were  over  them  that  were  numbered, 
offered : 

3 And  they  brought  their  offering 
before  the  Lord,  six  covered  wagons, 
and  twelve  oxen ; a wagon  for  two  of 
the  princes,  and  for  each  one  an  ox: 
and  they  brought  them  before  the  ta- 
bernacle. 

4 And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 

5 Take  It  of  them,  that  they  may 
be  to  do  the  service  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  cono-regation : and  thou  shalt 
give  them  unto  the  Levites,  to  every 
man  according  to  his  service. 

6 And  Moses  took  the  wagons  and 
the  oxen,  and  gave  them  unto  the 
Levites. 

7 Two  wagons  and  four  oxen  he 
gave  unto  the  sons  of  Gershon,  ac- 
cording to  their  service : 

8 And  four  wagons  and  eight  oxen 
he  gave  unto  the  sons  of  Merari,  ac- 
cording unto  their  service,  under  the 
hand  of  Ithamar  the  son  of  Aaron  the 
priest. 

9 But  unto  the  sons  of  Kohath 
he  gave  none:  because  the  service  of 
the  sanctuary  belonging  unto  them 
was  that  they  should  bear  u^  on  their 
shoulders. 

10  ^ And  the  princes  offered  for 
dedicating  of  the  altar  in  the  day  that 
it  was  anointed,  even  the  princes  of- 
fered their  offering  before  the  altar. 


11  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, They  shall  offer  their  offering, 
each  prince  on  his  day,  for  the  dedi- 
cating of  the  altar. 

12  ^ And  he  that  offered  his  offer- 
ing the  first  day  was  Nahshon  the  son 
of  Amminadab,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  : 

13  And  his  offering  was  one  silver 
charger,  the  weight  thereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirtv  shekels.,  one  silver 

j ' 

bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary;  both  of  them 
were  full  of  fine  flour  mingled  with 
oil  for  a ^ meat  offering:  ^Lev. 2. u 

14  One  spoon  of  ten  shekels  of  ^ 
gold,  full  of  incense : 

1 5 One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering: 

16  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a ^sin  Lev.  4. 
offering: 

17  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first,  year : 
this  was  the  offering  of  Nahshon  the 
son  of  Amminadab. 

18  ^ On  the  second  day  Nethaneel 
the  son  of  Zuar,  prince  of  Issachar, 
did  offer: 

19  He  offered  for  his  offering  one 
silver  charger,  the  weight  v/hereof 
%vas  an  hundred  and  thirty  shekels., 
one  silver  bov/1  of  seventy  shekels, 
after  the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary; 
both  of  them  full  of  fine  flour  min- 
gled with  oil  for  a meat  offering : 

20  One  spoon  of  gold  of  ten  she- 
kels., full  of  incense : 


3.  conoered  ^agons\  The  qualifying  word 
of  this  phrase  is  rendered  “litter,”  Is.  Ixvi. 
20;  and  some  (Gesen.,  De  Wette,  &c.)  prefer 
to  render  “litter  wagons:  ” /.£■.  litters  which 
were  not  on  wheels,  but  borne  by  two  oxen, 
one  in  front  and  one  behind.  Such  convey- 
ances vjould  probably  be  more  convenient 
than  wheeled  wagons  in  the  rough  country 
to  be  traversed. 

7 — 9.  To  the  Gershonites,  who  had  to 
transport  the  hangings  and  coverings  of  the 
tabernacle,  two  wagons  are  assigned:  to  the 
Merarites,  who  had  the  charge  of  the  solid 
parts  of  the  tabernacle,  four  wagons.  The 
furniture  and  vessels  the  Kohathites  were  to 
carry  on  their  own  shoulders.  Compare  iii. 
25i  26,  31,  36,  37. 


12 — 83.  The  several  princes  mxake  their 
offerings  in  the  order  assigned  to  the  tribes, 
ch.  ii.  It  was  doubtless  the  tribes  them- 
selves which  presented  these  gifts  through  their 
chiefs.  The  twelve  offerings  are  strictly  alike, 
and  had  no  doubt  been  arranged  and  pre- 
pared previously.  They  were  offered  how- 
ever on  twelve  separate  days,  and  the  narrative 
describing  each  severally  at  length  with  un- 
altered language,  reflects  somewhat  of  the 
stately  solemnity  which  marked  the  repetition 
of  the  same  ceremonial  day  by  day.  Of 
course  the  sacrifices  brought  by  each  prince 
were  offered  on  the  day  on  which  they  were 
presented;  the  chargers,  bowls,  and  spoons 
being  preserved  for  the  future  use  of  the  Sane 
tuary. 


676 


NUMBERS.  VIL 


[v.  21—49. 


21  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering : 

22  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

23  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Nethaneel  the 
son  of  Zuar. 

24  SI  On  the  third  day  Eliab  the 
son  of  Helon,  prince  of  the  children 
of  Zebulun,  did  offer: 

25  His  offering  was  one  silver 
charger,  the  weight  whereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver 
bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary;  both  of  them 
full  of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for 
a meat  offering: 

26  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels,^ full  of  incense : 

27  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a 
burnt  offering : 

28  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
oftering : 

O 

29  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Eliab  the  son 
of  Helon. 

30  SI  On  the  fourth  day  Elizur  the 
son  of  Shedeur,  prince  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Reuben,  did  offer: 

31  His  oftering  was  one  silver 
charger  of  the  weight  of  an  hundred 
and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver  bowl  of 
seventy  shekels,  after  the  shekel  of  the 
sanctuary;  both  of  them  full  of  fine 
flourmingled  with  oil  for  a meat  offering: 

32  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^ full  of  incense : 

33  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
ofl'ering : 

O 

34  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
oflering : 

O 

35  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  oflering  of  Elizur  the 
son  of  Shedeur. 


36  SI  On  the  fifth  day  Shelumiel 
the  son  of  Zurishaddai,  prince  of  the 
children  of  Simeon,  did  offer: 

37  His  offering  was  one  silver 
charger,  the -weight  whereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver 
bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary;  both  of  them 
full  of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for 
a meat  oflering: 

38  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^ full  of  incense : 

39  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
oflering : 

40  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

41  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  zvas  the  oflering  of  Shelumiel  the 
son  of  Zurishaddai. 

42  SI  On  the  sixth  day  Eliasaph 
the  son  of  Deuel,  prince  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Gad,  offered: 

43  His  oflering  was  one  silver 
charger  of  the  weight  of  an  hundred 
and  thirty  shekels^  a silver  bowl  of 
seventy  shekels,  after  the  shekel  of  the 
sanctuary;  both  of  them  full  of  fine 
flour  mingled  wi  th  oil  for  a meat  offerings 

44  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^ full  of  incense : 

45  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering : 

46  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

47  /ind  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  Iambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Eliasaph  the 
son  of  Deuel. 

48  SI  On  the  seventh  day  Elishama 
the  son  of  Ammihud,  prince  of  the 
children  of  Ephraim,  offered:  * 

49  His  oflering  was  one  silver 
charger,  the  weight  whereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver 
bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary;  both  of  them 
full  of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for 
a meat  offering: 


V.  50— 79-] 


NUMBERS.  VII. 


677 


50  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^ full  of  incense : 

51  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering: 

52  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

53  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Elishama  the 
son  of  Ammihud. 

54  ^ On  the  eighth  day  offered 
Gamaliel  the  son  of  Pedahzur,  prince 
of  the  children  of  Manasseh  : 

55  Elis  offering  was  one  silver 
charger  of  the  weight  of  an  hundred 
and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver  bowl  of 
seventy  shekels,  after  the  shekel  of 
the  sanctuary;  both  of  them  full  of 
fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for  a meat 
offering : 

56  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^ full  of  incense : 

57  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering : 

58  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering: 

59  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Gamaliel  the 
son  of  Pedahzur. 

60  On  the  ninth  day  Abidan 
the  son  of  Gideoni,  prince  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Benjamin,  offered: 

61  His  offering  was  one  silver 
charger,  the  weight  whereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver 
bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary;  both  of  them 
full  of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for 
a meat  offering : 

62  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^ full  of  incense : 

63  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering : 

64  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

65  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 


goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Abidan  the 
son  of  Gideoni. 

66  *11  On  the  tenth  day  Ahiezer 
the  son  of  Ammishaddai,  prince  of 
the  children  of  Dan,  offered: 

67  His  offering  was  one  silver 
charger,  the  weight  whereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver 
bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary;  both  of  them 
full  of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for 
a meat  offering : 

68  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she-- 
kels^  full  of  incense  : 

69  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering : 

70  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

71  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Ahiezer  the 
son  of  Ammishaddai. 

72  ^ On  the  eleventh  day  Pagiel 
the  son  of  Ocran,  prince  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Asher,  offered: 

73  His  offering  %vas  one  silver 
charger,  the  weight  whereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver 
bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary;  both  of  them 
full  of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for 
a meat  offering: 

74  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^  full  of  incense : 

75  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering : 

76  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

77  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Pagiel  the  son 
of  Ocran. 

78  ^ On  the  twelfth  day  Ahira 
the  son  of  Enan,  prince  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Naphtali,  offered: 

79  His  offering  was  one  silver 
charger,  the  weight  whereof  was  an 
hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  one  silver 


678 


NUMBERS.  VII.  VIII. 


[v.  80 2. 


bowl  of  seventy  shekels,  after  the  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary ; both  of  them  full 
of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil  for  a 
meat  offering: 

80  One  golden  spoon  of  ten  she- 
kels^ full  of  incense : 

81  One  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
one  lamb  of  the  first  year,  for  a burnt 
offering : 

82  One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering : 

83  And  for  a sacrifice  of  peace  of- 
ferings, two  oxen,  five  rams,  five  he 
goats,  five  lambs  of  the  first  year: 
this  was  the  offering  of  Ahira  the  son 
of  Enan. 

84  This  was  the  dedication  of  the 
altar,  in  the  day  when  it  was  anoint- 
ed, by  the  princes  of  Israel:  twelve 
chargers  of  silver,  twelve  silver  bowls, 
twelve  spoons  of  gold: 

85  Each  charger  of  silver  weighing 
an  hundred  and  thirty  shekels^  each 
bowl  seventy:  all  the  silver  vessels 
weighed  two  thousand  and  four  hun- 
dred shekels^  after  the  shekel  of  the 
sanctuary : 

86  The  golden  spoons  were  twelve, 
full  of  incense,  weighing  ten  shekels 
apiece,  after  the  shekel  of  the  sanc- 


tuary : all  the  gold  of  the  spoons  was 
an  hundred  and  twenty  shekels. 

87  All  the  oxen  for  the  burnt  of- 
fering were  twelve  bullocks,  the  rams 
twelve,  the  lambs  of  the  first  year 
twelve,  with  their  meat  offering : and 
the  kids  of  the  goats  for  sin  offering 
twelve. 

88  And  all  the  oxen  for  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  peace  offerings  were  twenty 
and  four  bullocks,  the  rams  sixty,  the 
he  goats  sixty,  the  lambs  of  the  first 
year  sixty.  This  was  the  dedication 
of  the  altar,  after  that  it  was  anointed. 

89  And  when  Moses  was  gone  into 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  to 
speak  with  Tim,  then  he  heard  the  "That is, 
voice  of  one  speaking  unto  him  from 

off  the  mercy  seat  that  was  upon  the 
ark  of  testimony,  from  between  the 
two  cherubims:  and  he  spake  unto 
him. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

I How  the  lamps  are  to  be  lighted.  5 The  con- 
secration of  the  Levites.  23  The  age  and  time 

of  their  service. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 Speak  unto  Aaron,  and  say  unto  « Exod. 
him,  When  thou  "lightest  the  lamps,  &4i%5. 


84 — 88.  If  a silver  shekel  be  taken, 
roughly,  as  weighing  2*5  of  a shilling,  and  a 
golden  shekel  1-15  of  a sovereign,  the  intrinsic 
worth,  by  weight,  of  each  silver  charger  will 
be  325J.,  of  each  bowl  i75.f.,  of  each  golden 
spoon  230J.  Consequently  the  aggregate  worth, 
by  weight,  of  the  whole  of  the  offerings  will 
be  ^438.  But  the  real  worth  of  such  a sum, 
when  measured  by  the  prices  of  clothing  and 
food  at  that  time,  must  have  been  vastly 
greater.  It  must  not  be  forgotten  too  that  the 
Tabernacle  itself  had  been  recently  constructed 
at  a vast  cost. 

89.  tabernacle  of  the  congregatioi{\  Rather 
of  meeting,  cf.  Ex.  xxix.  42  and  note. 

m)ith  him']  i.e.  as  marg.  with  God,  not  (as 
some)  with  himself.  'I'he  name  of  God  is 
implied  in  the  phrase  “tabernacle  of  meeting.” 

he  heard  the  •voice  of  one  speaking]  Rather  he 
heard  the  voice  speaking,  or  convers- 
ing. 'I'he  proper  force  of  the  Hebrew  par- 
ticiple (Hithpael,  as  in  2 S.  xiv.  13  ; Ezek.  ii.  2, 
xliii.  6)  would  be  given  if  we  render,  “he 
heard  the  voice  making  itself  as  speaking.” 
The  effect  was  as  though  Moses  was  audibly 


addressed  by  another  person:  how  this  effect 
was  produced  we  are  not  told. 

Thus  was  the  promise  of  Ex.  xxv.  20 — 22 
(on  which  see  notes)  fulfilled ; and  that  as  an 
immediate  response  on  the  part  of  God  to  the 
cheerful  readiness  with  which  the  tribes  had 
made  their  offerings,  and  supplied  everything 
needful  for  the  Holy  Place  and  its  seiwice  (cf. 
Lev.  ix.  23,  24,  and  notes).  All  being  now 
complete  as  God  had  appointed,  and  the  camp 
purified  from  defilements,  God  meets  Moses 
the  mediator  of  the  people,  not  as  before  on 
the  peak  of  Sinai  far  away,  but  in  their  very 
midst,  in  the  dwelling-place  which  He  hence- 
forth vouchsafed  to  tenant. 

Chap.  VIII.  1 — 4.  These  verses  en- 
join the  actual  lighting  of  the  lamps  on  the 
Golden  Candlestick.  This  was  now  to  be 
done  to  set  forth  symbolically  the  peculiar 
presence  which  God  had  now  (cf.  vii.  89)  ac- 
tually established  amongst  His  people.  The 
workmanship,  arrangements,  and  ritual  of  the 
Candlestick  and  its  Lamps  have  been  already 
discussed.  Ex.  xxv.  31  sqq.,  xxvii.  20  sqq., 
xxxvii.  1 7 sqq.,  xl.  24,  25  ; v/here  see  notes. 


V.  3—12.] 


NUMBERS.  VIII. 


679 


the  seven  lamps  shall  give  light  over 
against  the  candlestick. 

3 And  Aaron  did  so;  he  lighted 
the  lamps  thereof  over  against  the 
candlestick,  as  the  Lord  command- 
ed Moses. 

6Exod.  25.  ^ "^And  this  work  of  the  candlestick 

zvas  of  beaten  gold,  unto  the  shaft 
thereof,  unto  the  flowers  thereof,  was 
<:Exod.2s.  ^beaten  work:  according  unto  the 
pattern  which  the  Lord  had  shewed 
Moses,  so  he  made  the  candlestick. 

5 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

6 Take  the  Levites  from  among 
the  children  of  Israel,  and  cleanse 
them. 

fHeb  7 shdlt  thou  do  unto 

let  than  them,  to  cleanse  them:  Sprinkle  wa- 
VasoAo  ter  of  purifying  upon  them,  and  Met 
p^sover,  shave  all  their  flesh,  and  let 


them  wash  their  clothes,  and  so  make 
themselves  clean. 

8 Then  let  them  take  a young 
bullock  with  his  meat  offering,  even 
fine  flour  mingled  with  oil,  and  an- 
other young  bullock  shalt  thou  take 
for  a sin  offering. 

9 And  thou  shalt  bring  the  Le- 
vites before  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation : and  thou  shalt  gather  the 
whole  assembly  of  the  children  of  Is- 
rael together : 

10  And  thou  shalt  bring  the  Le- 
vites before  the  Lord  : and  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  shall  put  their  hands 
upon  the  Levites: 

1 1 And  Aaron  shall  ^ offer  the  Le- 
vites  before  the  Lord  for  an  ^ offering 

of  the  children  of  Israel,  that  Mheyj«^-^ 
may  execute  the  service  of  the  Lord,  they  may 

12  And  the  Levites  shall  lay  their 


2.  over  against  the  candlestick^  Cf.  Ex. 
XXV.  3 7 and  note. 

5 — 22.  Ordination  of  the  Levites  to  the 
duties  already  prescribed  for  them  in  chaps, 
iii.,  iv.  This  could  only  take  place  after  the 
formal  exchange  of  the  Levites  for  the  first- 
born fiii.  44 — 51);  and  probably  stands  here 
in  its  proper  chronological  order. 

The  “consecration”  of  the  Priests  is  re- 
corded Lev.  viii.  The  distinction  between  that 
ceremony  and  the  less  solemn  “purification” 
(cf.  V.  21)  of  the  Levites  is  marked.  The  Le- 
vites are  simply  • sprinkled  with  water,  have 
to  wash  their  clothes,  and  to  shave  their  flesh 
(2;.  7);  and  then  are  offered  (vv.  10,  ii)  to 
God  on  behalf  of  the  people.  There  is  no 
“washing”  with  water,  anointing,  or  sprin- 
kling with  the  blood  of  a consecrating  sacrifice 
(Lev.  viii.  6,  22,  30).  These  rites  of  purifi- 
cation are  similar  to  those  incumbent  on  the 
priests  of  Egypt:  see  Tntrod.  to  Pentateuch,’ 
p.  ij. 

7.  voater  of  purifying~\  Lit.  “sin  water:” 
i.e.  water  to  cleanse  from  sin.  This  water 
was  no  doubt  that  taken  from  the  laver  or 
the  sanctuary,  which  was  used  by  the  Priests 
for  purification  before  they  went  into  the 
tabernacle  to  minister  (cf.  v.  17;  Ex.  xxx.  18 
sqq.).  The  water  used  for  cleansing  the  leper 
(Lev.  xiv.  5)  was  prepared  in  a peculiar  man- 
ner for  that  single  purpose;  as  was  also  the 
water  of  separation,  ch.  xix.;  neither  could 
be  available  for  such  a purpose  as  the  inaugu- 
ration of  the  Levites. 

The  “sprinkling”  of  so  large  a body  of 
men  could  have  been  only  general.  The  tokens 


of  individual  purification  were,  however,  to 
be  exhibited  by  each  of  them  through  the 
shaving  of  the  body  and  washing  the  clothes ; 
on  which  ceremonies  and  their  import  see 
Lev.  xiv.  8 and  notes. 

8.  The  two  bullocks  were  “ to  make 
an  atonement  for  the  Levites,”  and  therefore 
are  presented  in  their  name.  These  offerings 
are  similar  to  those  prescribed  Lev.  viii.  14  sqq. 
at  the  consecration  of  the  priests,  except  that 
the  burnt-offering  was  on  that  occasion  a ram. 
The  larger  victim  corresponds  to  the  larger 
number  of  the  Levites. 

10.  the  children  of  Israel^  i.e.  through 
the  heads  of  their  tribes,  who  here,  as  else- 
where (cf.  vii.  2),  no  doubt  acted  for  their 
tribesmen.  This  act,  the  distinguishing  feature 
of  the  ceremony,  represented  the  transfer  to 
the  Levites  of  the  sacred  duties  originally  in- 
cumbent on  the  whole  people. 

11.  Offer... offering']^  Lit.  here  and  in  w. 
13?  15)  “wave,”  and  “wave-offering,”  as 
marg.  How  this  Vv^as  to  be  done  is  not  deter- 
mined. ^ Most  likely  Aaron  pointed  to  the 
Levites*,  and  then  waved  his  hands  as  in  or- 
dinary cases  of  making  this  offering.  The 
multitude  of  the  Levites  seems  to  preclude 
the  other  modes  suggested ; e.g.  causing  them 
to  march  backwards  and  forwards  before  the 
Altar,  or  taking  them  round  it.  The  cere- 
mony of  waving  ind’eated  (cf.  Lev.  vii.  30 
and  note)  that  the  offering  was  dedicated  to 
God,  and,  again,  by  grant  from  Him  with- 
drawn for  the  use  of  the  priests.  It  was 
therefore  aptly  used  at  the  inauguration  of  the 
Levites. 


68o 


NUMBERS.  VIII. 


[v.  13—24. 


cliap. 

45- 


f Kxod. 

t2. 

cnap.  3. 
Luke  2. 


tHcb. 

given. 


hands  upon  the  heads  of  the  bullocks : 
and  thou  shalt  offer  the  one  for  a sin 
offering,  and  the  other  for  a burnt  of- 
fering, unto  the  Lord,  to  make  an 
atonement  for  the  Levites. 

13  And  thou  shalt  set  the  Levites 
before  Aaron,  and  before  his  sons, 
and  offer  them  for  an  offering  unto 
the  Lord. 

14  Thus  shalt  thou  separate  the 
Levites  from  among  the  children  of 

3-  Israel : and  the  Levites  shall  be  ^mine. 

15  And  after  that  shall  the  Levites 
go  in  to  do  the  service  of  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  cono-reration : and  thou 

00 

shalt  cleanse  them,  and  offer  them  for 
an  offering. 

16  For  they  are  wholly  given  unto 
me  from  among  the  children  of  Is- 
rael; instead  of  such  as  open  every 
womb,  even  instead  of  the  firstborn 
of  all  the  children  of  Israel,  have  I 
taken  them  unto  me. 

13.  17  ^For  all  the  firstborn  of  the  chil- 

13.  dren  of  Israel  are  mine,  both  man  and 
23*  beast : on  the  day  that  I smote  every 
firstborn  in  the  land  of  Egypt  I sanc- 
tified them  for  myself. 

18  And  I have  taken  the  Levites 
for  all  the  firstborn  of  the  children  of 
Israel. 

19  And  I have  given  the  Levites 
as  U gift  to  Aaron  and  to  his  sons 


13.  And  thou  shalt  set]  The  copula  might 
perhaps  be  better  rendered  “thus”  in  this 
place  than  in  the  beginning  of  the  next  verse. 
The  ‘w.  13 — 15  reiterate  the  commands  of 
'v'v.  6 sepp,  and  point  to  the  rite  as  directly 
preparatory  to  the  Levites  going  in  “ to  do 
the  service  of  the  tabernacle.” 

16.  the  firstborn  of  all  the  children  of  Is- 
rael] Hebr.  more  emphatically,  “the  first- 
born of  every  one  of,  &c.” 

19.  make  an  atonement  for  the  children 
of  Israel]  i.e.  by  performing  those  services 
which  were  due  from  the  children  of  Israel; 
the  omission  of  which  by  the  children  of  Israel 
would  but  for  the  interposition  of  the  Levites 
Live  called  down  wrath  from  God. 

That  there  he  no  plague]  Cf.  i.  53.  7'he  in- 
stitution of  the  Levites  was  an  extension  of 
that  metliatorial  system  which  the  people 
themselves,  terrified  at  the  direct  manifesta- 
tions to  them  of  the  Divine  Presence,  desired, 
Deut.  V.  ij.  The  office  of  Moses,  of  the 


from  among  the  children  of  Israel,  to 
do  the  service  of  the  children  of  Israel 
in  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
and  to  make  an  atonement  for  the 
children  of  Israel : that  there  be  no 
plague  among  the  children  of  Israel, 
when  the  children  of  Israel  come  nigh 
unto  the  sanctuary. 

20  And  Moses,  and  Aaron,  and  all 
the  congregation  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  did  to  the  Levites  according 
unto  all  that  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses  concerning  the  Levites,  so  did 
the  children  of  Israel  unto  them. 

21  And  the  Levites  were  purified, 
and  they  washed  their  clothes;  and 
Aaron  offered  them  as  an  offering  be- 
fore the  LoPv.d;  and  Aaron  made  an 
atonement  for  them  to  cleanse  them. 

22  And  after  that  went  the  Le- 
vites in  to  do  their  service  in  the  ta- 
bernacle of  the  congregation  before 
Aaron,  and  before  his  sons:  as  the 
Lord  had  commanded  Moses  con- 
cerning the  Levites,  so  did  they  unto 
them. 

23  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

24  This  is  it  that  belongeth  unto 
the  Levites : from  twenty  and  five 
years  old  and  upward  they  shall  go  E ^ ^ ^ 

To  wait  upon  the  service  of  the  taber-  tovdnhe 
nacle  of  the  congregation : 


Priests,  and,  finally,  of  the  Levites,  was  to 
interpose  after  rules  and  limits  laid  down  by 
God  Himself  between  Him  and  the  people. 
The  substitution  of  the  Levites  for  the  first- 
born is  suggested  to  us  here  as  an  act  of 
mercy  on  the  part  of  God ; for  the  firstborn, 
had  they  had  to  discharge  their  duties  in  per- 
s>on,  would  assuredly  have  fallen  into  omissions 
or  transgressions  of  the  prescribed  order,  such 
as  would  have  drawn  down  those  judicial 
visitations  by  which  God  taught  Israel  the 
reverence  due  to  Him.  Even  the  Priests  and 
Levites  themselves  were  not  always  sufficiently 
heedful  and  reverent.  Cf.  Lev.  x.  i sqq.; 
Num.  xvii.;  a Sam.  vi.  6 sqq. 

21.  <ivere  purified]  Rather,  purified 
themselves;  i.e.  by  shaving  their  flesh  and 
washing  their  clothes,  as  directed  in  nj.  7. 

23 — 26.  Period  of  the  Levites’  service. 

24.  t'euenty  and  fi've  years  old  and  upward] 
But  in  iv.  3,  23,  30,  the  limit  is  fixed  at  thirty 
years  instead  of  twenty-five.  The  directions 


V.  25— 5-] 


NUMBERS.  VIII.  IX. 


68i 


,t  Heb. 
retiott 
from  the 
warfare  of 
the  ser- 
vice. 


25  And  from  the  age  of  fifty  years 
they  shall  ^ cease  waiting  upon  the 
service  thereof^  and  shall  serve  no 
more : 

26  But  shall  minister  with  their 
brethren  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, to  keep  the  charge,  and 
shall  do  no  service.  Thus  shalt  thou 
do  unto  the  Levites  touching  their 
char2:e. 

O 


CHAPTER  IX. 

I The  passover  is  commanded  agam.  6 A 
second  passover  alloived  for  them  that  were 
tincleaii  or  absent.  15  The  clond  gtiideth  the 
removings  and  encampings  of  the  Israelites. 


K 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai,  in  the 


there  given  however  are  temporary,  and  refer 
to  the  transport  of  the  Tabernacle  during  the 
journey  ings  in  the  wilderness ; those  of  this  place 
are  permanent,  and  determine  the  ordinary  and 
regular  obligations  of  the  Levites  with  respect 
to  the  service.  The  pulling  down,  erection,  and 
. conveyance  of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  furniture 

; would  require  the  services  of  able-bodied  and 

! ■ . careful  men  in  their  prime ; and  the  number 
of  Levites  between  30  and  50  might  well 
suffice  for  those  duties.  After  the  people 
j were  settled  in  Canaan,  and  the  Levites  dis- 
. persed  over  the  whole  land  in  their  cities,  the 

I somewhat  larger  number  which  the  law  now  - 
before  us  would  afford  was  necessary.  This 
number  indeed  proved  to  be  insufficient,  even 
fi  though  the  Tribe  had  considerably  increased 

fi  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  3),  when  David  reorganized 

! and  developed  the  whole  ritual  of  the  law; 

I . and  accordingly  amongst  his  last  acts  he  ex- 

tended  the  period  of  the  Levites’  service  by 
causing  it  to  commence  at  26  years  of  age 
j _(i  Chron.  xxiii.  24—28).  And  this  David 

i is  expressly  stated  to  have  done  because  the 

S : ^ Levites  had  no  longer  to  carry  the  Tabernacle 

P and  the  vessels  (i  Chr.  xxiii.  26);  and,  con- 

j i sequently,  younger  men  might  now  undertake 

» the  office.  This  rule  continued  in  force  from 

N the  time  of  David  downwards  (cf.  2 Chron. 

xxxi.  17 ; Ezra  hi.  8). 

: to  nvait  upon  the  sera)lce'\  Cf.  iv.  23  and 

note). 

'i  Chap.  IX.  1 — 5.  Passover  at  Sinai. 

I This,  as  being  kept  in  the  first  month,  was 

ij  prior  in  time  to  the  numbering  of  ch.  i.  i sqq., 

and  to  the  other  events  narrated  in  this  book. 

' It  is,  however,  recorded  here  as  introductory 
to  the  ordinance  of  0000.  6 — 14  in  this  chapter 
respecting  the  supplementary  Passover,  the 
j:  observance  of  which  was  one  of  the  last  oc- 

currences during  the  halt  at  Sinai. 


first  month  of  the  second  year  after 
they  were  come  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  saying, 

2 Let  the  children  of  Israel  also 
keep  "the  passover  at  his  appointed  " Exo^* 

season.  Lev.  23.  5. 

3 In  the  fourteenth  day  of  this 
month,  ^at  even,  ye  shall  keep  it  in  Eeut.  16. 
his  appointed  season : according  to  all  t Heb. 
the  rites  of  it,  and  according  to  all  the  ^thTuZ 
ceremonies  thereof,  shall  ye  keep  it.  evenings. 

4 And  Moses  spake  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  that  they  should  keep 
the  passover. 

5 And  they  kept  the  passover  on 
the  fourteenth  day  of  the  first  month 
at  even  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai: 


From  the  terms  of  the  institution  of  the 
Passover  (Ex.  xii.  25,  xiii.  5 — 10),  it  would 
appear  that  the  next  celebration  of  it  was 
designed  to  be  after  the  settlement  in  Canaan. 
As,  however,  the  anniversary  of  the  Feast 
occurred  before  the  wilderness  was  traversed, 
a special  command  of  God  is  given  to  meet 
the  case;  and  had  it  not  been  for  the  sub- 
sequent rebellion  of  the  people  they  would 
have  been  “ brought  into  the  land  of  the 
Canaanites”  before  this  festival  came  round 
a third  time. 

5.  As  to  the  manner  in  which  this  ex- 
ceptional Passover  was  observed  we  are  only 
informed  generally  in  oj.  3 that  the  Israelites 
conformed  to  “all  the  rites  and  ceremonies” 
of  it.  Probably,  in  some  details,  the  present 
Passover  differed  both  from  the  one  kept  at 
the  Exodus  itself  and  from,  all  subsequent 
ones.  The  direction  of  Ex.  xii.  17  (“they 
shall  take  of  the  blood  and  strike  it  on  the 
two  side  posts,  &c.”)  could  obviously  not  be 
carried  out  in  the  letter  whilst  the  people  were 
dwelling  in  tents;  and  indeed  may,  together 
with  the  whole  command  to  kill  the  Paschal 
victim  at  home,  be  regarded  as  superseded  by 
Lev.  xvii.  3 — 6,  enforced  as  regards  the  Pass- 
over  in  particular  by  Dent.  xvi.  5 sqq. 

But  if  the  blood  of  the  Paschal  victims  was 
sprinkled  by  the  Priests  upon  the  altar,  it  may 
be  asked  how  Aaron,  Eleazar,  and  Ithamar, 
the  only  Priests  at  this  time,  could  discharge 
this  duty  within  the  time  prescribed,  ‘ ‘ between 
the  two  evenings:”  cf.  Ex.  xii.  6.  The  num- 
ber of  victims  must  of  course  have  been 
great;  but  it  has  been  much  overstated  by 
those  who  estimate  it  to  have  reached  many 
scores  of  thousands.  To  eat  a morsel  of 
the  Paschal  victim  satisfied  the  commemora- 
tive purposes  of  the  Festival,  as  the  Jewish 
authorities  remark ; and  calculations  as  to  the 


682 


NUMBERS.  IX.  [v.6-15. 


according  to  all  that  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses,  so  did  the  children  of 
Israel. 

6 ^ And  there  were  certain  men, 
who  were  defiled  by  the  dead  body  of 
a man,  that  they  could  not  keep  the 
passover  on  that  day : and  they  came 
before  Moses  and  before  Aaron  on 
that  day : 

7 And  those  men  said  unto  him. 
We  are  defiled  by  the  dead  body  of  a 
man : wherefore  are  we  kept  back, 
that  we  may  not  offer  an  offering  of 
the  Lord  in  his  appointed  season 
among  the  children  of  Israel? 

8 And  Moses  said  unto  them. 
Stand  still,  and  I will  hear  what  the 
Lord  will  command  concerning  you. 

9 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

10  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, saying,  If  any  man  of  you  or  of 
your  posterity  shall  be  unclean  by 
reason  of  a dead  body,  or  be  in  a 
journey  afar  off,  yet  he  shall  keep  the 
passover  unto  the  Lord. 

11  The  fourteenth  day  of  the  se- 
cond month  at  even  they  shall  keep 


it,  and  eat  it  with  unleavened  bread 
and  bitter  herbs. 

12  They  shall  leave  none  of  it  un- 
to the  morning,  ^nor  break  any  bone  *Exod.  12. 
of  it : according  to  all  the  ordinances  John  19. 
of  the  passover  they  shall  keep  it.  36. 

13  But  the  man  that  is  clean,  and 
is  not  in  a journey,  and  forbeareth 
to  keep  the  passover,  even  the  same 
soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  among  his 
people : because  he  brought  not  the 
offering  of  the  Lord  in  his  appointed 
season,  that  man  shall  bear  his  sin. 

14  And  if  a stranger  shall  sojourn 
among  you,  and  will  keep  the  pass- 
over  unto  the  Lord  ; according  to  the 
ordinance  of  the  passover,  and  accord- 
ing to  the  manner  thereof,  so  shall  he 

do:  ^ye  shall  have  one  ordinance, '"Exod.  12. 
both  for  the  stranger,  and  for  him 
that  was  born  in  the  land. 

15  ^ And  ^on  the  day  that  the 40- 
tabernacle  was  reared  up  the  cloud 
covered  the  tabernacle,  namely^  the 

tent  of  the  testimony:  and  at  even 
there  was  upon  the  tabernacle  as  it 
were  the  appearance  of  fire,  until  the 
morning. 


number  of  lambs  required  to  supply  the  two 
million  of  Israelites  with  a meal  are  therefore 
irrelevant.  Neither  was  it  necessary  that  all 
the  victims  should  be  lambs:  cf.  Ex.  xii.  5. 
The  Priests  were  no  doubt  assisted  at  this 
tim.e,  as  afterwards  (cf.  ^ Chron.  xxx.  16, 
XXXV.  ii)  by  the  Levites.  In  such  points  of 
detail  the  administrators  of  the  law  of  Moses 
would  here,  as  elsewhere,  have,  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  power  to  order  what 
might  be  requisite  to  carry  the  law  into  effect. 
Josephus,  ‘Bell.  Jud.’  vi.  9.  3,  speaks  of  the 
blood  of  256,000  victims  having  been  in  his 
days  sprinkled  on  the  altar  within  three  hours. 

6.  certain  men'\  Probably  (cf.  Blunt’s 
‘Script.  Coincidences,’  pp.  62 — 65)  Mishael 
and  Elizaphan,  who  burled  their  cousins, 
Nadab  and  Abihu,  within  a week  of  this 
Piissover  (Lev.  x.  4,  5).  None  would  be 
more  likely  to  make  this  inquiry  of  Moses 
than  his  kinsmen,  who  had  defiled  themselves 
by  his  express  direction. 

11.  The  fourteenth  day  of  the  second 
montfj]  d'he  later  Jews  speak  of  this  as  the 
Little  Passover.  Coming,  as  it  did,  a month 
after  the  proper  Passover,  it  afford'd  ample 
time  for  a man  to  purify  himself  from  legal 


defilement,  as  also  to  return  from  any  but 
a very  distant  j'ourney.  It  was  in  conformity 
with  the  spirit  of  this  ordinance  that  Heze- 
kiah,  at  the  opening  of  his  reign,  celebrated 
the  Great  Passover  in  the  second  month,  being 
unable  to  complete  the  sanctification  of  the 
temple  and  priesthood  against  the  regular 
season  of  the  feast  (2  Chron.  xxix.,  xxx.). 

12.  according  to  all  the  ordinances']  i.e. 
those  relating  to  'the  passover-lamb,  not  those 
concerning  the  feast;  for  the  Little  Passover 
lasted,  according  to  the  Jews,  only  one  day; 
nor  was  it  held  to  be  needful  that  at  it  leaven 
should  be  put  away  out  of  the  houses. 

15 — 20.  The  signals  given  by  God  for 
marching  and  for  halting. 

15.  on  the  day  that  the  tabernacle  fwas 
reared  up]  Cf.  Ex.  xl.  34,  which  is  evidently 
referred  to  in  this  verse.  The  phenomenon 
first  appeared  at  the  Exodus  itself.  Ex.  xiii.  21, 
22  ; it  is  now  again  more  particularly  described 
in  connexion  with  the  journeyings  which  are 
to  be  narrated  in  the  sequel  of  the  book. 

the  tabernacle^  namdy^  the  tent  of  the  testi- 
mony] On  these  words  see  note  at  end  of 
chapter. 


V.  i6 — 23.] 


NUMBERS.  IX. 


683 


■ 16  So  it  was  alway:  the  cloud 

covered  it  by  day^  and  the  appearance 
of  fire  by  night. 

17  And  when  the  cloud  was  taken 
up  from  the  tabernacle,  then  after 
that  the  children  of  Israel  journeyed : 
and  in  the  place  where  the  cloud 
abode,  there  the  children  of  Israel 
pitched  their  tents. 

18  At  the  commandment  of  the 
Lord  the  children  of  Israel  journey- 
ed, and  at  the  commandment  of  the 

^ I Cor.  10.  Lord  they  pitched:  ^as  long  as  the 
cloud  abode  upon  the  tabernacle  they 
rested  in  their  tents. 

tHeb.  • And  when  the  cloud  ^tarried 
prolonged,  upon  the  tabemacle  many  days, 
then  the  children  of  Israel  kept  the 
charge  of  the  Lord,  and  journeyed 
not. 

20  And  so  it  was,  when  the  cloud 
was  a few  days  upon  the  tabernacle; 
according  to  the  commandment  of 


the  Lord  they  abode  in  their  tents, 
and  according  to  the  commandment 
of  the  Lord  they  journeyed. 

21  And  so  it  was,  when  the  cloud 

^ abode  from  even  unto  the  morning,  ^ Heb. 
and  that  the  cloud  was  taken  up  in 
the  morning,  then  they  journeyed : 
whether  it  was  by  day  or  by  night 
that  the  cloud  was  taken  up,  they 
journeyed. 

22  Or  whether  it  were  two  days,  or 
a month,  or  a year,  that  the  cloud 
tarried  upon  the  tabernacle,  remain- 
ing thereon,  the  children  of  Israel 
•^abode  in  their  tents,  and  journeyed  y-Exod.  40. 
not : but  when  it  was  taken  up,  they  37- 
journeyed. 

23  At  the  commandment  of  the 
Lord  they  rested  in  the  tents,  and  at 
the  commandment  of  the  Lord  they 
journeyed : they  kept  the  charge  of 
the  Lord,  at  the  commandment  of 
the  Lord  by  the  hand  of  Moses. 


20.  so  it  <zvas,  'when.^  &c.]  Rather, 

And  there  wa.s  also  when,  &c.  (cf.  for 
the  Hebrew,  Neh.  v.  2,  3,  4).  As  the  preceding 
verse  had  contemplated  a time  when  the  cloud 
tarried  many  days,  so  there  were  also  occa- 
sions on  which  it  tarried  but  few  days. 

21.  And  so  it  nvas.,  ^hen.,  &c.]  Rather, 
And  there  was  also  when  the  cloud 
abode  from  even  unto  morning,  and 


the  cloud  was  taken  up  in  the  morn- 
ing, and  they  journeyed:  see  on  nj.  20. 

22.  a year'\  The  Hebrew  expression  is 
“days,”  which  idiomatically  denotes  a year 
in  Lev.  xxv.  29.  But  in  the  present  passage 
the  ancient  translators,  whom  some  follow, 
understood  it  to  mean  simply  “a  longer  time.” 
It  probably  is  equivalent  to  “a  full  period,” 
though  not  necessarily  the  period  of  a year. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  ix.  15. 


1.  In  2;.  15  the  words  “ namely  the  tent  of 

the  testimony”  are  obviously  added  to  the 
word  “tabernacle”  (pilJ'D),  in  order  to  de- 
scribe the  phenomenon  more  accurately.  The 
passage  would  literally  run  “the  cloud  covered 
the  tabernacle  towards  the  tent  of  the  testi- 
mony” (myn  ; i.e.  the  cloud  did  not 

cover  the  whole  structure,  court  and  all,  but 
only  the  portion  of  it  in  which  the  Ark  was 
placed,  including  perhaps  the  holy  place  as  well 
as  the  holy  of  holies. 

2.  As  the  ark  was  termed  “the  Ark  of 
Testimony”  (cf.  Ex.  xxv.  16,  21,  22)  because 
the  testimony  (i.e.  the  decalogue)  was  placed 
in  it,  so  in  like  manner  the  inclosure  which 
contained  the  Ark  itself  was  termed  the  “tent 
of  the  testimony”  or  “witness:”  as  in  the 
passage  before  us,  and  in  xvii.  4,  8,  xviii.  2. 


3.  The  same  portion  of  the  structure  seems 
properly  to  be  indicated  by  the  phrase  PHN 
nyilD,  “tent  of  the  congregation,”  or  more  pro- 
perly “of  meeting;”  cf.  note  at  the  end  of 
Ex.  xl. 

4.  The  phrase  “tabemacle  of  testimony” 
(myn  pSI’tD),  seems  (cf.  i.  50,  x.  ii)  to  im- 
port generally  the  whole  stmcture. 

5.  The  A.  V.  generally  translates  pK^JD 

and  by  “tabemacle”  and  “tent”  re- 

spectively; but  in  Num.  xvi.  42,  43  (in  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  xvii.  7,  8)  the  latter  word  is 
represented  by  “tabemacle,”  as  it  is  also  in 
the  repeated  translation  of  nyiD  by 
“ tabernacle  of  the  congregation,”  in  Num.  iii. 
Respecting  the  structure  and  arrangements 
of  the  Tabernacle  full  information  is  given 
in  the  notes  on  Ex.  xxvi.  and  xl. 


NUMBERS.  X.  [v.  i-io. 


CHAPTER  X. 

I The  use  of  the  silver  h-timpets.  1 1 The  Is- 
raelites remove  from  Sinai  to  Paran.  14  The 
order  of  their  7narch.  29  Hobab  is  intreated 
by  Moses  7iot  to  leave  thc77i.  33  The  blessing  of 
Moses  at  the  re77iovi7ig  a7id  7'esti7ig  of  the  a7'k. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 Make  thee  two  trumpets  of  sil- 
ver; of  a whole  piece  shalt  thou  make 
them : that  thou  mayest  use  them  for 
the  calling  of  the  assembly,  and  for 
the  journeying  of  the  camps. 

3 And  when  they  shall  blow  with 
them,  all  the  assembly  shall  assemble 
themselves  to  thee  at  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

^ And  if  they  blow  but  with  one 
tru?npet^  then  the  princes,  which  are 
heads  of  the  thousands  of  Israel,  shall 
gather  themselves  unto  thee. 

5 When  ye  blov/  an  alarm,  then 
the  camps  that  lie  on  the  east  parts 
shall  go  forward. 

6 When  ye  blow  an  alarm  the  se- 
cond time,  then  the  camps  that  lie  on 
the  south  side  shall  take  their  jour- 


ney: they  shall  blow  an  alarm  for 
their  journeys. 

7 But  v/hen  the  congregation  is  to 
be  gathered  together,  ye  shall  blov/, 
but  ye  shall  not  sound  an  alarm. 

8 And  the  sons  of  Aaron,  the 
priests,  shall  blow  with  the  trumpets ; 
and  they  shall  be  to  you  for  an  ordi- 
nance for  ever  throughout  your  gene- 
rations. 

9 And  if  ye  go  to  war  in  your  land 
against  the  enemy  that  oppresseth 
you,  then  ye  shall  blow  an  alarm  with 
the  trumpets ; and  ye  shall  be  re- 
membered before  the  Lord  your 
God,  and  ye  shall  be  saved  from  your 
enemies. 

10  Also  in  the  day  of  your  glad- 
ness, and  in  your  solemn  days,  and  in 
the  beginnings  of  your  months,  ye 
shall  blow  with  the  trumpets  over 
your  burnt  offerings,  and  over  the 
sacrifices  of  your  peace  offerings ; that 
they  may  be  to  you  for  a memorial 
before  your  God : I atn  the  Lord 
your  God. 


Chap.  X.  1 — 10.  The  Silver  Trumpets. 
These,  as  employed  in  signalling  the  move- 
ments of  the  Camp,  are  here  mentioned  among 
other  preliminaries  for  the  impending  journeys. 
Occasion  is  taken  to  describe  the  various  uses 
of  the  Trumpets.  It  is  not  necessary  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Trumpets  were  now  first  ap- 
pointed by  God.  Indeed,  reference  is  made  to 
them  Lev.  xxv.  9. 

2.  The  trumpet  (kbatsotserah')  was  a 
straight  instrument,  differing  in  this  respect 
from  the  curved  horn  or  cornet  (keren^  sho~ 
pba)') ; yet  the  latter  is  frequently  rendered 
“trumpet”  in  the  English  Version,  when  the 
two  instruments  are  not  mentioned  together. 
The  Jewish  trumpet  is  described  (Joseph. 
‘ Ant.’  III.  12.  6)  as  “ a little  less  than  a cubit 
in  length;  the  tube  narrow,  a little  thicker 
than  a flute,  and  just  wide  enough  to  per- 
mit the  performer  to  blow  it;  while  it  termi- 
nated, like  other  trumpets,  in  the  form  of  a 
bell.'’  Such  instruments  are  represented, 
among  the  other  spoils  of  the  temple,  on  the 
Arch  of  Titus.  See  on  Ex.  xxv.  23.  From 
h.gyptian  monuments  it  appears  that  the 
Jewish  trumpet  was  copied  from  that  used 
in  the  armies  of  the  Pharaohs,  &c.  (see 
Wilkinson’s  ‘Manners  and  Customs  of  the 
Ancient  - Egyptians,’  ii.  pp.  260  sqq.).  The 
shape  of  the  cornet  bespeaks  its  pastoral 
origin.  At  first  it  was  a simple  ram’s  horn 


(Josh.  vi.  4);  and  the  metal  instrument  of 
later  times  preserved  the  original  shape. 

5.  blozu  a7i  alarm~\  i.e.  a long  conti- 
nuous peal.  Cf.  2;.  ye  shall  blo-iu^  but  not 
sou7id  an  alar7n:  i.e.  blow  in  short,  sharp 
notes  not  in  a continuous  peal. 

6.  tbe  second  time']  The  LXX.  introduces 
here  a third  and  a fourth  alarm  as  signals 
for  the  west  and  north  camps.  No  express 
mention  of  these  is  found  in  the  Hebrew  text, 
but  we  may  infer  that  they  were  actually  used. 

8.  tbe  sons  of  Aaron']  As  the  trumpets 
were  emblematic  of  the  voice  of  God  the 
Priests  only  were  to  use  them.  At  this  tim.e 
there  were  only  two  “sons  of  Aaron;”  but 
in  later  times,  when  the  number  of  priests 
v/as  greater,  more  trumpets  were  used;  we 
read  of  seven  in  the  reign  of  David,  i Chron. 
XV.  24 ; of  a hundred  and  twenty  in  that  of 
Solomon,  2 Chron.  v.  12. 

9.  For  examples  of  the  employment 
of  trumpets  in  war  cf.  xxxi.  6;  Josh,  vi.; 
2 Chron.  xiii.  12,  14,  xx.  28.  By  this  em- 
ployment was  signified  the  dependence  of 
God’s  people  on  His  aid. 

10.  in  tbe  day  of  your  gladness]  Cf. 
xxix.  i;  Lev.  xxiii.  24;  2 Chron.  xxix.  27; 
Ezra  iii.  10;  Neh.  xii.  35,  41;  Ps.  Ixxxi.  3. 

I am  tbe  Lord  your  God]  Rather,  even 
before  me,  tbe  Lord  your  God.  The 
words  do  not  form  a separate  period  as  in  A.V. 


V.  II— 15-] 


NUMBERS.  X. 


685 


11  II  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
twentieth  day  of  the  second  month, 
in  the  second  year,  that  the  cloud  was 
taken  up  from  off  the  tabernacle  of 
the  testimony. 

12  And  the  children  of  Israel  took 
their  journeys  out  of  the  wilderness  of 
Sinai  \ and  the  cloud  rested  in  the 
wilderness  of  Paran. 


13  And  they  first  took  their  journey 
according  to  the  commandment  of  the 
Lord  by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

14  ^ ^In  the  first  place  went  the  ^chap.  2. 
standard  of  the  camp  of  the  children 

of  Judah  according  to  their  armies: 
and  over  his  host  was  ‘^Nahshon  the  '''chap.  i. 
son  of  Amminadab. 

15  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 


11.  At  this  point  commences  the  second 
great  division  of  the  book,  extending  to  the 
close  of  chapter  xiv.  Cf.  Introd.  § 2.  The 
remaining  verses  of  the  present  chapter  nar- 
rate the  actual  break  up  of  the  camp  at  Sinai 
and  the  order  of  the  march. 

12.  took  their  journey 3\  Lit.  “journeyed 
after  their  journeys,”  cf.  Lx.  xvii.  i. 

the  qvilderness  of  Parari]  This  tract  com- 
prised about  one-third  of  the  entire  extent  of 
the  peninsula,  which  lies  between  Egypt  and 
Canaan,  and  is  the  eastern  half  of  the  great 
limestone  plateau,  which  constitutes  the  centre 
of  that  peninsula-  It  was  bounded  on  the 
north  by  the  Canaanitish  frontier;  on  the 
west  by  the  Brook  or  River  of  Egypt,  which 
parted  it  from  the  other  half  of  the  plateau, 
the  Wilderness  of  Shur;  on  the  south  by 
the  great  sand -belt,  which  sweeps  across 
the  peninsula  in  a northwardly-concave  line, 
from  gulf  to  gulf,  and  forms  a broad  demar- 
cation between  it  and  the  cliffs  of  Sinai;  and 
on  the  east  by  the  northern  portion  of  the 
Elanitic  gulf,  and  by  the  great  valley  of  the 
Arabah,  which  divides  it  from  the  m.ountains 
of  Edom.  The  Wilderness  of  Zin  (to  be 
carefully  distinguished  from  that  of  Sin), 
fonning  the  immediate  boundary  of  Canaan 
(xxxiv.  3),  was  its  north-eastern  extremity; 
and  it  is  thus  that  Kadesh  is  indifferently 
spoken  of  as  in  the  Wilderness  of  Zin,  or  in 
that  of  Paran  (xiii.  26,  xx.  i,  &c.).  In- 
deed, in  I Sam.  xxv.  i,  even  parts  of  the 
south  of  Canaan  seem  to  be  included  under 
the  name  of  Paran.  But  this  name  has  now 
disappeared  from  the  tract  in  question,  which, 
in  common  with  the  rest  of  the  plateau  of 
which  it  forms  a part,  is  known  under  the 
general  name  of  et-Tih,  “the  Wandering;” 
a name  also  specially  applied  to  the  range  of 
hills  that  mark  its  southern  edge.  It  must 
not  be  confounded  with  a district  which 
could  never  have  been  included  within  it,  the 
well-known  and  beautiful  W^ady  Feiran,  de- 
riving its  name  from  the  early  Christian  city 
on  which,  through  some  unexplained  cause, 
the  name  Pharan  was  bestowed.  But  a 
genuine  trace  of  it  may  perhaps  be  found  in 
the  Phara,  marked  in  the  Roman  tables  of  the 
fourth  century  as  a station  on  the  road  be- 
tween the  heads  of  the  two  gulfs,  120  Roman 
miles  from  the  western  and  50  from  the 
VoL.  I. 


eastern  extremity  (compare  Ritter,  i.  pp.  69 
and  428  sqq.  Clark’s  Transl.). 

The  Wilderness  of  Paran  is,  on  the  whole, 
to  European  eyes,  a blanched  and  dreary 
waste;  intersected  by  watercourses,  almost 
always  dry  except  in  the  rainy  season,  and 
crossed  by  low  ranges  of  horizontal  hills 
which  relieve  but  little  the  general  monotony 
of  its  appearance.  It  does  not  exhibit  the 
savage  and  frightful  desolation  of  the  Arabah ; 
but  neither,  on  the  other  hand,  is  it  enlivened 
by  the  fertile  valleys  to  be  found  amid  the 
granite  mountains  of  Sinai.  Its  soil  is  mostly 
strewn  with  pebbles,  through  which  a slight 
coating  of  vegetation  struggles;  yet  here  and 
there  level  plains  may  be  found  in  it  of  rich 
red  earth  fit  for  culture,  or  valleys  abounding 
in  shrubs  and  trees,  and  offering  coverts  for 
hares.  It  has  been  remarked  that  vegetation 
is  readily  produced  wherever  the  winter  rains 
do  not  at  once  run  to  waste  (see  Burckhardt, 
pp.  148  sqq.;  Rogers,  ‘ Mosaic  Records,’  Art. 
130).  But  this  vegetation  has  probably  been 
long  on  the  decrease,  and  is  still  decreasing, 
principally  from  the  reckless  destruction  of 
trees  for  charcoal,  and  the  aspect  of  the  wil- 
derness has  been  proportionately  deteriorated 
thereby:  see  Introd.  to  Exodus,  pp.  245,  246. 

Towards  this  wilderness  the  Israelites  now 
advanced  on  their  march  from  Sinai  to  Ca- 
naan, unaware  as  yet  that  on  its  wastes  the 
next  eight  and  thirty  years  of  their  existence 
would  be  spent.  They  did  not  actually  enter 
it  till  they  had  crossed  the  sand-belt : it  is 
therefore  mentioned  here  by  anticipation.  Their 
earliest  halting-places,  Kibroth-hattaavah  and 
Hazerolh,  were  not  within  its  limits  (xi.  35, 
xii.i6).  For  the  direction  of  their  march  see 
on  xi.  35. 

13.  A)id  they  first  took  their  journey^  &c.] 
Rather,  And  they  journeyed  (or,  set  forth) 
in  the  order  of  precedence  accord- 
ing to  (j.e.  established  by)  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord,  See.  The  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  word  for  “first”  is  determined 
by  its  use  in  the  following  verse,  where  it 
applies  to  the  camp  of  Judah  going  before 
tiie  rest.  This  order  of  precedence  is  described 
in  ns-v.  14 — 28. 

14.  according  to  their  armies']  Cf.  i,  3. 
There  were  three  tribal  hosts  in  each  camp ; 
and  each  tribe  had  of  course  its  subdivisions. 

X X 


686 


NUMBERS.  X. 


[v.  1 6 — 30. 


of  the  children  of  Issachar  was  Ne- 
thaneel  the  son  of  Zuar. 

16  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 
of  the  children  of  Zebulun  was  Eliab 
the  son  of  Helon. 

17  And  the  tabernacle  was  taken 
down;  and  the  sons  of  Gershon  and 
the  sons  of  Merari  set  forward,  bear- 
ing the  tabernacle. 

18^  And  the  standard  of  the  camp 
of  Reuben  set  forward  according  to 
their  armies:  and  over  his  host  was 
Elizur  the  son  of  Shedeur. 

19  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 
of  the  children  of  Simeon  was  Shelu- 
miei  the  son  of  Zurishaddai. 

20  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 
of  the  children  of  Gad  was  Eliasaph 
the  son  of  Deuel. 

21  And  the  Kohathites  set  forward, 
fchrip.  4.  bearing  the  ^sanctuary:  and 

^Thatis,  set  up  the  tabernacle  against  they 
aieGer-  came. 

snofiites  A 1 1 

audjhe  22  ^ And  the  standard  of  the  camp 
'itls?'''  of  the  children  of  Ephraim  set  for- 
Seever.  17.  accordiiig  to  thcir  armies:  and 

over  his  host  was  Elishama  the  son  of 
Ammihud. 

23  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 


of  the  children  of  Manasseh  was  Ga- 
maliel the  son  of  Pedahzur. 

24  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 
of  the  children  of  Benjamin  was  Abi- 
dan  the  son  of  Gideoni. 

25  ^ And  the  standard  of  the  camp 
of  the  children  of  Dan  set  forward, 
which  was  the  rereward  of  all  the 
camps  throughout  their  hosts  : and 
over  his  host  zvas  Ahiezer  the  son  of 
Ammishaddai. 

26  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 
of  the  children  of  Asher  was  Pagiel 
the  son  of  Ocran. 

27  And  over  the  host  of  the  tribe 
of  the  children  of  Naphtali  was  Ahira 
the  son  of  Enan. 

28  ^Thus  were  the  journeyings  of  f Heb. 
the  children  of  Israel  accordins;  to 
their  armies,  when  they  set  forward. 

29  ^ And  Moses  said  unto  Hobab, 
the  son  of  Raguel  the  Midianite, 
Moses’  father  in  law.  We  are  jour- 
neying unto  the  place  of  which  the 
Lord  said,  I will  give  it  you : come 
thou  with  us,  and  we  will  do  thee 
good:  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken  good 
concerning  Israel. 

30  And  he  said  unto  him,  I will 


17.  The  command  had  been,  in  general 
teiTns,  that  the  Levites,  with  the  tabernacle, 
should  occupy  the  central  place  in  the  line 
of  march,  after  the  camps  of  Judah  and 
Reuben,  ii.  17.  But  convenience  now  neces- 
sitated, if  not  a modification  of  this  order,  at 
least  a more  precise  determination  of  the 
method  of  executing  ic.  The  appointed  place 
of  the  tabernacle,  m the  midst  of  the  host, 
was  represented  during  the  march  by  the  ark, 
the  holy  vessels.  See.  carried  by  the  Kohatii- 
ites ; the  actual  structure  of  the  tabernacle 
was  borne  in  advance  by  the  Gershonites  and 
Merarites,  immiediately  behind  the  camp  of 
J udah ; so  as  to  be  set  up  ready  against  the 
arrival  of  the  sacred  utensils  borne  by  the 
Kohathites.  See  -v.  21,  and  cf.  chs.  ii.,  iv. 

21.  the  sanctuary.,  &c.]  i.e.  the  holy  fur- 
niture which  remained  when  the  tabernacle 
was  taken  down. 

29.  Hobah.,  the  son  of  Raguel  the  Mi- 
dianite., Moses'  father  in  la^'\  The  form 
Raguel,  for  Reuel  (Exod.  ii.  18),  has  need- 
lessly Ixvn  perpetuated  in  the  A.  V.  from 
the  Latin ; the  names  are  one  in  Hebrew 
(so,  Gaza  and  Az/ah,  Ai  and  Hai,  &c.). 
Reuel  was  probably  not  identical  with  Jethro: 


see  on  Ex.  ii.  18.  It  seems  evident  too  that 
Hobab  was  in  fact  the  brother-in-law,  not 
the  father-in-law,  of  Moses,  and  the  He- 
brew word  translated  in  A.V.  “fether-in- 
law,”  signifies  simply  any  relation  by  mar- 
riage, as  does  the  Greek  yo/n.Spoy : see  on  Ex. 
ii.  18.  Hobab  is  described  as  the  “son  of 
Reuel;”  and  the  desire  of  xMoses  to  obtain 
his  services  as  guide  through  the  wilderness 
indicates  that  he  \vas  younger  than  Moses’ 
father-in-law  could  now  have  been.  It  is 
stated  in  Exod.  xviii.  27  that  Jethro  quitted 
the  Israelites,  before  they  reached  Sinai,  to 
return  to  his  own  land ; whilst  it  appears 
from  the  passage  now  before  us  compared 
with  Judges  i.  16,  iv.  ii,  that  Hobab  even- 
tually accompanied  them,  and  obtained  a 
settlement  with  them  in  the  land  of  Canaan 
(so  Joseph.,  Bertheau,  Keil,  &c.).  Hobab 
and  Jethro  may  have  been  brethren  and  sons 
of  Reuel.  The  other  solution  that  Jethro  and 
Hobab  were  the  same  person,  Jethro  (“excel- 
lency”) being  his  official  title,  though  adopted 
by  many  authorities  ancient  and  modern,  seems 
less  probable.  More  improbable  still  is  the 
suggestion  that  Reuel,  Jethro,  and  Hobab  are 
all  three  appellations  of  one  individual. 


V-  31—35'] 


NUMBERS.  X. 


687 


not  go;  but  I will 'depart  to  mine 
own  land,  and  to  my  kindred. 

31  And  he  said,  Leave  us  not,  I pray 
thee ; forasmuch  as  thou  knowest  how 
we  are  to  encamp  in  the  wilderness,  and 
thou  mayest  be  to  us  instead  of  eyes. 

32  And  it  shall  be,  if  thou  go  with 
us,  yea,  it  shall  be,  that  what  good- 
ness the  Lord  shall  do  unto  us,  the 
same  will  we  do  unto  thee. 


33  ^ And  they  departed  from  the 
mount  of  the  Lord  three  days’  jour- 
ney : and  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of 
the  Lord  went  before  them  in  the 
three  days’  journey,  to  search  out  a 
resting  place  for  them. 

34  And  the  cloud  of  the  Lord  was 
upon  them  by  day,  when  they  went 
out  of  the  camp. 

35  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  the 


The  Mahometan  legends  neither  expressly 
identify  nor  yet  distinguish  between  Jethro, 
Reuel,  and  Hobab.  The  Shu’eib  of  whom 
they  speak,  corresponds  on  the  whole  rather 
to  the  early  host  and  father-in-law  than  to 
the  subsequent  companion  of  Moses;  though 
his  name  has  locally  connected  itself  with  a 
watercourse  running  westward  into  the  Jor- 
dan opposite  Jericho,  as  well  as  with  one  of 
the  ravines  at  Sinai,  and  with  a cave  on  the 
eastern  shores  of  the  eastern  branch  of  the  Red 
Sea.  But  even  were  these  legends  more  defi- 
nite, they  could  hardly  carry  weight  in  regard 
to  the  question  before  us. 

31.  thou  mayest  be  to  us  instead  of  eyes^ 
i.  e.  mayest  discern  what  is  needful  for  us : a 
proverbial  expression  still  in  use  in  the  East. 
The  narrative  gives  no  more  exact  descrip- 
tion of  the  services  expected  from  Hobab. 
The  divine  guidance  of  the  Pillar  of  the  cloud 
would  not  render  superfluous  the  human  con- 
ductor who  could  indicate  the  spots  where 
water,  fuel,  and  pasture  might  be  found,  the 
dangers  from  hurricanes,  and  the  localities 
infested  by  robbers.  Probably  indeed  the  Pil- 
lar prescribed  only  the  general  direction  of  the 
journey.  Nor  would  it  be  according  to  the 
general  analogy  of  God’s  dealings  had  He 
miraculously  rendered  His  people  independent 
of  such  aids  from  human  experience  and  sa- 
gacity as  were  within  their  reach. 

33.  three  days'  journey'^  Probably  a techni- 
cal expression  for  such  a distance  as  could 
not  be  traversed  in  a single  day,  and  there- 
fore not  without  intervals  of  encampment 
and  due  provision:  cf.  Gen.  xxx.  36;  Exod. 
iii.  18,  V.  3,  viii.  27,  xv.  22.  The  technical 
use  of  the  phrase  “Sabbath-day's  journey” 
for  another  average  distance,  Acts  i.  12,  is 
similar.  Even  were  the  expression  strictly  in- 
terpreted it  would  remain  to  be  noted  that 
three  days  of  Jewish  reckoning  are  not  neces- 
sarily more  than  one  whole  day  and  two 
fragments  of  days.  The  end  of  this  stage, 
where  the  tabernacle  was  first  re-erected,  and 
the  square  encampment  formed,  was  appa- 
rently Kibroth-hattaavah : see  xi.  24,  34, 
xxxiii.  16. 

the  ark  of  the  consenant  of  the  Lord  nvent 


before  thern\  From  ns.  21  and  ii.  17  it 
would  appear  that  the  usual  place  of  the  Ark 
during  the  march  was  in  the  midst  of  the 
host.  It  was  evidently  an  exceptional  case 
when,  in  Josh.  iii.  the  Ark  preceded  the  peo- 
ple into  the  bed  of  the  Jordan.  Nevertheless 
some,  especially  among  the  Jewish  commen- 
tators, attending  only  to  the  position  of  the 
Ark  at  the  commencement  of  that  miraculous 
passage,  deem  that  the  first  march  from 
Smai  was  also  similarly  exceptional,  it  being 
for  the  occasion  carried  before  the  host. 
Others,  as  Keil,  view  the  present  verse  as 
furnishing  the  key  to  the  true  interpretation 
of  the  earlier  notices : they  hold  that  the  Ark, 
as  distinguished  from  the  sanctuary,  went 
always  in  advance.  They  insist  on  the  inti- 
mate connexion  between  the  Ark  as  God’s 
throne  and  the  chnid  of  His  presence,  which 
latter  we  know  to  have  preceded  the  host  on 
its  long  line  of  march.  Cf.  Exod.  xiii.  21, 
xiv.  19.  But  the  better  view  is  that  of  Bp. 
Patrick,  that  the  words  “went  before  t'nem” 
do  not  here  imply  local  precedence.  The 
phrase,  or  its  equivalent,  is  used  of  a leader 
going  out  in  command  of  his  troops,  xxvii.  1 7 ; 
Deut.  xxxi.  3;  I Sam.  xviii.  16;  2 Chron.  i. 
10 ; who  of  course  would  not  necessarily  go 
before  them  in  a local  sense.  Thus  the  Ark 
may  well  be  said  to  have  gone  at  the  head 
of  the  Israelites,  when  it  was  borne  solemnly 
in  their  midst  as  the  outward  embodiment  of 
the  Presence  whose  sovereign  word  was  their 
law.  That  the  divine  cloud  remained  with 
the  Ark  as  they  journeyed  is  not  asserted,  and 
the  tenor  of  the  next  verse  seems  against  it ; 
as  also  is  the  fact  that,  when  the  tabernacle 
was  reared,  the  cloud  rested  over,  not  within, 
the  tabernacle. 

a resting  place~\  Lit.  “rest.”  It  is  com- 
monly understood  of  each  successive  encamp- 
ment ; or,  in  particular,  of  the  first  encamp- 
ment. Yet  the  term  would  hardly  be  here 
employed,  did  it  not  carry  with  it  a higher 
meaning,  pointing  to  the  promised  rest  of 
Canaan,  for  which  the  Israelites  were  now 
in  full  march,  and  from  the  speedy  enjoy- 
ment of  which  no  sentence  of  exclusion  as 
yet  debarred  them.  Cf.  Deut.  i.  33;  Ps.  xxxii. 
8 ; Ezek.  xx.  6. 

X X 2 


t 


688 


NUMBERS.  X.  XL  [v- 36-6. 


ark  set  forward,  that  Moses  said, 
‘^Psai.  68.  ^Rise  up,  Lord,  and  let  thine  ene- 
mies  be  scattered ; and  let  them  that 
hate  thee  flee  before  thee. 

36  And  when  it  rested,  he  said, 
\iich.ten  Return,  O Lord,  unto  the  +many 
thousands  of  Israel. 

SiDtds. 

CHAPTER  XL  . 

I The  burning  at  Taberah  quenched  by  Moses' 
prayer.  4 The  people  lust  for  flesh,  and 
loathe  manna.  10  Moses  complaineth  of  his 
charge.  16  God  divideth  his  burden  unto 
seventy  elders.  3 1 
Q at  Kibroth-hattaavah. 

Zlre  Tom-  AND  wheu  the  people  " com  plained, 
pininers.  ' Lt  displeased  the  Lord:  and 
c-.il  the  Lord  heard  it;  “and  his  anger 
was  kindled;  and  the  fire  of  the  Lord 
Psai.  78.  bm-nt  among  them,  and  consumed 


them  that  were  in  the  uttermost  parts 
of  the  camp. 

2 And  the  people  cried  unto  Mo- 
ses ; and  when  Moses  prayed  unto 
the  Lord,  the  fire  ^was  quenched. 

3 And  he  called  the  name  of  the 

place  "Taberah:  because  the  fire  of^ThaU^^ 
the  Lord  burnt  among  them. 

4 ^ And  the  ^mixt  multitude  that 

was  among  them  Tell  a lusting:  and 
the  children  of  Israel  Tlso  wept  again,  [fj. 
and  said,  ^ Who  shall  give  us  flesh  to  eat?  , 

5 We  remember  the  fish,  which  | 

we  did  eat  in  Egypt  freely ; the  cu-  6.'  j 

cumbers,  and  the  melons,  and  the  I 

leeks,  and  the  onions,  and  the  garlic : i 

6 But  now  our  soul  is  dried  away  : 
there  is  nothing  at  all,  beside  this 
manna,  before  our  eyes. 


35  36.  Each  forward  movement  and 

each  rest  of  the  Ark  was  made  to  bear  a 
sacramental  character.  The  one  betokened 
the  going  forth  of  God  against  his  enemies ; 
the  other,  His  gathering  of  His  own  people  to 
himself;  the  one  was  the  pledge  of  victory, 
the  other  the  earnest  of  repose.  The  verb  m 
16  is  best  taken  transitively  (with  Maurer, 
Gesen.  &c.) : “Restore”  {i.e.  to  the  land 
which  their  fathers  sojourned  in),  “ O Lord, 
the  ten  thousande  of  the  thousands  of  Israel. 
(Cf.  Psalm  Ixxxv.  4,  where  the  verb  m the 
Hebrew  is  the  same.) 

Cii\P  XI.  This  and  the  following  three 
chapters  recount  the  successive  rebellions  of 
the  Israelites  after  their  departure  from  Sinai; 
culminating  in  that  by  which  they  brought 
upon  themselves  the  sentence  of  personal  ex- 
clusion from  the  land  of  promise.  Incidental 
the  narrative  furnishes  some  details  or  the 
northward  march. 

1 — 3.  Burning  at  Taberah. 

1.  And  <Lvhen  the  people  complained,  it  dis- 
pleased the  Lord]  Render,  And  the  people 
were  as  those  that  complain  of  evil 
in  the  ears  of  the  Lord:  i.e.  they  mur- 
mured against  the  privations  of  the  march. 

the  fire  of  the  Lord]  Probably  lightning: 
cf.  Ps.  Ixxviii.  ^l.  The  cases  xvi.  35  and  Lev. 
x.  2 scfm  to  be  different. 

in  the  uttermost  parts]  Rather,  in  the 
end.  The  fire  did  not  reach  far  into  the 
camp.  It  was  quickly  quenched  at  the  inter- 
cession of  Moses. 

3.  Taberah]  {i.e.  “burning”):  not  the 
name  of  a station,  and  accordingly  not  found 
in  the  list  given  in  xxxiii.,  but  only  of  the 
spot  where  the  fire  broke  out.  This  incident 
might  seem  (cf.  ^v.  34)  to  have  occurred  at 


the  station  called,  from  another  still  more  ter- 
rible event  which  shortly  followed,  Kibroth- 
hattaavah  (so  Keil  and  Del.,  Clark,  ‘ Bible 
Atlas,’  p.  24);  see  on  Deut.  ix.  22. 

4 35.  Occurrences  at  Kibroth-hatta- 

avcih. 


4.  the  mlxt  multitude]  ("Hebrew,  hasaph- 
suph,  a word  which  occurs  here  only).  The 
word  resembles  our  “riff-raff,”  and  denotes 
a mob  of  people  scraped  together.  It  refers 
here  to  the  multitude  of  strangers  of  Lx. 
xii.  38,  who  had  followed  the  Israelites  from 
Egypt. 

cwept  agam-\  i.e.  as  they  had  done  before. 
Cf.  Ex.  xvi.  2 sqq. 


5.  We  remember  the  fish,  &c.]  The  na- 
tural dainties  of  Egypt  are  set  forth  m this 
passage  with  the  fullness  and  iHish  which 
bespeak  personal  experience.  Fish,  prlic, 
onions,  melons  (especially  water-melons),  and 
cucumbers,  abound  in  modem  Egypt,  and  are 
used  as  staple  articles  of  food.  The  hrst  three 
were  not  less  common  in  ancient  Egypt  (see 
Herod.  II.  125,  and  especially  Hengstenberg, 

‘ Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses,  ch.  vii.). 

leeks]  The  Hebrew  word  {kats'tr)  is  the 
ordinary  teim  for  grass  (cf.  Ps.civ.  14,  cxlvn. 
8 &c.);  .and  Hengstenberg  1.  c.  strongly  ad- 
vocates  the  same  rendering  in  this  place.  He 
identifies  the  kdtslr  with  a kind  of  clover 
freely  eaten  in  Egypt  at  the  present  day  1 he 
LXX.  however,  the  writers  of  which  must 
have  been  well  accpiainted  with  the  diet  cus- 
tomary in  the  country  in  question,  renders 
“leeks”  {TTpcicra);  and  this  is  followed  y 
most  authorities  ancient  and  modern.  LeeRs 
were  unquestionably  much  eaten  in  Egypt. 
Cf.  Plin.  ‘ Nat.  Hist.’  xix.  33. 


V.  7— 17-] 


NUMBERS.  XI. 


689 


-/Exod.i6.  7 And  ^the  manna  was  as  corian- 
/ Heb!  seed,  and  the  ^ colour  thereof  as 

colour  of  bdellium. 

8 the  people  went  about,  and 
gathered  /7,  and  ground  ft  in  mills,  or 
beat  ft  in  a mortar,  and  baked  ft  in 
pans,  and  made  cakes  of  it : and  the 
taste  of  it  was  as  the  taste  of  fresh  oil. 

9 And  when  the  dew  fell  upon  the 
camp  in  the  night,  the  manna  fell 
upon  it. 

10  ^ Then  Moses  heard  the  people 
weep  throughout  their  families,  every 
man  in  the  door  of  his  tent ; and  the 
anger  of  the  Lord  was  kindled  great- 
ly ; Moses  also  was  displeased. 

11  And  Moses  said  unto  the  Lord, 
Wherefore  hast  thou  afflicted  thy  ser- 
vant ? and  wherefore  have  I not  found 
favour  in  thy  sight,  that  thou  layest 
the  burden  of  all  this  people  upon 
me  ? 

12  Have  I conceived  all  this  peo- 
ple ? have  I begotten  them,  that  thou 
shouldest  say  unto  me.  Carry  them  in 


9nions\  The  staple  food  of  the  labourers  at 
the  pyramids:  Herod,  ii.  125.  These  vege- 
tables, which  grew  large  in  size  and  mild  in 
flavour,  were  in  various  forms  one  of  the  most 
common  dishes  of  the  Egyptians. 

garlic]  Cf.  Herod.  1.  c. 

6.  there  is  nothing  at  all^  beside  this 
manna^  before  our  eyes]  Heb.  “ Nought  at  all 
have  we  except  that  our  eyes  are  unto  this 
manna;”  i.  e.  “ Nought  else  have  we  to  expect 
beside  this  manna.”  Cf.  on  the  phrase,  “to 
have  the  eyes  towards,”  Ps.  xxv.  15. 

7—9.  On  the  manna  see  on  Ex.  xvi.; 
on  bdellium  Gen.  ii.  12.  The  description  of 
the  manna  seems  inserted  in  order  to  illus- 
trate the  unreasonableness  of  the  people  in 
disliking  it. 

10.  throughout  their  families]  The.  weep- 
ing was  general;  every  family  wept : cf.  Zech. 
xii.  12. 

e'very  man  in  the  door  of  his  tent]  The 
weeping  was  public  and  unconcealed. 

11 — 15.  The  complaint  and  remonstrance 
of  Moses  may  be  compared  with  Gen.  xviii. 
23  sqq.,  and  more  appositely  with  i K.  xix. 
4 sqq.;  Jonah  iv.  i — 3.  The  meekness  of 
Moses  (cf.  xii,  3)  sank  under  vexation  into 
despair.  The  language  shows  us  how  im- 
perfect and  prone  to  degeneracy  are  the  graces 
of  the  best  saints  on  earth,  as  the  forbearing 
answer  of  God  manifests  His  readiness  to 


thy  bosom,  as  a nursing  father  bear- 
eth  the  sucking  child,  unto  the  land 
which  thou  swarest  unto  their  fathers  .i* 

13  Whence  should  I have  flesh  to 
give  unto  all  this  people  ? for  they 
weep  unto  me,  saying.  Give  us  flesh, 
that  we  may  eat. 

14  I am  not  able  to  bear  all  this 
people  alone,  because  ft  fs  too  heavy 
for  me. 

15  And  if  thou  deal  thus  with  me, 
kill  me,  I pray  thee,  out  of  hand,  if  I 
have  found  favour  in  thy  sight;  and 
let  me  not  see  my  wretchedness. 

16  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Gather  unto  me  seventy  men  of 
the  elders  of  Israel,  whom  thou  know- 
est  to  be  the  elders  of  the  people,  and 
offleers  over  them ; and  bring  them 
unto  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion, that  they  may  stand  there  with 
thee. 

17  And  I will  come  down  and 
talk  with  thee  there : and  I will  take 
of  the  spirit  which  fs  upon  thee,  and 


heed  and  answer  the  sincere  pouring  out  of 
the  heart  to  Him,  even  though  its  utterances 
be  passionate  and  unmeasured.  For  certainly 
Moses  could  not  justly  say  that  God  had  laid 
“the  burden  of  all  this  people”  upon  him. 
Moses  had  ample  direction  and  help  from  God. 
Such  a trait  as  that  exhibited  in  this  passage 
would  not  have  been  attributed  to  Moses  by 
tradition. 

16.  seventy  men  of  the  elders  of  Israel] 
Seventy  elders  had  also  gone  up  with  Moses 
to  the  Lord  in  the  mofint.  Ex.  xxiv.  i,  9.  On 
the . historical  and  symbolical  significance  of 
this  number  see  note  there.  Seventy  is  accord- 
ingly the  number  of  colleagues  assigned  to 
Moses  to  share  his  burden  with  him ; and  to 
enable  them  for  their  office  the  spirit  of  the 
Lord  was  poured  upon  them.  This  appoint- 
ment is  totally  distinct  from  that  of  the  Cap- 
tains or  Rulers,  Exod.  xviii.  21  sq.  and  Deut. 
i.  9 sqq.  (see  note).  To  it,  however,  the  Jews 
trace  the  origin  of  the  Sanhedrim,  and  rightly, 
if  we  regard  the  Mosaic  college  as  the  proto- 
type on  which  the  Sanhedrim  was  modelled 
after  the  end  of  the  monarchy.  Subsequent 
notices  (xvi.  25;  Josh.  vii.  6,  viii.  10,  33,  ix. 
II,  xxiii.  2,  xxiv.  i,  31)  of  “the  Elders” 
(not  of  all-Xh&  elders,  as  in  Ex.  iv.  29,  xii.  21, 
xviii.  12)  make  no  mention  of  the  number 
seventy;  yet  so  connect  the  Elders  with  the 
government  of  Israel  as  to  point  to  the  fact 
that  the  appointment  now  made  was  no':  a 


690 


NUMBERS.  XL  [v.  18-28. 


will  put  It  upon  them ; and  they  shall 
bear  the  burden  of  the  people  with 
thee,  that  thou  bear  it  not  thyself 
alone. 

18  And  say  thou  unto  the  people, 
Sanctify  yourselves  against  to  mor- 
row, and  ye  shall  eat  flesh  : for  ye 
have  wept  in  the  ears  of  the  Lord, 
saying.  Who  shall  give  us  flesh  to  eat  ? 
for  it  was  well  with  us  in  Egypt: 
therefore  the  Lord  will  give  you  flesh, 
and  ye  shall  eat. 

19  Ye  shall  not  eat  one  day,  nor 
two  days,  nor  five  days,  neither  ten 
days,  nor  twenty  days ; 

tHeb.  20  But  a ^ whole  month,  until 
it  come  out  at  your  nostrils,  and  it  be 
loathsome  unto  you : because  that  ye 
have  despised  the  Lord  which  is 
among  you,  and  have  wept  before 
him,  saying.  Why  came  we  forth  out 
of  Egypt? 

21  And  Moses  said.  The  people, 
among  whom  I am^  are  six  hundred 
thousand  footmen ; and  thou  hast 
said,  I will  give  them  flesh,  that  they 
may  eat  a whole  month. 

22  Shall  the  flocks  and  the  herds 
be  slain  for  them,  to  suffice  them  ? 
or  shall  all  the  fish  of  the  sea  be  ga- 


thered together  for  them,  to  suffice 
them  ? 

23  And  the  Lord  said -unto  Moses, 

the  Lord’s  hand  waxed  short  .U  isai.  sex 
thou  shalt  see  now  whether  my  word  & 5^. 
shall  come  to  pass  unto  thee  or  not. 

24  ^ And  Moses  went  out,  and 
told  the  people  the  words  of  the  Lord, 
and  gathered  the  seventy  men  of  the 
elders  of  the  people,  and  set  them 
round  about  the  tabernacle. 

25  And  the  Lord  came  down  in  a 
cloud,  and  spake  unto  him,  and  took 
of  the  spirit  that  zvas  upon  him,  and 
gave  it  unto  the  seventy  elders:  and 
it  came  to  pass,  that^  when  the  spirit 
rested  upon  them,  they  prophesied, 
and  did  not  cease. 

26  But  there  remained  two  of  the 
men  in  the  camp,  the  name  of  the 
one  zvas  Eldad,  and  the  name  of  the 
other  Medad:  and  the  spirit  rested 
upon  them;  and  they  were  of  them 
that  were  written,  but  went  not  out 
unto  the  tabernacle : and  they  pro- 
phesied in  the  camp. 

27  And  there  ran  a young  man, 
and  told  Moses,  and  said,  Eldad  and 
Medad  do  prophesy  in  the  camp. 

28  And  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun, 


merely  temporary  one.  The  Council  of  the 
Elders  however  would  seem  to  have  soon 
fallen  into  desuetude.  We  find  no  traces  of 
it  in  the  days  of  the  Judges  and  the  Kings; 
nor  is  it  easy  to  see  how  such  an  institution 
would  have  worked  aldhg  with  the  forms  and 
modes  of  monarchical  government  prevalent 
in  the  ancient  East.  Cf.  note  on  Dent.  xvii.  8. 

elders  of  the  people^  and  officers  onyer  them~\ 
In  English  idiom,  “ elders  and  officers  of  the 
jjeople.”  Both  elders  and  officers  appear  in 
Egypt,  Ex.  iii.  16,  v.  6 sqq.  The  former  had 
headed  the  nation  in  its  efforts  after  freedom; 
the  latter  were  the  subordinate,  though  un- 
willing, agents  of  Egyptian  tyranny.  The 
two  classes  no  doubt  were  rvorking  together; 
and  from  those  who  belonged  to  either,  per- 
haps from  those  who  were  both  elders  and 
officers,  the  council  of  seventy  was  to  be 
selected. 

17.  / ^cvill  take  of  the  spirit  <vjhich  is 

upon  thee~\  Render  rather  separate  from  the 
spirit  d:c.;  i.e.  they  shall  have  their  portion 
in  the  same  divine  gift  whicli  thou  hast. 

25.  they  prophesicd'\  i.e.  under  the  ex- 
traordinary impulse  of  the  Holy  Ghost  they 


uttered  forth  the  praises  of  God,  or  declared 
His  Will.  Cf.  I Sam.  xix.  a a sqq.  The 
Hebrew  word  here  used  {hithnabhc)  imports 
etymologically  “they  were  caused  to  pour 
forth.” 

and  did  not  cease']  Render,  and  added  not 
(on  the  Hebrew  word  cf.  Dent.  v.  22)'  i.e. 
they  prophesied  at  this  time  only  and  not 
afterwards.  The  sign  was  granted  on  the 
occasion  of  their  appointment  to  accredit  them 
in  their  office;  it  was  not  continued,  because 
their  proper  function  was  to  be  that  of  govern- 
ment not  prophesying. 

26.  of  them  that  nvere  <iuritten~\  i.  e.  en- 
rolled amongst  the  Seventy.  The  expression 
points  to  a regular  appointment  duly  recorded 
and  permanent. 

nvent  nut  out  unto  the  tabernacle]  The  reason 
of  this  can  only  be  conjectured.  It  was  not 
ceremonial  uncleanness,  since  that  (cf.  v.  2) 
would  have  excluded  them  from  the  camp 
altogether. 

27.  a young  man]  Heb.  “ the  young  man ;” 
i.e.  the  attendants  collectively;  cf.  on  Ex.  iv. 
20. 


* 


V.  29—35-] 


NUMBERS.  XL 


691 


the  servant  of  Moses,  one  of  his  young 
men,  answered  and  said,  My  lord 
Moses,  forbid  them. 

29  And  Moses  said  unto  him,  En- 
viest  thou  for  my  sake  ? would  God 
that  all  the  Lord’s  people  were  pro- 
phets, and  that  the  Lor.d  would  put 
his  spirit  upon  them  ! 

30  And  Moses  gat  him  into  the 
camp,  he  and  the  elders  of  Israel. 

/Exod.t6.  31  ^ And  there  went  forth  a-^wind 
Rai.  78,  from  the  Lord,  and  brought  quails 
from  the  sea,  and  let  them  fall  by  the 
tHeb.  camp,  ^as  it  were  a day’s  journey  on 
this  side,  and  as  it  v/ere  a day’s  jour- 
aitay,  qj-j  Other  side,  round  about 

the  camp,  and  as  it  were  two  cubits 
high  upon  the  face  of  the  earth. 

32  And  the  people  stood  up  all  that 


29.  Eri'viest  thou  for  my  sakef\  (Cf.  St 
Mark  ix.  38  sqq.).  The  other  members  of 
the  Seventy  had  been  with  Moses  (cf.  16, 
24,  25)  when  the  gift  of  prophecy  was  be- 
stowed on  them.  They  received  “ of  the  spirit 
that  was  upon  him,-’  and  exercised  their  office 
visibly  through  and  for  him.  Eldad  and  Me- 
dad  prophesying  in  the  camp  seemed  to  Joshua 
to  be  acting  independently,  and  so  establishing 
a separate  centre  of  authority. 

31.  a <iuind']  That  is,  as  Ps.  Ixxviii.  26 
intimates,  though  in  a poetical  form  of  expres- 
sion, the  south-east  wind,  which  blew  from 
the  neighbouring  Elanitic  gulf  of  the  Red  Sea. 

quails']  Cf.  Ex.  xvi.  13, 

let  than  fall  by  the  camp]  Rather  “ threw 
them  upon  or  over  the  camp.”  The  meaning 
is  that  the  quails  were  borne  by  the  wind  upon 
the  encampment  and  into  its  neighbourhood. 
LXX.  coi’rectly  eVe/SaXei/  eVi  TTjv  TTapefxjSo- 
'ki]v.  Cf.  Ps.  Ixxviii.  27,  28. 

round  about]  i.e.  “on  both  sides  of:”  cf. 
Ex.  vii.  24. 

t'wo  cubits  high  upon  the  face  of  the  earth] 
Omit  the  word  “high”  supplied  by  the  A.  V., 
and  render  about  two  cubits  above 
tlie  face  of  the  ground:  i.e.  the  quails, 
wearied  with  their  long  flight,  flew  about 
breast  high,  and  were  easily  secured  by  the 
people.  So  Vulg.  “volabant  in  acre  duobus 
cubitibus  altitudine  super  terram.”  The  quail 
habitually  flies  with  the  wind,  and  low : “Aura 
vehi  volunt,  propter  pondus  corporum.  Co- 
tumix  terrestris  potius  quam  sublimis.”  Plin. 
‘N.  H.’  X.  23. 

32.  ten  homers]  On  the  homer,  the 
largest  measure  of  capacity  used  by  the  fle- 
brews,  cf.  Lev.  xxvii.  16.  The  quantity  of 
the  quails  indicated  by  the  statements  of  the 
text  is  prodigious,  and  must  be  recognised  as 


day,  and  all  that  night,  and  all  the 
next  day,  and  they  gathered  the  quails  ; 
he  that  gathered  least  gathered  ten 
homers ; and  they  spread  them  all 
abroad  for  themselves  round  about  the 
camp. 

33  And  while  the  ^flesh  was  yet-^Psai.  73. 
between  their  teeth,  ere  it  was  chew- 

ed,  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  was  kin- 
dled against  the  people,  and  the  Lord 
smote  the  people  with  a very  great 
plague. 

34  And  he  called  the  name  of  that 

place  " Kibroth-hattaavah  : because  « That  is, 
there  they  buried  the  people  that  gr.ives 
lusted.  ‘ • 

35  And  the  people  journeyed  from 
Kibroth-hattaavah  unto  Hazeroth  E 
and 'abode  at  Hazeroth. 


miraculous.  But  large  flocks  of  birds,  so 
numerous  as  to  darken  the  sky,  have  been 
seen  by  modern  travellers  in  the  same  district 
(Stanley,  ‘Sinai  and  Pal.’  p.  82).  The  people 
had  met  with  quails  before  in  the  desert : cf. 
Ex.  xvi.  13,  note  and  reff. 

they  spread  them  all  abroad  for  themsel-ves] 
In  order  to  salt  and  dry  them  (cf.  Herod. 
II.  .77). 

33.  ere  it  ^vas  chewed]  Better,  ere  it 
was  consumed,  as  all  the  ancient  transla- 
tors understood  it.  Such  a supply  of  food 
would  last  many  days.  Indeed  God  had  told 
them  that  they  should  eat  flesh  “a  whole 
month,”  until  it  came  out  at  their  nostrils, 
and  was  loathsome  unto  them  (yv.  20). 

smote  the  people]  A ncient  naturalists  assert 
that  the  quail  feeds  and  fattens  on  herbs  which 
are  poisonous  to  man,  and  regarded  the  bird 
as  unwholesome  for  food.  Cf.  Lucr.  iv.  642: 
“ Prseterea  nobis  veratrum  est  acre  venenum. 

At  capris  adipes  et  coturnicibus  auget :” 
and  Plin.  x.  23.  Eurther  illustrations  ai'e 
given,  Bochart,  ii.  657.  But  Dr  G.  M. 
Humphry,  Professor  of  Anatomy  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Cambriilge,  reports  in  a letter 
communicated  to  the  writer  (Dec.  21,  1870), 
that  “in  instances  in  which  the  contents  of 
the  quail’s  stomach  have  been  examined  after 
death  only  common  grass  and  other  seeds 
have  been  found.”  Lie  adds  however  that  the 
free  partaking  of  quails,  or  indeed  of  any 
other  bird,  “for  a whole  month,”  nj.  20,  by 
a people  lusting  for  flesh,  would  be  likely  to 
be  attended  with  injurious  consequences, 
especially  under  the  circumstances  in  which 
the  Israelites  then  were.  Thus  the  plague 
with  which  God  smote  the  people  is  to  be 
regarded,  as  are  m.iracles  in  many  other  cases, 
as  a Divine  interference  enhancing  a pre-exist- 


692 


NUMBERS.  XII. 


[v.  1—3.  - 


I Or, 
Cushite. 


CHAPTER  XIL 


I God  rehuketh  the  sedition  of  Miriam  and 
Aaron.  10  Miriam's  leprosy  is  healed  at  the 
prayer  of  Moses.  14  God  commandeth  her  to 
be  shut  ont  of  the  host. 


An  D Miriam  and  Aaron  spake 
against  Moses  because  of  the 
" Ethiopian  woman  whom  he  had  mar- 


ried: for  he  had  ^’married  an  Ethio-t^®^- 

* takeii. 

plan  woman. 

2 And  they  said,  Hath  the  Lord 
indeed  spoken  only  by  Moses?  hath 
he  not  spoken  also  by  us?  And  the 
Lord  heard  it. 

3 (Now  the  man  Moses  was  ^very  45. 


ing  cause.  The  surfeit  in  which  the  people 
indulged,  as  described  in  t-.  32,  of  itself  dis- 
posed them  to  sickness.  God's  wrath,  visiting 
the  gluttonous  through  their  gluttony,  aggra- 
vated natural  consequences  into  a supernatural 
visitation. 

35.  journeyed  from  Kibrotb-hattaavah'\ 
They  had  probably,  for  the  sake  of  the  quails, 
continued  at  Kibroth-hattaavah  longer  than 
they  otherwise  would  have  done.  Their  lust, 
and  God’s  indulgence  of  it,  had  been  their 
hindrance.  After  a month’s  delay  the  punish- 
ment which  had  o\’ertaken  them  would  make 
them  remove  the  more  readily  from  the  En- 
campment of  Death;  and,  accordingly,  the 
divine  signal  of  the  lifting  of  the  cloud  was 
given  for  their  forward  march. 

Hazerotlo]  This  place  has  been  identified  by 
Burckhardt  and  others  with  “ Ain  el  Had- 
herah,”  a fountain  some  forty  miles  N.E.  of 
Sinai.  This,  however,  lies  too  much  to  the 
east  of  the  proper  route  of  the  Israelites,*  and 
is  approached  by  a route  from  Sinai,  which 
offers  no  fitting  site  for  Kibroth-hattaavah. 
With  more  probability  Laborde  locates  Haze- 
roth  at  “ El  Ain,”  a place  famous,  as  its  name 
imports,  for  its  spring;  situated  some  fifteen 
miles  northward  of  Ain  el  Hadherah;  and  in 
the -route  which  the  host  must  apparently  have 
adopted;  i.e.  that  by  the  Wady  esZulakeh(cf. 
Stanley,  ‘Sinai,’  p.  84;  Clark's  ‘ Bible  Atlas,’ 
p.  24).  Mr  Clark,  however,  regards  El  Ain 
as  identical  with  Kibroth-hattaavah,  removing 
f lazeroth  many  miles  still  further  on  the  march 
northwards,  to  Bir-eth-Themed.  These  are 
mere  conjectures,  and,  in  the  instances  before 
us,  are  the  more  precarious,  as  the  name 
Ilazeroth  (=“  inclosures  ”)  is  of  the  sort  that 
almost  always  serves  more  places  than  one, 
and  is  as  suitable  to  a»  district  as  to  a particu- 
lar spot.  It  is  probable,  from  its  mention 
along  with  other  places  on  the  sea-shore,  that 
the  “ Ilazeroth”  of  Deut.  i.  i is  not  the  same 
as  the  one  now  before  us.  El  Ain,  from  its 
natural  advantages,  must  certainly  have  formed 
one  of  the  halting-places  in  the  earlier  -stages 
of  the  march  from  Sinai,  whether  it  be  identified 
with  Kibroth-hattaavah  or  Hazeroth.  It  is  here 
that  several  valleys  converge  around  springs, 
which,  from  tluir  copiousness,  render  this  the 
great  oasis  of  the  eastern  side  of  the  whole 
peninsula.  On  the  route  of  the  Israelites  from 
Ilazeroth  see  notes  on  xii.  16  and  xx.viii.  18. 


Chap.  XII.  1 — 15.  Rebellion  of  Miriam 
and  Aaron  against  Moses.  Miriam,  as  a pro- 
phetess (cf.  Ex'.  XV.  20,  21)  no  less  than  as  the 
sister  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  took  the  first 
rank  amongst  the  women  of  Israel;  and  Aaron 
may  be  regarded  as  the  ecclesiastical  head 
of  the  whole  nation.  But  instead  of  being 
grateful  for  the.se  high  dignities  they  presumed 
upon  them,  just  as  the  Levites  afterwards  did 
on  theirs  (cf.  xvi.  9),  and  went  on  to  challenge 
the  special  vocation  of  Moses  and  the  exclusive 
authority  which  God  had  assigned  to  him. 
This  envious  feeling  had  probably  rankled  in 
their  minds  for  some  time,  but  was  now  pro- 
voked to  open  outbreak  by  the  recent  (see 
next  note)  marriage  of  Moses,  the  circum- 
stances of  which  touched  the  female  suscepti- 
bilities of  Miriam.  She  probably  considered 
herself  as  supplanted,  and  that  too  by  - a 
foreigner.  It  is  evident  that  she  was  the  in- 
stigator, from  the  fact  that  her  name  stands 
conspicuously  first  (-z.^.  i),  and  that  the  punish- 
ment (pv.  10)  fell  on  her  alone.  Aaron  was 
misled  this  time  by  the  urgency  of  his  sister, 
as  once  before  (Ex.  xxxii.)  by  that  of  the 
people. 

1.  tbe  Ethiopian  (Heb.  “ Cushite”)  «ico- 
man  <u)hom  he  had  marriecT\  This  can  hardly  be 
Zipporah,  who  was  not  an  Ethiopian  but  a 
Midianite  (cf.  Ex.  ii.  21).  And  even  if  we 
regard  the  term  Cushite  as  one  which  Miriam 
applied  to  the  wife  of  Moses  in  contempt, 
because  of  her  dark  colour,  it  is  highly  im- 
probable that  Miriam  could  now  have  brought 
up  in  reproach  a marriage  which  Moses  had 
contracted  half  a century  at  least  previously, 
and  before  his  special  call  by  God.  It  is  far 
more  likely  that  Zipporah  was  dead,  and  that 
Miriam  in  consequence  expected  to  have 
greater  influence  than  ever  with  Moses.  Her 
disappointment  at  his  second  marriage  would 
consequently  be  very  great. 

On  Cush,  always,  when  translated  at  all, 
rendered  by  A.'V.  “ Ethiopia”  (e.^.  Ps.  Ixviii. 
31;  Is.  xliii.  3),  cf.  Gen.ii.  13,  x.  6,  and  notes. 

The  marriage  of  Moses  with  a woman 
descended  from  Ham  was  not  prohibited,  so 
long  as  she  was  not  of  the  stock  of  Canaan ; 
cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  1 1 — 16 ; but  it  would  at  any  time 
liave  been  offensive  to  that  intense  nationality 
winch  characterized  the  Jews.  The  Christian 
Fathers  note  in  the  successive  marriage  of 
IMoses  with  a Midianite  and  an  Ethiopian  a 
foreshadowing  of  the  future  extension  to  the 


V.  4—12.] 


NUMBERS.  XII. 


693 


meek,  above  all  the  men  which  were 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth.) 

4 And  the  Lord  spake  suddenly 
unto  Moses,  and  unto  Aaron,  and 
unto  Miriam,  Come  out  ye  three  unto 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 
And  they  three  came  out. 

5 And  the  Lord  came  down  in 
the  pillar  of  the  cloud,  and  stood  in 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle,  and  called 
Aaron  and  Miriam:  and  they  both 
came  forth. 

6 And  he  said.  Hear  now  my  words : 
If  there  be  a prophet  among  you,  / 
the  Lord  will  make  myself  known 
unto  him  in  a vision,  and  will  speak 
unto  him  in  a dream. 

7 My  servant  Moses  is  not  so, 
fHeb.  3.  “^who  is  faithful  in  all  mine  house. 

33.  8 With  him  will  I speak  ^mouth 

to  mouth,  even  apparently,  and  not 


in  dark  speeches ; and  the  similitude 
of  the  Lord  shall  he  behold : where- 
fore then  were  ye  not  afraid  to  speak 
against  my  servant  Moses  ? 

9 And  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was 
kindled  against  them  ; and  he  de- 
parted. 

10  And  the  cloud  departed  from 
off  the  tabernacle;  and,  behold,  Mi- 
riam heca?ne  leprous,  white  as  snow: 
and  Aaron  looked  upon  Miriam,  and, 
behold,  she  was  leprous. 

11  And  Aaron  said  unto  Moses, 
Alas,  my  lord,  I beseech  thee,  lay  not 
the  sin  upon  us,  wherein  we  have 
done  foolishly,  and  v/herein  we  have 
sinned. 

12  Let  her  not  be  as  one  dead,  of 
whom  the  flesh  is  half  consumed 
when  he  cometh  out  of  his  mother’s 
womb. 


Gentiles  of  God's  covenant  and  its  promises 
(cf.  Ps.  x!v.  9 sqq.;  Cant.  i.  4 sqq.);  and  in 
the  murmuring  of  Miriam  and  Aaron  a type 
of  the  discontent  of  the  Jews  because  of  such 
extension:  cf.  St  Luke  xv.  29.  30. 

2.  Hath  the  Lord  indeed  spoken  only  by 
Moses  f]  i.e.  Is  it  merely,  after  all,  by  Moses 
that  the  Lord  hath  spoken? 

3.  the  man  Moses  qvas  ^ery  mee}i\  These 
words  have  been,  with  no  little  insensibility  to 
the  finer  traits  of  the  passage,  often  regarded 
as  words  which  Moses  himself  could  not 
have  penned;  and  accordingly  have  been 
cited  sometimes  as  indicating  an  interpola- 
tion, sometimes  as  proof  that  the  book  is 
not  Mosaic.  When  we  regard  them  as  ut- 
tered by  ’Moses  not  proprio  motu^^’'  but 
under  the  direction  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which 
was  upon  him  (cf.  xi.  17),  they  exhibit  a cer- 
tain “objectivity,”  which  is  a witness  at  once  to 
their  genuineness  and  also  to  their  inspiration. 
There  is  about  these  words,  as  also  about  the 
passages  in  which  Moses  no  less  unequivocally 
records  his  own  faults  (cf.  xx.  12  sqq.;  Ex. 
iv.  24  sqq.;  Deut.  i.  37),  the  simplicity  of  one 
who  bare  witness  of  himself,  but  not  to  him- 
self (cf.  St  Matt.  xi.  28,  29).  The  words  are 
inserted  to  explain  how  it  was  that  Moses  took 
no  steps  to  vindioate  himself,  and  why  con- 
sequently the  Lord  so  promptly  intervened. 
Proposals  to  substitute  “miserable”  (Palfrey) 
or  “afflicted”  (Dr  "W.  Smith)  in  the  text 
instead  of  “meek”  are  needless,  and  if  the 
original  word  will  bear  such  rendering  it  cer- 
tainly does  not  solicit  it.  The  Hebrew  word 
occurs  frequently  in  the  Psalms,  is  usually 
rendered  by  “meek”  or  “humble,”  and  is 


frequently  applied  by  the  writers  to  themselves 
and  their  associates.  Cf.  Ps.  x.  17;  xxii.  27. 

4,  5.  suddenly^  In  wrath,  9. 

7.  faithful  in  all  mine  house'\  i.e.  ap- 
proved by  me  as  my  vicegerent  in  the  general 
administration  and  government  of  my  people, 
“My  whole  house,”  as  distinguished  from 
any  particular  department  of  it:  cf.  on  the 
expression  “house”  as  denoting  God’s  cove- 
nant people,  Hebr.  iii.  6,  “whose  house  are 
we;”  and  cf.  the  whole  passage  Hebr.  iii.  i — 6. 

8.  mouth  to  moutlS]  i.e.  without  the  in- 
tervention of  any  third  person  or  thing : cf. 
Ex.  xxxiii.  II,  Deut.  xxxiy.  10. 

eaien  apparently'\  Lit.  and  as  an  ap- 
pearance: an  apposition  to  elucidate  the 
words  preceding.  Moses  received  the  word 
of  God  direct  from  Him  and  plainly,  not 
through  the  medium  of  dream,  vision,  parable, 
dark  saying,  or  such  like;  cf.  Ex.  xxxiii.  ii, 
Deut.  xxxiv.  10. 

the  similitude  of  the  Lord  shall  he  behold~\ 
“No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time,”  St 
John  i.  18:  cf.  I Tim.  vi.  16,  and  especially 
Ex.  xxxiii,  20  sqq.  It  was  not  therefore  the 
Beatific  Vision,  the  unveiled  essence  of  the 
Deity,  which  Moses  saw  on  the  one  hand. 
Nor  was  it,  on  the  other  hand,  apnere  emblema- 
tic representation,  as  in  Ezek.  i.  26  sqq.,  Dan. 
vii.  9,  or  an  Angel  sent  as  a messenger.  It  was 
the  Deity  Himself  manifesting  Himself  so  as 
to  be  cognizable  to  mortal  eye.  The  special 
footing  on  which  Moses  stood  as  regards  God 
(cf.  Deut.  xviii.  18,  19,  and  note),  the  “ Gra- 
dus  Mosaicus”  of  theologians,  is  here  laid 
down  in  detail,  because  it  at  once  demonstrates 
that  the  supremacy  of  Moses  rested  on  the 


694 


NUMBERS.  XII.  XIII.  [v.  13-6. 


13  And  Moses  cried  unto  the  Lord, 
saying,  Heal  her  now,  O God,  I be- 
seech thee. 

14  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, If  her  father  had  but  spit  in  her 
face,  should  she  not  be  ashamed  seven 

13.  days  ? let  her  be  ^shut  out  from  the 
camp  seven  days,  and  after  that  let 
her  be  received  in  again. 

15  And  Miriam  was  shut  out  from 
the  camp  seven  days : and  the  people 
journeyed  not  till  Miriam  was  brought 
in  again. 

16  And  afterward  the  people  re- 
moved from  Hazeroth,  and  pitched  in 
the  wilderness  of  Paran. 

CFIAPTER  XIIL 

I The  names  of  the  men  who  were  sent  to  search 
the  land.  17  Their  instructions.  21  Their 
acts.  26  Their  relation. 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
l\  saying, 

2 Send  thou  men,  that  they  may 
search  the  land  of  Canaan,  which  I 
give  unto  the  children  of  Israel:  of 
every  tribe  of  their  fathers  shall  ye 
send  a man,  every  one  a ruler  among 
them. 

3 And  Moses  by  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord  sent  them  from 
the  wilderness  of  Paran : all  those 
men  were  heads  of  the  children  of 
Israel.. 

4 And  these  were  their  names  : of 
the  tribe  of  Reuben,  Shammua  the 
son  of  Zaccur. 

5 Of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  Shaphat 
the  son  of  Hori. 

6 Of'the  tribe  of  Judah,  Caleb  the 
son  of  Jephunneh. 


distinct  appointment  of  God,  and  also  that 
Miriam  in  contravening  that  supremacy  had 
incurred  the  penalty  proper  to  sins  against  the 
theocracy  (cf.  Trench,  ‘ On  the  Miracles,’  pp. 
212—216). 

12.  as  one  dead~\  “ Leprosy  was  no- 
thing short  of  a living  death,  a poisoning  of 
the  springs,  a corrupting  of  all  the  humours, 
of  life;  a dissolution  little  by  little  of  the 
whole  body,  so  that  one  limb  after  another 
actually  decayed  and  fell  away.”  Trench, 
‘Miracles,’  p.  213.  Cf.  notes  on  Lev.  xiii. 

13.  Heal  her  no^.^  0 God.,  I beseech  thee~\ 
A slight  and  probable  alteration  of  the  Hebrew 
punctuation  («/  for  el')  affords  the  rendering, 
“Oh  not  so;  heal  her  now,  I beseech  thee;” 
so  Knobel  and  others. 

14.  If  her  father']  i.e.  if  her  earthly  parent 
had  treated  her  with  contumely  (cf.  Deut.xxv, 
9)  she  would  feel  for  a time  humiliated,  how 
much  more  when  God  has  visited  her  thus? 

se-ven  days]  Cf.  Lev.  xiii.  4,  5. 

16.  the  ojoilderness  of  Paran]  See  onx.  12. 

Chap.  XIIL — The  fourth  and  crowning 
rebellion  of  the  Israelites  on  their  first  north- 
ward march  took  place  in  the  summer  of  the 
second  year  from  the  Exodus  (cf.  Introd.  § 3. 
and  note  on  w.  20  of  this  chap.),  on  the  re- 
turn of  the  sp'ies  from  The  account 

of  it  occupies  two  entire  chapters. 

1.  Hnd  the  Lord  spake]  The  mission  of 
the  spies  wns  firsi  suggested  by  the  Israelites 
themselves,  Deut.  i.  22  and  note. 

2.  ewery  one  a ruler]  So  in  w.  3,  “ all 
those  men  were  heads,  &:c.;”  that  is,  heads  of 
houses  or  families;  for  a comparison  of  the 


list  with  that  of  i.  5 sqq.  shews  that  they  were 
not  the  princes  of  the  tribes,  though  the 
words  rendered  “prince”  and  “ruler”  are,  in 
Hebrew,  the  same. 

3.  from  the  avilderness  of  Paran]  More 
particularly  from  Kadesh  in  the  wilderness  of 
Paran:  cf.  2;.  26  and  xxxii.  8. 

4 — 15.  Cf.  i.  5 — 15.  The  tribe  of  Zebu- 
lun  (y.  10)  is  out  of  its  natural  place,  which 
is  next  after  Lssachar,  and  last  of  those  de- 
scended from  Leah ; as  also  is  that  of  Benja- 
min (yv.  9),  inserted  between  Ephraim  and 
Manasseh.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 
original  order  has  been  disturbed  by  errors  of 
transcription.  It  may  be  conjectured  too  in 
n).  7 that  the  name  of  the  father  of  I gal  has 
dropped  out  of  the  text,  and  that  the  words 
following  I gal  belong  to  the  next  verse.  They 
probably  served  to  introduce  the  name  of  the 
spy  from  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  and  should 
run  thus,  “Of  the  sons  of  Joseph,  of  the 
tribe  of  Ephraim,  &c.:”  cf.  v.  ii. 

The  tribe  of  Levi  being  already  set  apart 
for  the  service  of  theTabernale  did  not  furnish 
a representative  on  this  occasion. 

Of  the  names  here  given  those  of  Joshua 
and  Caleb  alone  are  otherwise  known  to  us. 

6.  Caleb]  Called,  xxxii.  12,  and  twice 
in  Josh,  xiv.,  “the  Kenezite.”  Kenaz,  cf. 
Gen.  xxxvi.  1 1,  15,  was  the  name  of  one  of  the 
“ dukes  of  Edom.”  In  the  genealogy  of  the 
family  of  Caleb  given  i Chron.  ii.  we  find 
also  other  Edomitish  names:  e.g.  Shobal ; cf. 

I Chron.  ii.  50,  52  with  Gen.  xxxvi.  20,  23. 
It  has  on  these  grounds  been  conjectured  that 
the  family  of  Caleb  was  of  Edomite  extrac- 
tion, and  was  incorporated  into  the  tribe  of 
Judah.  It  must  be  remembered  however  that 


V.  7 20.] 


NUMBERS.  XIII. 


695 


7 Of  the  tribe  of  Issachar,  Igal  the 
son  of  Joseph. 

8 Of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  Oshea 
the  son  of  Nun. 

9 Of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  Palti 
the  son  of  Raphu. 

10  Of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun,  Gad- 
diel  the  son  of  Sodi. 

11  Of  the  tribe  of  Joseph,  namely^ 
of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  Gaddi  the 
son  of  Susi. 

12  Of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  Ammiel 
the  son  of  Gemalli. 

13  Of  the  tribe  of  Asher,  Sethur 
the  son  of  Michael. 

14  Of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  Nahbi 
the  son  of  Vophsi. 

15  Of  the  tribe  of  Gad,  Geuel  the 
son  of  Machi. 

16  These  are  the  names  of  the 
men  which  Moses  sent  to  spy  out  the 


land.  And  Moses  called  Oshea  the 
son  of  Nun  Jehoshua. 

17^  And  Moses  sent  them  to  spy 
out  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  said  unto 
them.  Get  you  up  this  way  south- 
ward, and  go  up  into  the  mountain: 

18  And  see  the  land,  what  it  is; 
and  the  people  that  dwelleth  therein, 
whether  they  be  strong  or  weak,  few 
or  many; 

19  And  what  the  land  is  that  they 
dwell  ill,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad ; 
and  what  cities  they  be  that  they  dwell 
in,  whether  in  tents,  or  in  strong 
holds ; 

20  And  what  the  land  A,  whether 
it  be  fat  or  lean,  whether  there  be 
wood  therein,  or  not.  And  be  ye  of 
good  courage,  and  bring  of  the  fruit 
of  the  land.  Now  the  time  was  the 
time  of  the  firstripe  grapes. 


Israel  and  Edom  were  of  kindred  origin,  and 
that  therefore  the  use  of  similar  names  by  the 
two  peoples  is  not  surprising. 

16.  And  Moses  called  Oshea Jehoshuci\ 

It  is  most  probably,  though  not  necessarily  to 
be  inferred  from  the  text,  that  Moses  did  this 
first  at  this  time.  The  earlier  employment  of 
the  name  (Ex.  xvii.  9,  xxiv.  13,  &c.)  by  which 
Oshea  became  henceforth  known  is  natural  in 
one  who  wrote  after  “Joshua”  had  passed 
into  current  use.  The  original  name  however 
is  still  used  Deut.  xxxii.  44. 

Oshea,  Hoshea,  or  Hosea,  the  name  also 
of  the  last  king  of  Israel  and  the  first  minor 
prophet,  means  “deliverance”  or  “salvation.” 
To  this  Moses  added  a syllable  containing  the 
sacred  name,  Jehovah  or  Jah : thus  intimating 
that  salvation  was  from  God,  and  by  the  hand 
of  him  who  bore  the  title  of  “ God’s  salva- 
tion.” Jehoshua  was  contracted  in  later  He- 
brew (cf.  Neh.  viii.  17)  into  Jeshua:  the  Vulg. 
writes  Josua  or  Josue  ; LXX.  'irjaovs-  On  the 
name  see  Bp.  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  Art.  2. 

17.  south-zuard^  Rather  “by  the  negeb, 
or  south-country”  (from  ndgans  “ to  be  dry”)  ; 
a well-defined  tract  of  territory  forming  the 
southernmost  and  least  fertile  portion  of  the 
land  of  Canaan  and  of  the  subsequent  in- 
heritance of  Judah.  It  extended  northward 
from  Kadesh  to  within  a few  miles  of  He- 
bron, and  from  the  Dead  Sea  westward  to  the 
Mediterranean  (cf.  especially  Josh.  xv.  21 — • 
32).  The  characteristic  features  of  this  region, 
long  unrecognized,  have  been  elucidated  in  a 
recent  monograph  by  Rev.  Edward  Wilton, 
“The  Negeb,  or  ‘South  Country’  of  Scrip- 
ture,” London,  1863  ; and  see  also  Mr  Clark’s 


‘Bible  Atlas,’  pp.  ii,  12,  where  the  several 
physical  divisions  of  the  Holy  Land,  remark- 
able in  themselves,  are  characterized  and  shown 
to  be  constantly  apparent  in  the  Old  Test.  The 
Negeb  is  frequently  mentioned  in  Scripture; 
and  it  is  also  three  times  enumerated,  by  its 
Hebrew  name,  with  the  Egyptian  article  pre- 
fixed, in  the  list  of  places  conquered  by  Shi- 
shak  hieroglyphically  engraven  on  the  walls  of 
Karnak  (see  Brugsch,  ‘ Geographische'  In- 
schriften,’  il.  p.  69). 

into  the  mountain^  The  hill-country  of 
southern  and  central  Canaan,  mostly  within 
the  borders  of  Judah  and  Ephraim.  It  com- 
mences a few  miles  south  of  Hebron,  and 
extending  northward  to  the  plain  of  Jezreel, 
runs  out  eventually  north-westward  into  the 
sea  in  the  headland  of  Carmel. 

19.  in  tents']  i.e.  in  open  unwalled  villages. 

20.  And  be  ye  of  good  courage^  and 
brings  &c.]  Rather,  perhaps,  And  take 
boldly,  &;c. 

the  time...  of  the  firstripe  grapes]  The  first 
grapes  ripen  in  Palestine  in  July  and  August : 
the  vintage  is  gathered  in  September  and  Oc- 
tober. This  indication  of  date  tallies  with 
what  we  should  have  inferred  from  the  pre- 
vious narrative.  For  the  Israelitish  host  had 
quitted  Sinai  on  the  20th  day  of  the  second 
month  (x.  ii),  or  about  the  middle  of  May : 
since  then  they  had  spent  a month  at  Kibroth- 
hattaavah  and  a week  at  Hazeroth,  and  had 
accomplished,  in  all,  from  150  to  200  miles  of 
march : it  therefore  must  have  been  at  least 
the  beginning  of  July,  and  may  have  been  a 
month  later,  when  the  spies  were  despatched 
into  the  land  of  promise. 


696 


NUMBERS.  XIII. 


[v.  2 1 — 24. 


21  ^ So  they  went  up,  and  search- 
ed the  land  from  the  wilderness  of 
Zin  unto  Rehob,  as  men  come  to 
Hamath. 

22  And  they  ascended  by  the  south, 
and  came  unto  Hebron ; where  Ahi- 
man,  Sheshai,  and  Talmai,  the  chil- 
dren of  Anak,  were.  (Now  Hebron 
was  built  seven  years  before  Zoan  in 
Egypt.) 


23  “^And  they  came  unto  the  " brook  i. 
of  Eshcol,  and  cut  down  from  thence  n 6r, 

a branch  with  one  cluster  of  grapes, 
and  they  bare  it  between  two  upon  a 
staff ; and  they  brought  of  the  pome- 
granates, and  of  the  figs. 

24  The  place  was  called  the  ” brook 

” Eshcol,  because  of  the  cluster  of  11  xhaHs, 
grapes  which  the  children  of  Israel  ^/grapes. 
cut  down  from  thence. 


21.  the  cjollderness  of  Zhi]  The  north- 
eastern portion  of  the  wilderness  of  Paran, 
The  spring  of  Kadesh  lay  within  it ; and 
from  Kadesh  on  the  west  it  probably  stretched 
away  to  the  Arabah  on  the  east  (see  on  x.  12, 
xxxiv.  3 sqq.) 

unto  Rehob']  Probably  the  Beth-rehob  of 
Judg.  xviii.  28,  near  Dan-Laish ; and  appa- 
rently to  the  north  of  it,  since  it  gave  its  name 
to  a Syrian  kingdom  (2  S.  viii.  3),  and  must 
thus  have  lain  without  the  territory  occupied 
by  the  Israelites  It  may  perhaps  be  identified 
with  the  village  Khurbeh  or  Khureibeh,  be- 
tween Banlas  and  Hasbeiya. 

as  men  come  to  Hamath]  By  the  “ entrance 
of  Hamath,”  the  assigned  boundary  of  the  in- 
heritance of  Israel  (cf.  on  xxxiv.  8),  is  to  be 
understood  the  southern  approach  to  Hamath, 
from  the  plain  of  Coele-Syria,  lying  between 
those  two  ranges  of  Lebanon  called  Libanus 
and  Antilibanus.  A low  screen  of  hills  con- 
nects the  northernmost  points  of  these  two 
ranges;  and  through  this  screen  the  Orontes 
bursts  from  the  upper  Ccelesyrian  hollow 
into  the  open  plain  of  Hamath.  (Stanley, 
‘S.  and  P.’  p.  399.)  Its  approximate  place 
in  the  map  is  in  latitude  34*^20';  and  it  lies 
south-west  of  Riblah,  which  was  itself  within 
the  Hamath  territory  (2  K.  xxiii.  33,  &c.). 
A different  view  of  the  entrance  of  Hamath  is 
taken  by  Robinson  (‘ B.  R.’  iii.  551,  and 
568,  569)  and  Porter  (‘ Damascus,’  pp.  332 
sqq.  &c.).  They  understand  it  of  the  western 
approach  to  Hamath,  from  the  Mediter- 
ranean, and  make  it  the  interval  which  sepa- 
rates the  northern  end  of  Lebanon  from  the 
mountains  of  the  Nusairiyeh.  But  this  is  less 
probable;  and  even  Robinson  virtually  admits 
that  in  the  present  passage  the  southern  ap- 
proach to  Hamath  must  be  intended. 

22.  bjr  the  south]  By  the  south-country, 
cf.  'v.  17. 

Ahiman^  Sheshai^  cind  Talmah  the  children  of 
Anak]  'I'he  jirogenitor  of  the  Anakim  was 
Arba  “the  father  of  Anak”  (Josh.  xv.  13), 
from  whom  the  city  of  Hebron  took  its  name 
of  Kirjath-Arba.  The  name  Anak  denotes 
“long  necked;”  and  though  here  the  name  of 
a race  may  originally  have  been  that  of  a 
chieftain,  yet  Ahiman,  Sheshai,  and  Talmai 


were  probably  not  individual  warriors,  but 
names  of  three  tribes  of  the  Anakim.  Hence 
we  find  them  still  in  existence  half  a century 
later,  when  Caleb,  who  now  brought  tidings 
of  them,  became  their  eventual  destroyer 
(Josh.  XV.  14). 

No^v  Hebron  rajas  built  seven  years  before 
Tjoan  in  Egypt]  Knobel  is  probably  right  in 
explaining  the  somewhat  abrupt  introduction 
of  this  parenthesis  by  the  supposition  that 
these  two  cities  had  a common  founder,  and 
were  built,  or  perhaps,  at  least  in  the  case  of 
Zoan  (Tanis,  see  on  Ex.  v.  i)  rebuilt,  by  the 
Llyksos,  to  which  nations,  once  the  conquerors 
of  Egypt,  the  Anakim  perhaps  belonged.  The 
Hyksos  fortified  and  garrisoned  Zoan  as  a 
defence  of  their  Eastern  frontier. 

23.  the  brook  of  Eshcol]  This  is  gene- 
rally identified  with  the  rich  valley  immedi- 
ately to  the  north  of  Hebron ; described  by 
Robinson  as  producing  the  largest  and  best 
grapes  in  all  Palestine,  besides  pomegranates, 
figs,  apricots,  quinces,  and  othxer  fruits,  in 
abundance.  A fountain  in  it,  lying  within  a 
mile  of  the  city,  is  said  by  Van  de  Velde  to 
be  still  known  as  Ain  Eskaly.  The  valley 
was,  in  all  likelihood,  originally  named  after 
one  of  the  three  chiefs  who  were  confederate 
with  Abraham  (Gen.  xiv.  24) ; but,  as  often 
came  to  pass,  the  Israelites,  wittingly  or  un- 
wittingly, took  up  in  a new  and  significant 
sense  the  name  which  they  found ; and  to 
them  the  valley  thus  became  the  Valley  of  the 
Cluster. 

they  bare  it  betvueen  t^uo  upon  a staff  ] Reland 
(‘ Palest.’ 351,  apud  Rosenm.  Scholia  in  loc.) 
narrates,  on  the  authority  of  an  eyewitness,  that 
bunches  of  grapes  are  found  in  Palestine  of 
ten  pounds  weight ; Schul/ius  had  seen  them 
two  pounds  heavier  than  this : Ignatius  of 
Rheinfelden  speaks  of  clusters  an  ell  long : 
Tobler,  of  individual  grapes  as  large  as  plums. 
Kitto  (‘Phys.  Hist,  of  Palestine,’  p.  330) 
states  that  a bunch  of  grapes  of  enormous 
size  waS  produced  at  Welbeck  from  a Syrian 
vine,  and  sent  as  a present  in  1819  from  the 
Duke  of  Portland  to  the  Marquis  of  Rock- 
ingham. It  weighed  nineteen  pounds,  and 
was  conveyed  to  its  destination,  more  than 
twenty  miles  distant,  on  a staff'  by  four 
labourers,  two  of  whom  bore  it  in  rotation. 


V.  25—33-] 


NUMBERS.  XIII. 


697 


25  And  they  returned  from  search- 
ing of  the  land  after  forty  days. 

26  ^ And  they  went  and  came  to 
Moses,  and  to  Aaron,  and  to  all  the 
congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
unto  the  wilderness  of  Paran,  to  Ka- 
desh;  and  brought  back  word  unto 
them,  and  unto  all  the  congregation, 
and  shewed  them  the  fruit  of  the  land. 

27  And  they  told  him,  and  said, 
W e came  unto  the  land  whither  thou 
sentest  us,  and  surely  it  floweth  with 

fExod.33.  ^ milk  and  honey  j and  this  is  the  fruit 
of  it. 

28  Nevertheless  the  people  be  strong 
that  dwell  in  the  land,  and  the  cities 
are  walled,  and  very  great : and  more- 
over we  saw  the  children  of  Anak 
there. 

29  The  Amalekites  dwell  in  the 
land  of  the  south:  and  the  Hittites, 
and  the  Jebusites,  and  the  Amorites, 
dwell  in  the  mountains : and  the  Ca- 


naanites  dwell  by  the  sea,  and  by  the 
coast  of  Jordan. 

30  And  Caleb  stilled  the  people 
before  Moses,  and  said,  Let  us  go  up 
at  once,  and  possess  it;  for  we  are 
well  able  to  overcome  it. 

31  But  the  men  that  went  up  with 
him  said,  We  be  not  able  to  go  up 
against  the  people ; for  they  are  strong- 
er than  we. 

32  And  they  brought  up  an  evil 

report  of  the  land  which  they  had 
searched  unto  the  children  of  Israel, 
saying.  The  land,  through  which  we 
have  gone  to  search  it,  is  a land  that 
eateth  up  the  inhabitants  thereof ; and 
all  the  people  that  we  saw  in  it  are 
Lnen  of  a great  stature.  ^ Heb.^ 

33  And  there  we  saw  the  giants,  statiires, 
the  sons  of  Anak,  which  coine  of  the 
giants : and  we  were  in  our  own  sight 

aS  grasshoppers,  and  so  we  were  in 
their  sight. 


25.  after  forty  days\  They  had  no 
doubt  in  this  time  explored  the  whole  land. 
It  was  however  with  the  southern  part  that 
the  Israelites  expected  to  have  to  deal  immedi- 
ately : and  accordingly  it  is  that  which  is  par- 
ticularly referred  to  in  the  following  verses, 
Hebron  and  its  vicinity  above  all. 

26.  to  Kadesh']  See  Note  at  the  end  of 
chapter. 

28.  the  cities  are  ailed]  The  annals 
of  the  patriarchal  times  do  not  suggest  such 
a condition  of  things  in  Canaan  as  is  here 
described.  No  doubt  the  repeated  invasions  of 
the  Egyptians  (see  Essay  on  Egyptian  His- 
tory, § 25)  had  compelled  the  Canaanites  to 
entrench  themselves  in  those  fortifications  which 
afterwards,  as  the  book  of  Joshua  shows, 
were  the  element  of  their  greatest  strength.. 


29.  The  Amalekites]  See  on  xiv.  25. 

the  Canaanites]  i.e.  those  of  the  Pheni- 
cian  race : the  word  is  here  used  in  its  narrow 
sense:  cf.  Gen.  x.  15 — 18. 

32.  a land  that  eateth  up^  &c.]  i.e,  it 
is  a land  which  from  its  position  is  exposed  to 
incessant  attacks  from  one  quarter  and  an- 
other, and  so  its  occupants  must  be  always 
armed  and  watchful  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  38,  which 
however  does  not  furnish  a strict  parallel).  In 
fact  the  early  annals  of  Canaan,  though  very 
fragmentary,  afford  evidences  of  various  and 
extensive  invasions,  wars  of  extermination, 
&c.:  cf.  xxi.  27,  28;  Deut.  ii.  20,  &c. 

On  the  combination  of  two  originally  inde- 
pendent but  consistent  supplementary  narra- 
tives in  this  chapter,  cf.  Introd.  § 4-  7* 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xiii.  26. 


unto  the  nvilderness  of  Paran.,  to  Kadesh] 
(i)  Kadesh  is  in  the  foot-notes  identified  with 
Ain-el-Weibeh,  which  lies  in  the  Arabah, 
about  ten  miles  north  of  the  place  in  which 
Mount  Hor  abuts  on  that  valley.  Here  the 
Wady  el  Ghuweir  opens  into  the  low  grounds, 
and  affords  an  access,  by  far  the  best,  indeed 
the  only  one  practicable  for  an  army,  through 
the  mountain  country  of  Edom,  to  the  north- 
west: cf.  on  XX.  14  and  17.  It  was  this 
doubtless  which  the  ambassadors  of  Moses, 
sent  from  Kadesh  to  the  king  of  Edom,  de- 
scribed XX.  17  as  “the  king’s  highway.”  At 


Ain-el-Weibeh  are  three  fountains  issuing 
from  the  chalky  rock.  Probably  in  ancient 
times  the  water  supply  here,  as  elsewhere 
throughout  the  Sinaitic  Peninsula,  was  more 
copious  than  at  present,  and  the  place  ac- 
cordingly of  greater  importance.  Yet  even 
now  Ain-el-Weibeh  is  the  most  frequented 
v/atering-place  in  the  Arabah.  See  Robinson, 
‘ B.  R.’  II.  173 — 176.  Robinson’s  identifica- 
tion of  Ain-el-Weibeh  as  the  ancient  Kadesh 
has  been  generally  accepted  by  English  geo- 
graphers as  the  most  probable,  e.g.  by  Mr 
Clark  in  his  ‘Bible  Atlas,’  pp.  24 — 26,  by 


NUMBERS.  XIII. 


698 

Wordsworth,  Porter,  &:c. ; and  by  some  also 
amongst  the  Germans. 

(2)  Yet  so  difficult  has  it  been  found  to 
group  satisfactorily  all  the  passages  in  which 
mention  is  made  of  Kadesh  round  this  or  any 
other  one  spot,  that  some  commentators  and 
geographers  (after  Reland)  have  assumed  that 
two  distinct  places  must  be  supposed  to  bear 
the  name  in  the  Bible:  and  they  observe  that 
we  have  mention  of  Kadesh  and  of  Kadesh 
Barnea;  of  Kadesh  in  the  wilderness  ofParan, 
and  of  Kadesh  in  that  of  Zin;  and  also  of 
Meribah  Kadesh. 

And  no  doubt  the  appellation,  which  is 
equivalent  to  Holy  Place,  or  Sanctuary,  is 
one  which  was  in  fact  borne  by  several  locali- 
ties ; see  below,  § 8.  But  it  seems  clear, 
nevertheless,  that  one  and  the  same  locality 
throughout  is  intended  in  the  Old  Testament 
by  these  three  names.  For  the  encampment 
from  which  the  spies  were  dispatched  and  to 
which  they  returned  is  called  Kadesh  in  xiii. 
26,  but  Kadesh  Barnea  in  xxxii.  8,  as  it  is 
also  in  Deut.  ix.  2,3,  Josh.  xiv.  6,  7.  (On 
the  term  “Barnea”  see  note  on  xxxii.  8.)  .It 
is  further  clear,  on  comparing  Ezek.  xlvii.  i^, 
xlviii.  28  with  Num.  xxxiv.  4,  Josh.  xv.  *3 
and  Deut.  xxxii,  51,  that  Meribah  Kadesh  is 
the  same  as  Kadesh  Barnea.  Kadesh  appears 
to  have  been  the  name  of  a city,  xx.  16  ; is 
doubtless  the  Kedesh  mentioned  Josh.  xv.  23 
as  one  of  the  “ uttermost  cities  of  Judah  to- 
ward the  coast  of  Edom  southward ; ” was  on 
the  south  border  of  Judah,  xxxiv,  4 ; and 
was  evidently  a leading  landmark  in  the 
boundary  line.  The  name  of  the  city  was 
extended,  as  was  often  the  case,  to  the  district 
around  it,  hence  “the  wilderness  of  Cades,” 
Ps.  xxix.  8:  cf.  Deut,  xxxii.  51.  That  Ka- 
desh is  sometimes  assigned  to  the  wilderness 
of  Paran  (e.g.  xii.  16,  xiii.  3 compared  with 
xiii.  26),  and  sometimes  to  that  of  Zin  (xiii. 
21,  XX.  I,  xxxiii.  36),  is  explained  by  the  fact 
that  the  name  of  Zin  was  given  to  the  north- 
ernmost portion  of  the  great  desert  cf  Paran 
in  which  Kadesh  lay:  see  on  x.  12,  xiii.  21. 

(3)  It  is  further  apparent  on  comparing 
Num.  xii.  16  with  xxxiii.  18,  and  then  refer- 
ring to  xiii,  3,  21,  and  26,  that  the  same  en- 
campment wliich  is  described  in  chap,  xiii,  as 
at  Kadesh  is  in  the  catalogue  of  stations  in 
xxxiii.  named  Rithmah. 

(4)  I'he  ancient  name  of  Kadesh  seems, 
Gen.  xiv.  7 (where  see  note),  to  have  been 
En-mishpat,  “ well  of  judgment.”  This  may 
perhaps  point  to  the  place  as  being  not  only  a 
religious  centre,  but  one  also  where  litigation 
was  wont  to  be  determined.  And  the  priestly 
and  judicial  functions  were  and  'are  often 
combined  in  the  East.  Rithmah  is  however 
probably  descriptive  of  a district,  and  is  de- 
rived (see  note  on  xxxiii.  18)  from  tlie  broom 
which  abounded  thereabouts.  Possibly  the 
name  Rithmah  was  more  particularly  asso- 
ciated with  the  encampment  in  this  portion  of 


the  desert  which  took  place  during  the  first 
march  towards  Canaan,  Num.  xxxiii.  18,  and 
was  given  in  order  to  distinguish  it  from  a 
second  encampment,  also  near  Kadesh,  and 
therefore  in  the  same  district,  though  not 
necessarily  on  the  same  spot,  which  occurred 
in  the  fortieth  year,  Num.  xxxiii,  38. 

(5)  The  criteria  for  determining  the  situa- 
tion of  Kadesh  are  the  following : 

(a)  It  is  described  by  Moses  in  the  em- 
bassy sent  to  the  king  of  Edom  as  “a  city  in 
the  uttermost  of  thy  border,”  Num.  xx.  16. 
But  at  that  time  the  territory  of  Edom  con- 
sisted only  of  Mount  Seir,  Deut.  ii.  4,  and 
Mount  Hor  was  the  western  limit  of  it  towards 
the  Arabah,  Num.  xx.  22,  23,  xxxiii.  37. 

(I?)  In  Deut.  i.  2 the  distance  from  Horeb 
to  Kadesh  is  described  as  eleven  days’  journey 
“by  the  way  of  Mount  Seir;”  and  in  n).  19 
of  the  same  chapter  the  same  journey  to  Ka- 
desh is  described  as  made  “ through  all  that 
great  and  terrible  wilderness  by  the  way  of 
the  mountain  of  the  Amorites.”  By  the 
“ mountain  of  the  Amorites”  is  to  be  under- 
stood most  probably  (cf.  Judg.  i.  36)  the 
white  calcareous  ridge  near  2000  feet  high  in 
places  which  skirts  the  Arabah  on  the  west, 
and  is  by  it  separated  from  Mount  Seir. 

(c)  It  would  further  seem  from  xx.  22 
and  xxxiii.  37,  that  Kadesh  was  only  one 
march  distant  from  Mount  Hor. 

(d)  And  Kadesh  was  north  of  Mount 
Hor;  for  the  host  marched  from  the  former 
to  the  latter  as  the  first  stage  in  their  tedious 
journey,  when  denied  a passage  through  the 
defiles  of  Mount  Seir,  they  turned  away  and 
went  southwards  to  compass  the  land  of 
Edom:  cf.  Num.  xx.  21,  22;  Deut.  ii.  8. 

(e)  Kadesh  was  situated  on  low  ground, 
at  least  on  ground  low  as  compared  with  that 
in  its  neighbourhood.  For  the  spies  are  re- 
peatedly and  consistently  spoken  of  as  “ going 
up”  to  search  the  land  (cf,  xiii.  21,  22):  and 
the  land  itself  is  described  as  “ the  mountain,” 
xiii.  17:  cf.  xiv.  40,  42,  44,  45. 

These  conditions  are  all  of  them  satisfied  if 
we  assume  that  Kadesh  is  the  modern  Ain-el- 
Weibeh:  and  then  the  route  by  which  the 
host  made  their  first  rash  and  disastrous  in- 
vasion of  Canaan  (xiv.  40  sqq.)  would  be  that 
through  the  steep  pass  of  es  Safah  or  es  Sufah : 
see  on  xiv.  45,  and  xxxiv.  3 — 5. 

(6)  The  objections  urged  against  this  view 
are,  that  A in-el-  Weibeh  is  at  present  a spot  of 
no  great  importance,  and  that  there  is  near  it 
no  remarkable  cliff'  such  as  seems  implied  in 
the  narrative  of  Moses’  disobedience,  xx.  7 sqq. 
The  former  objection  has  been  already  an- 
swered in  the  first  paragraph  of  this  note : the 
latter  seems  of  little  weight,  since  the  high 
cliffs  at  the  mouth  of  the  Wady  el  Ghuweir 
are  certainly  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Ain-el- 
W'eibeh,  and  were  in  front  of  the  host  when 
it  was  proposing  to  march  eastward  through 
Mount  Seir.  WT  may  add,  that  the  word 


V 


NUMBERS.  XIII. 


seJa  used  of  the  cliff  at  Kadesh,  on  which 
stress  has  been  laid  (cf.  Stanley  ‘ S.  and  P.’ 
p.  95),  is  employed  Judg.  vi.  20  to  describe 
the  rock  on  which  Gideon  laid  his  offering, 
which  can  hardly  have  been  a cliff. 

(7)  Other  travellers  have  suggested  Ain 
Hash,  some  twelve  miles  north  of  Ain-el- 
Weibeh ; others  Ain  esh  Shehabeh,  fifteen 
miles  to  the  south-west ; little  is  known  of 
these  places ; the  latter  seems  too  far  away  to 
the  south  to  have  been  in  the  frontier  of 
Judah;  the  former,  though  but  little  known, 
satisfies  the  leading  conditions  of  the  texts  in 
which  Kadesh  is  mentioned,  as  well  as  does 
Ain-el-Weibeh. 

(8)  Thus  much  can  hardly  be  said  for  the 
claim  of  el-Ain,  more  than  70  miles  away  to 
the  westward,  though  advocated  by  Messrs. 
Rowlands  and  Williams  (‘  Holy  City,’  1,  463 
sqq.),  by  Mr  Wilton  (‘  Negeb,’  pp.  79,  80)  ; 
by  many  German  geographers  and  commenta- 
tors, Ritter,  Tuch,  Kurtz,  &c. ; and  in  par- 
ticular by  the  original  writer  of  the  notes  on 
Numbers  for  this  Commentary,  Mr  Thrupp. 
The  principal  argument  in  favour  of  this 
site  is  that  it  is  said  to  be  called  Kudes  or 
Kadeis  or  Gadis,  and  that  there  is  in  its  neigh- 
bourhood a plain  bearing  the  name  Abu  Rete- 
met,  which  recalls  the  Rithmah  of  xxxiii.  18. 
But  the  root  from  which  Kadesh  is  derived 
appears  to  have,  and  to  have  had  from  ancient 
times,  a wide  range  as  a topographical  term. 
We  have,  e.g.  El  Kuds,  the  Arabic  name  of 
Jerusalem;  Kedesh  of  Naphtali,  Josh.  xix.  37, 
the  modern  Kedes  (cf.  Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’ 
III.  366  sqq.);  Kadisha,  “the  sacred  stream,” 
the  name  of  a Phoenician  river,  Stanley,  ‘ S. 
and  P.’  p.  269,  Porter,  ‘ Damascus,’  pp.  301 
sqq.;  Kaditha,  a village  in  the  same  dis- 
trict, Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  ii.  444;  Kadessa  or 
Cadessah,  given  as  another  name  of  Madurah 
by  Bertou  and  others  (cf.  Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’ 
II.  179  note);  Cadish  in  Syria,  frequently 
named  in  early  Egyptian  annals,  and  identified 
by  Brugsch  with  Emesa,  the  modern  Hums. 
Others  have  found  traces  of  the  same  name 
in  Elusa,  now  El  Khalaseh:  and  lastly  the 
map  engraved  by  Kiepert  for  the  last  edi- 
tion of  Robinson’s  ‘B.  R.’  gives,  after 
Abeken,  a Jebel  el  Kudeis  in  the  western 
part  of  the  desert.  Robinson  indeed  denies 
(see  foot-notes  in  i.  189,  and  ii.  194)  that  El 
Ain  has  the  name  of  Kudes  or  Kadeis  at  all, 
and  thinks  that  Rowlands  mistook  for  Kudes 
the  name  Kudeirat,  which  is  given  to  El  Ain 
after  a tribe  of  Arabs  that  water  there.  But 
even  if  Rowlands  be  right  as  to  the  name,  its 
occurrence  at  El  Ain  would  prove  nothing, 
since  it  occurs  elsewhere  repeatedly,  and  pro- 
bably in  ancient  times  was  given  to  many 
places  which  do  not  now  bear  it. 

(9)  Again,  Rithmah,  like  Abu  Retemet, 
“Broom  Plain,”  no  doubt  derived  its  name 
from  the  broom-plant,  retem.  But  names 
suggested  by  peculiarities  of  vegetation  are  of 


699 

constant  occurrence  in  the  nomenclature  of 
the  Peninsula  of  Sinai ; and  the  broom  is  the 
largest  and  most  conspicuous  shrub  of  the 
Desert,  growing  thickly  in  the  watercourses 
in  many  parts.  It  probably  gave  a name  to 
many  localities  ; and  Robinson  in  fact,  ‘ B.  R.’ 

I.  84,  visited  a Wady  Retameh  abounding  in 
the  retem,  on  his  journey  between  Suez  and 
Sinai,  about  a day’s  march  from  the  latter. 

Altogether  then  the  resemblance  of  the 
names  Kudos  and  Retemet  to  the  Kadesh  and 
Rithmah  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  even  the  oc- 
currence of  both  of  them  in  the  same  locality, 
are  far  from  conclusive  of  the  question. 

(10)  And  it  is  obvious  that  El  Ain  satis- 
fies none  of  the  criteria  stated  above  (§  5) 
for  determining  the  site  of  the  ancient  Kadesh. 

It  is  described  (Num.  xx.  16)  as  “a  city  in 
the  uttermost  of  the  border”  of  Edom.  So 
too  Mount  Hor  is  said  to  be  “ in  the  edge  of 
the  land  of  Edom,”  Num.  xxxiii.  37  ; and  the 
Hebrew  term  in  the  two  passages  is  the  same. 
Yet  El  Ain  lies  far  away  to  the  west,  more 
than  seventy  miles  in  a direct  line  from  Mount 
Hor,  and  sixty  from  the  nearest  spur  of  Mount 
Seir.  El  Ain  then  could  not  by  any  stretch 
of  language  be  said  to  be  “in  the  border” 
or  “ edge”  of  the  land  of  Edom.  The  terri- 
tory of  Edom  did  not  in  the  days  of  Moses 
extend  beyond  the  Arabah  to  the  west  (Stan- 
ley, ‘ S.  and  P.’  p.  94,  note;  Clark’s  ‘Bible 
Atlas,’  p.  26). 

Moreover,  if  Kadesh  be  identified  with  El 
Ain,  it  cannot  be  explained  how  Moses  came 
to  journey  thither  by  the  “way  of  Mount 
Seir,”  see  above,  § 5 A “The  way  of  Shur” 
was  his  proper  course,  as  the  map  demon- 
strates. And  even  had  he  unaccountably 
chosen  the  very  circuitous  course  by  Mount 
Seir,  why,  when  he  was  at  Mount  Seir, 
close  to  the  defiles  through  which  he  de- 
sired to  obtain  a passage,  and  near  to  the 
chief  city  and  head-quarters  of  the  king  of 
Edom,  should  he  journey  away  far  to  the 
west  before  sending  the  embassy  mentioned 
in  Num.  xx.  14 — 17;  and  since'he  had  to 
come  back  again  to  Mount  Hor,  inflict  thus 
on  the  host  a gratuitous  march  and  counter- 
march of  near  150  miles? 

It  has  been  remarked  above,  § 5 that 
Kadesh  was  situated  on  ground  distinctly 
lower  than  that  which  lay  in  front  of  the 
host  when  it  first  reached  the  border  of  Ca- 
naan. But  El  Ain  is  on  high  ground;  from 
it  the  spies  must  have  gone  do^n  rather  than 
up  towards  Hebron. 

(11)  Lastly,  the  territory  allotted  to  Judah 
(see  Josh.  xv.  21 — 47)  seems  to  have  included 
the  whole  of  the  Negeb,  or  South  Country. 
But  a boundary-line  drawn  through  El  Ain 
towards  “the  river  of  Egypt”  would  cross  the 
middle  of  the  Negeb,  and  so  cut  off  a portion 
of  the  promised  inheritance.  The  true  Ka- 
desh, then,  which  was  unquestionably  a bor- 
der city  (cf.  Num.  xxxiv.  5 — 5),  must  have 


700 


NU'MBERS.  XIV. 


[v.  I,  2. 


been  situated  more  to  the  south  than  El  Ain 
is,  had  it  lain  in  this  part  of  the  Desert  at  all. 

(12)  Others  (e.g.  Stanley,  ‘ S.  and  P.’ 
pp.  94  sqq.)  have  identified  Kadesh  with 
Petra;  and  the  Syriac  and  Chaldee  Version 
uniformly  replace  Kadesh  in  the  Scripture 
narrative  by  Rekem,  the  Aramaic  name  of 
Petra.  TheTargums  render  Kadesh  Barnea 
by  Rekem -Giah,  /.  e.  “ Rekem  of  the  Ravine.” 
The  word  Petra  itself  recalls  the  cliff  (sela) 
which  Moses  smote,  Num.  xx.  8 — ii  ; draw- 
ing from  it  the  second  miraculous  supply  of 
Avater ; and  the  fact  that  the  word  used  of  the 
rock  at  Kadesh  is  sela^  and  not,  as  in  the  nar- 
rative of  former  like  miracles,  Ex.  xvii.  6, 
the  more  ordinary  word  tsur  is,  no  doubt, 
noteworthy.  There  appears,  too,  2 K. 
xiv.  7,  to  have  been  a city  in  Edom  called 
Selah,  which  pcssibly  was  Petra.  And  Je- 
rome (‘Onom.’  s.v.)  connects  Kadesh  with 
Petra : “ Cades  Barnea  in  deserto  qine  con- 
jungitur  civitate  Petrae  in  Arabia.”  And 
lastly,  the  gorge  in  which  Petra  is  bears  the 
name  of  Wady  Musa,  as  having  been  cleft  by 
Moses’  rod. 

(13)  Such  coincidences  are  striking;  but 
Petra  lies  too  far  southwards  to  have  been  in 
the  frontier  of  Judah;  it  is  not  a city  “in 
the  uttermost  of  the  border”  of  Edom,  but  is 
rather  in  the  heart  of  Edom,  far  in  the  defiles 
through  which  the  Israelites  vainly  sought  a 
passage : and  moreover  it  is  in  the  very  skirts 
of  Mount  Hor,  whereas  Num.  xxxiii.  37 
speaks  of  an  encampment  at  Kadesh,  and  then 
of  a separate  and  distinct  one  at  Mount  Hor. 

(14)  Whilst  therefore  it  must  remain  as 
yet  doubtful  what  precise  spot  is  the  Kadesh 
of  Scripture,  yet  it  seems  clear  on  the  whole 
that  traces  of  this  famous  sanctuary  must  be 
looked  for  in  the  neighbourhood  suggested  by 
Robinson,  that  of  Ain-el-Weibeh. 

(15)  If  the  arguments  contained  in  § 3 
of  this  note  be  correct,  it  will  be  apparent 
that  two  separate  encampments  of  the  host 
are  named  after  Kadesh.  I'he  first,  the  Rith- 
mah  of  the  catalogue  in  Num.  xxxiii.  18,  19, 
took  place  in  the  middle  of  the  summer,  in  the 
second  year  after  the  exodus,  see  on  xiii.  20 ; 
the  latter  in  the  first  month  of  the  fortieth 
year,  see  on  xx.  i.  On  the  former  occasion 
the  people  abode  in  Kadesh  for  some,  per- 
haps many  months.  For  it  was  here  that 
they  expected  for  forty  days  the  return  of  the 
spies,  xiii.  25;  and  here  Moses  and  theTaber- 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

I The  people  imirvinr  at  the  navs.  6 Joshua 
and  Caleb  labour  to  still  them,  ii  God  tlu'eat- 
cneth  them.  1 3 Moses  persuadeth  God,  and 
obtaineth  pardon.  26  The  7nurmurers  a7'e 
deprived  of  entering  into  the  land.  36  The 
men  luho  raised  the  evil  report  die  by  a plague. 
40  The  people  that  -would  invade  the  land 
against  the  -wUl  of  God  are  smitten. 


nacle  remained,  xiv.  44 : whilst  the  people, 
though  sentenced  by  God  to  wander  in  the 
desert,  attempted  notwithstanding  to  occupy 
the  land  of  rest.  And  after  their  repulse  by 
the  Canaanites,  they  spent,  as  it  seems,  Deut. 
i.  45,  46,  “many  days,”  the  usual  Hebrew 
idiom  for  any  long  period,  in  vain  endeavours 
to  obtain  remission  of  their  sentence.  Eventu- 
ally this  prolonged  encampment  at  Kadesh 
was  broken  up;  and  the  people  “compassed 
Mount  Seir  many  days,”  Deut.  ii.  i;  i.e. 
roamed  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran  until  the 
generation  of  murmurers  was  wasted  away. 
To  this  long  and  dreary  period  must  be  as- 
signed the  seventeen  stations  enumerated 
Num.  xxxiii.  19 — 36  ; on  which  see  note  on 
“i;.  19  of  that  chapter.  Finally,  the  host  was 
re-assembled  at  Kadesh  early  in  the  fortieth 
year  (cf.  xx.  i and  note),  and  was  evidently 
again  encamped  here  for  a period  of  from 
three  to  four  months:  cf.  xx.  i with  xx.  22 — 
28,  and  xxxiii.  38.  Here  it  was  that  Miriam 
died  and  was  buried,  ibid.:  here  that  the 
people  mustered  in  full  strength  for  the  final 
march  on  Canaan,  soon  exhausted  the  natural 
supplies  of  water,  xx.  2 sqq.,  and  were  given 
to  drink  from  the  rock  smitten  by  the  rod  of 
Moses:  here  that  sentence  was  pronounced  on 
Moses  and  Aaron  for  their  sin,  xx.  12,  13  ; and 
from  hence  that  the  messengers  were  dispatch- 
ed to  the  king  of  Edom,  xx.  14  sqq.  After  the 
return  of  the  messengers  the  people  turned 
away  from  Edom,  quitted  Kadesh  for  the 
last  time,  and  after  a halt  at  Mount  Hor  oc- 
casioned by  the  death  of  Aaron,  proceeded 
by  the  marches  set  forth  xxxiii.  4 1 — 49  round 
the  borders  of  Edom  to  the  Plains  of  Moab. 

(16)  It  is  possible  that  the  memorable 
events  which  happened  at  Kadesh  during  the 
years  covered  by  the  book  of  Numbers  first 
made  the  spot  famous,  and  that  the  name  of 
Kadesh  was  bestowed  upon  it  because  of  the 
long  continuance  thereof  the  Tabernacle  with 
its  priests  and  services. 

After  the  settlement  in  Canaan  the  energies 
and  interests  of  the  nation  found  channels  far 
away  from  the  sterile  and  remote  district  of 
the  northern  Arabah.  Kadesh  seems  gradu- 
ally to  have  lapsed  into  obscurity,  and  to  have 
become,  what  it  probably  was  originally,  no- 
thing more  than  a watering  place  for  the 
nomadic  tribes  of  the  Desert.  The  latest  allu- 
sion to  it  by  name  in  the  Jewish  annals  is  in 
Judith  i.  9.  Josephus  does  not  mention  it  at  all. 


AND  all  the  congregation  lifted 
up  their  voice,  and  cried;  and 
the  people  wept  that  night. 

2 And  all  the  children  of  Israel 
murmured  against  Moses  and  against 
Aaron : and  the  whole  congregation 
said  unto  them,  Would  God  that  we 


V.  3-14]  NUMBERS.  XIV. 


701 


had  died  in  the  land  of  Egypt ! or 
would  God  we  had  died  in  this  wil- 
derness ! 

3 And  wherefore  hath  the  Lord 
brought  us  unto  this  land,  to  fall  by 
the  sword,  that  our  wives  and  our 
children  should  be  a prey?  were  it 
not  better  for  us  to  return  into 
Egypt  ? 

4 And  they  said  one  to  another. 
Let  us  make  a captain,  and  let  us  re- 
turn into  Egypt. 

5 Then  Moses  and  Aaron  fell  on 
their  faces  before  all  the  assembly  of 
the  congregation  of  the  children  of 
Israel. 

6 ^ And  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun, 
and  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh, 
which  were  of  them  that  searched  the 
land,  rent  their  clothes : 

7 And  they  spake  unto  all  the  com- 
pany of  the  children  of  Israel,  saying, 
The  land,  which  we  passed  through 
to  search  it,  is  an  exceeding  good 
land. 

8 If  the  Lord  delight  in  us,  then 
he  will  bring  us  into  this  land,  and 
give  it  us ; a land  which  floweth  with 
milk  and  honey. 

9 Only  rebel  not  ye  against  the 


Lord,  neither  fear  ye  the  people  of 
the  land ; for  they  are  bread  for  us : 
their  Mefence  is  departed  from  them, 
and  the  Lord  is  with  us : fear  them 
not. 

10  But  all  the  congregation  bade 
stone  them  with  stones.  And  the 
glory  of  the  Lord  appeared  in  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation  before 
all  the  children  of  Israel. 

1 1 ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, How  long  will  this  people  pro- 
voke me?  and  how  long  will  it  be 
ere  they  believe  me,  for  all  the  sign6 
which  I have  shewed  among  them  ? 

12  I will  smite  them  with  the  pes- 
tilence, and  disinherit  them,  and  will 
make  of  thee  a greater  nation  and 
mightier  than  they. 

13  And  "Moses  said  unto  the  •3-- 
Lord,  Then  the  Egyptians  shall 

hear  A,  (for  thou  broughtest  up  this 
people  in  thy  might  from  among 
them  B 

14  And  they  will  tell  it  to  the  in- 
habitants of  this  land : for  they  have 
heard  that  thou  Lord  art  among  this 
people,  that  thou  Lord  art  seen  face  ^ Exod.  13. 
to  face,  and  that  ‘^thy  cloud  standeth 

over  them,  and  that  thou  goest  be- 


ChaP.  XIV.  5.  Then  Moses  and  Aaron 
fell  on  their  face s'\  Already  Caleb  had  en- 
deavoured to  still  the  people  before  Moses 
(xiii.  30)  ; already  Moses  himself  (Deut.  i. 
29  sqq.)  had  endeavoured  to  recall  the  people 
to  obedience.  After  the  failure  of  these  elforts 
Moses  and  Aaron  cast  themselves  down  in 
solemn  prayer  before  God  (cf.  xvi.  2a)  ; and 
the  appearance  of  the  glory  of  the  Lord  in 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  {y.  10) 
was  the  immediate  answer. 

9.  their  defence^  Lit.  “their  shadow,” 
i.  e.  their  shelter  as  from  the  scorching  sun  : 
an  Oriental  figure.  Gf.  Is.  xxx.  2,  3,  xxxii.  2. 

12.  and  disinherit  them~\  By  the  pro- 
posed extinction  of  Israel  the  blessings  of  the 
covenant  would  revert  to  their  original  donor. 

13 — 17.  The  syntax  of  these  verses  is 
singularly  broken.  Moses  describes  himself 
(Ex.  iv.  10,  see  note)  as  “not  a man  of 
words,”  and  as  “slow  of  speech,  and  of  a 
slow  tongue.”  These  defects  would  be 
apt  to  embarrass  him  doubly  in  an  exigency 
like  the  present.  And,  just  as  does  St  Paul 
when  deeply  moved,  Moses  presses  his  argu- 
•VOL.  1. 


ments  one  on  the  other  without  pausing  to 
ascertain  the  grammatical  finish  of  his  ex- 
pressions. He  speaks  here  as  if  in  momentary 
apprehension  of  an  outbreak  of  God’s  wrath, 
unless  he  could  perhaps  arrest  it  by  crowding 
in  every  topic  of  deprecation  and  intercession 
that  he  could  summon  on  the  instant.  His 
appeal,  preserving  its  native  ruggedness,  may 
be  paraphrased  thus:  “And  if  then  the 
Egyptians  shall  hear  how,  after  bringing  up 
this  people  by  Thy  might  from  amongst  them, 
— and  if  they  shall  tell  the  inhabitants  of  the 
land  what  they  have  heard,  how  that  Thou, 
Lord,  wast  among  this  people.  Thou  who  art 
seen,  O Lord,  face  to  face  of  them,  and  whose 
cloud  resteth  over  them,  and  who  goest  be- 
fore them  in  a pillar  of  cloud  by  day  and  in  a 
pillar  of  fire  by  night ; — and  if  then  Thou 
shalt  kill  this  people  as  one  man,  and  so  the 
nations  which  have  heard  the  fame  of  Thee 
shalt  tell  and  say.  Because  the  Lord  was  not 
able  to  bring  this  people  into  the  land  which 
He  sware  unto  them,  therefore  He  hath  slain 
them  in  the  wilderness: — Now  therefore,  I 
beseech  Thee,  let  the  power  of  my  Lord  be 
great,  &c.” 


Y Y 


702 


NUMBERS.  XIV. 


[v.  15—24. 


fore  them,  by  day  time  in  a pillar  of  a 
cloud,  and  in  a pillar  of  fire  by 
night. 

15  ^ Now  X thou  shalt  kill  all  this 
people  as  one  man,  then  the  nations 
which  have  heard  the  fame  of  thee 
will  speak,  saying, 

f Deut.  9.  j 5 Because  the  Lord  was  not  ^ able 

to  bring  this  people  into  the  land 
which  he  sware  unto  them,  there- 
fore he  hath  slain  them  in  the  wil- 
derness. 

17  And  now,  I beseech  thee,  let  the 
power  of  my  Lord  be  great,  according 
as  thou  hast  spoken,  saying, 

-^Exod.  34.  18  The  Lord  is  ^longsuftering,  and 

Psai.  103.  of  great  mercy,  forgiving  iniquity  and 
transgression,  and  by  no  means  clear- 
^Exod.20.  ing  the  guilty^  ^visiting  the  iniquity  of 
^ 34. 7.  the  fathers  upon  the  children  unto  the 
third  and  fourth  generation. 

19  Pardon,  I beseech  thee,  the  ini- 
quity of  this  people  according  unto 


the  greatness  of  thy  mercy,  and  as 
thou  hast  forgiven  this  people,  from 
Egypt  even  ''until  now.  “9?. 

20  And  the  Lord  said,  I have  par- 
doned  according  to  thy  word : 

21  But  as  truly  as  I live,  ail  the 
earth  shall  be  filled  with  the  glory  of 
the  Lord. 

22  Because  all  those  men  which 
have  seen  my  glory,  and  my  miracles, 
which  I did  in  Egypt  and  in  the  wil- 
derness, and  have  tempted  me  now 
these  ten  times,  and  have  not  heark- 
ened to  my  voice ; 

22  Turelv  they  shall  not  see  the  ^ Heb, 
land  winch  1 sware  unto  their  Fathers,  the  latid. 
neither  shall  any  of  them  that  pro- 
voked me  see  it : 

24  But  my  servant  Caleb,  be- Josh.  i 
cause  he  had  another  spirit  with  him, 
and  hath  followed  me  fully,  him  will 
I bring  into  the  land  whereinto  he 
went ; and  his  seed  shall  possess  it. 


IS.  Cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  6,  7. 

20.  I ha've  pardoned^  God  consents  to 
presei*ve  the  nation;  but  sentences  the  rebels 
to  personal  exclusion  from  Canaan. 

21—23.  Render;  But  as  truly  as  I 
live,  and  as  all  the  earth  shall  he 
filled  with  the  glory  of  the  Lord; 
{y.%2)  all  those  men,  &c.;  (t^.  23)  shall 
not  see,  &c.  The  Hebrew  particle  (chT), 
erroneously  rendered  “ because”  in  A.  V., 
introduces  (as  often  in  such  forms)  the  sub- 
stance of  the  oath  to  which  the  preceding 
verse  gave  the  introduction.  The  particle  in 
beginning  of  t?.  23  signifies  merely  “not.” 
Cf.  Deut.  xxxii.  40  and  note. 

22.  these  ten  times']  Ten  is  the  number 
which  imports  completeness.  Cf.  Gen.  xxxi.  7. 
The  sense  is  that  the  measure  of  their  provo- 
cations was  now  full ; the  day  of  grace  was  at 
last  over.  I'he  Rabbins  however  take  the 
words  literally,  and  enumerate  ten  several 
occasions  on  which  the  people  had  tempted 
God  since  the  Exodus. 

24.  my  sernsant  Caleb]  Caleb  only  is 
mentioned  here  as  also  in  xiii.  30  sqq.  Both 
passages  probably  form  part  of  the  matter  in- 
troduced at  a later  period  into  the  narrative  of 
Moses,  ;lnd  either  by  Joshua  or  under  his 
superintendence.  Hence  the  name  of  Joshua 
is  omitted,  and  his  faithfulness  together  with  its 
reward  are  taken  for  granted.  In  'vnj.  30,  38, 
both  names  are  mentioned  together ; and  these 


verses  in  all  likelihood  belong  to  the  same 
original  composij:ion  with  6 — 10.  See 

Introd.  § 7.  I 

It  is  notev/orthy  also  that  no  express  men- 
tion is  made  of  Moses  and  Aaron  as  exempt 
from  the  sentence : though  their  inclusion  in  it 
only  took  place  long  subsequently  (cf.  xx.  12). 

But  such  exemption  is  perhaps  implied  in  the 
fact  that  God  speaks  to  them  (t;.  26)  vdiilst 
giving  judgment  upon  the  “ evil  congregation.” 
Eleazar  too,  who  had  already  entered  on  the 
duties  of  the  priesthood  (iv.  16,  &c.),  and 
therefore  was  doubtless  more  than  _ twenty 
years  old,  survived  to  assist  Joshua  in  allot- 
ting Canaan  to  the  victorious  tribes.  Josh, 
xiv.  I.  But  as  the  tribe  of  Levi  had  no  repre- 
sentative amongst  the  twelve  spies  (cf.  xiii. 

4 — 15),  it  was  not  included  with  the  “all 
that  were  numbered”  of  <v.  39  (cf.  i.  46,  47)? 
so  its  exception  from  the  judgment  seems  self- 
evident. 

The  exceptions  then  were  on  the  whole 
neither  few  nor  inconsiderable ; and  the  fact  that 
only  one  of  them  is  named,  v.  30,  whilst  yet 
the  language  is  emphatically  general,  should 
serve  as  a warning  against  the  common  as- 
sumption that  the  words  of  Scripture  can  have 
no  limitations  except  such  as  are  actually  ex- 
pressed. 

Ps.  xc.,  which  is  entitled  “a  Prayer  of 
Moses,”  has  been  most  appropriately  regarded 
as  a kind  of  dirge  upon  those  sentenced  thus 
awfully  by  God  to  waste  away  in  the  wilder- 
ness. 


NUMBERS.  XIV. 


703 


V.  25—35.] 

25  (Now  the  Amalekites  and  the 
Canaanites  dwelt  in  the  valley.)  To 
morrow  turn  you,  and  get  you  into 
the  wilderness  by  the  way  of  the  Red 
sea. 

26  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

27  How  long  shall  I bear  with  this 
evil  congregation,  which  murmur 
against  me?  I have  heard  the  mur- 
muringsof  the  children  of  Israel,  which 
they  murmur  against  me. 

chap.  26.  28  Say  unto  them,  truly  as  I 

4^32. 10.  saith  the  Lord,  as  ye  have  spoken 

; in  mine  ears,  so  wi.ll  I do  to  you : 

29  Your  carcases  shall  fall  in  this 
-'‘Dent.  I.  wilderness;  and  ^^all  that  were  num- 
bered  of  you,  according  to  your  whole 
number,  from  twenty  years  old  and 
upward,  which  have  murmured  against 
me, 

■i  Heb.  30  Doubtless  ye  shall  not  come  in- 
%ykatd.  the  land,  concerning  which  I Tware 


to  make  you  dwell  therein,  save  Ca- 
leb the  son  of  Jephunneh,  and  Joshua 
the  son  of  Nun. 

31  But  your  little  ones,  which  ye 
said  should  be  a prey,  them  will  I 
bring  in,  and  they  shall  know  the 
land  which  ye  have  despised. 

32  But  as  for  you,  your  carcases, 
they  shall  fall  in  this  wilderness. 

33  And  your  children  shall  " wan- ii 
der  in  the  wilderness  forty  years,  and 
bear  your  whoredoms,  until  your  car- 
cases be  wasted  in  the  wilderness. 

34  After  the  number  of  the  days 

in  which  ye  searched  the  land,  even 
"forty  days,  each  day  for  a year,  shall  * ^s- 

ye  bear  your  iniquities,  even  forty  Ezek.  4. 6 
years,  and  ye  shall  know  my  “ breach  " Or, 

of  promise. 

35  I the  Lord  have  said,  I will 
surely  do  it  unto  all  this  evil  congre- 
gation, that  are  gathered  together 
against  me:  in  this  wilderness  they 


25.  No^jo  the  Amalekites  and  the  Canaanites 
d-welt  in  the  'valley]  These  words  are  best  un- 
derstood as  the  continuation  of  the  answer  of 
God  to  Moses:  And  now  the  Amalek- 
ites  and  the  Canaanites  are  dwell- 
ing (or  abiding)  in  the  valley:  where- 
fore turn  you,  &c.”  (that  so  be  not 
smitten  before  them) . Some  difficulty  has  been 
occasioned  by  the  fact  that  in  'v'v.  43 — 45  these 
tribes  are  represented  rather  as  dwelling  on  the 
hill.  The  Syriac  version  alters  the  passage  before 
us  accordingly  ; but  such  procedure  is  unne- 
cessary. What  was  in  one  respect  a valley,  or 
rather,  as  the  Hebrew  term  emek  implies,  a 
broad  sweep  betvreen  hills,  might  in  another 
respect  be  itself  a hill,  as  lying  on  the  top  of  the 
mountain-plateau.  Such  was  precisely  the  case 
with  the  elevated  plain  on  which  the  conflict 
of  the  disobedient  Israelites  with  the  Ama- 
lekites and  Canaanites  eventually  ensued  (see 
on  'u.  45).  This  was  perhaps  the  very  plain 
which  had  long  been  known  as  one  of  the 
seats  of  the  Amalekites,  the  “country  (or 
field)  of  the  Amalekites,”  by  which,  centuries 
back,  the  invader  had  pursued  his  march  from 
Kadesh  to  the  Amorite  city  of  Hazezon-tamar 
(Gen.  xiv.  7);  the  “field”  (i  S.  xxvii.  5, 
Heb.)  in  which  lay  the  city  of  Ziklag,  if  that 
be,  as  is  probable  (see  Wilton,  ‘The  Negeb,’ 
pp.  206 — 209)  identical  with  the  modern  Kas- 
luj.  The  text  speaks  of  this  district  as  tenanted, 
generally,  by  the  Amalekites  and  Canaanites. 
The  former  term  points  to  the  nomad  bands  that 
roved  through  its  open  pastures : the  latter, 
here  taken  in  its  wider  sense,  to  the  Amorites 


of  the  neighbouring  cities  (comp.  'v.  45  with 
Deut.  i.  44),  who  probably  lived  in  league 
with  the  Amalekites. 

To  morrow]  Not  necessarily  the  next  day, 
but  an  idiom  for  “hereafter,”  “hencefor- 
ward:” Ex.  xiii.  14,  Josh.  iv.  6,  See. 

by  the  <u)ay  of  the  Red  sea]  That  is,  appa- 
rently, of  the  eastern  or  Elanitic  gulf.  Re- 
specting the  course  of  the  subsequent  wander- 
ings see  xxxiii.  20 — 36,  and  notes. 

30.  save  Caleb... and  Joshua]  Cf.  xxxii. 
II,  12. 

32.  But  as  for  you.,  your  carcases.,  &C.] 
Rather,  But  your  carcases,  even  yours, 
shall  fall,  &c. 

33.  your  ^whoredoms]  Their  several  re- 
bellions had  been  so  many  acts  of  faithless 
departure  from  the  Lord  who  had  taken  them 
unto  himself.  And  as  the  children  of  the 
unchaste  have  generally  to  bear  in  their  earthly 
carers  much  of  the  disgrace  and  the  misery 
which  forms  the  natural  penalty  of  their 
parents’  transgression  ; so  here  the  children  of 
the  Israelites,  although  suffered  to  hope  for  an 
eventual  entry  into  Canaan,  were  yet  to  endure, 
through  many  long  years’  wandering,  the  ap- 
propriate punishment  of  their  fathers’  wilful- 
ness. 

34.  my  breach  of  promise]  In  Hebrew 
this  is  one  word,  found  elsewhere  only  in  Job 
XXX.  10  (where  A.  V.  renders  “occasions”): 
and  here  best  rendered  perhaps,  “my  with- 
drawal,” “my  turning  away.” 


i 


Y Y 2 


704 


NUMBERS.  XIV.  XV. 


[v.  36—2. 


i'  I Cor. 
10. 

Heb.  3. 
Jude  5- 


^ Deub 

41. 


shall  be  consumed,  and  there  they 
shall  die. 

36  And  the  men,  which  Moses 
sent  to  search  the  land,  who  return- 
ed, and  made  all  the  congregation  to 
murmur  against  him,  by  bringing  up 
a slander  upon  the  land, 

37  Even  those  men  that  did  bring 
up  the  evil  report  upon  the  land, 

10.  '^died  by  the  plague  before  the  Lord. 

38  But  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun, 
and  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh, 
which  were  of  the  men  that  went  to 
search  the  land,  lived  still. 

39  And  Moses  told  these  sayings 
unto  all  the  children  of  Israel:  and 
the  people  mourned  greatly. 

40  ^ And  they  rose  up  early  in  the 
morning,  and  gat  them  up  into  the 

I.  top  of  the  mountain,  saying,  Lo,  ^we 
he  here.,  and  will  go  up  unto  the 
place  which  the  Lord  hath  promised : 
for  we  have  sinned. 

41  And  Moses  said.  Wherefore 
now  do  ye  transgress  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord  ? but  it  shall  not 
prosper. 


42  Go  not  up,  for  the  Lord  is  not 
among  you;  that  ye  be  not  smitten 
before  your  enemies. 

43  Lor  the  Amalekites  and  the  Ca- 
naanites  are  there  before  you,  and  ye 
shall  fall  by  the  sword:  because  ye 
are  turned  away  from  the  Lord, 
therefore  the  Lord  will  not  be  with 
you. 

44  But  they  presumed  to  go  up 

unto  the  hill  top  : nevertheless  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  and 
Moses,  departed  not  out  of  the  camp,  ^ 

45  Then  the  Amalekites  ^'Tame  44. 
down,  and  the  Canaanites  which  dwelt 
in  that  hill,  and  smote  them,  and  dis- 
comfited them,  even  unto  Hormah. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

I The  law  of  the  meat  offering  and  the  drink 
offering,  13,  29  The  stranger  is  wider  the 
same  lazv.  1 7 The  law  of  the  first  of  the 
dough  for  an  heave  offering.  22  The  sacri- 
fice for  sin  of  ignorance.  30  The  punish- 
ment of  presumption.  32  He  that  violated 
the  sabbath  is  stoned.  37  The  lazo  of  fringes. 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying,  _ 

2 ^ Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 


« Lev.  23. 
10. 


44.  they  presumed  to  go  up~\  Rather  per- 
haps “they  despised”  (fi.e.  the  warning  of 
Moses  j'ust  given),  “so  as  to  go  up,  &c.” 
Cf.  Dent.  i.  41 — 43?  ‘'^^d  note. 

45.  unto  Hormah~\  Lit.  “the  Hormah:” 
i.e.  “the  banning,”  or  “ban-place.”  This 
name,  of  which  we  find  the  history  in  xxi.  3, 
is  here  used  by  anticipation.  The  mention  of 
it  in  Josh.  xii.  14  as  the  seat  of  a Canaanitish 
king  marks  it  as  a city  of  importance.  Its 
site  is  disputed.  Its  earlier  nam.e,  Zephath, 
Judg.  i.  17,  has  been  compared  with  that  of 
the  ascent  es-Safah  on  the  south-eastern  fron- 
tier of  Canaan  (Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’  ii.  p.  198, 
foot-note:  see  on  xxxiv.  3 sqq.):  and  it  was 
probably  by  this  steep  pass  (Nakb  es  Safah, 
see  on  xxxiv.  3 — 5)  that  the  Israelites  quitted 
the  Arabah  for  the  higher  ground.  See  note 
at  end  of  ch.  xiii.,  and  Robinson,  ii.  180 — 182, 
and  194.  Rowlands  identifies  Zephath  with 
Sebata,  which  lies  further  to  the  west,  about  25 
miles  norih  of  Ain  Kadeis.  Sebata  was  visited 
by  Rev.  C.  H.  Palmer  late  in  the  year  1869. 
Its  ruins  are  very  extensive,  including  three 
churches  and  a tower.  'I'here  is  an  Arab 
saying  “ Creater  ruins  than  kd-Aujeh  and 
El-Abdeh  there  are  none,  save  only  Sebata, 
which  is  grander  than  cither.”  Near  this  city, 
and  protecting  it  fnnn  a very  commanding 
position,  is  a ruined  fortress  called  Kl-Mesh- 


rifeh,  furnished  with  escarpments,  bastions, 
and  stropg  towers,  which  Mr  Palmer  sup- 
poses to  have  been  the  site  of  the  “ Watch- 
tower”  in  question.  (See  Quarterly  Statement 
of  Palestine  Exploration  Fund,  No.  VI.  March 
31  to  June  30,  1870,  pp.  315,  316.)  Yet  it 
must  be  observed  that  the  name  Sebata  or 
Esbata  has  not,  in  Arabic  (cf.  Seetzen,  ill. 
p.  44),  the  resemblance  to  Zephath  which 
the  English  orthography  suggests.  And  in 
fact  later  notices  of  the  city  (i  S.  xxx.  30, 

I Chron.  iv.  30)  seem  to  shew  that,  of  its 
two  names,  Hormah  was  that  which  sur- 
vived. Perhaps  its  real  site  was  some  miles 
east  of  Sebata  at  the  ruins  called  Rakhmah 
(or  Rukhama),  a name  which  in  Hebrew 
letters  is  an  anagram  of  Hormah.  If  so,  we 
can,  notwithstanding  our  imperfect  know- 
ledge of  the  surrounding  region,  trace  the 
pro'gress  of  the  Israelite  invaders.  The  direc- 
tion of  their  line  of  march  would  be  N.  N.  W., 
from  the  Arabah.  Continuing  onward  past 
Rakhmah  or  Hormah,  it  would  lead  them 
into  the  extensive  plain  now  known  as  es-Serr 
or  es-Slr,  the  Seir  of  Dcut.  i.  44-  A fur- 
ther progress  of  20  miles  along  this  plain 
would  have  brought  them  to  the  royal  city  of 
Arad  (see  xxi.  i.  Josh.  xii.  14),  still  bearing 
its  ancient  designation  though  in  ruins.  But  . 
their  enemies,  warned  of  their  approach,  waited 


V.  3— 14-] 


705 


NUMBERS.  XV. 


rael,  and  say  unto  them,  When  ye 
be  come  into  the  land  of  your  habi- 
tations, which  I give  unto  you, 

3 And  will  make  an  offering  by  lire 
unto  the  Lord,  a burnt  offering,  or 
'Lev.  22.  a sacrihce  ^in  ^performing  a vow,  or 
Heb.  in  a freewill  offering,  or  in  your  so- 
■eparat-  fcasts,  to  make  a ^sweet  savour 

Exod.  29.  unto  the  Lord,  of  the  herd,  or  of  the 
dock: 

'Lev.  2. 1.  ^ Then  shall  he  that  offereth  his 

offering  unto  the  Lord  bring  a meat 
offering  of  a tenth  deal  of  dour  min- 
gled with  the  fourth  part  of  an  hin  of 
oil. 

5 And  the  fourth  part  of  an  hin  of 
wine  for  a drink  offering  shalt  thou 
prepare  with  the  burnt  offering  or 
sacrifice,  for  one  lamb. 

6 Or  for  a ram,  thou  shalt  prepare 
/hr  a meat  offering  two  tenth  deals  of 
dour  mingled  with  the  third  part  of 
an  hin  of  oil. 

7 And  for  a drink  offering  thou 
shalt  offer  the  third  part  of  an  hin  of 


wine,  for  a sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord. 

8 And  when  thou  preparest  a bul- 
lock for^  a burnt  offering,  or  for  a 
sacrifice  in  performing  a vow,  or  peace 
offerings  unto  the  Lord  : 

9 Then  shall  he  bring  with  a bul- 
lock a meat  offering  of  three  tenth 
deals  of  dour  mingled  with  half  an 
hin  of  oil. 

10  And  thou  shalt  bring  for  a 
drink  offering  half  an  hin  of  Wmo^for 
an  offering  made  by  fire,  of  a sweet 
savour  unto  the  Lord. 

1 1 Thus  shall  it  be  done  for  one 
bullock,  or  for  one  ram,  or  for  a 
lamb,  or  a kid. 

12  According  to  the  number  that 
ye  shall  prepare,  so  shall  ye  do  to 
every  one  according  to  their  number, 

13  All  that  are  born  of  the  country 
shall  do  these  things  after  this  manner, 
in  offering  an  offering  made  by  fire, 
of  a sweet  savour  unto  the  Lord. 

14  And  if  a stranger  sojourn  with 


for  them  probably  under  the  command  of  the 
king  of  Arad  on  the  plain,  and  there  defeated 
them.  From  the  statement  that  they  were 
diiven  back  only  to  Hormah  it  would  seem 
that  the  country  between  that  and  Kadesh 
remained  in  their  possession. 

Chap.  XV.  The  contents  of  the  next  five 
chapters  must  apparently  be  referred  to  the 
long  period  of  wandering  to  which  (xiv.  33)  the 
^ople  were  condemned.  See  Introd.  § 3. 
Chapter  xx.  introduces  us  at  once  to  the 
transactions  belonging  to  the  second  encamp- 
ment at  Kadesh  in  the  fortieth  year  after  the 
Exodus. 

The  chapter  now  before  us  lays  down  cer- 
tain ordinances.  These  will  be  seen,  as  we 
proceed,  to  be  connected  with  the  circum- 
stances of  the  time  in  which,  as  their  posi- 
tion indicates,  they  were  promulgated. 

— 21.  Ordinances  respecting  the  meat-, 
drink-,  and  heave-offerings. 

2.  When  ye  be  come  into  the  land  of  your 
habitations']  After  the  account  of  the  rebellion 
and  of  the  discomfiture  at  Kadesh,  the  main 
interest  of  the  history  descends  on  the  Israel- 
ites of  the  younger  generation.  To  them  is 
conveyed  in  these  words  the  hope  that  the 
nation  should  yet  enter  into  the  land  of  pro- 
mise. The  ordinances  that  follow  are  more 
likely  to  have  been  addressed  to  adults  than  to 
children  ; and  we  may  therefore  assume  that  at 


the  date  of  their  delivery  the  new  generation 
was  growing  up,  and  the  period  of  wander- 
ing drawing  towards  its  close.  During  that 
period  the  meat-offerings  and  drink-offerings 
piescribed  by  law  had  been  probably  inter- 
mitted by  reason  of  the  scanty  supply  of  corn 
and  wine  in  the  wilderness.  The  command 
therefore  to  provide  such  offerings  was  a 
pledge  to  Israel  that  it  should  possess  the 
land  which  was  to  furnish  the  wherewithal 
for  them. 

4—12.  The  meat-offering  is  treated  of 
Lev.  II.  ^ No  mention  is  there  made  of  any 
drink-offering  ; yet  from  scattered  notices  (Ex. 
xxix,  40,  Lev.  xxiii.  14)  it  appears  to  have 
been  an  ordinary  accessory  to  the  former. 
N^w  however  it  is  prescribed  that  a meat- 
offeiing  and  a drink-offering  of  definite  mea- 
sure shall  accompany  every  sacrifice.  This 
measure  is  apparently  the  same  as  had  been 
customary  already.  The  lambs  of  the  mornirw 
and  evening  sacrifice  had  been  each  accompanied 
from  the  first  by  one  tenth  deal  of  flour 
a quarter  of  a hin  of  oil,  and  the  like  of  wine 
(Ex.  xxix.  40)  ; and  these  measures  are  now 
prescribed  for  every  lamb,  though  double  that 
quantity  of  flour  was  (Lev.  xxiii.  13)  pre- 
scribed as  an  adjunct  to  the  ware-sheaf 
Larger  measures  are  prescribed  for  a ram, 
and  still  larger  for  a bullock.  If  m.ore  than 
one  animal  be  sacrificed,  the  proper  measures 
must  be  used  with  each. 


f 


NUMBERS.  XV. 


[v.  15—25- 


706 


you,  or  whosoever  be  among  you  in 
your  generations,  and  will  offer  an 
offering  made  by  fire,  of  a sweet  sa- 
vour unto  the  Lord;  as  ye  do,  so  he 
shall  do. 

<rExod.  12.  ^ One  ordinance  shall  be  both 

chap.  9.  for  you  of  the  congregation,  and  also 
for  the  stranger  that  sojourneth  with 
you^  an  ordinance  for  ever  in  your 
generations:  as  ye  are^  so  shall  the 
stranger  be  before  the  Lord. 

16  One  law  and  one  manner  shall 
be  for  you,  and  for  the  stranger  that 

. sojourneth  with  you. 

17  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

18  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them.  When  ye, 
come  into  the  land  whither  I bring 
you, 

19  Then  it  shall  be,  that,  when  ye 
eat  of  the  bread  of  the  land,  ye  shall 
offer  up  an  heave  offering  unto  the 
Lord. 

20  Ye  shall  offer  up  a cake  of  the 
first  of  your  dough  for  an  heave  offer- 


15.  as  ye  are,  so  shall  the  stranger  be, 
&:c.]  The  meaning  is,  “as  with  you,  so 
shall  it  be  with  the  stranger,  &c.” 

IS.  When  ye  come  into  the  lanf  Cf.  on 
<v.  'i.  The  general  principle  under  which  the 
ordinance  of  this  and  the  three  verses  follow- 
ing comes  is  laid  down  Ex.  xxii.  29,  xxiii.  19, 
It  nad  already  been  exemplified  in  the  olfering 
of  the  “ firstfruits,  green  ears  of  corn,”  Lev. 
ii.  14;  that  of  “the  sheaf  of  firstfruits,” 
Lev.  xxiii.  9 sqq. ; and  that  of  the  “two  wave 
loaves,”  ibid.  ns.  17.  It  is  now  enjoined  in 
addition  that  a similar  offering  be  made  of  the 
first  dough  of  the  year.  These  offerings 
having  been  waved  or  heaved  before  the  Lord 
(xviii.  24)  became  the  perquisite  of  the  priests. 
Cf.  Neh.  X.  37  ; Ezek.  xliv.  30. 

20,  21.  (louglj]  Or  perhaps,  “coarse 
meal.”  The  Hebrew  word  occurs  elsewhere 
only  at  Neh.  x.  37,  Ezek.  xliv.  30,  where  the 
reference  is  to  this  ordinance. 

as  ye  do  the  heanse  offering  of  the  threshing- 
fioorl  Of  this,  unless  it  be  the  same  vvith 
the  dried  green  ears  of  Lev.  ii.  14,  nothing  is 
said  elsewhere. 

22  31.  Ordinances  respecting  sins  of 

ignor.mc-'  and  sins  of  presumption. 

22.  ^'Ind  if  ye  hanse  erredi\  The  heavy 
punishments  which  had  already  overtaken  the 
people  might  naturally  give  rise  to  apprehen- 
sions for  the  future,  especially  in  view  of  the 


ing:  as  ye  do  the  heave  offering  of  the 
threshingfloor,  so  shall  ye  heave  it. 

21  Of  the  first  of  your  dough  ye 
shall  give  unto  the  Lord  an  heave 
offering  in  your  generations. 

22  ^ And  if  ye  have  erred,  and 
not  observed  all  these  commandments, 
which  the  Lord  hath  spoken  unto 
Moses, 

23  Even  all  that  the  Lord  hath 
commanded  you  by  the  hand  -of 
Moses,  from  the  day  that  the  Lord 
commanded  Moses.^  and  henceforward 
among  your  generations ; 

24  Then  it  shall  be,  if  ought  be 
committed  by  ignorance  ^without  the  ^ 
knowledge  of  the  congregation,  thafj/^r 
all  the  congregation  shall  offer  one 
young  bullock  for  a burnt  offering, 

for  a sweet  savour  unto  the  Lord, 
with  his  meat  offering,  and  his  drink 
offering,  according  to  the  ” manner,  >'  <>, 

O'  . , - ^ f . ordmance 

and  one  kid  or  the  goats  tor  a sin 
offering. 

25  And  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  all  the  congregation  of 


fact  that  on  the  approaching  entrance  into 
Canaan  the  complete  observance  of  the  Law 
in  all  its  details  would  become  imperative  on 
them.  To  meet  such  apprehensions  a distinc- 
tion is  emphatically  drawn  between  sins  of 
ignorance  and  those  of  presumption  : and  the 
people  are  reminded  that  for  the  fonner  an 
atonement  is  provided.  Cf.  Lev.  iy.  13  sqq. 
The  passage  deals  separately  with  imperfec- 
tions of  obedience  which  would  be  regarded 
as  attaching  to  the  whole  nation  (nsnK  22 — 26), 
such  as  e.g.  dereliction  of  a sacred  duty  on 
the  part  of  a ruler ; and  those  of  individuals 
(yvn).  27 — 30). 

24.  nvithout  the  knonvledge  of  the  congre- 
gation'] lit.  as  marg.  '■from  the  eyes  of  the 
congregation.”  The  words  point  to  an  error 
of  omission  which  escaped  notice  at  the  time  : 
i.e.  to  an  oversight. 

one  young  bullock]  The  reference  here  is 
to  sins  of  omission;  cf.  ns.  22,  “if  ye  have  , 
erred,  and  not  obsei-ved  all  these  command- 
ments.” In  Lev.  1.  c.  the  reference  is  to  sins 
of  commission.  Accordingly  thei'e  is  some 
difference  in  the  ritual.  There  the  bullock 
was  treated  as  a sin-offering,  here  as  a burnt- 
offering.  With  the  burnt-offering  however  is 
to  be  joined  the  kid  of  sin-offering  (cf.  Lev. 
iv.  23)  as  an  atonement  for  the  sin  of  him  or 
them  who  had  occasioned  the  lapse  on  the 
part  of  the  people  at  large. 


V.  26 — 3^-] 


NUMBERS.  XV. 


707 


the  children  of  Israel,  and  it  shall  be 
forgiven  them;  for  it  is  ignorance; 
and  they  shall  bring  their  offering,  a 
sacrifice  made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord, 
and  their  sin  offering  before  the  Lord, 
for  their  ignorance: 

26  And  it  shall  be  forgiven  all  the 
congregation  of  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  the  stranger  that  sojourneth 
among  them ; seeing  ail  the  people 
were  in  ignorance. 

/Lev.  4.  27  ^ And  -^if  any  soul  sin  through 

ignorance,  then  he  shall  bring  a she 
goat  of  the  first  year  for  a sin  offering. 

28  And  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  the  soul  that  sinneth 
ignorantly,  when  he  sinneth  by  igno- 
rance before  the  Lord,  to  make  an 
atonement  for  him;  and  it  shall  be 
forgiven  him. 

29  Ye  shall  have  one  law  for  him 

1 Heb.  that  ^ sinneth  through  ignorance,  both 
doetk.  bom  among  the  chil- 

dren of  Israel,  and  for  the  stranger 
that  sojourneth  among  them. 

30  But  the  soul  that  doeth  ought 

i Heb.  'presumptuously,  whether  he  be  born 
Idghtiaud  land,  or  a stranger,  the  same 

reproacheth  the  Lord  ; and  that  soul 
shall  be  cut  off  from  among  his  people. 

31  Because  he  hath  despised  the 


word  of  the  Lord,  and  hath  broken 
his  commandment,  that  soul  shall  ut- 
terly be  cut  off ; his  iniquity  shall  be 
upon  him. 

32  And  while  the  children  of 
Israel  were  in  the  wilderness,  they 
found  a man  that  gathered  sticks  up- 
on the  sabbath  day. 

33  And  they  that  found  him  ga- 
thering sticks  brought  him  unto  Mo- 
ses and  Aaron,  and  unto  all  the  con- 
gregation. 

34  And  they  put  him  ^in  ward, Lev.  24. 
because  it  was  not  declared  what 
should  be  done  to  him. 

35  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, The  man  shall  be  surely  put  to 
death  : all  the  congregation  shall  stone 
him  with  stones  without  the  camp. 

36  And  all  the  congregation  brought 
him  without  the  camp,  and  stoned 
him  with  stones,  and  he  died ; as  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses. 

37  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

38  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  bid  ^them  that  they  make -^■'Deut.  22. 
them  fringes  in  the  borders  of  their  Matt.  23. 
garments  throughout  their  genera- 
tions,  and  that  they  put  upon  the 
fringe  of  the  borders  a ribband  of  blue: 


30.  presumptuously]^  The  original  (cf. 
margin,  and  Ex.  xiv.  8)  imports  something 
done  wilfully  and  openly ; in  case  of  a sin 
against  God  it  implies  that  the  act  is  com- 
mitted ostentatiously  and  in  bravado : cf.  the 
French  “haut  la  main.” 

reproacheth  the  Lord]  Rather  revileth  or 
blasphemeth  the  Lord;  cf.  Ezek.  xx.  27. 

32.  A?id  'while  the  children  of  Israel  were 
in  the  wilderness]  Moses  mentions  here,  as 
is  his  wont  (cf.  Lev.  xxiv.  10 — 16),  the  first 
open  transgression  and  its  punishm.ent  in 
order  to  exemplify  the  laws  which  he  is  laying 
down.  The  offence  of  Sabbath-breaking  was 
one  for  which  there  could  be  no  excuse.  This 
law  at  least  might  be  observed  even  in  the 
wilderness.  The  notice  of  time  while  the 
children  of  Israel  were  hi  the  wilderness  is 
thus  no  token  that  the  narrative  was  written 
when  the  people  were  no  longer  there.  On 
the  contrary  it  is  properly  introduced  here  to 
contrast  the  ordinance  of  the  Sabbath,  given 
some  time  ago.  Ex.  xxxi.  14,  and  daringly 
violated  in  the  case  before  us,  with  the  series 
of  ordinances  first  given  in  this  very  chapter. 


The  latter  were  not  obligatory  until  after  the 
settlement  in  Canaan:  the  former  was  obli- 
gatory already.  Transgression  of  it  was 
therefore  a presumptuous  sin,  and  was  pun- 
ished accordingly.  • 

34.  it  was  not  declared  what  should  be  done 
to  him]  Death  had  indeed  been  assigned  as 
the  penalty  (Ex.  xxxi.  14,  xxxv.  2);  but  it 
had  not  been  determined  how  that  death  was 
to  be  inflicted.  On  the  Hebrew  word  trans- 
lated here  “declare,”  cf.  Lev.  xxiv.  12,  Neh. 
viii.  8. 

37 — 41.  Ordinance  of  the  fringes. 

38.  that  they  put  upon  the  fringe  of  the 
borders  a ribband  of  blue]  Render  that  they 
add  to  the  fringes  of  the  borders  (or 
corners)  a thread  of  blue  : cf.  Deut.xxii. 

12,  where  the  word  translated  “fringes”  is  a 
different  one  but  vrith  the  same  general  sense. 
These  fringes  are  considered  by  Wilkinson 
to  be  of  Egyptian  origin  (‘Anc.  Egypt,’  ii. 

321,  322).  The  ordinary  outer  Jewish  gar- 
ment was  a quadrangular  piece  of  cloth  like 
a modern  plaid,  to  the  corners  of  which,  in 


NUMBERS.  XV.  XVL 


[v.  39—3’ 


708 


39  And  it  shall  be  unto  you  for  a 
fringe,  that  ye  may  look  upon  it,  and 
remember  all  the  commandments  of 
the  Lord,  and  do  them ; and  that  ye 
seek  not  after  your  own  heart  and 
your  own  eyes,  after  which  ye  use 
to  go  a whoring : 

40  That  ye  may  remember,  and 
do  all  my  commandments,  and  be 
holy  unto  your  God. 

41  I am  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  to  be  your  God:  I afji  the 
Lord  your  God. 

CHAPTER  XVL 

I T/ie  rebellion  of  Korah,  DatJian,  and  Abh'am. 
•23  Moses  separateth  the  people  from  the  rebels' 
tents.  31  The  earth  swalloweth  up  Korah, 


conformity  with  this  command,  a tassel  was 
attached.  Each  tassel  had  a conspicuous 
thread  of  deep  blue,  this  colour  being  doubt- 
less symbolical  of  the  heavenly  origin  of  the 
commandments  of  which  it  was  to  serve  as 
a memento.  Tradition  determined  that  the 
other  threads  should  be  white, — this  colour 
being  an  emblem  of  purity  (cf.  Is.  i.  18).  The 
arrangement  of  the  threads  and  knots,  to 
which  the  Jews  attached  the  greatest  import- 
ance, was  so  adjusted  as  to  set  forth  sym- 
bolically the  613  precepts  of  which  the  Law 
was  believed  to  consist.  In  our  Lord’s  time 
the  Pharisees  enlarged  their  fringes  (Matt, 
xxiii.  5)  in  order  to  obtain  reputation  for  their 
piety.  In  later  times  however  the  Jews  have 
worn  the  fringed  garment  {taFitb)  of  a smaller 
size  and  as  an  under  dress.  Its  use  is  how- 
ever still  retained,  especially  at  morning  prayer 
in  the  Synagogue. 

39.  that  ye  seek  nof\  Rather,  that  ye 
nvander  not. 

41.  May  be  connected  with  the  preceding, 
and  thus  rendered : Unto  me  the  Lord  your  God, 
ojjhich  brought  you  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  to 
be  your  God:  even  unto  me,  the  Lord  your  God. 

Chap.  XVL  Rebellion  of  Korah  and  his 
company.  Tins  narrative  is  regarded  even  by 
Ewald,  Knobel,  &c.  as  possessing  the  charac- 
teristics attributed  by  them  to  the  oldest  docu- 
ments, It  has  also,  as  will  be  noted  in  the 
course  of  it,  remarkable  internal  tokens  of 
historical  truth.  See  these  latter  more  fully 
developed  by  Blunt,  ‘ redesigned  Coin.’  pp.  15 
— 79.  'Lire  date  of  the  transaction  contained  in 
it  cannot  be  determined,  but-z;-!'.  13,14  probably 
point  to  a period  not  much  later  than  that 
of  the  i-ebellion  at  Kadesh.  At  any  rate  this 
chapter  does  not  necessarily  rank  chronologi- 
cally after  the  one  preceding. 


and  afire  consnmeth  others.  36  The  ce7^sers 
areresei'ved  to  holy  itse.  41  Fourteen  thousand 
and  seven  himdred  are  slam  by  a plague  for 
muri7iuring  against  Moses  and  Aaron.  46 
Aaroji  by  incense  stayeth  the  plague. 

NOW  ^Korah,  the  son  of  Izhar,  '^chap.  27. 

the  son  of  Kohath,  the  son  of  iiccius.  45. 
Levi,  and  Dathan  and  Abiram,  thej^hen. 
sons  of  Eliab,  and  On,  the,  son  of 
Peleth,  sons  of  Reuben,  took  men: 

2 And  they  rose  up  before  Moses, 
with  certain  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
two  hundred  and  fifty  princes  of  the 
assembly,  '^famous  in  the  congrega-  chap.  26. 
tion,  men  of  renown ; 

3 And  they  gathered  themselves 
together  against  Moses  and  against 
Aaron,  and  said  unto  them,  take\Yieo. 
too  much  upon  you,  seeing  all  the 


1.  Korah,  the  son  of  l%.har'\  “Son”  here 
is  equivalent  to  descendant,  as  often  in  the 
Bible.  Amram  and  Izhar  were  brothers,  cf. 
Ex.  vi.  18,  and  thus  Korah  was  connected 
by  distant  cousinship  with  Moses  and  Aaron. 
Though  being  a Kohathite,  he  was  of  that 
division  of  the  Levites  which  had  the  most 
honourable  charge,  yet  as  Eiizaphan,  who  had 
been  made  “ chief  of  the  families  of  the 
Kohathites”  (iii.  30),  belonged  to  the  youngest 
branch  descended  from  Uzziel  (cf.  iii.  27), 
Korah  probably  regarded  himself  as  injured; 
and  therefore  took  the  lead  in  this  rebellion 
which  bears  always  his  name  in  particular : 
cf.  w.  5,  6,  xxvi.  9 ; Jude  ii. 

Dathan  and  Ahiram...On^  Of  these.  On 
is  not  again  mentioned.  lie  probably  with- 
drew from  the  conspiracy.  These  three  were 
Reubenites;  and  were  probably  discontented 
because  the  birthright  had  been  taken  away 
from  their  ancestor  (cf.  Gen.  xlix.  3 and  note), 
and  with  it  the  primacy  of  their  own  tribe 
amongst  the  tribes  of  Israel.  The  Reubenites 
encamped  near  to  the  Kohathites  (cf.  ii.  25 
and  note),  and  “thus  the  two  families  were 
conveniently  situated  for  taking  counsel  to- 
gether” (cf.  Blunt,  p.  76).  One  pretext  of 
the  insurrection  probably  was  to  assert  the 
rights  of  primogeniture, — on  the  part  of  the 
Reubenites  against  Moses,  on  the  part  of 
Korah  against  the  appointment  of  Uzziel. 

took  men']  The  original  has  simply  “took;” 
what  they  took  is  not  said.  See  note  at  end  of 
chapter. 

2.  tvoo  hundred  and  fifty  princes  of  the 
assembly]  These  appear  to  have  belonged 
to  the  other  tribes,  as  is  implied  in  the  state- 
ment (xxvii.  3)  that  Zelophehad  the  Manassite 
was  “ not  in  the  company  of  Korah.” 


V.  4 — 1^>-] 


NUMBERS.  XVI. 


709 


congregation  are  holy,  every  one  of 
them,  and  the  Lord  is  among  them : 
wherefore  then  lift  ye  up  yourselves 
above  the  congregation  of  the  Lord  ? 

4 And  when  Moses  heard  /V,  he 
fell  upon  his  face : 

5 And  he  spake  unto  Korah  and 
unto  -all  his  company,  saying.  Even 
to  morrow  the  Lord  will  shew  who 
are  his,  and  who  is  holy;  and  v/ill 
cause  him  to  come  near  unto  him: 
even  him  whom  he  hath  chosen  will 
he  cause  to  come  near  unto  him. 

6 This  do;  Take  you  censers,  Ko- 
rah, and  all  his  company; 

7 And  put  lire  therein,  and  put 
incense  in  them  before  the  Lord  to 
morrow:  and  it  shall  be  that  the  man 
whom  the  Lord  doth  choose,  he  shall 
he  holy:  ye  take  too  much  upon  you, 
ye  sons  of  Levi. 

8 And  Moses  said  unto  Korah, 
Hear,  I pray  you,  ye  sons  of  Levi : 

9 Seemeth  it  but  a small  thing  unto 
you,  that  the  God  of  Israel  hath  se- 
parated you  from  the  congregation  of 
Israel,  to  bring  you  near  to  himself 
to  do  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  of 
the  Lord,  and  to  stand  before  the 
congregation  to  minister  unto  them  ? 

10  And  he  hath  brought  thcQ  near 


to  him^  and  all  thy  brethren  the  sons 
of  Levi  with  thee : and  seek  ye  the 
priesthood  also  ? 

11  For  which  cause  both  thou  and 
all  thy  company  are  gathered  together 
against  the  Lord  : and  what  is  Aaron, 
that  ye  murmur  against  him? 

12  ^ And  Moses  sent  to  call  Da- 
than  and  Abiram,  the  sons  of  Eliab : 
which  said,  We  will  not  come  up: 

13  Is  it  a small, thing  that  thou 
hast  brought  us  up  out  of  a land  that 
rloweth  with  milk  and  honey,  to  kill 
us  in  the  wilderness,  except  thou 
make  thyself  altogether  a prince  over 
us  ? 

14  Moreover  thou  hast  not  brought 
us  into  a land  that  floweth  with  milk 
and  honey,  or  given  us  inheritance  of 
fields  and  vineyards:  wilt  thou  ^put^Heb. 
out  the  eyes  of  these  men?  we  will 

not  come  up. 

15  And  Moses  was  very  wroth, 

and  said  unto  the  Lord,  ^Respect  not  ‘^Oea  4.4. 
thou  their  offering:  I have  not  taken 
one  ass  from  them,  neither  have  I 
hurt  one  of  them. 

16  And  Moses  said  unto  Korah, 

Be  thou  and  all  thy  company  before 
the  Lord,  thou,  and  they,  and  Aaron, 
to  morrov/ : 


3.  all  the  congregation  are  holy\  Cf. 
Ex,  xix.  6.  The  real  attack  of  Korah  was 
doubtless  upon  the  authority  of  the  family  of 
Aaron  over  the  Levites,  Cf.  nj.  10.  His 
object  was  not  to  abolish  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  Levites  and  the  people,  but  to  win 
priestly  dignity  for  himself  and  his  kinsmen. 
But  this  ultimate  design  is  masked  for  the 
present  in  order  to  win  support  from  the 
Reubenitesby  putting  forward  claims  to  spiri- 
tual equality  on  behalf  of  every  Israelite. 

8.  ye  sons  of  Le‘vi\  Moses  addresses  Korah, 
but  speaks  in  the  plural,  both  as  includ- 
ing the  Levites  of  Korah’s  faction  and  also  in 
order  to  intimate  that  he  was  aware  of  the 
real  motives  of  the  Levite  conspirators  (cf. 
note  on  no.  3). 

9.  Seemeth  it  but  a small  thing  unto  you^ 
&c.]  The  “seemeth”  is  not  in  the  original. 
Render  thus:  Is  it  too  little  for  you,  i.e. 
“ is  it  less  than  your  dignity  demands  ? ” 

11,  The  words  of  Moses  in  his  wrath  are 
broken.  Literally  the  verse  runs:  “Where- 


fore against  the  Lord  (not  against  Aaron) 
thou  and  all  thy  company  who  are  gathered 
together,  and  Aaron,  what  is  he,  that  ye  mur- 
mur against  him?”  Cf.  the  parallel  reproof  of 
Ananias  by  St  Peter,  Acts  v.  3,  4.  The 
Aaronic  priesthood  was  of  divine  appoint- 
ment; and  thus  in  rejecting  it,  the  conspira- 
tors were  really  rebelling  against  God. 

13.  Is  it  a small  thing  that  thou  hast 
brought  us  up  out  of  a land  that  fio^eth  nvith 
milk  and  honey  f\  With  perverse  contempt  for 
the  promises  Dathan  and  Abiram  designate 
Egypt  by  the  terms  appropriated  elsewhere  to 
the  land  of  Canaan.  But  in  fact  an  exchange 
of  taunts  was  being  carried  on  between  the 
parties;  the  “ye  take  too  much  upon  you” 
of  Moses  in  ns.  7,  is  his  reproof  of  the  like 
words  used  by  the  conspirators  in  ‘t;.  3,  and 
their  “is  it  a small  thing”  in  the  verse  before 
us  is  but  the  echo  of  his  words  in  -z;.  9. 

14.  nvilt  thou  put  out  the  eyes  of  these 
menf\  i.e.  “blind  them  to  the  fact  that  you 
keep  none  ot  your  promises;”  equivalent  to 
“throw  dust  in  their  eyes.” 


710 


NUMBERS.  XVI. 


[v.  17—33- 


17  And  take  every  man  his  censer, 
and  put  incense  in  them,  and  bring 
ye  before  the  Lord  every  man  his 
censer,  two  hundred  and  fifty  censers  ; 
thou  also,  and  Aaron,  each  of  you  his 
censer. 

18  And  they  took  every  man  his 
censer,  and  put  fire  in  them,  and  laid 
incense  thereon,  and  stood  in  the  door 
of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation 
with  Moses  and  Aaron. 

19  And  Korah  gathered  all  the 
congregation  against  them  unto  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation : and  the  glory  of  the  Lord 
appeared  unto  all  the  congregation. 

20  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

21  Separate  yourselves  from  among 
this  congregation,  that  I may  con- 
sume them  in  a moment. 

22  And  they  fell  upon  their  faces, 
and  said,  O God,  the  God  of  the 
spirits  of  all  flesh,  shall  one  man  sin, 
and  wilt  thou  be  wroth  v/ith  all  the 
congregation  ? 

23  ®!i  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

24  Speak  unto  the  congregation, 
saying.  Get  you  up  from  about  the 
tabernacle  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and 
Abiram. 

25  And  Moses  rose  up  and  went 
unto  Dathan  and  Abiram;  and  the 
elders  of  Israel  followed  him. 

26  And  he  spake  unto  the  congre- 
gation, saying.  Depart,  I pray  you, 
from  the  tents  of  these  wicked  men. 


and  touch  nothing  of  theirs,  lest  ye 
be  consumed  in  all  their  sins. 

27  So  they  gat  up  from  the  taber- 
nacle of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abi- 
ram, on  every  side ; and  Dathan 
and  Abiram  came  out,  and  stood 
in  the  door  of  their  tents,  and  their 
wives,  and  their  sons,  and  their  little 
children. 

28  And  Moses  said,  Hereby  ye 
shall  know  that  the  Lord  hath  sent 
me  to  do  all  these  works ; for  I have 
not  done  them  of  mine  own  mind. 

29  If  these  men  die  Ahe  common’^  Heb. 
death  of  all  men,  or  if  they  be  visited  ^7nandicih. 
after  the  visitation  of  all  men;  then 

the  Lord  hath  not  sent  me. 

30  But  if  the  Lord  ^ make 

new  thing,  and  the  earth  open  her  creature. 
mouth,  and  swallow -them  up,  with 
all  that  appertain  unto  them,  and 
they  go  down  quick  into  the  pit; 
then  ye  shall  understand  that  these 
men  have  provoked  the  Lord. 

31  "^And  it  came  to  pass,  as 
had  made  an  end  of  speaking  all 
these  words,  that  the  ground  clave 
asunder  that  was  under  them : 

32  And  the  earth  opened  her 
mouth,  and  swallowed  them  up,  and 
their  .houses,  and  all  the  men  that 
appertained  unto  Korah,  and  all  their 
goods. 

33  They,  and  all  that  appertained 
to  them,  went  down  alive  into  the 
pit,  and  the  earth  closed  upon  them ; 
and  they  perished  from  among  the 
congregation. 


24.  from  about  the  tabernacle  cf  Korah.^ 
Dathan^  and  biram']  Render,  Dwelling  of 
Korah,  &c.  The  tent  of  Korah,  as  a Kohath- 
ite,  stood  on  the  south  side  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  Lord:  and  those  of  Dathan  and  Abiram, 
as  Reubenites,  in  the  outer  line  of  encampment 
on  the  same  side:  cf.  on  n.  i.  Yet  though  the 
tents  of  these  three  were  thus  contiguous  the 
narrative,  whilst  not  going  into  detail,  suggests 
to  us  that  they  did  not  share  the  same  fate. 
Korah  and  his  company  who  dared  to  intrude 
themselves  on  the  priestly  ohice  were  destroyed 
by  fire  from  the  Lord  at  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  Lord,  7'.  35;  the  Reubenites, 
who  had  reviled  Most's  for  the  failure  of  the 
promises  about  the  pleasant  land,  were  sud- 
denly engulfed  whilst  standing  at  their  own 


tent-doors  in  the  barren  wilderness  {nyv.  31 
— 33).  The  A.V.  then  is  inaccvirate  in  the 
heading  of  this  chapter,  where  it  states,  “31, 
The  earth  swalloweth  up  Korah,  and  a fire 
consumeth  others.”  Cf.  xxvi.  10,  ii,  and 
note.  This  real  and  obviously  imdes'gned  co- 
incidence between  the  statement  made  in  those 
verses  and  that  of  these  is  kappil-y  drawn  out 
by  Blunt,  pp.  78,  79. 

27.  stood  in  the  door  of  their  tents]  Ap- 
parently in  contumacious  defiance. 

32.  all  the  771  :n  that  appei'tained  unto 
Korah]  Lit.  “all  unto  Korah;”  i.e.  not  his 
sons,  for  we  read  xxvi.  ii,  “the  children  of 
Korah  died  not,”  but  all  belonging  to  him 
who  had  associabd  themselves  with  him  in 
this  rebellion. 


V.  34—48.] 


NUMBERS.  XVL 


711 


34  And  all  Israel  that  were  round 
about  them  fled  at  the  cry  of  them : 
for  they  said,  Lest  the  earth  swallow 
us  up  also. 

35  And  there  came  out  a Are 
from  the  Lord,  and  consumed  the 
two  hundred  and  fifty  men  that 
offered  incense. 

36  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

37  Speak  unto  Eleazar  the  son  of 
Aaron  the  priest,  that  he  take  up 
the  censers  out  of  the  burning,  and 
scatter  thou  the  fire  yonder;  for  they 
are  hallowed. 

38  The  censers  of  these  sinners 
against  their  own  souls,  let  them 
make  them  broad  plates  for  a co- 
vering of  the  altar:  for  they  offered 
them  before  the  Lord,  therefore  they 
are  hallowed : and  they  shall  be  a 
sign  unto  the  children  of  Israel. 

39  And  Eleazar  the  priest  took 
the  brasen  censers,  wherewith  they 
that  were  burnt  had  offered ; and 
they  were  made  broad  plates  for  a 
coverino;  of  the  altar: 

40  To  be  a memorial  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  that  no  stranger, 
which  is  not  of  the  seed  of  Aaron, 
come  near  to  offer  incense  before 
the  Lord  ; that  he  be  not  as  Korah, 
and  as  his  company : as  the  Lord 
said  to  him  by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

41  ^ But  on  the  morrow  all  the 
congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel 


murmured  against  Moses  and  against 
Aaron,  saying.  Ye  have  killed  the 
people  of  the  Lord. 

42  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  the 
congregation  was  gathered  against 
Moses  and  against  Aaron,  that  they 
looked  toward  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation:  and,  behold,  the  cloud 
covered  it,  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord 
appeared. 

43  And  Moses  and  Aaron  came 
before  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation. 

44  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

45  Get  you  up  from  among  this 
congregation,  that  I may  consume 
them  as  in  a moment.  And  they 
fell  upon  their  faces. 

46  And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron, 
Take  a censer,  and  put  fire  therein 
from  off  the  altar,  and  put  on  in- 
cense, and  go  quickly  unto  the  con- 
gregation, and  make  an  atonement 
for  them:  for  there  is  wrath  gone 
out  from  the  Lord  ; the  plague  is 
begun. 

47  And  Aaron  took  as  Moses  com- 
manded, and  ran  into  the  midst  of 
the  congregation ; and,  behold,  the 
plague  was  begun  among  the  peo- 
ple : and  he  put  on  incense,  and 
made  an  atonement  for  the  people. 

48  And  he  stood  between  the  dead 
and  the  living;  and  the  plague  was 


35.  there  came  out  a fire  from  the  Lord\ 
i.e.  As  appears  from  the  similar  case  Lev.  x. 
I — 7,  the  fire  came  out  from  the  sanctuary  or 
the  altar, 

37.  Elea‘x:,ar'\  Not  Aaron  himself,  be- 
cause as  high-priest,  and  as  one  of  those  that 
offered  incense  {y.  17),  it  was  not  meet  that 
he  should  be  defiled  by  going  among  the  dead. 

scatter  thou  the  fiire  yonder~\  That  is,  “afar 
off.”  As  the  censers  were  not  to  be  used  again 
for  censers,  so  the  coals  on  them  were  to  be 
used  no  miore  for  kindling  the  incense  to  be 
offered  before  the  Lord.  Yet  neither  of  them 
could  fittingly  be  employed  for  common  pur- 
poses. I'he  censers  therefore  were  beaten  into 
plates  for  the  altar;  the  coals  scattered  at  a 
distance. 

38.  these  sinners  against  their  own  souls'] 
That  is,  “ against  their  own  lives.”  By  their 


sin  they  had  brought  destruction  upon  them- 
selves. 

45.  they  fell  upon  their  faces]  In  inter 
cession  for  the  people;  cf.  -u.  22,  xiv.  5. 

46.  a censer]  Rather  the  censer,  i.e. 
that  of  the  High-priest  which  was  used  by 
him  on  the  Great  Day  of  Atonement : cf.  Lev. 
xvi.  12;  Heb.  ix.  4,  It  appears  from  Lev. 
X.  I,  that  each  priest  had  also  his  own  censer, 
no  doubt  for  the  daily  incense  offering ; Ex. 
XXX.  I — 8.  Korah  and  his  company  had  pro- 
bably provided  themselves  with  censers  in  emu- 
lation of  the  priests:  cf.  <v.  6,  Ezek.  viii.  ii, 

and  go]  Or  perhaps,  “And  carry  it,” 

make  an  atonement  for  them]  The  effectual 
intercession  of  Aaron  in  behalf  of  the  people 
was  the  best  answer  to  the  reproaches  of  those 
that  disparaged  his  dignity. 


712 


NUMBERS.  XVI.  XVII. 


[v.  49—5- 


49  Now  they  that  died  in  the 
plague  were  fourteen  thousand  and 
seven  hundred,  beside  them  that  died 
about  the  matter  of  Korah. 


48.  He  stood  between  the  dead  and  the 
Having ; and  the  plague  was  stayed^  A striking 
proof  of  the  efficacy  of  that  very  Aaronic 
priesthood  which  the  rebels  had  presumed  to 
reject.  The  incense  offering  which  had  brought 
down  destruction  when  presented  by  un- 
authorized hands,  now  in  the  hand  of  the  true 


50  And  Aaron  returned  unto  Mo- 
ses unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation  : and  the  plague 
was  stayed. 


priest  is  the  medium  of  instant  salvation  to 
the  whole  people.  Aaron  by  his  acceptable 
ministration  and  his  personal  self-devotion 
foreshadows  emphatically  in  this  transaction 
the  perfect  mediation  and  sacrifice  of  Him- 
self made  by  Christ. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xvi.  i. 


The  Jerusalem  Targiim  supplies 
(counsel)  as  the  accusative  after  np'*!.  If  this 
be  accepted,  and  the  verb  referred,  as  from 
its  being  first  in  the  sentence  and  in  the  sin- 
gular number,  seems  necessary,  to  Korah, 
then  imi  may  be  “with  Dathan”  (cf. 

•v.  18).  The  translation  will  then  run:  “And 
Korah  . . . took  counsel  apart  with  Dathan 
and  Abiram,  &c.”  Various  other  renderings, 
less  satisfactory,  have  been  offered.  L.XX.  gives 
which  certainly  does  not  answer  to 
our  present  text.  Accordingly  emendations 
have  been  proposed,  and  for  np'!  have  been 
suggested  *?np'’'l,  “l^’p''),  Dp'’1 ; of  which  the 
last  corresponds  in  a general  Avay  to  the  ren- 
dering of  Onkelos  “ he  .separated  him- 

self”), and  to  that  of  the  Syriac  Version. 
The  Arab,  is  equivalent  to  “he  drew  near.” 
The  ancient  translators  with  these  exceptions 
seem  to  have  had  our  present  text  before  them ; 
and  to  have  followed  it,  though  with  different 
interpretations.  The  Vulgate  omits  the  word 


altogether.  Probably  however  the  difficulty  of 
construction  arises  from  an  after  insertion  of 
the^  mention  of  Dathan  and  Abiram,  and  of 
their  insurrection  against  Moses,  into  the 
original  narrative  of  the  sedition  of  Korah. 
This  narrative  would  run  naturally  as  follows  ; 

'1^-p  nnp“p  -i.T^'-p  mp  np'i 
Dwn 

“Now  Korah,  the  son  of  Izhar,  the  son  of 
Kohath,  the  son  of  Levi,  took  of  the  children 
of  Israel  two  hundred  and  fifty,  &c.”  In  it, 
moreover,  Korah  and  his  company  would  be 
naturally  represented  as  gathering  themselves 
together  against  Aaron  as  well  as  against 
Moses,  n>.  3.  But  in  the  expansion  of  this 
narrative  with  a view  of  making  it  comprise 
the  account  of  the  proceedings  of  Dathan  and 
Abiram,  it  became  important  to  mark  that  the 
outcry  of  the  latter  was  directed  against  Moses 
alone;  hence  the  introduction  of  the  opening 
words  of  “z;.  2. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


I Aaron's  rod  among  all  the  rods  of  the  tribes 
only  foitrisheth.  10  It  is  left  for  a,  monu- 
ment against  the  rebels. 


K 


ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 

2 Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  take  cf  every  one  of  them 
a rod  according  to  the  house  of  their 
fathers,  of  all  their  princes  according 
to  the  house  of  their  fathers  twelve 


rods  : write  thou  every  man’s  name 
upon  his  rod. 

3 And  thou  shalt  write  Aaron’s 
name  upon  the  rod  of  Levi : for  one 
rod  shall  be  for  the  head  of  the  house 
of  their  fathers. 

4 And  thou  shalt  lay  them  up  in 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation 
before  the  testimony,  "where  I will  "Exod.  25. 
meet  with  you. 

5 And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that 


(liiAi*.  XVII.  Further  vindication  (yv. 
I — ii)  of  the  priestly  authority  of  Aaron. 

2.  Cf.  Kzek.  xxxvii.  16,  sqq. 

3.  thou  shall  write  Aaron's  name  upon 
the  rod  of  Leoji^  'Fhc  Le'.  ites  had  taken  part 
in  the  late  outbreak.  It  was  therefore  neces- 


sary to  vindicate  the  supremacy  of  the  house 
of  Aaron  over  them ; and  accordingly  his 
name  was  written  on  the  rod  of  Levi,  although 
being  the  son  of  Kohath,  the  second  son  of 
Levi  (Ex.  vi.  16,  sqq.),  he  would  not  be  the 
natural  head  of  the  tribe. 

4.  before  the  testimony~\  See  on  v.  10. 


V.  6—1.] 


NUMBERS.  XVII.  XVIII. 


713 


the  man’s  rod,  whom  I shall  choose, 
shall  blossom:  and  I will  make  to 
cease  from  me  the  murmurings  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  whereby  they 
murmur  against  you. 

6 ^ And  Moses  spake  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  and  every  one  of 

princes  gave  him  U rod  apiece, 
one  prince,  for  cach  priiice  one,  according  to 
Vieprh^e.  their  fathers’  houses,  even  twelve 
rods  : and  the  rod  of  Aaron  was 
among  their  rods. 

7 And  Moses  laid  up  the  rods  be- 
fore the  Lord  in  the  tabernacle  of 
witness. 

8 And  it  came  to  pass,  that  on 
the  morrow  Moses  went  into  the 
tabernacle  of  witness;  and,  behold, 
the  rod  of  Aaron  for  the  house  of 
Levi  was  budded,  and  brought  forth 
buds,  and  bloomed  blossoms,  and 
yielded  almonds. 

9 And  Moses  brought  out  all  the 
rods  from  before  the  Lor.d  unto  all 


the  children  of  Israel  : and  they 
looked,  and*  took  every  man  his  rod. 

10  *fl  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Bring  ^Aaron’s  rod  again  before Heb.  9. 
the  testimony,  to  be  kept  for  a token 
against  the  ' rebels ; and  thou  shalt  t Heb. 
quite  take  away  their  murmurings  ‘^relfuimu 
from  me,  that  they  die  not. 

1 1 And  Moses  did  so:  as  the  Lord 
commanded  him,  so  did  he. 

12  And  the  children  of  Israel  spake 
unto  Moses,  saying.  Behold,  we  die, 
we  perish,  we  all  perish. 

13  Whosoever  cometh  any  thing 
near  unto  the  tabernacle  of  the  Lord 
shall  die : shall  we  be  consumed  with 
dying  ? 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

I The  charge  of  the  priests  and  Levites.  9 The 

priests'  poiiion.  ai  The  Levites'  portion.  25 

The  heave  offermg  to  the  priests  out  of  the 

Levites'  portion. 

AND  the  Lord  said  unto  Aaron, 

Thou  and  thy  sons  and  thy 


6.  eaoen  tavelaoe  rods^  Possibly  the  two 
tribes  of  the  children  of  J oseph  were  reckoned 
together,  as  in  Deut.  xxvii.  12.  But  as  these 
two  tribes  had  separate  princes,  and  it  was 
with  the  names  of  the  princes  that  the  rods 
were  marked  {y.  2),  it  is  more  probable  that 
the  whole  number  of  rods  was  twelve  ex- 
clusively of  Aaron’s,  as  the  Vulgate  expressly 
renders  (“fuerunt  virgje  duodecim  absque 
virga  Aaron  ”). 

8.  yielded  almonds']  Or  rather  “ripened 
almonds,”  i.e.  “brought  forth  ripe  almonds.” 
Probably  different  portions  of  the  rod  shewed 
the  several  stages  of  the  process  of  fruc- 
tification through  which  those  parts  which 
had  advanced  the  furthest  had  passed.  The 
name  almond  in  Hebrew  denotes  the  “waking- 
tree,”  the  “waking-fruit;”  and  is  applied  to 
this  tree,  because  it  blossoms  early  in  the 
season.  It  serves  here,  as  in  Jer.  i.  ii,  12,  to 
set  forth  the  speed  and  certainty  with  which, 
at  God’s  will.  His  purposes  are  accomplished. 
So  again  the  blossoming  and  bearing  of  Aaron’s 
’ rod,  naturally  impotent  when  severed  from  the 
parent  tree,  may  signify  the  profitableness 
because  of  God’s  appointment  and  blessing  of 
the  various  means  of  grace  (the  priesthood, 
the  sacraments),  which  of  themselves  and  apart 
from  Him  could  have  no  such  efficacy.  The 
incidents  of  this  marvel  are  then  by  no  means 
arbitrary.  It  is  instructive  to  compare  Is.  iv. 
a,  xi.  I,  liii.  2 ; Jer.  xxxiii.  6 ; Zech.  vi.  12. 

10.  the  testimony]  i.e.  The  Two  Tables 


of  the  Law;  cf.  Ex.  xxv.  16.  No  doubt  the 
rod  lay  in  front  of  the  Tables  within  the  Ark. 
It  appears,  i Kings  viii.  9,  that  in  the  days  of 
Solomon  there  was  nothing  in  the  ark  save 
the  two  Tables.  Aaron’s  rod  then  was  pro- 
bably lost  when  the  Ark  was  taken  by  the 
Philistines. 

12,  13.  A new  section  should  begin  with 
these  verses.  They  are  connected  retrospec- 
tively with  chap,  xvi, ; and  form  the  imme- 
diate introduction  to  ch.  xviii.  The  people 
were  terror-stricken  by  the  fate  of  the  com- 
pany of  Korah  at  the  door  of  the  taber- 
nacle ; followed  up  by  the  plague  in  which  so 
many  thousands  of  their  numbers  had  perished. 
Presumption  passes  by  reaction  into  despair. 
Was  there  any  approach  for  them  to  the 
tabernacle  of  the  Lord?  Was  there  any 
escape  from  death,  except  by  keeping  aloof 
from  his  presence  ? The  answers  are  supplied 
by  the  ordinances  that  follow ; ordinances 
which  testified  that  the  God  of  judgment 
was  still  a God  of  grace  and  of  love. 

Chap.  XVIII.  The  priesthood  of  Aaron 
having  been  thus  confirmed,  the  functions  of 
his  family  and  of  the  Levites  are  now  finally 
and  completely  regulated;  and  definite  pro- 
vision made  for  their  maintenance.  The  direc- 
tions given  in  a)<v.  i — 24,  as  more  immediately 
pertaining  to  the  office  of  the  priests,  are 
addressed  by  God  directly  to  Aaron. 

1.  the  iniquity  of  the  sanctuary]  i.  e. 
Guilt  of  the  offerxes  which  an  erring  people 


714 


NUMBERS.  XVIII. 


[v.  2 II. 


^ chap. 
45- 


father’s  house  with  thee  shall  bear 
the  iniquity  of  the  sanctuary : and 
thou  and  thy  sons  with  thee  shall 
bear  the  iniquity  of  your  priesthood. 

2 And  thy  brethren  also  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi,  the  tribe  of  thy  father, 
bring  thou  with  thee,  that  they  may 
be  joined  unto  thee,  and  minister 
unto  thee : but  thou  and  thy  sons 
with  thee  shall  minister  before  the 
tabernacle  of  witness. 

3 And  they  shall  keep  thy  charge, 
and  the  charge  of  all  the  tabernacle: 
only  they  shall  not  come  nigh  the 
vessels  of  the  sanctuary  and  the 
altar,  that  neither  they,  nor  ye  also, 
die. 

4 And  they  shall  be  joined  unto 
thee,  and  keep  the  charge  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  for 
all  the  service  of  the  tabernacle : and 
a stranger  shall  not  come  nigh  unto 
you. 

5 And  ye  shall  keep  the  charge 
of  the  sanctuary,  and  the  charge  of 
the  altar : that  there  be  no  wrath  any 
more  upon  the  children  of  Israel. 

6 And  I,  behold,  I have  "taken 
your  brethren  the  Levites  from  a- 
mong  the  children  of  Israel : to  you 
they  are  given  as  a gift  for  the  Lord, 


to  do  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation. 

7 Therefore  thou  and  thy  sons 
with  thee  shall  keep  your  priest’s 
office  for  every  thing  of  the  altar, 
and  within  the  vail ; and  ye  shall 
serve : I have  given  your  priest’s 
office  unto  you  as  a ’service  of  gift: 
and  the  stranger  that  cometh  nigh 
shall  be  put  to  death. 

8 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Aaron,  Behold,  I also  have  given 
thee  the  charge  of  mine  heave  of- 
ferings of  all  the  hallowed  things  of 
the  children  of  Israel;  unto  thee 
have  I given  them  by  reason  of  the 
anointing,  and  to  thy  sons,  by  an 
ordinance  for  ever. 

9 This  shall  be  thine  of  the  most 
holy  things,  reserved  from  the  fire : 
every  oblation  of  theirs,  every  meat 
offering  of  theirs,  and  every  sin  offer- 
ing of  theirs,  and  every  trespass 
offering  of  theirs,  which  they  shall 
render  unto  me,  shall  be  most  holy 
for  thee  and  for  thy  sons. 

10  In  the  most  holy  place  shalt 
thou  eat  it ; every  male  shall  eat  it : 
it  shall  be  holy  unto  thee. 

1 1 And  this  is  thine ; the  heave 
offering  of  their  gift,  with  all  the 


would  be  continually  committing  against 
the  majesty  of  God,  when  brought  into  con- 
tact, through  the  ordinances,  with  the  mani- 
festations of  His  presence.  Cf.  Ex.  xxviii. 
38;  also  viii.  19,  and  note. 

the  iniquity  of  your  priest hoo;l~\  As  the 
priests  themselves  \vere  but  men,  they  could 
no  more  than  others  abide  it,  if  God  were 
extreme  to  mark  what  was  done  amiss.  An 
atonement  was  consequently  ordained  for 
them  (Lev.  xvi.);  and  they  were  strengthened 
to  bear  the  iniquity  of  their  own  unintentional 
offences,  by  being  entrusted  with  the  cere- 
monial means  of  taking  it  away.  The  word 
“bear”  has,  in  the  Old  Testament,  this  double 
sense  of  “enduring”  and  “removing;”  but  in 
the  person  of  Christ,  who  atoned  by  His  own 
endurance,  the  two  are  in  effect  one. 

2.  that  they  may  be  joined'^  An  allusion 
to  the  name  I.evi,  which  signifies  “ being 
joined.”  d'he  old  name  is,  in  fact,  taken  up 
with  a new  meaning;  the  Levites  became,  by 
virtue  of  their  office,  a Levi  indeed  ; cf.  Eph. 
ii.  13,  sqq. 


unto  thee'\  The  priests  ministered  to  the 
Lord : the  Levites  to  the  priests. 

4.  a stranger']  i.  e.  every  one  not  a Levite. 
So,  v.  %\i  denotes  every  one  who  was  not  a 
priest : cf.  iii.  10,  xvi.  40. 

6,  7.]  Inasmuch  as  the  Lord  proceeds 
after  this  to  speak  of  the  portion  assigned  to 
the  priests  for  their  maintenance.  He  takes 
occasion  here,  beforehand,  to  instruct  them 
that  the  office  which  they  fill,  and  the  help 
which  they  enjoy,  are  gifts  from  Him,  and  are 
to  be  viewed  as  such. 

8.  by  reason  of  the  anointing]  Recent, 
commentators  render  “for  a portion.”  See 
on  Lev.  vii.  35. 

10.  In  the  most  holy  place]  Rather, 
“among  the  most  holy  things;”  as  in  iv.  4: 
i.e.  “As  the  most  holy  of  things  shalt  thou 
eat  it.”  Accordingly  only  the  males  of  the 
priestly  families  could  eat  of  the  things  here  spe- 
cified. On  the  contrary,  of  the  heave  and  wave 
offerings  describixl  in  the  next  verse,  both  males 
and  females  of  these  families  might  partake. 


V.  12 21. 


NUMBERS.  XVIII. 


wave  offerings  of  the  children  of  Is- 
/'Lcv.  lo.  rael:  I have  given  them  unto  '^thee, 
and  to  thy  sons  and  to  thy  daughters 
with  thee,  by  a statute  for  ever  : 
every  one  that  is  clean  in  thy  house 
shall  eat  of  it. 

< Hcb.  12  All  the  ^best  of  the  oil,  and 

all  the  best  of  the  wine,  and  of  the 
wheat,  the  flrstfruits  of  them  which 
they  shall  offer  unto  the  Lord,  them 
have  I given  thee. 

13  And  whatsoever  is  first  ripe  in 
the  land,  which  they  shall  bring  unto 
the  Lord,  shall  be  thine;  every  one 
that  is  clean  in  thine  house  shall 
eat  of  it. 

f Lev.  27,  ‘^Everything  devoted  in  Israel 

shall  be  thine. 

«fExod.  13.  13  Everything  that  openeth  ^the 

& 22.  29.  matrix  in  all  flesh,  which  they  bring 
unto  the  Lord,  whether  it  he  of  men 
chap. 3.13.  Qj-  beasts,  shall  be  thine:  neverthe- 
less the  firstborn  of  man  shaft  thou 
surely  redeem,  and  the  firstling  of 
unclean  beasts  shaft  thou  redeem. 

16  And  those  that  are  to  be  re- 
deemed from  a month  old  shaft  thou 
^Exod.  30.  according  to  thine  estima- 

Lev^27.2s.  tion,  for  the  money  of  five  shekels, 
47.  ^ after  the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary, 
Ezek.  45-  ^v^hich  ts  twenty  gerahs. 


715 


17  But  the  firstling  of  a cow,  or 
the  firstling  of  a sheep,  or  the  first- 
lino;  of  a o-oat,  thou  shaft  not  re- 
deem ; they  are  holy  : thou  shaft 
sprinkle  their  blood  upon  the  altar, 
and  shaft  burn  their  fat  for  an  offe.r- 
ing  made  by  fire,  for  a sweet  savour 
unto  the  Lord. 

18  And  the  flesh  of  them  shall  be 
thine,  as  the  Avave  breast  and  as  the^Exod.  29. 
right  shoulder  are  thine. 

19  All  the  heave  offerings  of  the 
holy  things,  which  the  children  of 
Israel  offer  unto  the  Lord,  have  I 
given  thee,  and  thy  sons  and  thy 
daughters  with  thee,  by  a statute 
for  ever:  it  is  a covenant  of  salt 
for  ever  before  the  Lord  unto  thee 
and  to  thy  seed  with  thee. 

20  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Aaron,  Thou  shalt  have  no  inhe- 
ritance in  their  land,  neither  shalt 
thou  have  any  part  among  them : 

^I  am  thy  part  and  thine  inheritance  ir  Deut.  10. 
among  the  children  of  Israel.  | ^ 

21  And,  behold,  I have  given  the  13. 
children  of  Levi  all  the  tenth  in  Ez’ek.  ^.^. 
Israel  for  an  inheritance,  for  their 
service  which  they  serve,  even  the 
service  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation. 


15.  surely  redeem... redeenP^  A stronger 
expression  is  intentionally  used  in  reference  to 
the  redemption  of  the  firstborn  of  man  than  in 
reference  to  that  of  unclean  beasts.  For  the 
rule  as  to  the  fonner  admitted  of  no  excep- 
tion : the  owner  of  the  latter,  if  unwilling  to 
redeem,  might  destroy  the  beasts  (Ex.  xiii.  13, 
xxxiv.  20).  Usually  of  course  he  would  re- 
deem them,  but  in  the  case  of  a diseased  or 
maimed  animal  he  might  well  be  excused  from 
making  a payment  for  that  which,  if  redeem- 
ed, would  be  worthless.  As  to  the  mode  of 
redemption  of  unclean  beasts,  it  had  been  ori- 
ginally enjoined  that  the  firstling  of  an  ass 
should  be  redeemed  with  a lamb.  But  the 
owner  of  the  beast  might  not  be  always  able  to 
provide  a lamb,  especially  in  the  wilderness, 
and  the  liability  was  accordingly  commuted 
(Lev.  xxvii.  27).  Into' all  the  details  of  this 
the  present  ordinances  do  not  enter.  Their 
object  is  not  so  much  to  prescribe  accurately 
to  the  people  what  should  be  paid,  as  to  assign 
to  the  priests  their  various  revenues. 

16.  according  to  thine  estimatio?{\  Cf.  Lev. 
V.  15,  xxvii.  2T,  and  notes. 


18.  as  the  ^ave  breast  and  as  the  right 
shoulder  are  thine~\  This  reference  to  the  earlier 
legislation  of  Ex.  xxix.  26 — 28  (eventually 
modified  by  Deut.  xviii.  3)  seems  to  indicate 
that  the  ordinance  in  question  belongs  to  a 
comparatively  early  period  of  the  years  of 
wandering. 

19.  a covenant  of  salt]  Cf.  2 Chron.  xiii.  5. 
Covenants  were  ordinarily  cemented  in  the 
East  by  the  rites  of  hospitality ; of  which 
salt  was  the  obvious  token,  entering  as  it  does 
into  every  article  of  diet.  It  indicates  perpe- 
tuity : cf.  Lev.  ii.  13,  and  note. 

20.  I am  thy  part  and  thine  inheritance] 
Cf.  Deut.  X.  9. 

21.  all  the  tenth  in  Israel]  Cf.  Lev.  xxvii. 
.30 — 33-  "The  dedication  of  the  tithe  had  how- 
ever been  handed  down  from  patriarchal  times. 
See  Deut.  Introd.  § iv.  Abraham  paid  tithes 
to  Melchizedek:  Jacob  had  promised  the  tithe 
of  all  wherewith  God  blessed  him  if  he  should 
return  in  peace  to  his  father’s  house.  But 
now  first  the  Lord’s  tithes  are  assigned  to  the 
Levites  for  their  support.  The  payment  of  tithes 


7i6 


NUMBERS.  XVIIL 


[v.  2 2 32. 


t Ileb. 
io  die. 


22  Neither  must  the  children  of 
Israel  henceforth  come  nigh  the  ta- 
bernacle of  the  congregation,  lest  they 
bear  sin,  Und  die. 

23  But  the  Levites  shall  do  the 
service  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, and  they  shall  bear  their 
iniquity:  it  shall  be  a statute  for  ever 
throughout  your  generations,  that  a- 
mong  the  children  of  Israel  they  have 
no  inheritance. 

24.  But  th.e  tithes  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  which  they  offer  as  an 
heave  offering  unto  the  Lord,  I have 
given  to  the  Levites  to  inherit : there- 
fore I have  said  unto  them.  Among 
the  children  of  Israel  they  shall  have 
no  inhcidtance. 

25  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  sayixUg, 

26  Thus  speak  unto  the  Levites, 
and  say  unto  them,  When  ye  take 
of  the  children  of  Israel  the  tithes 
which  I have  given  you  from  them 
for  your  inheritance,  then  ye  shall 
offer  up  an  heave  offering  of  it  for 
the  Lord,  even  a tenth  part  of  the 
tithe. 

27  And  this  your  heave  offering 


shall  be  reckoned  unto  you,  as  though 
it  were  the  corn  of  the  threshing- 
floor,  and  as  the  fulness  of  the  wine- 
press. 

28  Thus  ye  also  shall  offer  an 
heave  offering  unto  the  Lord  of  all 
your  tithes;  which  ye  receive  of  the 
children  of  Israel;  and  ye  shall  give 
thereof  the  Lord’s  heave  offering  to 
Aaron  the  priest. 

29  Out  of  all  your  gifts  ye  shall 
offer  every  heave  offering  of  the 
Lord,  of  ail  the  Test  thereof,  even  'Heb. 
the  hallowed  part  thereof  out  of  it. 

30  Therefore  thou  shalt  say  unto 
them.  When  ye  have  heaved  the 
best  thereof  from  it,  then  it  shall  be 
counted  unto  the  Levites  as  the^ 
increase  of  the  threshingdoor,  and  as 
the  increase  of  the  winepress. 

31  And  ye  shall  eat  it  in  every 
place,  ye  .and  your  households : for 
it  is  your  reward  for  your  service  in 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

32  And  ye  shall  bear  no  sin  by 
reason  of  it,  when  ye  have  heaved 
from  it  the  best  of  it:  neither  shall 
ye  pollute  the  holy  things  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  lest  ye  die. 


to  them  is  recognized  in  Neh,  x.  37,  xii.  44  ; 
Tobit  i.  7.  Whether  the  Levites  received  the 
tithes  of  live  stock  as  well  as  of  produce  seems 
doubtful.  In  no  passage  is  there  distinct  men- 
tion of  the  former  being  theirs  ; and  as  a large 
number  of  animals  must  have  been  required 
for  the  public  sacrifices,  it  is  probable  that  the 
tithes  of  live  stock  were  used  for  this  purpose. 

22.  lest  they  bear  sln.^  and  die~\  Heb. 
“ To  bear  sin,  and  die;”  which  would  be  the 
consequence  of  their  approach. 

23.  bear  their  iniquity']  The  words  are 
ambiguous.  They  probably  refer  to  the  ini- 
(piity  of  the  people ; who  would,  had  tliey  ap- 
proached the  tabernacle  have  fallen,  from  their 
proneness  to  transgress,  into  overt  acts  of 
offence.  Against  such  a result  they  were, 
through  the  ministrations  of  the  Levites,  mer- 
cifully protected.  Cf.  n).  i,  and  Lev.  xix.  17. 

24.  as  a7i  heanje  offering]  Here  only 
are  tlie  tithes  described  as  a heave-offering ; 
though  in  'v.  26  the  priestly  tithes  are  also  to 
be  dedicated  to  their  purpose  by  the  ceremony 
of  heaving  them  to  the  Lord.  It  is  possible 
that  all  that  is  m.eant  is  that  the  tithes,  being 
solemnly  set  apart  for  sacred  purposes,  be- 


cam.e  virtually  a heave-offering,  like  the  gifts 
for  the  Tabernacle.  Ex.  xxv.  2.  There  is  no 
reason  to  think  that  the  tithes  were  in  fact 
heaved  or  waved  before  the  Lord,  though  they 
were  appropriated  just  as  were  those  offerings 
that  were  heaved  or  waved. 

25 — 32.  Command  as  to  the  tithe  of 
the  Levitical  tithe.  This  command,  as  enjoin- 
ing perquisites  of  Aaron  and  his  family,  is  ad- 
dressed to  Moses  as  the  head  of  the  whole 
nation,  not  to  Aaron,  who  would  be  directly 
interested  in  it. 

27.  shall  be  reckoned  unto  yoii\  Or,  by 
you,  as  the  same  phrase  means  also  at  the 
close  of  Ex.  xii.  16.  The  Levites  were,  of 
their  tithes,  to  pay  tithe  to  the  priests,  just  as 
other  Israelites  paid  tithe  to  the  Levites. 

29.  Out  of  all  your  gifts]  The  spirit  of 
this  law  would  extend  to  all  the  revenues  of 
the  Levites,  and  we  may  thus  assume  that  of 
the  increase  of  their  cattle,  as  well  as  of  their 
tithes,  a tithe  was  paid  by  them  for  the  Lord’s 
service. 

32.  neither  shall  ye  pollute,  &c.]  Rather, 
and  by  not  polluting  the  holy  things 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  ye  shall  not 


V.  I— 3-] 


NUMBERS.  XIX. 


717 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

i The  ivatc}'  of  separation  made  of  the  ashes  of 
a red  heifer.  1 1 The  law  for  the  zcse  of  it  in 
purification  of  the  tindea  n. 

And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
^ and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

2 This  is  the  ordinance  of  the  law 
which  the  Lord  hath  commanded, 


die.  The  words  are  words  of  comfort  and 
assurance  ; and  form  a fitting  conclusion  to 
the  legislation  of  the  chapter. 

Chap.  XIX.  Ordinances  respecting  purifi- 
cation from  the  uncleanness  of  death. 

The  association  of  death  with  sin  (Gen.  ii. 
17)  sufficiently  explains  the  ideas  on  which 
these  ordinances  are  based.  The  principle  that 
death  and  all  pertaining  to  it,  as  being  the 
manifestation  and  result  of  sin,  are  defiling, 
and  so  lead  to  interruption  of  the  living  re- 
lationship between  God  and  His  people,  is 
not  now  introduced  for  the  first  time,  nor  is 
it  at  all  peculiar  to  the  Mosaic  law.  It  was, 
on  the  contrary,  traditional  amongst  the  Is- 
raelites from  the  earliest  times,  is  assumed  in 
various  enactments  made  already  (cf.  v.  2, 
ix.  6,  sqq.;  Lev.  x.  i,  7,  xL  8,  ii,  24,  xxi, 
I,  sqq.),  and  is  traceable  in  various  forms 
amongst  many  nations  of  antiquity;  e.g.  the 
Egyptian  priests  were  obliged  to  shun  graves, 
funerals  and  funeral  feasts  (Porph.  ‘ de  Abst."* 
n.  5 c):  the  Persian  Zendavesta  has  rules  of 
remarkable  strictness  and  particularity  on  the 
subject  (cf.  Biihr,  ‘Symbol.’  II.  466,  467,  reffi); 
and  these  were  even  exceeded  by  the  rules  pre- 
vailing amongst  the  Indians,  both  ancient  and 
modern  (cf.  Knobel,  note  in  loc.') : like  ideas 
are  found  amongst  the  Romans  (cf.  Plutarch, 
‘Sulla,’  35;  Virgil,  ‘H^in.’  vi.  228,  sqq.;  and 
Festus,  ‘ apud  Kn.’  in  loc. ; and  Bilhr,  ii.  471), 
and  Greeks  (cf.  Eurip.  ‘ Alcest.’  97,  sqq., 

‘ Helen.’  1450,  sqq.,  ‘ Iph.  Taur.’  380,  sqq.; 
Thucyd.  in.  104). 

The  tapu^  or  uncleanness,  regarded  amongst 
the  Maofies  of  New  Zealand  as  attaching  to 
the  man  who  has  handled  the  dead,  is  such  that 
not  only  can  he  not  enter  any  house,  or  come 
in  contact  with  any  person  or  thing,  without 
defiling  it,  but  he  may  not  even  put  forth  his 
hands  to  the  food  which  he  himself  eats  (see 
‘ Old  New  Zealand,’  by  a Pakeha  Maori,  pp. 
122  sqq.). 

The  rites  of  purifying  prescribed  amongst 
these  various  nations  trace  points  of  similarity 
to  those  laid  down  in  this  chapter ; and  indeed 
sprinklings  and  washings  would  naturally 
form  a part  in  them  all  (cf.  ch.  viii.  7).  Moses 
then  adopted,  here  as  elsewhere,  existing  and 
ancient  customs,  with  significant  additions,  as 
helps  in  the  spiritual  education  of  his  people. 

The  ordinance  was  probably  given  at  this 
time  because  the  plague  which  happened  (xvi. 

VoL.  I. 


saying,  Speak  unto  the  children  of 
Israel,  that  they  bring  thee  a red  heifer 
without  spot,  wherein  is  no  blemish, 
and  upon  which  never  came  yoke : 

3 And  ye  shall  give  her  unto  Ele- 
azar  the  priest,  that  he  may  bring 
her  "’’forth  without  the  camp,  and'^Heb.  1 
one  shall  slay  her  before  his  face : 


46 — 50)  about  the  matter  of  Korah  had 
spread  the  defilement  ^ of  death  so  widely 
through  the  camp  as  to  seem  to  require  some 
special  measures  of  purification,  more  particu- 
larly as  the  deaths  through  it  were  in  an  extra- 
ordinary m.anner  the  penalty  of  sin.  Occasion 
is  accordingly  taken  to  introduce  a new  or- 
dinance on  the  whole  subject,  which  might 
serve  to  re-assure  the  affrighted  people  at  the 
time,  supply  a ready  means  of  relief  from  this 
sort  of  uncleanness  for  the  future,  and  by  the 
typical  character  of  its  new  elements  provide 
a vehicle  for  important  instruction  as  to  a 
more  real  Atonement  afterward  to  be  revealed. 
That  the  ordinance  of  the  red  heifer  in  fact 
produced  a deep  impression  appears  from  its 
introduction  with  characteristic  variations  into 
the  Koran,  the  second  Sura  of  which  is  en- 
titled ‘ ‘ the  Heifer.” 

1.  unto  Moses  and  unto  Aaro7i\  Unto 
Aaron  as  well  as  unto  Moses,  because  the 
ordinance  was  intended  not  merely  for  future 
observance,  but  also  for  immediate  necessities. 

2.  a red  heifer~\  “Red,  in  order  to 
shadow  forth  man’s  earthly  body,  even  as  the 
name  Adam  bears  allusion  to  the  red  earth  of 
which  man’s  body  was  fashioned”  (Theodo- 
ret,  ‘ Qu.  in  Num.’  35).  Others  less  appositely 
regard  the  colour  as  an  emblem  of  life:  others 
again  of  sin  (cf.  Is.  i.  18).  The  female  sex  of 
the  victim  perhaps  denoted  that  the  offering 
was  only  of  secondary  import ; it  was  an  of- 
fering not  for  actual  sin,  but  only  for  cere- 
monial defilement. 

'without  spot.,  wherein  is  no  blemish'\  As 
with  sin-offerings  generally,  Lev.  iv.  3. 

upon  which  nea}er  came  yoke^  So  here  and 
in  Dent.  xxi.  3,  i S.  vi.  7,  in  the  case  of  female 
victims.  In  that  of  male  victims  this  condition 
was  not  imposed : it  can  therefore  hardly  bear  a 
typical  meaning.  Female  cattle  were  not  com- 
monly employed  in  ploughing,  and  were  per- 
haps therefore  deemed  to  be  marred  if  so  used. 

3.  unto  Elea%ar'\  Cf.  xvi.  37.  The  work 
would  necessarily  require  a priest ; yet  as  it 
rendered  him  unclean  for  the  day,  the  high- 
priest  was  relieved  of  it. 

without  the  camp'\  The  defilement  was 
viewed  as  transferred  to  the  victim  that  was 
to  be  offered  for  its  removal.  Under  these 
circumstances  the  victim,  like  the  defiled  per- 
sons themselves,  would  be  removed  outside  the 
camp.  So  too  those  that  had  to  do  with  the 

z z 


7i8 


NUMBERS.  XIX.  [v.  4-12. 


4 And  Eleazar  the  priest  shall  take 
of  her  blood  with  his  finger,  and 

^Heb. 9.  ^sprinkle  of  her  blood  directly  before 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation 
seven  times: 

5 And  one  shall  burn  the  heifer  in 
^ Exod. 29.  his  sight;  ^her  skin,  and  her  flesh, 
Ltv.  4.  II,  and  her  blood,  with  her  dung,  shall 

he  burn: 

6 And  the  priest  shall  take  cedar 
wood,  and  hyssop,  and  scarlet,  and 
cast  it  into  the  midst  of  the  burning 
of  the  heifer. 

7 Then  the  priest  shall  wash  his 
clothes,  and  he  shall  bathe  his  flesh 
in  water,  and  afterward  he  shall  come 
into  the  camp,  and  the  priest  shall  be 
unclean  until  the  even. 

8 And  he  that  burneth  her  shall 
wash  his  clothes  in  water,  and  bathe 


his  flesh  in  water,  and  shall  be  un- 
clean until  the  even. 

9 And  a man  that  is  clean  shall 
gather  up  the  ashes  of  the  heifer, 
and  lay  them  up  without  the  camp 
in  a clean  place,  and  it  shall  be  kept 
for  the  congregation  of  the  children 
of  Israel  for  a water  of  separation: 
it  is  a purification  for  sin. 

10  And  he  that  gathereth  the  ashes 
of  the  heifer  shall  wash  his  clothes, 
and  be  unclean  until  the  even:  and 
it  shall  be  unto  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  unto  the  stranger  that 
sojourneth  among  them,  for  a statute 
for  ever. 

1 1 'll  He  that  toucheth  the  dead 
body  of  any  'man  shall  be  unclean 
seven  days. 

12  He  shall  purify  himself  with 


heifer  were  unclean  until  evening,  just  as  if 
they  had  touched  a defiled  man  22).  The 
Jewish  traditionary  practice,  subsequently  to 
the  building  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  was 
to  slay  the  heifer  on  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
eastward  from  the  temple  across  the  valley  of 
the  Kidron.  Here  the  priest  was  able,  through 
the  open  eastern  gate  of  the  temple- court,  to 
behold  the  sanctuary  in  the  direction  of  which 
he  was  to  sprinkle  the  heifer’s  blood  (y.  4). 
The  particular  pollution  to  be  remedied  by 
this  ordinance  was  the  indirect  one  resulting 
from  contact  with  tokens  and  manifestations 
of  sin,  not  the  direct  and  personal  one  arising 
from  actual  commission  of  sin.  So  tao  the 
sinless  Antitype  had  to  bear  the  reproach  of 
associating  with  sinners  (St  Lukev,  30,  xv.  2). 
And  as  the  red  heifer  was  expelled  from  the 
precincts  of  the  camp,’  so  was  the  Saviour 
cut  off  in  no  small  measure  during  His  Life 
from  the  fellowship  of  the  chief  representa- 
tives of  the  Theocracy,  and  put  to  death  out- 
side Jerusalem  between  two  thieves.  Cf.  Heb. 
xiii.  II,  12. 

5.  her  skty  and  her  flesh,  &c.]  The 
defilement,  being  external,  extended  to  the 
whole  body  of  the  animal : hence  the  propriety 
of  burning  the  victim  entire  and  everything 
connected  with  it. 

6.  cedar  nvood,  and  hyssop,  arid  scarlet\ 
As  incase  of  leprosy;  Lev.  xiv.  4,  6,  49- 
All  thrt'e  were  associated  with  purification. 
Cedar-wood,  when  burnt,  gave  forth  an  odour 
regarded  as  counteractive  to  corruption  and 
death.  Hence  it  was  burnt  at  funerals,  and 
the  resin  of  it  was  used  in  embalming.  Plin. 
‘Nat.  Hist.’  XVI.  21,  76,  and  xxiv.  ii; 
Herod,  ii.  87.  Hyssop  was  a well-known 


detergent.  The  scarlet  dye  (which  stands  in 
Lev.  xiv.  between  the  other  two,  and  which 
thus  seems  to  have  an  emblematical  meaning 
not  radically  different  from  theirs)  was  em- 
ployed in  medicine  for  strengthening  the  heart. 
It  may  also  be  viewed  as  pointing  by  its 
colour 'to  the  healing  blood  of  Christ. 

9.  nvater  of  separatiori]  In  viii.  7,  the 
water  of  purification  from  sin  is  in  the  He- 
brew, “ water  of  sin.”  So  that  which  was 
to  remedy  a state  of  legal  separation  is  here 
called  “ water  of  separation.” 

10.  he  that  gathereth  the  ashes']  The 
ashes  were  to  be  gathered  by  one  who  had 
taken  no  previous  part  in  the  work  to  be  per- 
formed, and  so  was  still  clean.  _ But  the 
execution  of  his  task  rendered  him  equally 
unclean  with  the  others.  For  the  defilement 
of  the  people,  previously  transferred  to  the 
heifer,  was  regarded  as  concentrated  in  the 
ashes.  The  sprinkling  of  the  ash-water  upon 
any  unclean  person  was  the  Individual  appli- 
cation of  that  purification  which  had  already 
been  provided,  or  rather  effected,  for  all. 

The  provision  for  purification 
from  defilement  is  supplemented  by  a defi- 
nite determination  of  various  degrees  of  un- 
cleanness. One  practical  effect  of  thus  attach- 
ing defilement  to  a dead  body,  to  all  that 
touched  it,  &c.,  would  be  to  insure  early 
burial,  and  to  correct  a practice  not  uncom- 
mon in  the  Isast,  of  leaving  the  dead  to  be 
devoured  by  the  wild  beasts.  That  these  or- 
dinances were  promulgated  in  the  wilderness 
appears  from  the  references  to  “the  tent”  in 
•V.  14.  It  may  be  asked,  therefore,  how  would 
these  directions  be  construed  when  the  people 
came  to  dwell  in  settled  and  more  spacious 


V.  13— 1-] 


NUMBERS.  XIX.  XX.. 


719 


it  on  the  third  day,  and  on  the  se- 
venth day  he  shall  be  clean : but  if 
he  purify  not  himself  the  third  day, 
then  the  seventh  day  he  shall  not 
be  clean. 

13  Whosoever  toucheth  the  dead 
body  of  any  man  that  is  dead,  and 
purifieth  not  himself,  defileth  the 
tabernacle  of  the  Lord  ; and  that 
soul  shall  be  cut  off  fr^m  Israel : 

' because  the  water  of  separation  was 
not  sprinkled  upon  him,  he  shall  be 
unclean;  his  uncleanness  is  yet  upon 
him. 

14  This  is  the  law,  when  a man 
dieth  in  a tent:  all  that  come  into 
the  tent,  and  all  that  is  in  the  tent, 
shall  be  unclean  .seven  days. 

15  And  every  open  vessel,  which 
hath  no  covering  bound  upon  it,  is 
unclean. 

16  And  whosoever  toucheth  one 
that  is  slain  with  a sword  in  the 
open  fields,  or  a dead  body,  or  a 
bone  of  a man,  or  a grave,  shall  be 
unclean  seven  days. 

1 7 And  for  an  unclean  person  they 
shall  take  of  the  ^ ashes  of  the 
burnt  heifer  of  purification  for  sin, 

IwJ'wrt  Tunning  water  shall  be  put 
ten  shall  thereto  in  a vessel: 
given.  ^ clean  person  shall  take 

hyssop,  and  dip  it  in  the  water,  and 
sprinkle  it  upon  the  tent,  and  upon 
all  the  vessels,  and  upon  the  persons 
that  were  there,  and  upon  him  that 


touched  a bone,  or  one  slain,  or  one 
dead,  or  a grave : 

19  And  the  clean  person  shall 
sprinkle  upon  the  unclean  on  the 
third  day,  and  on  the  seventh  day: 
and  on  the  seventh  day  he  shall  pu- 
rify himself,  and  wash  his  clothes, 
and  bathe  himself  in  water,  and  shall 
be  clean  at  even. 

20  But  the  man  that  shall  be  un- 
clean, and  shall  not  purify  himself, 
that  soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  among 
the  congregation,  because  he  hath 
defiled  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord  : 
the  water  of  separation  hath  not  been 
sprinkled  upon  him ; he  is  unclean. 

21  And  it  shall  be  a perpetual 
statute  unto  them,  that  he  that 
sprinkleth  the  water  of  separation 
shall  wash  his  clothes;  and  he  that 
toucheth  the  water  of  separation  shall 
be  unclean  until  even. 

22  And  whatsoever  the  unclean 
person  toucheth  shall  be  unclean ; and 
the  soul  that  toucheth  it  shall  be  un- 
clean until  even. 

CHAPTER  XX. 

I The  children  of  Israel  come  to  Zin,  where 
Miriam  dieth.  2 They  murmur  for  want  of 
water.  7 Moses  smiting  the  rock  bi'ingcth 
foi'th  water  at  Meribah.  14  Moses  at  Kadesk 
desireth  passage  through  Edom,  which  is  de- 
nied him.  22  At  mount  Hor  Aaron  resigneth 
his  place  to  Eleazar,  and  dieth. 

Then  came  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, even  the  whole  congrega- 


abodes  ? Michaelis  hazards-  an  opinion  that 
the  defilement  would  only  reach  to  that  apart- 
ment of  the  house  in  which  the  death  had 
occurred.  The  LXX.,  with  whom  modern 
Jewish  usage  coincides,  replacing  the  word 
“tent”  by  “house”  (oIklo),  imply  that  what 
was  law  for  the  one  was  law  also  for  the  other. 

Chap.  XX.  This  and  the  next  chapter 
narrate  the  journey  of  the  people  from  Ka- 
desh  round  Mount  Seir  to  the  heights  of  Pis- 
•gah,  near  the  Jordan,  and  the  various  inci- 
dents connected  with  that  journey.  A list  of 
the  several  marches  is  given  xxxiii.  37 — 41. 
They  formed  the  third  and  last  stage  of  the 
progress  of  Israel  from  Sinai  to  Canaan,  and 
took  place  in  the  fortieth  year  of  the  Exodus. 

The  incidents  are  apparently  not  narrated 
in  a strictly  chronological  order,  for  the  at- 


tack of  king  Arad  (xxi.  i)  no  doubt  took 
place  during  the  march  from  Kadesh  to  Mount 
Hor  (xxxiii.  37 — 40),  and  before  the  host 
had  by  turning  away  southwards  (xx.  ai, 
xxi.  4)  relieved  the  king  from  his  apprehen- 
sions. Indeed  the  leading  purpose  of  ch.  xx. 
seems  to  be  to  narrate  the  loss  by  the  people 
of  their  original  leaders  before  their  entrance 
into  the  land  of  promise.  On  the  chronology 
of  this  period  see  Introd.  § 3. 

1.  even  the  qvbole  congregation']  The 
A.V.  rightly  marks  the  expression  as  em- 
phatic by  inserting  the  word  “even.”  The 
words  occur  before  in  xiii.  26,  and  xiv.  i,  at 
the  commencement  of  the  tedious  period  of 
penal  wandering.  Their  use  again  now  serves 
to  mark  its  close,  and  points  to  a re-assem- 
bling of  the  people  for  the  purpose  of  at  last 

Z Z 2 


NUMBERS.  XX.  [v.  i. 

tion,  into  the  desert  of  Zin  in  the  in  Kadesh;  and  Miriam  died  there, 
first  month : and  the  people  abode  and  was  buried  there. 


resuming  the  advance  to  the  promised  land. 
The  long  3 8 years  w^hich  intervene  are  almost 
a blank  (see  lutrod.  § 2) ; they  can  hardly  be 
said  to  form  a portion  of  the  history  of  God’s 
people  at  all,  for  the  covenant  though  not 
cancelled  was  in  abeyance.  A veil  is  accord- 
ingly thrown  by  Moses  over  this  dreary  inter- 
val, during  which  the  rebellious  generation 
was  wasting  away.  But  the  words  before  us 
seem  to  hint,  what  is  in  itself  natural  and 
likely,  that  the  “congregation”  was  during 
these  years  broken  up.  No  doubt  round  the 
Tabernacle  there  continued  an  organized  camp 
consisting  of  the  Levites  and  others,  which 
was  moved  from  time  to  time  up  and  down 
the  country.  But  there  was  no  longer  any 
reason  for  the  coherence  of  the  whole  people 
in  mass,  and  we  may  accordingly  believe  that 
they  were  scattered  over  the  face  of  the  Vv^ilder- 
ness  of  Paran,  and  led  a nomadic  life  as  best 
suited  the  pasturage  of  the  cattle.  It  is  thus 
that  the  modern  Bedouins  maintain  very  large 
flocks  and  herds  in  these  same  deserts.  “On 
one  occasion,”  says  Mr  J.  L.  Porter  (cited  in 
‘ Mosaic  Records”  by  Mr  B.  B.  Rogers,  p.  67, 
note,  2nd  Edit.  1865),  “I  rode  for  two  suc- 
cessive days  through  the  flocks  of  a section  of 
the  Anazeh  tribe,  and  the  encampment  of  the 
chief  was  then  at  a noted  fountain,  thirty 
miles  distant,  at  right  angles  to  my  course ; 
yet  the  country  was  swaiTning  with  men  and 
women,  boys  and  girls,  looking  after  the 
cattle.”  He  adds  with  special  reference  to 
the  Israelites,  “The  camp  would  be  a mere 
nucleus.  Yet  as  being  the  head-quarters 
of  the  nation,  containing  the  I'abcrnacle,  the 
priests,  and  the  chiefs,  and  forming  the  rally- 
ing point  for  the  warriors,  it  was  the  only  place 
with  which  the  sacred  historian  is  concerned.” 
Thus  the  encampments  named  xxxiii.  18 — 36 
would  be  various  spots  at  which  in  the  course 
of  tht^se  years  the  'I'abernacle  was  for  a time 
pitched  ; and  possibly  in  u.  22,  “ Kehelathah” 
(“assembling”),  and  ‘v.  25,  “Makheloth” 
(“assemblies”),  may  be  names  bestowed  be- 
cause of  some  extraordinary  though  temporary 
gatherings  of  the  Israelites  there. 

We  can  hardly  doubt  that  daring  tfte  year’s 
sojourn  at  Sinai  there  would  be  a dispersion 
of  the  people  for  the  purpose  of  foraging;  and 
it  is  obvious  how  ])ertinent  are  the  above  con- 
siderations, based  as  they  are  upon  the  sugges- 
tions of  the  text  and  the  known  habits  of 
oriental  nations,  to  the  difliculties  which  have 
been  raised  as  to  the  means  of  subsistence  for 
the  multitudes  of  Israel  in  the  wilderness. 

Although  it  is  no  part  of  the  plan  of  Scrip- 
ture to  give  details  on  this  subject,  yet  one  or 
two  incidental  notices  throw  light  upon  it.  It 
is  evident  e.g.  from  Deut.  ii.  26 — 29,  that  the 
Israelites  had  traflic  in  provisions  with  sur- 


rounding tribes;  indeed  the  regular  highway 
of  the  caravans  from  the  East  to  Egypt,  and 
•vice  ^!erja,  lay  across  the  Desert  of  the 
Wandering;  and  from  Ps.  Ixxiv.  14  it  appears 
to  have  been  the  belief  of  a later  generation 
that  fish  were  occasionally  at  least  to  be  had, 
no  doubt  from  the  gulf  of  Akabah,  on  which 
was  the  encampment,  xxxiii.  35,  and  where  it 
may  have  been  for  years.  (Cf.  Hengstenb.  on 
Ps.  Ixxiv. ; Rogers,  ‘ Mosaic  Rec.’  p.  134.) 
Nothing  too  is  better  ascertained  than  the  fact 
that  the  resources  of  the  whole  district  were  in 
ancient  times  vastly  greater  than  they  now  are. 
The  traces  of  a population,  fertility,  and  wealth, 
that  have  long  passed  away,  are  found  by 
every  traveller;  cf.  Burckhardt,  pp.  469,  495, 
&c. ; Stanley,  ‘Sinai,’  pp.  24,  sqq.,  and  several 
authorities  there  quoted ; Ewald,  ‘ Hist,  of 
Israel,’  Vol.  1.  p.  620  and  note  (English  transl. 
by  Martineau);  and  see  further  in  Introd.  to 
Exodus,  pp.  245,  246.  The  language  used  in 
Deut.  i.  19,  viii.  15,  &c.,  respecting  the  hard- 
ships of  the  journey  through  the  wilderness, 
belongs  more  particularly  to  the  latest  marches 
in  the  fortieth  year  through  the  Arabah  (see  on 
xxi.  4),  rather  than  to  the  whole  period  of  the 
wanderings;  and  is  such  as  would  naturally 
suggest  itself  to  one  who  entered  after  toil- 
some wayfaring  upon  the  fertile  pastures  of 
Gilead  and  Bashan. 

The  Israelites  also  had  doubtless  these 
natural  resources  supplemented  where  needful 
by  miraculous  aid.  We  can  hardly  think  that 
the  manna,  or  the  occasional  bestowal  of 
quails,  or  of  water,  which  are  actually  recorded 
were  the  only  facts  of  the  kind  that  took 
place.  Rather  are  those  facts  mentioned  as 
examples,  selected  because  of  some  special  in- 
struction wrapped  up  in  the  particular  in- 
stances. The  whole  guidance  of  Israel  through 
the  wilderness  is  constantly  referred  to  God’s 
special  and  immediately  superintending  care: 
Deut.  viii.  4,  sqq.,  xxix.  5;  Neh.  ix.  21;  Is. 
Ixiii.  II — 14;  Amos  ii.  10,  &c.  It  is  pro- 
bable indeed,  and  seems  remarkably  suggested 
by  the  language  of  many  later  references,  that 
the  miraculous  supply  of  water  for  the  people 
and  their  cattle  was,  as  in  this  ch.,  'v%\  8,  ii, 
and  earlier  at  Rephidim  on  the  march  to  Sinai 
(Ex.  xvii.  I sqq.),  so  elsewhere,  one  of  God’s 
frequent  mercies  to  them;  cf.  Judges  v.  4 sqq.; 
Ps.  Ixviii.  7 sqq.  Compare  also  the  glowing 
language  of  Isaiah,  evidently  foretelling  God’s 
future  graciousness  to  His  people  in  terms* 
borrowed  from  the  past  in  chs.  xxxv.  i,  sqq., 
xli.  17,  sqq.,  xliii.  16,  sqq.,  xlix.  9 — 10,  and 
Hos.  ii.  14,  sqq.  This  whole  subject  is  well 
handled  by  Mr  Rogers,  ‘Mos.  Records,’ pp. 
142,  sqq.,  wlio  illustrates  also  from  various 
travellers  “the  magical  effect”  of  a supply  of 
water  in  any  part  of  the  peninsula.  It  must 


numbers.  XX. 


2 And  there  was  no  water  for  the 
congregation:  and  they  gathered  them- 
selves together  against  Moses  and 
against  Aaron. 

3 And  the  people  chode  with  Mo-*- 
ses,  and  spake,  saying,  Would  God 

a^chap.  II.  that  we  had  died  "when  our  brethren 
died  before  the  Lord  ! 

*Exod.i7.  4 And  ^why  have  ye  brought  up 
the  congregation  of  the  Lord  into 
this  wilderness,  that  we  and  our  cat- 
tle should  die  there  ? 

5 And  wherefore  have  ye  made  us 
to  come  up  out  of  Egypt,  to  bring 
us  in  unto  this  evil  place?  it  is  no 
place  of  seed,  or  of  figs,  or  of  vines, 
or  of  pomegranates  \ neither  is  there 
any  water  to  drink. 

6 And  Moses  and  Aaron  went  from 
the  presence  of  the  assembly  unto 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 


congregation,  and  they  fell  upon  their 
faces:  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord 
appeared  unto  them. 

7 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

8 Take  the  rod,  and  gather  thou 
the  assembly  together,  thou,  and 
Aaron  thy  brother,  and  speak  ye 
unto  the  rock  before  their  eyes ; and 
It  shall  give  forth  his  water,  and 
thou  shalt  bring  forth  to  them  water 
out  of  the  rock  : so  thou  shalt  give  the 
congregation  and  their  beasts  drink. 

9  And  Moses  took  the  rod  from 
before  the  Lord,  as  he  commanded 
him. 

TO  And  Moses  and  Aaron  gather- 
ed the  congregation  together  before 
the  rock,  and  he  said  unto  them. 
Hear  now,  ye  rebels;  must  we  fetch 
you  water  out  of  this  rock  ? 


be  added  too  that  the  Israelites,  from  their  so- 
journ in  Egypt,  were  familiar  with  artificial 
irrigation,  and  well  able  to  husband  and  turn 
to  account  all  available  supplies  of  water 
whether  ordinary  or  extraordinary.  ’ 

Yet  tliough  God’s  extraordinary  bounty 
was  thus  still  vouchsafed  to  them,  it  is  pro- 
bable that  this  period  was,  amongst  the  perish- 
ii^S^  geneiation  at  all  events,  one  of  great  reli- 
gious declension,  or  even  apostasy.  To  it  must 
no  doubt  be  referred  such  passages  as  Ezek. 
XX.  15  sqq.;  Amos  v.  25  sqq. ; Hosea  ix.  10, 
into  the  desert  of  Zin-]  Cf.  x.  la,  xxxiv.  3, 
sqq.  and  notes.  The  place  of  encampment 
was  no  doubt  adjacent  to  the  spring  of  Kadesh. 
On  the  former  occasion  they  probably  en- 
camped on  the  more  level  ground  of  the  wil- 
derness of  Paran  to  the  west ; but  now,  for  some 
reason  unknown  to  us,  on  the  hills  of  the  wild- 
einess  of  Zin  to  the  east.  Hence  perhaps  the 
difference  of  the  terms  used  in  reference  to  these 
two  encampments  at  Kadesh  (cf.  xii.  16,  xiii. 
26;  also  xxxiii.  36,  with /A  18,  and  note). 

the  first  month~\  Of  the  fortieth  year  of 
the  Exodus;  see  Introduction,  § 3. 

and  the  people  abode  in  Kadesb~\  These 
words  are,  perhaps,  through  some  private 
theory  of  the  history  of  the  wanderings,  ig- 
nored by  Josephus  and  by  the  later  Targums. 
Put  being  represented  in  the  older  versions, 
they  are  doubtless  genuine. 

Miriam  died  there ^ and  <vjas  buried  there\ 
Eusebius  mentions  that  in  his  day  her  sepul- 
chre was  still  shewn,  apparently  either  at 
Petra  or  not  far  from  it  (‘Onom.’  apud 
Hieron.  s.v.  Cades-barne).  No  sepulchre  is 


now  shewn  as  Miriam’s  either  at  Petra  or  else- 
where; and  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  iv.  4.  § 6)  places 
her  sepulchre  on  a mountain  named  Zin? 

2—6.  Complaints  of  the  people  for  want 
of  water.  The  spring  of  Kadesh  (cf.  on  xiii 
26),  near  which  they  were  probably  encamped 
was  no  doubt  wholly  insufficient  for  the  wants 
of  so  great  a concentrated  multitude.  The 
language  of  the  murmurers  is  noteworthy. 
It  has  the  air  of  a traditional  remonstrance 
handed  down  from  the  last  generation.  Cf 
xiv.  2,  sqq.;  Ex.  xvii.  3. 

6.  they  fell  upon  their  faces']  Cf.  xiv.  5,  &c. 

8.  _ Take  the  rod]_  Not  the  budding  rod 
of  xvii.  5 , but  that  with  which  the  miracles  in 
Egypt  had  been  wrought  (Ex.  vii.  8,  sqq.,  to 
sqq  viii.  5,  sqq.,  &c.),  and  which  had  been 
used  on  a similar  occasion  at  Rephidim,  Ex. 
XVII.  5,  sqq.  This  rod,  as  the  memorial  of  so 
many  Divine  incerpositions,  was  naturally  laid 
up  m the  Tabernacle,  and  is  accordingly  n,  g- 
described  ,^now  as  taken  by  Moses  “’from 
before  the  Lord.” 

the  rock]  Heh.  sela,  cliff;  a different  word 
trom  zur,  by  which  the  “rock”  in  Horeb  is 
designated. 

10.  ye  rebels]  See  note  at  end  of  chapter. 
must  ^ve  fetch,  &c.J  The  later  Targumists, 
recent  comm,  render,  “Can  w^e 
fetch  &c. ; and  view  the  words  as  words  of 
doubt.  But  other  passages  of  Scripture  fcf 
xxvii.  14;  Deut.  xxxii.  51,  5:,;  Pg.  cvi.  33) 
do  not  bear  out  the  view  that  it  was  in  doubt 
U V succouring  power  that  the  “un- 

belief (-U.  12)  of  Moses  and  Aaron  con- 


721 


722 


t Ps.  106. 

32.  &C. 
il  That  is, 
Strife. 


NUMBERS.  XX.  [v,  11-17. 


1 1 And  Moses  lifted  up  his  hand, 
and  with  his  rod  he  smote  the  rock 
twice:  and  the  water  came  out  abun- 
dantly, and  the  congregation  drank, 
and  their  beasts  also. 

12  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses  and  Aaron,  Because  ye  be- 
lieved me  not,  to  sanctify  me  in 
the  eyes  of  the  chiluren  of  Israel, 
therefore  ye  shall  not  bring  this  con- 
gregation into  the  land  which  I have 

given  them.  ^ t • 

13  ^This  is  the  water  of  "Meri- 
bah ; because  the  children  of  Israel 
strove  with  the  Lord,  and  he  was 
sanctified  in  them. 

14  ^ And  Moses  sent  messen- 
gers from  Kadesh  unto  the  king  of 


sisted;  nor  is  it  likely  that  they  who  had 
wrought  the  miracle  at  Rephidim  would  be 
staggered  when  bidden  to  do  a like  thing 
again.  The  A.  V.  has  therefore  rightly  re- 
tained the  older  interpretation. 


Edom,  Thus  saith  thy  brother  Israel, 

Thou  knbwest  all  the  travel  that  hath 
t befallen  us;  /S... 

15  How  our  fathers  went  down 
into  Egvpt,  and  we  have  dwdt  in 
Egypt  a long  time;  and  the  il^gyp- 
tians  vexed  us,  and  our  fathers : 

16  And  when  we  cried  unto  the 
Lord,  he  heard  our  voice,  and  sent 
an  angel,  and  hath  brought  us  forth 
out  of  Egypt:  and,  behold,  we  are 
in  Kadesh,  a city  in  the  uttermost 
of  thy  border: 

17  Let  us  pass,  I pray  thee, 
through  thy  country:  we  will  not 
pass  through  the  fields,  or  through 
the  vineyards,  neither  will  we  drink 
of  the  water  of  the  wells:  we  will 


and  he  <was  sanctified  in  tkeni]  An  allusion 
doubtless  to  the  name  ‘‘Kadesh”  (holy), 
which  though  not  now  bestowed,  acquired 
a new  significance  from  the  fact  that^  God 
here  indicated  His  own  sanctity,  punishing 
Moses  and  Aaron  who  had  trespassed  against 


11.  he  smote  the  rock  t<zvice'\  The  com- 
mand, -u.  8,  was  “Speak  ye  unto  the  rock.”  The 
act  of  smiting,  and  especially  with  two  strokes, 
indicates  violent  irritation  on  the  part  of 
Moses;  as  does  also  his  unseemly  mode  of 
addressing  the  people;  “Hear  now,  ye  rebels.'’ 
The  form  too  of  the  question,  ‘-must  &c.,’ 
directs  the  people  not,  as  ought  to  have  been 
the  case,  to  God  as  their  deliverer,  but  to 
Moses  and  Aaron  personally.  In  fact  the 
faithful  servant  of  God,  worn  out  by  the 
reiterated  perversities  of  the  people,  at  last 
breaks  down ; and  in  the  actual  discharge  of 
his  duty  as  God’s  representative  before  Israel, 
acts  unworthily  of  the  great  function  enti  listed 
to  him.  Thus  Moses  did  not  “sanctify  God 
in  the  eyes  of  the  children  of  Israel.”  Aaion 
might  have  checked  the  intemperate  words 
and  acts  of  Moses,  and  did  not.  Hence  God 
punishes  both  by  withdrawing  them  fiom 
their  work  for  Him,  and  handing  over  its 
accomplishm.ent  to  another. 

13.  the  nvater  of  Merihah']  i.e.  “Strife.” 
The  place  is  called  “xMeribah  in  Kadesh,]’ 
xxvii.  14,  and  “ .Meribah-Kadesh,”  Dent,  xxxii. 
5T,  to  distinguish  it  from  the  “Meribah”  of 
Ex.  xvii.  2,  sipp  'Ehe  fact  of  this  addition  to 
the  common  name,  and  the  diverse  circum- 
stances of  the  two  cases,  shew  that  we  have 
not  here  another  version  of  the  same  occur- 
rence; nor  in  forty  years  is  it  surprising  that 
scarcity  of  water  should  be  repeatedly  recorded 
in  the  annals  of  the  wanderings  through  the 
wilderness.  Indeed  the  same  want  is  men- 
tioned again  in  the  very  next  ch.,  -u.  5. 


it. 

14.  Cf.  Judg.  xi.  16,  17.  It  appears 
from  comparing  xx.  i with  xxxiii.  ^8,  that 
the  ho.st  must  have  remained  in  Kadesh  some 
three  or  four  months.  No  doubt  time  was 
required  for  re-organization.  It  may  be  also  | 
that  they  proposed,  as  38  years  previously,'  to  | 
invade  Canaan  from  this  quarter,  but  were  | 
prevented  by  obstacles  of  which  they  had  for 
a time  reason  to  hope  for  the  removal.  The  . 
passage  of  Egyptian  troops  through  the  west  | 
and  south  of  Canaan  might  be  such  an  obstacle.  | 
Eventually  however  they  were,  for  reasons 
which  we  can  but  conjecture,  moved  round  to 
the  eastern  frontier,  through  the  territory  of 
Moab.  In  order  to  gain  the  banks  of  Jordan 
by  the  shortest  route  they  had  to  march  nearly 
due  east  from  Kadesh,  and  pass  through  the 
heart  of  the  Edomitish  mountains.  These  are 
lofty  and  precipitous,  traversed  by  two  or 
three  narrow  defiles,  of  which  one  (the  Wady 
Ghuweir)  only  is  practicable  for  an  army. 
Hence  the  necessity  of  the  request  2;.  17.  ; 

Thus  saith]  Cf.  Deut.  ii.  4,  and  reff.  j 

thy  brother]  An  appeal  to  the  Edomites  to  j 
remember  and  renew  the  old  kindnesses  of  | 
Jacob  and  Esau,  Gen.  xxxiii.  1—17* 

It  appears  from  Judg.  xi.  17  that  a similar 
request  was  addressed  to  the  Moabites. 

16.  an  angel]  Cf.  Ex.  xiv.  19.  The 
term  is  to  be  understood  as  importing  gene- 
rally the  supernatural  guidance  under  which 
Israel  was. 

a city  in  the  uttermost  of  thy  border]  On  ' 
Kadesh  see  note  at  end  of  ch.  xiii.  ; 


I 

j 


V.  18—29.] 


NUMBERS.  XX: 


723 


go  by  the  king’s  high  way,  we  will 
not  turn  to  the  right  hand  nor  to 
the  left,  until  we  have  passed  thy 
borders. 

18  And  Edom  said  unto  him.  Thou 
shalt  not  pass  by  me,  lest  I come  out 
against  thee  with  the  sword. 

19  And  the  children  of  Israel  said 
unto  him.  We  will  go  by  the  high 
way ; and  if  I and  my  cattle  drink 
of  thy  water,  then  I will  pay  for  it : 
I will  only,  without  doing  any  thing 
else^  go  through  on  my  feet. 

20  And  he  said.  Thou  shalt  not 
go  through.  And  Edom  came  out 
against 'him  wdth  much  people,  and 
with  a strong  hand. 

21  Thus  Edom  refused  to  give 
Israel  passage  through  his  border: 
wherefore  Israel  turned  away  from 
him. 

22  ^ And  the  children  of  Israel, 
even  the  whole  congregation,  jour- 

^chap.33.  2ieyed  from  ‘'^Kadesh,  and  came  unto 
mount  Hor. 

23  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses and  Aaron  in  mount  Hor,  by  the 
coast  of  the  land  of  Edom,  saying. 


24  Aaron  shall  be  gathered  unto 
his  people:  for  he  shall  not  enter 
into  the  land  which  I have  given 
unto  the  children  of  Israel,  because 

ye  rebelled  against  my  ^ word  at  the  ^ Heb. 
water  of  Meribah.  fnotcth. 

25  “^Take  Aaron  and  Eleazar  his  ^^hap.  33. 
son,  and  bring  them  up  unto  mount  Deut.  32. 
Hor : 

26  And  strip  Aaron  of  his  gar- 

ments, and  put  them  upon  Eleazar 
his  son : and  Aaron  shall  be  ga- 
thered his  people^  and  shall  die 

there. 

27  And  Moses  did  as  the  Lord 
commanded  : and  they  went  up  into 
mount  Hor  in  the  sight  of  ail  the 
congregation. 

28  And  Moses  stripped  Aaron  of 
his  garments,  and  put  them  upon 
Eleazar  his  son;  and  Aaron  died Deut.  10. 
there  in  the  top  of  the  mount:  and  & 32. 50. 
Moses  and  Eleazar  came  down  from 

the  mount. 

29  And  when  all  the  congrega- 
tion saw  that  Aaron  was  dead,  they 
mourned  for  Aaron  thirty  days,  even 
all  the  house  of  Israel. 


17.  by  the  king's  high  <^vay\  Heb.  “by 
the  king’s  way.”  In  19  the  word  used 
(mesillaJj)  denotes  a causeway  or  raised  road, 
adapted  for  military  purposes.  To  such  the 
name  “imperial  road”  (glerh  es- sultan')  is  in 
the  East  still  often  given.  Moses  doubtless 
sought  a passage  by  the  Wady  Ghuweir, 
leading  eastward  through  the  heart  of  the 
mountains  of  Edom  to  the  table-land  above ; 
see  on  14,  This  valley  has  still  excellent 
pasture  and  many  springs. 

20.  And  Edom  came  out  against  him'\ 
The  Israelites,  without  awaiting  at  Kadesh 
the  return  of  their  ainba,ssadors,  commenced 
their  eastward  march.  At  the  tidings  of  their 
approach  the  EMomites  mustered  their  forces 
to  oppose  them ; and  on  crossing  the  Arabah 
they  found  their  ascent  through  the  mountains 
barred.  The  notice  of  this  is  inserted  here 
to  complete  the  narrative;  but  in  order  of 
time  it  comes  after  the  march  of  -u.  22. 

22.  mount  Hor]  On  the  name  see  Note  at 
end  of  chapter.  The  topographical  remark 
in  'u.  23,  that  this  mountain  is  “by  the  coast” 
(/. e.  border)  “of  the  land  of  Edom”  (xxxiii. 
37),  the  authority  of  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  iv.  4. 
7),  and  constant  tradition  identify  Mount  Hor 
as  the  modern  Jebel  Harun,  situated  on  the 


eastern  side  of  the  Arabah,  and  close  to  Petra. 
This  striking  mountain,  rising  on  a dark  red 
bare  rock,  to  a height  of  near  5000  feet  above 
the  Mediterranean,  is  remarkable  far  and  near 
for  its  two  summits,  on  one  of  which  is  still 
shown  a small  square  building,  crowned  with 
a dome,  called  the  Tomb  of  Aaron  (Stanley, 
‘S.  and  P.’  p.  86,  Ritter,  I.  448,  Eng.  Transl.). 
The  host  w^as  doubtless  encamped  in  the 
Arabah  below  (at  a place  called  Moseroth  or 
Mosera,  xxxiii.  30;  Deut.  x.  6),  whilst  Aaron 
and  his  companions  ascended  the  mountain 
“in  the  sight  of  the  congregation”  (ru.  27). 
Though  Hor  unquestionably  lay  withih  the 
territory  of  Edom,  yet  there  could  be  no  un- 
friendly trespass  in  the  mere  ascent  of  its 
barren  heights  by  the  three  leaders  of  the  host, 
especially  whilst  a friendly  reply  to  their 
peaceful  message  (“u.  14),  was  expected. 

26.  of  his  garments]  The  priestly  gar- 
ments, wherewith  he  had  invested  him,  Lev. 
viii.  7 — 9. 

put  the7n  upon  Eleazar]  By  way  of  solemn 
transference  of  Aaron’s  office  to  him,  cf. 
I Kings  xix.  19. 

27.  in  the  sight  of  all  the  congregation] 
The  congregation  could  not  however  witness 


NUMBERS.  XXI. 


[V.I. 


the  actual  transaction  on  the  mountain-top. 
Thus  in  his  death  as  in  his  life  (ch.  xvii.) 
is  Aaron's  dignity  guarded  by  God.  The 
transference  of  his  office  to  his  son,  at  the 
command  of  God  and  by  the  hand  of  Moses, 
sets  forth  in  act  the  will  of  God  for  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  High  Priesthood,  notwith- 


standing the  mortality  of  its  successive  in- 
heritors (Hebr.  vii.  23);  and  also  its  subordi- 
nation to  him  who  came  invested  with  direct 
authority  from  God. 

29.  Aaron  <voas  dead'\  Cf.  xxxiii,  37 — 39  ; 
Deut.  X.  6. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  -xx.  to,  22. 


10.  Heb.  □'"IfOn.  This  is  probably  the  word 
used  by  our  Lord  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  St  Matt.  v.  20,  and  rendered  rather 
-^fter  the  sound  than  the  sense  by  the  Greek 
ixcape.  For  the  verb  HID  seems  to  bra  word 
designed,  like  murmur,  and  the  German  “mur- 
ren,”  to  echo  its  own  sense;  and  to  mean  in 
in  the  first  place  “to  complain  fretfully;” 
hence  “to  be  refractory,”  “to  rebel,”  as  in 
-v.  24  of  this  chapter.  The  words  Marah  and 
Meribah  are  cognate. 

22.  Hor  has  been  immiemorially  treated  as  a 
proper  name,  yet  it  is  probably  only  an  archaic 
form  of  “in,  the  common  Hebrew  term  for 
“mountain”  (Gesen.,  Fiirst.  sub.  v,).  Hence 
it  is  applied,  xxxiv.  7,  to  a summit  of  Mount 


Lebanon,  where  the  L>XX.  renders  ad  'verhum^ 
TO  opos  TO  opos.  It  affords  too  the  only  ex- 
ample in  the  Bible  in  which  the  proper  name 
comes  first ; for  “ Hor,  the  mountain,”  would 
exhibit  the  order  of  the  words  in  the  original. 
It  is  probable  that  the  proper  import  of  the 
expression  “inn  nn  is  simiply  “summit  of  the 
mountain;”  as  is  noted  by  Jerome  (‘ Ep.  ad 
Fabiolam’)  in  remarking  upon  this  passage  of 
Numbers:  “Legi  potest,  Ascendit  Aaron  sa- 
cerdos  in  montis  montem.”  So  Jarchi  in  loc. 
“ Mons  fuit  super  montem,  veluti  pomum  par- 
vum  super  pomum  magnum.”  Mount  Hor 
in  fact  ‘ ‘ rises  like  a huge  castellated  building 
from  a lower  base”  (Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’  p.  86). 
The  mountain  intended  xxxiv.  7 was  probably 
one  of  similar  outline. 


CHAPTER  XXL 

I Israel  with  some  loss  destroy  the  Canaanites 
at  Hor  mail.  4 The  people  nnirtmiriiig  are 
plagued  701  th  fiery  serpents.  7 'They  repent- 
ing are  healed  by  a brasen  serpent.  10  Sundry 
journeys  of  the  Isi'aelites.  2 1 Sihon  is  over- 
come, 33  and  Og. 


AND  when  "king  Arad  the  Ca- 
iiaanite,  which  dwelt  in  the 
south,  heard  tell  that  Israel  came 
by  the  way  of  the  spies ; then  he 
fought  against  Israel,  and  took  some 
of  them  prisoners. 


Chap.  XXL  1.  king  Arad  the  Canaanitc~\ 
Rather,  “the  Canaanite,  the  king  of 
Arad.”  See  on  xiv.  45.  Arad  stood  on  a small 
hill,  now  called  Tel-Arad  (Rob.  ii.  loi,  201), 
20  miles  south  of  Hebron.  (Euseb.  ‘Chiom.’ 
s.  V.  'Apap,a).  Human  habitations  have  now 
disappeared  from  the  spot ; but  a ruined 
reservoir  remains,  and  fragments  of  pottery  are 
still  ^ound  there. 

in  the  soutJj\  See  on  xiii.  17,  22. 

by  the  avay  of  the  spies']  i.  e.  Through  the 
desert  of  Zin,  the  route  which  the  spies  sent 
out  by  Mo.ses  38  years  before  bad  adopted;  cf. 
xiii.  21.  On  the  expression,  which  is  not  free 
from  difficulty,  see  note  at  end  of  chapter. 

he  fought  against  Israel]  This,  as  has  been 
already  observed  (cf.  xx.  i,  and  note),  can 
hardly  have  taken  place  after  the  death  of 
Aaron.  ''Fhe  king  of  Arad  cannot  be  supposed 
to  have  waited  until  the  host  had  marched  more 
than  sixty  miles  away  from  his  borders  to 
iNIount  Hor,  and  was  in  full  march  further 
away,  before  attacking  them ; nor  can  the 


Israelites,  on  the  other  hand,  have  laid  aside 
their  journey  towards  Canaan,  retraced  their 
steps  into  the  wilderness  of  Zin,  and  returaed 
to  Kadesh  in  order  to  invade  Arad,  which  lay 
north  of  that  place.  The  attack  of  the  king 
was  most  probably  made  just  when  the  camp 
broke  up  from  Kadesh,  and  the  ultimate 
direction  of  the  march  was  not  as  yet  pro- 
nounced. The  words,  “when  the  king  . . . 
heard  tell  that  Israel  came  by  the  way  of  the 
spies,”  seem  to  hint  that  the  king  of  Arad 
apprehended  that  the  invasion  of  Canaan  would 
be  attempted  from  the  same  quarter  as  before, 
xiv.  40 — 45,  and  determined  to  take  the  offen- 
sive, and  try  to  drive  back  his  enemies  ere 
they  reached  his  teriitory.  The  insult  was  no 
doubt  avenged  as  soon  as  the  host  was  ready 
for  action.  The  order  of  the  narrative  in  these 
chapters,  as  occasionally  elsewhere  in  this  book 
(cf.  on  ix.  I,  &;c.),  is  not  that  of  time,  but  of 
subject-matter;  and  the  war  against  Arad  is 
introduced  here  as  the  first  of  the  series  of 
victories  gained  under  Moses,  which  the  his- 
torian now  takes  in  hand  to  narrate. 


t 


V.  2—7.] 


NUMBERS.  XXI. 


725 


2 And  Israel  vowed  a vow  unto 
the  Lord,  and  said,  If  thou  wilt 
indeed  deliver  this  people  into  my 
hand,  then  I will  utterly  destroy  their 
cities. 

3 And  the  Lord  hearkened  to  the 
voice  of  Israel,  and  delivered  up. 
the  Canaanites ; and  they  utterly 
destroyed  them  and  their  cities:  and 

II  That  is,  he  called  the  name  of  the  place  " Hor- 

Utterde-  1 
si  ruction,  mail. 

4 And  they  journeyed  from 
mount  Hor  by  the  way  of  the  Red 
sea,  to  compass  the  land  of  Edom: 


and  the  soul  of  the  people  was  much 
•I  discouraged  because  of  the  way.  n Or, 

5 And  the  people  spake  against 
God,  and  against  Moses,  Where- 
fore  have  ye  brought  us  up  out  of 
Egypt  to  die  in  the  wilderness  ? for 
there  is  no  bread,  neither  is  there 

any  water;  and  ‘^our  soul  loatheth  ^ chap,  n, 
this  light  bread. 

6 And  “^the  Lord  sent  fiery  ser- 
pents  among  the  people,  and  they  ^ Cor.  lo. 
bit  the  people;  and  much  people  of^* 

Israel  died. 

7 ^ Therefore  the  people  came 


3.  he  called  the  name  of  the  place']  Render^ 
the  name  of  the  place  was  called.  The 
transitive  verb  here  is,  by  a common  Hebrew 
idiom,  equivalent  to  an  impersonal  one. 

Hormah]  i.e.  “Ban.”  On  the  site  of  this 
place  see.xiv.  45,  and  note.  In  Judges  i.  17, 
we  read  that  the  men  of  Judah  and  Simeon 
“slew  the  Canaanites  that  inhabited  Zephath, 
and  utterly  destroyed  it and  further,  that  “the 
name  of  the  city  was  called  Hormah.”  But 
it  does  not  follow  that  the  name  “Hormah” 
was  first  bestowed  in  consequence  of  the  de- 
struction of  the  place  in  the  time  of  the  J udges, 
and  that  in  Numbers  its  occurrence  is  a sign 
of  a post-Mosaic  date  of  composition.  The 
text  of  Num.  xxi.  3 informs  us  that  this 
aggression  of  the  king  of  Arad  was  repelled, 
and  avenged  by  the  capture  and  sack  of  his 
cities;  and  that  the  Israelites  “banned”  them 
(cf.  Lev.  xxvii.  a 8,  29).  But  it  was  not  the 
plan  of  the  Israelites  in  the  time  of  Moses  to 
remain  in  this  district.  They  therefore  marched 
away  south-eastward;  and  no  doubt  for  the 
time  the  Canaanites  resumed  possession,  and 
restored  the  ancient  name  (Zephath).  But 
Joshua  again  conquered  the  king  of  this  dis- 
trict, and  finally  in  the  time  of  the  early 
Judges  the  ban  of  Moses  and  his  contem- 
poraries was  fully  executed.  We  have  there- 
fore in  the  passage  before  us  the  history  of 
the  actual  origin  of  the  name  “Hormah.” 

4.  And  they  journeyed]  Their  direct 
route  to  Moab  through  the  valleys  of  Edom 
being  closed  against  them  (xx.  20,  21),  they 
were  now  compelled  to  seek  a circuitous 
one  by  marching  round  the  mountain  fast- 
nesses. Their  course  lay  down  the  Arabah ; 
between  the  limestone  cliffs  of  the  Tih  on  the 
west,  and  the  granite  range  of  Mount  Seir  on 
the  east,  until,  a few  hours  north  of  Akaba 
(Ezion-Geber)  the  Wady  Ithm  opened  to 
them  a gap  in  the  hostile  mountains,  allowed 
them  to  turn  to  their  left,  and  to  march  north- 
wards towards  Moab  (Dent.  ii.  3).  Cf.  Ritter, 
‘S.  and  P.’  Vol.  I.  p.  75  (Clark’s  Transl.). 


They  were  thus  for  some  days  (see  on  xxii.  i) 
in  the  Arabah,  a mountain  plain  of  loose 
sand,  gravel,  and  detritus  of  granite,  which 
though  sprinkled  with  low  shrubs,  especially 
near  the  mouths  of  the  wadys  and  the  courses 
of  the  winter-torrents,  furnishes  extremely 
little  either  of  food  or  water,  and  is  moreover 
often  troubled  by  sand-stoims  from  the  shore 
of  the  gulf  (see  Ritter,  i.  53  sqq.  Eng.  Transl.). 
Elence  “the  soul  of  the  people  was  much  dis- 
couraged because  of  the  way.” 

5.  this  light  bread]  i.  e.  this  vile,  con- 
temptible bread.  The  Hebrew  word  is  derived 
from  a root  signifying  “to  be  light,”  and  so 
“to  be  mean,”  “despised,”  &c.  Cf.  the 
Horatian  “ et  spondere  levi  pro  paupere,” 
‘ A.  P.’  423 

6.  fiery  serpents]  The  epithet  (Dent, 

viii.  15,  Is.  xiv.  29,  xxx.  6)  denotes  the  in- 
flammatory effect  of  their  bite.  So  in  Greek 
writers  we  read  of  the  (Nicander, 

‘Theriaca,’  334),  a poisonous  snake  whose 
bite  caused  intense  thirst;  of  the  nprjo-Tijp  and 
the  Kavaojv  (^Elian,  ‘Nat.  An.’  vi.  51),  names 
which  point  in  like  manner  to  fever,  swelling, 
and  inflammation.  The  peninsula  of  Sinai, 
and  not  least,  the  Arabah,  abounds  in  venom- 
ous reptiles  of  various  kinds,  which  may 
well  be  described  in  such  ternis.  V.  Schu- 
bert travelling  in  this  district  remarks:  “In 
the  afternoon  they  brought  us  a very  mottled 
snake  of  large  size,  marked  with  fiery  red 
spots  and  wavy  stripes,  which  belonged  to  the 
most  poisonous  species,  as  the  formation  of 
its  teeth  clearly  showed.  According  to  the 
Bedouins,  these  snakes,  which  they  greatly 
dreaded,  were  very  common  in  that  neigh- 
bourhood,” II.  406:  see  also  Burckhardt,  p. 
499.  Alexander  in  crossing  Gedrosia  lost 
many  men  through  the  serpents  which  sprang 
upon  those  passing  by  from  the  sand  and 
brushwood  (Strabo  xv.  723).  Strabo  also 
remarks  the  dangers  of  mis  kind  to  which 
travellers  in  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  were  ex- 
posed (xvi.  759). 


726 


NUMBERS.  XXL 


[v.  8—13. 


to  Moses,  and  said,  We  have  sinned, 
for  we  have  spoken  against  the  Lord, 
and  against  thee  ; pray  unto  the 
Lord,  that  he  take  away  the  ser- 
pents from  us.  And  Moses  prayed 
for  the  people. 

8 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Make  thee  a fiery  serpent,  and  set 
it  upon  a pole : and  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  that  every  one  that  is  bitten, 
2 Kings  when  he  looketh  upon  it,  shall  live. 
johJs.  14.  9 And  ^Moses  made  a serpent  of 


brass,  and  put  it  upon  a pole,  and 
it  came  to  pass,  that  if  a serpent  had 
bitten  any  man,  when  he  beheld  the 
serpent  of  brass,  he  lived. 

10  ^ And  the  children  of  Israel  set 
forward,  and  ^pitched  in  Oboth.  43.^^^' 

1 1 And  they  journeyed  from  O- 
both,  and  pitched  at  " Ije-abarim,  in  ii^r, 
the  wilderness  which  is  before  Moab,  Abarim. 
toward  the  sunrising. 

12  H From  thence  they  removed, 
and  pitched  in  the  valley  of  Zared. 


8.  Make  thee  a fiery  serpent]  i.e.  a ser- 
pent resembling  in  appearance  the  reptiles 
which  attacked  the  people.  The  resemblance 
was  of  the  essence  of  the  symbolism  (cf. 

1 Sam.  vi.  5).  As  the  brazen  serpent  repre- 
sented the  instrument  of  their  chastisement,  so 
the  looking  unto  it  at  God’s  v/ord  denoted 
acknowledgment  of  their  sin,  longing  for  deli- 
verance from  its  penalty,  and  faith  in  the  means 
appointed  by  God  for  healing.  The  typical  im- 
port of  this  incident,  indicated  by  the  Saviour 
Himself  (St  John  iii.  14,  15),  has  been  very  co- 
piously treated  of  by  the  Christian  Fathers  and 
commentators.  In  the  serpent  of  brass,  harm- 
less itself,  but  made  in  the  image  of  the  creature 
that  is  accursed  above  others  (Gen.  iii.  14), 
they  rightly  see  a figure  of  Him  who  though 
“holy,  harmless,  undefiled,  separate  from_ sin- 
ners” (Heb.  vii.  a6),  was  yet  “made  sin” 
(2  Cor.  V.  21),  and  “made  a curse”  (Gal.  iii. 
13)  for  us.  And  the  eye  of  faith  fixed  on  Him 
beholds,  as  in  his  day  and  degree  did  the 
stricken  Israelite  in  the  wilderness,  the  mani- 
festation at  once  of  the  deserts  of  sin,  of  its 
punishment  imminent  and  deprecated,  and  of 
the  method  of  its  remission  devised  by  God 
Himself. 

The  explanations  of  certain  commentators 
that  the  brazen  serpent  was  set  forth  by  Moses 
as  an  emblem  of  healing  by  the  medical  art; 
as  a form  of  amulet  to  be  copied  and  worn; 
as  a reminiscence  of  Egyptian  serpent-worship, 
&c.,  are  obviously  unworthy  and  beside  the 
mark,  and  are  rebuked  by  Wisd.  xvi.  7.  Cf. 

2 Kings  xviii.  4. 

10,  11.  Ohotb]  At  the  opening  in  the  hills 
now  known  as  Wady-el-lthm,  the  route  of 
the  Israelites  took  a sharp  turn,  and  ran  thence- 
forward in  a north-easterly  direction.  After 
a march  of  about  fifty  miles  they  would  reach 
the  line  of  the  present  pilgrim  route  between 
Mekka  and  Damascus;  and  along  this,  or 
nearly  so,  their  march  must  for  some  distance 
have  lain.  The  earlier  stations  in  this  part  of 
their  journey  were  Zalmonah  and  Punon 
(xxxiii.  41,  42).  Oboth  was  north  of  Punon, 
east  of  the  northern  part  of  Edom,  and  is 


pretty  certainly  the  same  as  the  present  pil- 
grim halting-place  el-Ahsa.  The  name  denotes 
“holes  dug  in  the  ground  for  water,”  being 
the  plural  of  the  term  oh  or  obah^  which 
appears  in  Arabic  ZiS.'weiheh.  The  term  hasy^ 
of  which  ahsa  is  the  plural,  has  the  same 
meaning;  and  thus  the  modern  station  cor- 
responds to  the  ancient  both  in  name  and 
place.  The  brook  Wady-el- Ahsa,  which, 
rising  near  the  spot,  runs  north-westwards  into 
the  southern  bay  of  the  Dead  Sea,  is  the 
boundary  between  the  modern  provinces  of 
jebefi  and  Kerak,  as  it  probably  was  in  ancient 
times  between  Edom  and  Moab.  On  advanc- 
ing further  north,  therefore,  the  Israelites 
would  find  themselves  in  the  “wilderness”  or 
pasture-land  to  the  east  of  Moab.  Here  they 
encamped,  on  the  border  of  Moab,  at  lim,  a 
name  which  signifies  “ruinous  heaps”  (xxxiii. 
4<?);  called  here  more  fully,  Ije-abarim,  or  lim 
of  Abarim,  to  distinguish  it  from  another 
lim  in  south-western  Canaan  (Josh.  xv.  29). 
The  name  Abarim,  usually  rendered  “further 
regions,”  but  perhaps  better  rendered  “coast 
regions,”  is  more  particularly  applied  to  the 
hills  immediately  facing  Jericho  (xxvii.  12, 
xxxiii.  47,48;  Deut.  xxxii.  49),  and  denotes 
generally,  as  we  may  gather  from  Jer.  xxii.  20 
(where  it  is  erroneously  rendered  “passages”), 
the  whole  upland  country  on  the  east  of  the 
Jordan.  The  Greek  equivalent  of  the  name 
is  Perea,  familiar  to  us  through  the  writings  of 
Josephus.  The  Syriac  Version,  by  a peculiar 
punctuation  of  the  word  represented  in  A.  V. 
by  “ Abarim,”  gives  to  it  the  sense  “ He- 
brews.” The  same  name  would  thus  stand 
“ Ije  of  the  Hebrews;  ” as  if  the  people  had 
left  their  names  with  this  place  of  their  en- 
campment. 

12.  the 'valley  of  Zared]  Rather  the  brook 
or  watercourse  of  Zared;  more  properly 
written  Zered.  It  is  to  be  identified  with 
the  present  Wady  Ain  Franjy,  the  main 
upper  branch  of  Wady  Kerak.  This  was  the 
first  westward-flowing  brook  that  crossed  the 
line  of  march.  As  such,  it  marked  an  era  in 
their  progress;  and  the  summons  to  them  to 


I Or, 
Vaheb  n, 
Stiphak. 


V.  14-17-]  NUMBERS.  XXI.  ^ 727 


13  From  thence  they  removed, 
and  pitched  on  the  other  side  of 
Arnon,  which  is  in  the  wilderness 
that  cometh  out  of  the  coasts  of  the 
Amorites:  for  Arnon  is  the  border 
of  Moab,  between  Moab  and  the 
Amorites. 

14  Wherefore  it  is  said  in  the 
book  of  the  wars  of  the  Lord, 
“ What  he  did  in  the  Red  sea,  and 
in  the  brooks  of  Arnon, 


leaneih. 


15  And  at  the  stream  of  the  brooks 
that  goeth  down  to  the  dwelling  of 
Ar,  and  ^ lieth  upon  the  border  of  t Heb. 
Moab. 

16  And  from  thence  they  went  to 
Beer:  that  is  the  well  whereof  the 
Lord  spake  unto  Moses,  Gather  the 
people  together,  and  I will  give  them 
water. 

17  ^ Then  Israel  sang  this  song,  Ascmd. 
^Spring  up,  O wellj  **  sing  ye  unto  it 


I Heb. 


Or, 

answer. 


cross  it  is  still  preserved  to  us  in  Deut.  ii.  13. 
The  word  Zered  signifies  ‘ ‘ osier ; ” and,  remark- 
ably enough,  the  name  Wady  Safsaf,  Willow 
Brook,  still  clings  to  the  tributary  which 
unites  with  Wady  Ain  Franjy  below  Kerak. 
Possibly  one  of  these  is  identical  with  the 
“brook  of  the  willows,”  of  Isaiah  xv.  7. 

13.  on  the  other  side  of  Arnon\  The 
Arnon,  now  the  Wady  Mojeb,  is  an  im- 
petuous torrent;  the  most  important  of  all 
the  streams  which  run  into  the  Dead  Sea  from 
the  east.  The  Israelites  probably  crossed  the 
principal  branch  of  the  stream,  now  known 
as  Sell  Saideh.  For  their  course  lay  through 
the  “wilderness”  or  pasture-ground,  and  east 
of  a range  of  hills  which  here  runs  in  the 
form  of  the  quadrant  from  south-west  to 
north-east. 

Arnon  is  the  border  of  Moab,  between  Moab 
and  the  Amorites']  i.e.  between  the  territory 
which  remained  to  the  Moabites,  and  that 
which  the  Amorites  had  wrested  from  them, 
nj.  On  the  former  the  Israelites  did  not 
set  foot  (Deut.  ii.  9) : the  latter,  as  will  here- 
after appear,  they  triumphantly  traversed.  It 
seems  here  implied  that  the  Moabitish  territory 
no  longer  extended  to  the  north  of  the  Arnon 
or  of  that  branch  of  it  which  the  Israelites 
crossed.  They  could  therefore  without  scruple 
follow  the  most  direct  course  towards  Dibon 
(xxxiii.  45) ; marching  north-westward  along 
the  northern  bank  of  Arnon,  and  taking  advan- 
tage of  the  break  which  it  makes  in  the  neigh- 
bouring hills,  to  pass  through  them  to  the 
territory  on  the  west.  See  on  this  'u.  Introd. 

§ 4. 

14.  the  book  of  the  (wars  of  the  Lord] 
Of  this  book  nothing  is  known  except  what 
may  be  gathered  from  the  passage  before  us. 
It  was  apparently  a collection  of  sacred  odes 
commemorative  of  that  triumphant  progress 
of  God’s  people  which  this  chapter  records. 
From  it  is  taken  the  ensuing  fragment  of 
ancient  poetry  relating  to  the  passage  of  the 
Arnon,  and  probably  also  the  Song  of  the 
Well,  and  the  Ode  on  the  Conquest  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Sihon  17, 18,  27 — 30).  The 
allusion  to  this  book  cannot  supply  any  valid 


argument  against  the  Mosaic  authorship  of 
Numbers;  see  Introd.  § 4. 

What  he  did  in  the  Red  sea,  &c.]  The 
words  which  follow  to  the  end  of  the  next 
verse  are  a reference  rather  than  a quotation. 
Contemporaries  who  had  “the  Book  of  the 
Wars  of  the  Lord”  at  hand,  could  of  course 
supply  the  context.  In  the  absence  of  such 
help  we  can  only  conjecture  the  sense  of  the 
words  before  us ; which  are  a mere  fragment 
of  a strophe,  probably  even  grammatically 
incomplete,  without  either  verb  or  nominative. 
The  A.  V.  follows  the  ancient  Jewish  divi- 
sion and  interpretation  of  the  clauses.  The 
Marg.  however,  suggests  a better  sense;  and, 
supplying  some  such  verb  as  “conquered,” 
the  words  would  run  “He”  (i.e.  the  Lord) 
“conquered  Vaheb  in  Suphah,  the  brooks,  &c.” 
See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

15.  to  the  drivelling  of  Ar]  Ar(cf.  27.  28,  Is. 
XV.  I,  and  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter)  was  on  the 
bank  of  the  Arnon,  lower  down  the  stream  than 
where  the  Israelites  crossed.  And  near  the  spot 
where  the  upper  Arnon  (Seil  Saideh)  receives 
the  tributary  Nahaliel  (77.  19),  there  rises, 
in  the  midst  of  the  meadow-land  between  the 
two  torrents,  a hill  covered  with  what  are 
doubtless  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  city.  I'he 
place  was  first  visited  by  Burckhardt.  A 
neighbouring  aqueduct  testifies  to  its  former 
importance.  The  peculiarity  of  the  site  points 
to  it  as  the  “city  that  is  in  the  midst  of  the 
river,”  Josh.  xiii.  9,  16;  cf.  Deut.  ii.  36,  and 
note.  It  had  been,  perhaps,  heretofore  the 
chief  city  of  the  Moabites;  it  now  marked  the 
limit  of  their  territory ; and  it  was  hither  ac- 
cordingly that  the  king  of  Moab  went  to 
welcome  Balaam  (xxii.  36,  and  note).  It  was 
respected  by  the  Israelites  (Deut.  ii.  9,  29),  as 
being  still  a frontier  city  of  Moab,  although 
it  lay  on  the  northern  bank  of  what  was  else- 
where the  boundary  stream;  but  it  had  not 
escaped  the  ravages  of  the  Amorites  in  the 
recent  war  (77.  28). 

16.  Beer]  That  is,  “Well.”  Probably 
the  one  afterward  known  as  Beer-elim,  the 
“well  of  heroes,”  Is.  xv.  8. 

17,  18.  This  song,  recognized  by  all 
authorities  as  dating  from  the  earliest  times, 


28 


NUMBERS.  XXL 


[v.  1 8 — 20. 


18  The  princes  digged  the  well, 
the  nobles  of  the  people  digged  it, 
by  the  direction  of  the  lawgiver,  with 
their  staves.  And  from  the  wilderness 
they  went  to  Mattanah : 

19  And  from  Mattanah  to  Na- 


and  from  Nahaliel  to  Ba- 


haliel 
moth ; 

20  And  from  Bamoth  in  the 
ley,  that  is  in  the  Tountry  of  Moab, 
to  the  top  of  'Tisgah,  which  looketh  ^ 
toward  “ Jeshimon.  demess. 


1 t Heb. 

val-_;?^/^. 


and  suggested  apparently  by  the  fact  that  God 
in  this  place  gave  the  people  water  not  from 
the  rock,  but  by  commanding  Moses  to  cause 
a well  to  be  dug,  bespeaks  of  itself  the  glad 
zeal,  the  joyful  faith,  and  the  hearty  co-opera- 
tion amongst  all  ranks,  which  at  the  time 
possessed  the  people.  In  after  time  it  may 
well  have  been  the  water-drawing  song  of  the 
maidens  of  Israel. 

18.  by  the  direction  of  the  lawginier~\  Render 
with  the  lawgiver’s  sceptre;  i.e.  un- 
der the  direction  and  with  the  authority  of 
Moses ; cf.  on  the  Hebrew  word  Gen.  xlix. 
10,  and  note. 

And  from  the  'Wilderness  they  went  to  Matta- 
nah'] The  “wilderness”  comprised  all  the 
district  east  of  the  hills  mentioned  in  the  note 
on  1;.  13:  Mattanah  was  the  first  station  on 
the  west.  It  has  not  been  identified  with 
certainty.  Eusebius  makes  it  the  Maschana  of 
his  day,  which  lay  on  the  Arnon,  la  miles 
from  some  known  town,  perhaps  Dibon. 

19.  Nahaliel]  i.e.  “brook  of  God.”  The 
name  is  still  approximately  preserved  in  that 
of.  Wady  Enkheileh,  which  unites  with  Seil 
Saideh  to  form  Wady  Mojeb  (see  on  ns.  15). 
The  Israelites  must  have  crossed  the  stream 
not  much  above  Ar. 

Bamoth]  Otherwise  Bamoth-baal,  “the 
high  places  of  Baal,”  xxii.  41:  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  Dibon  in  Josh.  xiii.  17,  and 
Is.  XV.  2.  Mesha  in  recording  his  triumphs 
on  the  Moabite  stone  speaks  of  himself  as 
having  “rebuilt”  Beth-Bamoth.  It  had  no 
doubt  been  destroyed  in  the  struggles  which 
would  seem  to  have  been  constant  between 
the  Moabites  and  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and 
Gad.  The  halt  here  described  as  made  at 
Bamoth  is  identical  with  that  connected,  xxxiii. 
45,  with  Dibon-gad,  for  it  appears  from  Josh., 
xiii.  17  that  Dibon  and  Bamoth-Baal  were 
neighbouring  towns.  The  words  of  the  next 
verse  describe  the  encampment  as  at  “ Ba- 
moth in  tlie  valley”  or  “in  the  ravine.”  Im- 
mediately north  of  Dibon,  and  within  two  miles 
of  it,  in  the  centre  of  the  valley  of  Wady 
Waleh,  a northern  tributary  of  the  Arnon, 
rises  a detached  knoll,  of  no  great  height,  upon 
the  right  bank  of  the  rivulet.  On  its  summit 
are  the  remains  of  a very  larger  quadrangular 
platform,  constructed  of  rude  stones  laid  to- 
gether without  cement.  It  was  visited  by  Irby 
and  Mangles;  and  to  tliern  the  tliought  first 
suggested  itself  tliat  this  might  be  one  of  the 


altars  of  the  high  places.  The  spot  is  still  in 
some  measure  consecrated,  and  paltry  votive 
offerings  hang  around  a tomb  on  its  summit. 
Should  it  be  objected  that  from  this  site 
Balaam  could  hardly  have  gazed  on  the  Israel- 
ites in  their  encampment  opposite  Jericho 
(xxii.  41),  the  answer  is  that  “Bamoth  in  the 
ravine”  did  not  necessarily  constitute  the  whole 
of  the  “Bamoth”  round  Dibon:  there  may 
have  been  other  high  places  to  the  west,  where 
stand  the  ruins  Keraum  Abu  el-Hossein,  or  on 
part  of  Jebel  Attarus. 

20.  in  the  country  of  Moah]  Rather,  in 
the  field  of  Moah:  the  upland  pastures, 
or,  as  travellers  have  described  them,  flat 
downs,  which  are  intersected  by  the  ravine  of 
Wady  Waleh.  These,  as  also  “the  plains  of 
Moab”  (xxii.  i),  had  now  passed  to  the 
Amorites,  and  it  was  from  the  latter  that 
Israel  wrested  them. 

From  Dibon  the  Israelites  proceeded  to 
Almon-diblathaim,  or  rather  “ Almon-toward- 
Diblathaim;”  cf.  xxxiii.  46.  The  neighbouring 
town,  by  means  of  which  this  place  was  distin- 
guished from  Almon  on  the  west  of  the 
Jordan  (Josh.  xxi.  18),  was  probably  the 
Beth-diblathaim  of  Jer.  xlviii.  22,  where  Me- 
sha, according  to  the  Moabite  inscription, 
built  a temple  ; but  the  sites  of  both  are  un- 
known. 

to  the  top  of  Pisgahy  which  looketh  toward 
Jeshimon]  (Or,  “the  waste.”)  In  xxxiii.  47, 
this  encampment  is  described  as  “ in  the 
mountains  of  Abarim  before  Nebo.”  Pisgah. 
was  a ridge  of  the  Abarim  mountains,  west- 
ward from  Heshbon;  Nebo,  a town  on  or 
near  that  ridge  (xxxii.  3,  38),  and  apparently 
lying  on  its  western  slope,  inasmuch  as  the 
Israelite  encampment  on  the  height  was  “be- 
fore,” i.e.  to  the  east  of,  Nebo.  A ruined 
village  of  the  name  Neba  has  been  mentioned 
by  travellers  as  still  existing  in  those  parts 
(cf.  Robinson,  ‘B.  R.’  1.570,  note),  and  from 
the  latest  account  seems  to  be  on  the  most 
elevated  of  the  crests,  due  west  of  Baal-meon 
(xxxii.  38),  and  three  miles  south-west  of 
Heshbon  (Tristram,  ‘ Land  of  Israel,’  p.  535). 
From  the  summit  of  Pisgah  the  Israelites 
gained  their  first  view  of  the  wastes  of  the 
Dead  Sea  and  of  the  valley  of  the  Jordan.  It 
was  hither,  moreover,  that  Moses  subsequently 
again  ascended,  to  view,  before  his  death,  the 
land  of  promise.  The  interest  attaching  to 
the  spot,  and  the  need  of  a convenient  name 


V.  21 27-] 


NUMBERS.  XXL 


/Deut. 

27. 

Judg.  i: 
19. 


^ Deut. 
7- 


h Josh.  : 
2. 

Ps.  135-  : 
Amos  2. 


21  ^ And  -^Israel  sent  messengers 
c.  unto  Sihon  king  of  the  Amorites, 

saying, 

22  Let  me  pass  through  thy  land : 
we  will  not  turn  into  the  fields,  or 
into  the  vineyards ; we  will  not  drink 
of  the  waters  of  the  well : but  we  will 
go  along  by  the  king’s  high  way,  un- 
til we  be  past  thy  borders. 

20.  23  ^And  Sihon  would  not  suffer 

Israel  to  pass  through  his  border:  but 
Sihon  gathered  all  his  people  toge- 
ther, and  went  out  against  Israel  into 
the  wilderness : and  he  came  to  Jahaz, 

’ and  fought  against  Israel. 

24  And  Israel  smote  him  with  the 


edge  of  the  sword,  and  possessed  his 
land  from  Arnon  unto  Jabbok,  even 
unto  the  children  of  Ajnmon : for  the 
border  of  the  children  of  Ammon  was 
strong. 

25  And  Israel  took  all  these  cities: 
and  Israel  dwelt  in  all  the  cities  of 
the  Amorites,  in  Heshbon,  and  in 
all  the  tillages  thereof. 

26  For  Heshbon  was  the  city  of 
Sihon  the  king  of  the  Amorites,  who 
had  fought  against  the  former  king 
of  Moab,  and  taken  all  his  land  out 
of  his  hand,  even  unto  Arnon. 

27  Wherefore  they  that  speak  in 
proverbs  say.  Come  into  Heshbon, 


for  it,  has  led  Christians  often  to  designate  it 
as  “Nebo,”  rather  than  as  “the  mountain  of, 
or  near  to,  Nebo;”  but  the  latter  is  the  correct 
appellation  (Deut.  xxxii.  49,  xxxiv.  i);  and 
in  Scripture,  even  to  the  latest  times,  “Nebo,” 
alone,  denoted  only  the  town  (Is.  xv.  2 ; Jer. 
xlviii.  I,  22).  And  indeed  the  uniform,  peak- 
less character  of  the  ridge  of ’Pisgah  renders 
it  unlikely  that  its  different  portions  would  be 
distinguished  otherwise  than  by  the  names  of 
adjacent  villages. 

21 — 24.  Having  chronicled  without  inter- 
ruption the  progress  of  the  Israelites  through 
the  Amoritish  territory,  Moses  now  goes 
back  to  relate  the  story  of  the  conflict  by 
M^hich  their  way  had  been  opened.  The  town 
which  gave  its  name  to  the  battlefield,  and 
which  grateful  memories  converted  in  after 
times  into  a Levitical  city,  lay,  according  to 
Eusebius,  between  Dibon  and  Medeba;  to  the 
east  of  the  route  followed  by  the  non-combat- 
ants ; and  in  a country  as  yet  unexplored  by 
modern  travel. 

24.  unto  Jabbokl  Now  Wady  Zerka: 
cf.  Gen.  xxxii.  22.  In  its  early  course  it  runs 
eastward  under  Rabbah  of  the  Children  of 
Ammon,  always  in  ancient  days  one  of  the 
strongest  fortresses  of  the  East.  Hence  it 
curves  northward  and  westward  to  within  a 
few  miles  of  Gerasa.  Thence  it  flows  west- 
ward, and  reaches  the  Jordan,  45  miles  north 
of  the  Arnon.  It  was  between  Rabbah  and 
Gerasa  that  it  formed  the  Ammonite  boundary. 
The  territory  westward  from  it,  through 
which  the  direct  route  between  those  two 
places  lies,  and  which  had  probably  been 
wre.sted  from  the  Ammonites  by  the  Amorites 
(see  Josh.  xiii.  25;  Judg.  xi.  13),  is,  though 
now  one  vast  pasture,  covered  with  the  ruined 
sites  of  former  cities,  and  must  once  have 
been  thickly  peopled.  The  eastern  territory, 
to  which  in  the  days  of  Mo.ses  the  Ammonites 


were  restricted,  and  through  which  the  Mekka 
pilgrim-road  now  passes,  remains  as  yet  almost 
unvisited  by  Europeans. 

for  the  border  of  the  children  of  Ammon  ^ivas 
strong]  These  words  are  intended  to  explain 
what  had  prevented  Sihon  from  carrying  his 
conquests  further:  he  had  paused,  no  doubt, 
before  the  fortress  of  Rabbah.  The  Israelites 
had  a different  reason  for  respecting  the 
Ammonitish  territory.  (Cf.  Deut.  ii.  19  sqq.) 

25.  Heshbon]  Now  Heshban,  a ruined 
city,  due  east  of  the  point  where  the  Jordan 
enters  the  Dead  Sea;  conspicuous  from  all 
parts  of  the  high  plateau  on  which  it  stands, 
but  concealed,  like  the  rest  of  the  plateau, 
from  the  valley  beneath. 

26.  all  his  land]  Evidently  that  to  the 
north  of  the  Arnon  alone  is  intended: — an 
example  of  the  limitation  with  which  the 
biblical  statements  must  be  sometimes  under- 
stood ; and  which  may  be  legitimately  assumed 
in  many  cases  where  no  direct  proof  of  it  can 
be  furnished. 

27.  Wherefore]  The  word  of  the  histo- 
rian introducing  the  song  which  follows. 

they  that  speak  in  prowrbs]  The  original 
has  for  these  words  only  one,  a participle  from 
a verb  which  signifies  “to  place  side  by  side,” 
and  so  “to  draw  comparisons.”  The  word 
{hammd' shleyni)  is  in  fact  almost  equivalent 
to  “the  poets;”  for  mashal  and  its  derivatives 
serve  as  general  terms,  not  restricted  to  any 
one  poetic  style  amongst  the  Hebrews.  The 
word  supplies  the  title  of  the  Book  of  Pro- 
verbs itself ; and  is  used  of  the  parable  proper 
as  in  Ezek.  xvii.  2 ; of  the  prophecies  of  Balaam, 
xxiii.  7 — 10,  xxiv.  3 — 9,  &c.,;  of  a taunting 
song  of  triumph  over  fallen  Babylon  in  Is.  xiv. 
4 sqq.,  an  instance  very  similar  to  the  one 
before  us.  The  Hebrew  Poetry  is  essentially 
sententious  and  gnomuc  in  character,  and  its 


730 


NUMBERS.  XXL 


[v.  27—33. 


let  the  city  of  Sihon  be  built  and 
prepared : 

28  For  there  is  a fire  gone  out 
of  Heshbon,  a flame  from  the  city 
of  Sihon:  it  hath  consumed  Ar  of 
Moab,  the  lords  of  the  high  places 
of  Arnon. 

29  Woe  to  thee,  Moab ! thou  art 
I King.s  undone,  O people  of  ^’Chemosh:  he 
I-  7, 33.  hath  given  his  sons  that  escaped,  and 

his  daughters,  into  captivity  unto  Si- 
hon king  of  the  Amorites. 


30  We  have  shot  at  them;  Hesh- 
bon is  perished  even  unto  Dibon, 
and  we  have  laid  them  waste  even  unto 
Nophah,  which  reacheth  unto  Medeba. 

31  ^ Thus  Israel  dwelt  in  the  land 
of  the  Amorites. 

32  And  Moses  sent  to  spy  out 
Jaazer,  and  they  took  the  villages 
thereof,  and  drove  out  the  Amorites 
that  were  there. 

33  ^ '^’And  they  turned  and  went-i-Deut. 
up  by  the  way  of  Bashan : and  Og  & 2^.  7. 


style  is  based  on  antithesis,  in  words,  or  sense. 
The  verb  in  question  then  expresses  the  genius 
of  that  poetry  very  accurately. 

29.  ChetnosIS]  The  national  god  of  the 
Moabites  (cf.  Jer.  xlviii.  7,  13,  46),  who  are 
called  after  him  “ the  people  of  Chemosh.” 
I'he  name  probably  means  “ Vanquisher,” 
or  ‘‘  Master;”  see  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 
Tlie  worship  of  (Ihemosh  was  introduced 
into  Israel  by  Solomon,  i K.  xi.  7 ; 2 K. 
xxiii.  13.  It  was  no  doubt  to  Chemosh  that 
Mesha,  king  of  Moab,  offered  up  his  .son  as  a 
burnt-offering:  2 K.  iii.  26,  27,  where  see 
notes. 

30.  V/e  ha've  shot  at  them']  O thers  ‘ ‘ vre  have 
burned  them:”  see  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

IVb'icb  reacheth  unto]  Rather  witli  fire 
unto  Medeba. 

The  Ode  itself  may  be  exhibited  thus: 

Come  ye  to  Heshbon, 

Built  and  established  be  the  city  of  Sihon : 

For  a fire  is  gone  forth  from  Heshbon, 

A flame  from  the  city  of  Sihon, 

It  hath  consumed  Ar  of  Moab, 

And  the  lords  of  the  Bamoth  of  Arnon. 
Woe  to  thw,  Moab!  Thou  art  undone,  O 
people  of  Chemosh! 

His  sons  he  hath  rendered  fugitives,  and  yielded 
his  daughters  into  captivity 
To  the  king  of  the  Amorites,  Sihon ! 

But  we  have  shot  at  them — perished  is  Hesh- 
bon— unto  Dibon: 

We  have  wasted  unto  Nophah,  with  fire  unto 
Medeba. 

In  the  first  six  lines  (yv.  27,  28)  the  poet 
imagines  for  the  Amorites  a song  of  exulta- 
tion for  their  victories  over  Moab,  and  for  the 
conseciuent  glories  of  Heshbon,  tlieir  own 
capital.  In  the  next  three  lines  (y.  29)  he 
himself  joins  in  this  strain ; which  now  becomes 
one  of  half-real,  half-ironical  compassion  for 
the  .Moabites,  whom  their  idol  Chemosh  was 
unable  to  save.  But  in  the  last  two  lines 
{'V.  30)  a startling  change  takes  place;  and 
the  new  and  decisive  triumph  of  the  poet’s 
own  countrymen  is  abruptly  introduced;  and 


the  boastings  of  the  Amorites  fade  utterly 
away.  The  structure  of  these  two  lines  is  of 
a thoroughly  Hebrew  cast,  the  words  being 
put,  for  the  sake  of  symmetry,  into  an  order 
by  which  the  syntax  is  disgui.sed : they  would 
otherwise  run  thus,  ‘ ‘ We  have  shot  at  them 
unto  Dibon;  we  have  wasted  with  fire  unto 
Nophah  and  unto  Medeba:  Heshbon  {t.e.  the 
pride  of  Heshbon,  as  capital  of  the  Amorites) 
is  perished.”  Of  all  these  towns  Heshbon 
was  the  northernmost,  and  therefore,  to  the 
advancing  Israelites,  the  last  to  be  reached. 
For  Dibon,  see  on  xxxii.  34.  Medeba,  now 
Madeba,  was  4 miles  south-east  of  Heshbon. 
It  appears  from  i Chron.  xix.  7,  15,  to  have 
been  a fortified  place  in  the  reign  of  David. 
And  the  Moabite  inscription  informs  us  that 
Medeba  was  seized  and  held  by  Omri  and 
his  successors,  no  doubt  as  a fortress  through 
which  the  obedience  of  the  surrounding  dis- 
trict might  be  insured.  Nophah  is  unknown, 
unless  it  be  Arneibah,  10  miles  east  south-east 
of  Medeba. 

32.  Jaazer]  To  be  identified  probably  with 
the  ruins  Sir  or  es-Sir,  10  miles  north-east  of 
Heshbon.  They  consist  of  a castle  and  a 
large  walled  pool  (Seetzen,  ii.  p.  318);  the 
latter  being  probably  the  “sea”  of  Jer.  xlviii. 
32.  The  city  gave  its  name  to  the  territory 
around  if. (xxxii.  i ; cf.  Josh.  xiii.  23  ; 2 S.  xxiv. 
5).  The  occupation  of  it  by  the  Israelites 
virtually  completed  their  conquest  of  the 
A morite  kingdom ; and  prepared  the  way  for 
the  pastoral  settlem.ents  in  it  which  they  not 
long  after  established  (xxxii.  35). 

33.  u4nd  they  turned  and  nvent  up  by  the 
(Way  of  Bashan]  In  these  apparently  unim- 
portant words  is  contained  the  record  of  the 
Israelitish  occupation  of  Gilead  north  of  the 
Jabbok;  a territory  which,  though  peopled, 
like  southern  Gilead,  by  the  Amorites  (Deut. 
iii.  9;  Josh.  ii.  10,  &c.),  formed  part  of  the 
domain  of  Og  king  of  Bashan,  who  was 
himself  of  a different  race  (Deut.  iii.  2;  Josh, 
xii.  5,  xiii.  ii).  The  occupation  was  effected 
by  the  Machirites  of  Manasseh  (xxxii.  39). 


V.  34,  35-] 


NUMBERS.  XXI. 


731 


^ Ps.  135. 

II. 


the  king  of  Bashan  went  out  against 
them,  he,  and  all  his  people,  to  the 
battle  at  Edrei. 

34  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Fear  him  not:  for  I have  deli- 
vered him  into  thy  hand,  and  all  his 
people,  and  his  landj  and  ^thou  shalt 


do  to  him  as  thou  didst  unto  Sihon 
king  of  the  Amorites,  which  dwelt  at 
Heshbon. 

35  So  they  smote  hini,  and  his 
sons,  and  all  his  people,  until  there 
was  none  left  him  alive : and  they 
possessed  his  land. 


AVe  are  not  told  whether  they  were  led  thither 
by  express  warrant  of  God,  or  whether  their 
advance  upon  Bashan  was  provoked  by  Og 
and  his  people. 

at  Edret]  Now  Edhra’ah,  vulgarly  Der’a; 
situate  on  a branch  of  the  Jarmuk.  This 
river  is  not  mentioned  in  Scripture,  but  formed 
the  boundary  between  Gilead  and  Bashan. 
The  identification  of  Edrei  rests  on  the  frontier 
position  of  the  site,  on  the  modern  name,  and 
on  the  testimony  of  Eusebius;  but  it  is  only 
recently  that  the  explorations  of  Wetzstein 
(‘ Reisebericht,’ pp.  47,  8)  have  disclosed  the 
fact  that  the  original  city  was  subterranean, 


and  that  its  streets  may  still  be  seen  running 
in  all  directions  beneath  the  present  inhabited 
town,  which  is  built  on  the  ground  above. 
Some  with  less  probability,  especially  since  the 
discoveries  just  mentioned,  would  seek  Edrei 
10  miles  further  north,  .in  the  extensive  and 
commanding  ruins  bearing  the  name  of  Edhr’a, 
like  the  other  (see  Porter,  ‘Damascus,’  pp. 
a/I  sqq.,  and  ‘Diet,  of  Bible,’  s.  v.  Edrei). 
The  battle  of  Edrei  was  followed  by  the  con- 
quest of  all  Og’s  dominions,  Deut.  iii.  4.  Tlie 
carrying  off  of  one  remarkable  trophy  to  Rab- 
bah  (Deut.  iii.  ii)  suggests  that  the  Ammon- 
ites may  have  iaken  part  with  the  Israelites 
in  this  war. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xxi.  i,  14,  15,  29,  30. 


1.  by  the  way  of  the  spies\  This  rendering 
is  supported  by  Vulg.  and  most  Jewish  and 
modern  authorities;  the  noun  D''”inX  being 
regarded  as  identical  with  the  □'in  of  xiv.  6 
with  a prosthetic  N.  This  explanation,  though 
conjectural,  is  on  the  whole  the  most  probable.* 
The  LXX.  (followed  by  Saad.,  Gesen.,  Dathe, 
Maurer,  &c.)  make  the  word  in  question  a 
proper  name,  6buv  "Adapelfi]  but  no  traces  of 
such  a name  have  ever  been  discovered  else- 
where. Aramaic  etymology  suggests  “by  the 
way  of  the  places;”  Arabic,  “by  way  of  the 
tracks”  or  “monuments.” 

14.  The  rendering  adopted  by  our  version 
after  Jarchi,  Vulg.  and  most  Jewish  authorities,  ' 
assumes  (i)  that  DDI  is  here  written  for 
and  is  a verb  signifying  “dedit,”  “fecit;”  and 
(2)  that  nSID  is  a form  of  ^l^D,  and  this  itself 
an  elliptical  expression  for  fl1D“Db  the  sea  of 
weed,  the  Red  Sea.  On  the  latter  part  of  the 
second  assumption  see  on  Deut.  i.  i. 

Both  assumptions  are  now  generally  regarded 
as  untenable. 

Whilst  the  full  import  of  v/ords  so  entirely 
fragmentary  must  remain  uncertain,  it  is  al- 
lowed by  nearly  all  modern  commentators 
that  must  be  a proper  name  marked  in  the 
usual  way  by  as  in  the  accusative  case, 
and  co-ordinate  with  “the  brooks  of  Amon  ” 
which  follow.  The  LXX.  would  seem  to 
have  had  a slightly  different  reading,  DHT  for 
nni,  for  it,  taking  the  v/ord  as  a proper  name, 
translates  Za)o/3. 

The  verb  must  be  supplied  in  some  such 
way  as  is  suggested  in  the  foot-note. 


n DID  is  in  all  likelihood  a proper  name  also, 
and  denotes  the  district,  perhaps  an  alluvial 
one  remarkable  for  its  reeds  and  v/ater-flags, 
in  which  Vaheb  was  situated  (cf.  on  Deut. 
i.  i). 

Some,  however  (Gesen.,  Keil,  AVordsw., 
&c.),  regard  it  as  a common  noun  from  the 
verb  FlID  “to  destroy,”  and  translate  “in  a 
storm,”  or  “whirlwind,”  in  which  sense  the 
word  occurs  Job  xxi.  18,  and  with  the  same 
prep.  2 in  Nah.  i.  3.  The  sense  would  thus 
be:  “In  a storm  the  Lord  conquered  Vaheb, 
and  the  brooks,  &c.” 

Another  modern  len dering,  altering  the 
accepted  punctuation,  but  respecting  ordinary- 
grammatical  laws,  gives  the  sense  thus: 

“Vaheb  in  Suphah  did  He  conquer,  and  the 
brooks ; 

Amon  and  the  outpouring  of  the  brooks, 

That  goeth  down,  &c.” 

15.  Many  modem  scholars,  after  the 
example  of  Reland,  have  regarded  Ar  as 
the  same  with  Rabbath-Moab  or  Areopolis, 
the  ruins  of  which,  still  bearing  the  name 
Rabbah,  lie  10  miles  south  of  the  Arnon. 
The  distinction  between  Ar  and  Rabbah  was 
in  recent  times  first  brought  out  by  Hengsten- 
berg  (‘Geschichte  Bileams.’  p.  234  sqq.)  ; but 
he  fell  into  the  error  which  Ritter,  who  other- 
wise followed  him,  avoided,  of  supposing 
Areopolis  to  be  the  classical  name  of  the 
former  rather  than  of  the  latter  city.  Jerome, 
it  is  true,  in  his  commentary  on  Is.  xv.,  asserts 
the  identity  of  Ar  with  Areopolis;  but  has 
probably  no  better  ground  for  so  doing  than 


NUMBERS.  XXL 


7,32 


the  fact  that  the  two  words  are  the  same  in 
their  first  syllable.  Eusebius,  in  his  article  on 
Ar  in  the  ‘ Onomasticon,’  drops  no  hint  of  the 
identity  in  question,  though  he  speaks  freely 
of  Areopolis  elsewhere  in  that  work  (s.  vv. 
Arnon,  Agallim,  Arina,  Moab).  On  the  con- 
trary, he  distinctly  implies  that  Areopolis  was 
the  same  with  Rabbath-Moab  (s.  v.  Moab). 
This  Rabbah  of  Moab  is  itself  not  mentioned 
in  the  Bible;  it  was  perhaps  a city  of  late 
growth. 

29.  The  derivation  and  significance  of  the 
name  Chemosh  are  uncertain.  The 

most  probable  conjecture  is  that  adopted  by 
Gesen.,  who  refers  it  to  the  root  “to 

vanquish,”  “to  subdue;”  the  labial  letters 
D and  2 being,  as  they  often  are,  interchanged. 
This  derivation  is  to  some  extent  supported 
by  the  joint  mention  of  Chemosh  wfith  Mo- 
lech  and  with  Milcom,  i Kings  xi.  5 — 8, 
2 Kings  xxiii.  13.  These  names,  as  also  the 
Malcham  of  Zeph.  i.  5,  are  evidently  only 
dialectical  varieties  of  one  title  ; and  they  have 
a similar  sense  to  the  other*  title  of  Baal, 
and  to  that  of  Chemosh  according  to  the 
probable  explanation  suggested  above;  i.e. 
“ Lord,”  “ King,”  “ Master,” &c.  From  2 Kings 
xvii.  16,  17,  and  xxi.  5,  6,  it  would  seem  that 
Molech  and  Baal  w^ere  worshipped  with  the 
same  rites ; and  regarded  as  in  effect  the  same 
deity. 

Other  less  probable  derivations  are,  that  of 
Furat,  ‘ Lex.,’  who  derives  Chemosh  from 

“to  burn,”  or  “glow,”  the  Arabic  and 

regards  him  as  the  “Fire-God;”  that  of 
Hyde,  repeated  by  Rosenm.  and  Winer  from 

“culex,”  which  w^ould  identify  Che- 
mosh wfith  the  “Baal-zebub”  of  2 Kings  i.  2: 
cf.  Zevs  (iTTOfxvLos,  Pausan.  v.  14.  2 ; and  that 
of  Clericus  from  “celer  fuit,” 

which  w^ould  represent  Chemosh  as  the  “Sun- 
god.” 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  identify  Che- 
mosh with  various  deities  of  other  nations: 
e.g.  wdth  Saturn,  the  planet  of  ill-omen,  a 
hypothesis  based  on  the  Jewish  tradition  that 
Chemosh  w’as  w'orshippcd  under  the  image  of 
a black  star;  and  with  Ares  or  Mars,  because 
he  is  represented  on  coins  of  Areopolis  (the 
ancient  Rabbath)  as  an  armed  warrior  (Eck- 
hel,  ‘Doct.  Num,  Vet.’  iii.  394).  Jerome 
on  Isa.  XV.  i,  derives  the  name  Areopolis 
itself  from  "Apeoy  noXis,  a derivation  however 
which  is  certainly  erroneous;  see  last  note. 

Recent  inquiries  have  how'cver  more  and 
more  suggested  the  opinion  that  the  different 
names  assigned  to  the  heathen  deities  of  an- 
cient Oriental  Mythology  are  in  origin  and 
principle  nothing  more  than  the  recognition 
separately  of  the  attributes  belonging  to  the 
one  supreme  God.  d'hese  in  the  progress  of 
corruption  and  superstition  were  attached  one 


by  one  to  idols  of  various  names ; and  became 
localized  usually  upon  special  occasions  and 
circumstances  and  wdth  various  rites  in  differ- 
ent places.  Thus  the  diverse  names  Chemosh, 
Ashtoreth,  Baal,  Molech,  &c.  would  seem  to 
point  to  one  central,  original,  comprehensive 
conception  of  which  these  several  cults  repre- 
sent portions  and  depravations.  Of  this  idea 
the  Moabite  stone  has  furnished  a new  and 
very  striking  illustration.  It  makes  mention, 
in  connection  with  the  capture  of  Nebo,  of 
a god  called  “ Ashtar-Chemosh.”  This  title 
at  once  connects  the  Moabite  religion  with 
the  Phoenician,  in  wfiiich  Ashtar,  the  mascu- 
line form  of  Astarte  or  Ashtoreth,  represents 
one  side  (i.  e.  the  male)  of  the  creative  and  re- 
productive powder  wKich  is  conceived  to  be 
one  of  the  leading  attributes  of  God. 

It  wmuld  thus  seem  probable  that  Chemosh, 
in  one  at  least  of  the  manifestations  in  which 
the  Moabites  venerated  him,  was  connected 
with  the  androgynous  deities  of  Phoenicia. 
Amongst  them  we  have  not  only  Ashtar,  the 
masculine  form  of  Astarte  and  identified  with 
Baal ; but  Astarte  herself  is  spoken  of  as 
“the  King,”  “the  Sun  God,”  “the  Face  of 
Baal,”  &c.;  see  Schlottm.ann,  “Die  Inschrift 
Eshmunazar’s,”  p.  143:  and  ‘Die  Siegesaule 
Mesa’s,’  p.  28  sqq.  (cf.  the  “Venus  Victrix” 
and  “Venus  Amathusia,”  “eadem  mas  et 
foemina,”  of  classical  art  and  literature). 
It  is  probably  because  Baal  was  frequently 
worshipped  as  an  androgynous  deity,  and  not 
by  way  of  contempt  (as  has  been  commonly 
supposed),  that  the  name  has  the  feminine 
‘article  several  times  in  LXX.:  e.g.  Hos.  ii.  8 ; 
Zeph.  i.  4 ; Tobit  i.  5 ; cf.  Rom.  xi.  4. 

Accordingly  the  worship  of  Chemosh  as- 
sumed various  forms  in  different  places,  and 
was  accompanied  by  a ritual  appropriate  to 
the  special  attribute  to  be  praised  or  propiti- 
ated. As  the  god  of  War  and  Victory  he 
exacted  human  sacrifices:  cf.  2 Kings  iii.  26, 
27  ; and  Mesha  on  the  Moabite  stone  de- 
clares himself,  after  taking  Ataroth,  if  that 
be  (as  seems  probable)  the  proper  name  which 
has  to  be  replaced  in  line  xi.  of  the  Inscription, 
to  have  killed  all  the  warriors  for  the  well- 
pleasing of  Chemosh  and  Moab,  and  to  have 
taken  out  of  the  city  all  the  spoil  and  dedi- 
cated it  also  to  Chemosh : cf.  the  precisely 
similar  treatment  of  Jericho  by  Joshua,  Josh, 
vi.  17,  18;  and  see  Dr  Ginsburg,  “The 
Moabite  Stone,”  p,  34.  .As  the  lord  of  pro- 
ductiveness he  is  probably  identical  with  Baal- 
peor,  as  Jerome  ‘in  Jovin,’  i.  12,  long  ago 
surmised  (*liyD  “aperire”).  It  was  the 
licentious  rites  connected  with  the  Moabite 
worship  in  its  last-named  development  which 
led  to  the  transgression  of  Israel  mentioned  in 
Num.  XXV.  I — 3;  jesh.  xxii.  17;  and  gave 
occasion  to  such  protective  enactments  as  that 
of  Deut.  xxii.  5,  where  see  note.  He  was 
probably  also  worshipped  as  “the  Sun  God;” 
and  it  is  likely  that  the  remark  of  Eusebius, 


V-  I— 3-] 


NUMBERS.  XXII. 


733 


‘ Onom.’  s.  V.  ’'Apim,  is  to  be  thus  explained  ; 
for  he  states  that  the  god  of  the  peojjle  of 
Areopolis  (/. d*.  Ar  Moab)  was  Ariel;  a 
word  which  in  Ezek.  xliii.  15,  at  least  (if  not 
elsewhere)  appears  according  to  Gesen.,  Furst, 
xc.  to  signify  “the  fire,”  or  “hearth  of 
God.” 

30.  the  first  word  in  this  verse,  has 

been  very  variously  rendered;  its  punctuation 
is  anomalous ; and  the  ancient  authorities  (e.g. 
LXX.,  Vulg.,  Onkelos,  the  Arabic  and  Syriac 
Versions)  generally  regarded  it  as  a noun, 
and  are  followed  by  Clericus  and  Rosenm. ; 
though  they  difier  amongst  themselves  as  to  its 
meaning.  Modern  commentators  and  gram- 
marians are  agreed  that  the  word  is  a verb,  the 
first  person  pi.  Imp.  Kal  of  H")'  with  the  suffix 
of  third  person  pi.,  the  termination  □ being 
written  as  in  Ex.  xxix.  30,  for  D.. 

Of  the  sense  assigned  to  the  verb  in  this  place 
by  the  A.  V.,  “to  shoot,”  examples  will  be 


found  in  Gesen.  The  same  sense  is  adopted 
by  Maurer,  Schroder,  Dathe,  See.  Others 
(Keil,  Wordsw.,  &c.)  prefer  the  secondary 
sense  of  the  verb,  “to  throw  down,”  of  which 
an  example  occurs  Ex.  xv.  4.  Ewald  how- 
ever (‘Ausf,  Lehrbuch  der  Heb.  Sprache,’  p. 
424  note),  and  Furst  (‘ Lex.’ s.v.  m'),  connect 
the  word  with  n“lX,  and  translated  “ to  burn.” 
This  sense  has  support  from  the  Arabic,  and 
suits  well  with  the  sequel  of  the  verse, 

The  word  first  pers.  pi,  Hiph,  Imperf. 
from  has  also  the  suffix  of  the  third  person 
pi.  in  an  irregular  form;  cf.  Ewald,  ‘Ausf. 
Lehr,  der  Hebr.  Spr.’  p.  628. 

In  the  conclusion  of  the  verse  the  reading 
yields  no  satisfactory  sense,  and  the  "1  is 
marked  by  the  Masoretes  with  a circle  over  it 
as  suspicious.  Commentators  generally,  both 
ancient  and  modern,  have  adopted  the  reading 
which  the  LXX.,  the  Samaritan  Text  and 
version  have  evidently  followed. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

I Balak's  first  message  for  Balaam  is  refused. 
15  His  second  message  obtaincth  him.  An 
angel  would  have  slain  him.,  if  his  ass  had 
not  saved  him.  36  Balak  e7itertaineth  Jwn. 

And  the  children  of  Israel  set  for- 
^ ward,  and  pitched  in  the  plains 


Chap.  XXII.  With  this  chapter  begins 
the  fourth  and  last  division  of  the  Book  (see 
Introd.  § 2),  comprising  fourteen  chapters. 
In  them  are  narrated  the  events  which  befell 
Israel  whilst  encamped  in  the  plains  of  Moab, 
and  certain  instructions  and  arrangements  are 
laid  down  by  Moses  with  reference  to  their 
actual  entry  upon  the  promised  inheritance, 
from  which  they  were  now  separated  only  by 
the  Jordan. 

The  first  three  chapters  of  this  division  record 
the  appearance  and  prophecies  of  Balaam : see 
note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

1.  the  plains']  Heb.  arahoth;  the  w^ord 
is  the  plural  of  that  which  is  used  to  denote 
the  whole  depressed  tract  along  the  Jordan 
and  the  Dead  Sea,  and  onward,  wffiei-e  it  Ts 
still  called  the  Arabah  (cf.  on  xxi.  4),  to  the 
Elanitic  gulf.  Near  the  mouth  of  the  Jordan 
this  tract  is  about  eleven  miles  across,  a breadth 
of  from  four  to  five  miles  being  on  the  eastern 
bank.  The  space  occupied  by  the  Israelitish 
camp  consisted,  in  the  main,  of  a large  and 
luxuriant  oasis  upon  this  bank,  slightly  raised 
above  the  barren  flat,  sultry  because  sheltered 
by  the  Persean  hills  which  bear  up  the  fertile 
plateau  above,  and  watered  by  the  brooks 
which,  descending  from  those  hills,  run  west- 
ward across  the  plain  into  the  Jordan  (see  Tris- 
tram, ‘Land  of  Israel,’  pp.  528  sqq.).  It 
commenced  on  the  south  at  Beth-jeshimoth, 
“house  of  the  wastes,”  close  to  the  Dead  Sea: 
VoL.  I. 


of  Moab  on  this  side  Jordan  by  Je- 
richo. 

2 ^ And  Balak  the  son  of  Zippor 
saw  all  that  Israel  had  done  to  the 
Amorites. 

3 And  Moab  was  sore  afraid  of 


thence  it  covered  the  sites  of  the  future  cities 
Beth-ram  (in  A.  V.  “Beth-aram”),  now'  er- 
Rameh  (Josh.  xiii.  27),  and  Beth-haran,  now 
Beit-haran,  (xxxii.  36):  and  terminated  north- 
wards at  Abel-shittim,  the  “acacia-meadow.” 
This  place  is  no  longer  to  be  distinguished  by 
its  peculiar  vegetation,  for  acacias  are  now^ 
common  to  the  whole  district  around,  but  is 
doubtless  to  be  sought  along  the  brook' that 
flows  past  the  ruins  of  Keferein.  These  reach 
upwards  from  the  plain  to  a small  rocky  slope 
above,  and  probably  represent  the  ancient  city 
of  Abila,  to  which  the  meadow  eventually 
gave  its  name  (Jos.  ‘Ant.’  iv.  8.  i,  v.  i.  i). 
Immediately  north  of  the  camp  was  Nimrah 
or  Beth-nimrah,  now  Nimrun  (xxxii.  3,  36),. 
J osephus  mentions  four  of  these  cities  together ; 
viz.  Bethennabris  (Beth-nimrah,.  Abila  (Abel), 
Julias,  i.e.  Betharamphtha  (Beth-ram,  in\ 
Aramaic  Beth-rametha),  and  Besemoth  (Beth- 
jeshimoth).  ‘B.  J.’  IV.  7. 

of  Moab]  See  on  xxi.  20. 

'on  th'is  s'lde  Jordan  by  Jericho]  Rather,  a-- 
cross  the  Jordan  of  Jericho,  i.e.  that  part 
of  Jordan  which  skirted  the  territory  of  Jeri- 
cho. This  foi*m  of  expression  indicates  the  site 
of  the  camp  in  its  relation  to  the  well-known 
city  of  Jericho.  On  the  phrase  “ on  this  side 
Jordan  ” see  on  Deut.  i.  i. 

2.  Balak  the  son  of  Z'lppor]  The  way  in 
wffiich  he  is  mentioned  in  oj.  4,  and  the  ex- 

3 A 


734 


NUMBERS.  XXII. 


[v.  4—13- 


the  people,  because  they  were  many : 
and  Moab  was  distressed  because  of 
the  children  of  Israel. 

4 And  Moab  said  unto  the  elders 
of  Midian,  Now  shall  this  company 
lick  up  all  that  are  round  about  us, 
as  the  ox  licketh  up  the  grass  of  the 
field.  And  Balak  the  son  of  Zip- 
por  was  king  of  the  Moabites  at  that 
time. 

« Josh.  24,  5 ^He  sent  messengers  therefore 

y-  unto  Balaam  the  son  of  Beor  to 

Pethor,  which  is  by  the  river  of  the 
land  of  the  children  of  his  people,  to 
call  him,  saying.  Behold,  there  is  a 
people  come  out  from  Egypt  r behold, 
t Heb.  they  cover  the  ^ face  of  the  earth,  and 
they  abide  over  against  me : 

6 Come  now  therefore,  I pray 
thee,  curse  me  this  people ; for  they 
are  too  mighty  for  me : peradventure 
I shall  prevail,  that  we  may  smite 
them,  and  that  I may  drive  them  out 
of  the  land ; for  I v/ot  that  he  whom 
thou  blessest  is  blessed,  and  he  whom 
thou  cursest  is  cursed. 

7 And  the  elders  of  Moab  and 


the  elders  of  Midian  departed  with 
the  rewards  of  divination  in  their 
hand;  and  they  came  unto  Balaam, 
and  spake  unto  him  the  words  of 
Balak. 

8 And  he  said  unto  them.  Lodge 
here  this  night,  and  I will  bring  you 
word  again,  as  the  Lord  shall  speak 
unto  me:  and  the  princes  of  Moab 
abode  with  Balaam. 

9 And  God  came  unto  Balaam, 
and  said.  What  men  are  these  with 
thee 

10  And  Balaam  said  unto  God, 
Balak  the  son  of  Zippor,  king  of 
Moab,  hath  sent  unto  me,  sayings 

11  Behold,  there  is  a people  come 

out  of  Egypt,  which  covereth  the 
face  of  the  earth:  come  now,  curse 
me  them;  peradventure  G.  shall  be 
able  to  overcome  them,  and  drive 
them  out.  ^ 

12  And  God  said  unto  Balaam, 
Thou  shalt  not  go  with  them;  thou 
shalt  not  curse  the  people : for  they 
are  blessed. 

13  And  Balaam  rose  up  in  the 


pression  in  xxi.  26  (“former  king  of  Moab”)? 
suggest  that  Balak  was  not  the  hereditary 
king,  and  that  a change  of  dynasty  had  taken 
place.  The  later  Targums  make  Balak  a 
Midianite ; and  not  improbably.  His  father’s 
name,  Zippor,  “Bird,”  reminds  us  of  those 
of  other  Midianites,  e.g.  Oreb,  “ Crow,”  Zeeb, 
“ Wolf.”  Possibly  the  Midianitish  chieftains 
had  taken  advantage  of  the  weakness  of  the 
Moabites  after  the  Amoritish  victories  to 
establish  themselves  as  princes  in  the  land,  as 
the  Hyksos  had  done  in  Egypt;  possibly  they 
had  been  imposed  upon  the  Moabites  by 
Sihon ; cf.  Josh.  xiii.  21. 

3.  <was  distressed  because  of^  Lit.  “shrank 
from  before  them,”  in  terror. 

5.  Balaam  the  son  of  Beor]  See  Note  at  end 
of  the  chapter. 

Pethor^  <ivhicb  is  by  the  rrver  of  the  land  of 
the  children  of  his  people]  Rather,  whicli  was 
on  the  river  (i.c.  the  Euphrates,  so  called 
here  and  elsewhere  by  pre-eminence),  in  his 
native  land.  For  “his  people”  some  ancient 
authorities  read  “Ammon,”  but  wrongly:  the 
Ammon  it  ish  territory  did  not  stretch  to  the 
Euphrates.  On  Pethor,  see  Note  at  end  of 
the  chapter. 

7.  Re<vjards  of  divinatiori]  Heb.  “divi- 


nations,” rightly  interpreted  in  2 Pet.  ii.  15,  by 
“the  wages  of  unrighteousness.”  So  in  2 Sam. 
iv.  10,  the  Hebrew  word  for  “good  tidings” 
denotes  the  reward  of  such  tidings. 

8.  this  night]  It  was  either  in  dream  or 
in  nightly  vision  that  Balaam  expected  his 
communications.  His  eventual  compliance 
with  Balak’s  request  suggests  an  unfavourable 
interpretation  of  his  conduct  on  this  occasion. 
He  must  surely  have  known  that  God’s 
blessing  was  on  the  people  with  whose  marvel- 
lous march  forth  from  Egypt  he  was  ac- 
quainted, and  from  whom  he  had  himself 
probably  learned  much.  And  his  reply  to  the 
messengers  next  morning  (yv.  13),  betrays  the 
desire  to  venture  to  the  utmost  of  that  which 
God  would  not  forbid  rather  than  to  carry 
out  God’s  will  in  hearty  sincerity. 

12.  Phou  shalt  not  go  woith  them ; thou 
shalt  not  curse  the  people]  The  meaning  is 
substantially  : “Thou  shalt  not  go  with  them 
to  curse  the  people.”  In  Hebrew,  two  clauses 
of  which,  the  one  is  logically  subordinate  to 
tlie  other,  often  appear  as  coordinate.  So  in 
the  Second  Commandment,  “Thou  shalt  not 
make  . . . thou  shalt  not  bow  down  to  them 
i.e.  “Thou  shalt  not  make  ...  in  order  to  bow 
down  to  them.” 


V.  14—23-] 


NUMBERS.  XXII. 


735 


morning,  and  said  unto  the  princes 
of  Balak,  Get  you  into  your  land : 
for  the  Lord  refuseth  to  give  me 
leave  to  go  with  you. 

14  And  the  princes  of  Moab  rose 
up,  and  they  went  unto  Balak,  and 
said,  Balaam  refuseth  to  come  with  us. 

15  ^ And  Balak  sent  yet  again 
princes,  more,  and  more  honourable 
than  they. 

16  And  they  came  to  Balaam,  and 
said ‘to  him.  Thus  saith  Balak  the  son 

Heb.  of  Zippor,  ^Let  nothing,  I pray  thee, 
IhJIiieiied  hinder  thee  from  coming  unto  me : 
from,&=c.  jy  JTqj-  J promote  thee  unto 
very  great  honour,  and  I will  do 
whatsoever  thou  sayest  unto  me  : 
come  therefore,  I pray  thee,  curse 
me  this  people. 

18  And  Balaam  answered  and  said 
>chap.  24.  unto  the  servants  of  Balak,  ^If  Balak 
would  give  me  his  house  full  of  silver 
and  gold,  I cannot  go  beyond  the 
word  of  the  Lord  my  God,  to  do 
less  or  more. 


19  Now  therefore,  I pray  you, 
tarry  ye  also  here  this  night,  that  I 
may  know  what  the  Lord  will  say 
unto  me  more. 

20  And  God  came  unto  Balaam 
at  night,  and  said  unto  him.  If  the 
men  come  to  call  thee,  rise  up,  and 
go  with  them ; but  yet  the  word 
which  I shall  say  unto  thee,  that 
shalt  thou  do. 

21  And  Balaam  rose  up  in  the 
morning,  and  saddled  his  ass,  and 
went  with  the  princes  of  Moab. 

22  ^ And  God’s  anger  was  kindled 
because  he  went:  and  the  angel  of 
the  Lord  stood  in  the  way  for  an 
adversary  against  him.  Now  he  was 
riding  upon  his  ass,  and  his  two  ser- 
vants were  with  him. 

23  And  “^the  ass  saw  the  angel  of^^Pet 
the  Lord  standing  in  the  way,  and  jude  n 
his  sword  drawn  in  his  hand : and 

the  ass  turned  aside  out  of  the  way, 
and  went  into  the  field : and  Balaam 
smote  the  ass,  to  turn  her  into  the  way. 


15.  ^nd  Balak  sent  yet  again,  &c,]  Balak, 
like  the  ancient  heathen  world  generally, 
not  only  believed  in  the  efficacy  of  the  curses 
and  incantations  of  the  soothsayers,  but  re- 
garded their  services  as  strictly  venal.  So  the 
favours  of  the  gods  themselves  were  likewise 
considered  as  purchasable  (cf.  Plin.  ‘Nat. 
flist.’  XXVIII.  4).  Hence  Balak,  when  his  first 
offer  was  declined,  infers  at  once  that  he  had  not 
bid  high  enough,  and  sends  “princes  more  and 
more  honourable,”  with  richer  presents  than 
before.  And  the  terms  of  Balaam’s  answer  as 
reported  to  the  king  (“Balaam  refuseth  to 
come”)  would  seem  to  invite  the  construction 
actually  put  on  them  by  Balak. 

19.  ye  also]  i.e.  as  the  other  envoys  be- 
fore you.  The  spirit  in  which  Balaam  acted 
displays  itself  now  more  clearly.  There  was 
no  ground  for  expecting  different  directions 
from  God  on  the  matter  than  those  already 
given. 

20.  rise  up,  and  go  nvitb  them]  God’s 
first  command  to  Balaam,  -i;.  12,  verbally 
two-fold  (“thou  shalt  not  go  with  them;” 
“thou  shalt  not  curse,  &c.”),  was  one  and 
simple  in^  effect.  He  was  bidden  absolutely 
to  reject  the  request  of  the  princes  of  Moab. 
Had  Balaam  possessed  a sincere  spirit  of 
obedience,  he  would  have  found  in  these 
first  instructions  a final  decision  upon  the 


matter.  His  hypocritical  importunity  with  God 
v^^hen  the  fresh  messengers  came  from  Balak 
demonstrate  his  aversion  to  God’s  declared 
will.  Thenceforward  he  was  no  longer  on 
probation  for  the  dignity  of  being  God’s  loyal 
ambassador,  but  was  degraded  to  the  meaner 
function  of  an  unwilling  instrument.  Accord- 
ingly he  is  provided  with  new  instructions. 
Origen  obseiwes  that  had  Balaam  been  worthy 
God  would  have  put  His  word  in  his  heart ; 
but  as  that  heart  was  occupied  by  the  lust  of 
gain,  the  word  was  put  in  the  prophet’s  mouth 
only.  The  spirit  of  God’s  dealings  with 
Balaam  is  rightly  exhibited  in  this  remark, 
though  the  sense  of  the  Scripture  phrase,  “ to 
put  a word  in  the  mouth”  is  hardly  so  (cf. 
Deut.  xviii.  18).  On  the  character  of  Balaam, 
see  Bp.  Butler’s  well-known  Sermon,  and  that 
ofDr  J.  H.  Newman,  ‘Parochial  Sermons,’ 
Vol.  IV. 

22.  the  angel  of  the  Lord  stood  in  the 
(zvay  for  an  adversary  against  him]  i.  e.  The 
angel  that  led  the  Israelites  through  the  wil- 
derness (Ex.  xiv.  19,  &c.),  and  subsequently 
appeared  as  the  Captain  of  the  Lord’s  host 
to  Joshua  (Josh.  v.  13).  In  desiring  to  curse 
Israel,  Balaam  was  fighting  against  Israel's 
Leader.  The  presence  of  the  angel  in  his 
path  was  designed  to  open  his  eyes,  blinded  by 
sin,  to  the  real  character  of  his  course  of 
conduct. 


3 A 2 


736 


NUMBERS.  XXII.  [v.  24-32. 


24  But  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
stood  in  a path  of  the  vineyards,  a 
wall  on  this  side,  and  a wall  on 
that  side. 

25  And  when  the  ass  saw  the  an- 
gel of  the  Lord,  she  thrust  herself 
unto  the  wall,  and  crushed  Balaam’s 
foot  against  the  wall ; and  he  smote 
her  again. 

26  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
went  further,  and  stood  in  a narrow 
place,  where  was  no  way  to  turn 
either  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the 
left. 

27  And  when  the  ass  saw  the  angel 
of  the  Lord,  she  fell  down  under 
Balaam  : and  Balaam’s  anger  was 
kindled,  and  he  smote  the  ass  with  a 
stafF. 

28  And  the  Lord  opened  the 
mcuth  of  the  ass,  and  she  said  unto 
Balaam,  What  have  I done  unto  thee, 


that  thou  hast  smitten  me  these  three 
times  ? 

29  And  Balaam  *said  unto  the  ass. 
Because  thou  hast  mocked  me:  I 
would  there  were  a sword  in  mine 
hand,  for  now  would  I kill  thee. 

30  And  the  ass  said  unto  Balaam, 

Jm  not  I thine  ass,  ^ upon  which  thou  w 
hast  ridden  " ever  since  / was  thine  ridden 
unto  this  day  r was  i ever  wont  to  ii  or, 
do  so  unto  thee  ? And  he  said.  Nay. 

3 1 Then  the  Lord  opened  the.eyes 
of  Balaam,  and  he  saw  the  angel  of 
the  Lord  standing  in  the  way,  and 
his  sword  drawn  in  his  hand : and  he 
bowed  down  his  head,  and  “ fell  flat 

on  his  face.  himself. 

32  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  said 
unto  him.  Wherefore  hast  thou  smitten 
thine  ass  these  three  times?  behold, 

I went  out  ^to  withstand  thee,  be-  to  be  ah 

7 • 1 r adverse. 

cause  thy  way  is  perverse  berore  me : it, 


24.  tn  a path  of  the  vineyards]  i.e.  in  a 
path  shut  in  by  vineyard-walls  on  each  side. 
The  progress  from  the  road  through  the  open 
field  (fv.  23)  to  that  walled  in,  and  thence  to 
the  strait  place,  where  there  was  no  room  to 
turn  (f).  26),  shews  that  Balaam  was  approach- 
ing a city,  no  doubt  that  which  was  the  goal 
of  his  journey. 

28.  And  the  Lord  opened  the  mouth  of 
the  The  account  of  this  occurrence  can 
hardly  have  come  from  any  one  else  than 
Balaam  himself,  and  may  perhaps  have  been 
given  by  him  to  the  Israelites  after  his  capture 
in  the  war  against  Midian.  Cf.  on  xxxi.  8. 
I'hat  which  is  here  recorded  was  apparently 
perceived  by  him  alone  amongst  human  wit- 
nesses. For  though  his  two  servants  were 
with  him  (-u.  22),  and  the  envoys  of  Balak 
also  ('u.  35),  yet  the  marvel  does  not  appear  to 
have  attracted  their  attention.  The  cries  of 
the  ass  would  seem  then  to  have  been  signifi- 
cant to  Balaam’s  mind  only  (so  St  Greg.  Nyss. 

‘ de  Vita  Mosis,’  sub  fneni).  God  may  have 
brought  it  about  that  sounds  uttered  by  the 
creature  after  its  kind  became  to  the  prophet’s 
intelligence  as  though  it  addressed  him  in 
rational  speech.  Indeed  to  an  augur,  priding 
himself  on  his  skill  in  interpreting  the  cries 
and  movements  of  animals,  no  more  startling 
warning  could  be  given  than  one  so  real  as 
this,  yet  conveyed  through  the  medmm  of  his 
own  art;  and  to  a seer  pretc’ndiiig  to  super- 
human wisdom  no  more  humiliating  rebuke 
can  be  imagined  than  to  teach  him  by  the 
mouth  of  his  own  ass.  These,  the  special 


significances  of  the  transaction,  would  be 
missed  entirely  if  we  were  to  suppose  (as 
Maimonides  apud  Grotius  in  loc.,  Bauer, 
Thoiuck,  and  especially  Hengstenberg,  ‘ Ges- 
chichte  Bileams,’  pp.  48  sqq.)  that  the  whole 
passed  in  a vision,  Balaam  being  by  the  power 
of  God  cast  into  an  ecstatic  state.  And  the 
words  “the  Lord  opened,  &c.”  clearly  indicate 
that  it  was  on  the  ass  not  on  the  prophet 
that  the  Divine  Hand  was  more  immediately 
laid.  O n the  other  hand,  the  opinion  that  the 
ass  actually  uttered  with  the  mouth  articulate 
words  of  human  speech  (though  still  defended 
by  Baumgarten,  Von  Gerlach,  Wordsw.  &c.) ; 
or  even  that  the  utterance  of  the  ^ss  was  so 
formed  in  the  air  as  to  fall  with  the  accents  of 
man’s  voice  on  Balaam’s  ears  (a  Lapide  in  loc.), 
seems  irreconcileable  with  Balaam’s  behaviour. 
Balaam  was  indeed  labouring  under  derange- 
ment, induced  by  his  indulgence  of  avarice 
and  ambition,  and  this  too  aggravated  at  the 
moment  by  furious  anger;  yet  it  seems  scarcely 
conceivable  that  he  could  actually  have  heard 
human  speech  from  the  mouth  of  his  own 
ass,  and  even  go  on  as  narrated  in  -vno.  29,  30, 
to  hold  a dialogue  with  her,  and  show  no 
signs  of  dismay  and  astonishment. 

31.  and  be  sa-du  the  angel  of  the  Lord'] 
The  angel  was  outwardly  visible,  as  in  Ex. 
xiv.  19,  and  was  thus  now  seen  by  Balaam,  as 
before  by  the  ass;  yet  was  visible  with  such 
limitation  that  he  was  not  beheld  by  any 
others.  Beyond  this  we  know  not  the  manner 
or  conditions  of  his  appearance. 

32.  is  per'verse]  Rather,  is  headlong. 


V.  33—41-] 


NUMBERS.  XXII. 


737 


33  And  the  ass  saw  me,  and  turned 
from  me  these  three  times : unless  she 
had  turned  from  me,  surely  now  also 
I had  slain  thee,  and  saved  her  alive. 

34  And  Balaam  said  unto  the  angel 
of  the  Lord,  I have  sinned  ; for  I 
knew  not  that  thou  stoodest  in  the 
way  against  me  : now  therefore,  if  it 

tueb.  Misplease  thee,  I will  get  me  back 

: he  roil  in  / ^ ° 

! thme  eyes,  again. 

35  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  said 
unto  Balaam,  Go  with  the  men : but 
only  the  word  that  I shall  speak  un- 
to thee,  that  thou  shalt  speak.  So 
Balaam  went  with  the  princes  ofBalak. 

36  ^ And  when  Balak  heard  that 
Balaam  was  come,  he  went  out  to 
meet  him  unto  a city  of  Moab,  which 
is  in  the  border  of  Arnon,  which  is  in 
the  utmost  coast. 


37  And  Balak  said  unto  Balaam, 
Did  I not  earnestly  send  unto  thee  to 
call  thee  ? wherefore  earnest  thou  not 
unto  me  ? am  I not  able  indeed  to 
promote  thee  to  honour 

38  And  Balaam  said  unto  Balak, 
Lo,  I am  come  unto  thee  : have  I 
now  any  power  at  all  to  say  any 
thing the  word  that  God  putteth 
in  my  mouth,  that  shall  I speak. 

39  And  Balaam  went  with  Balak, 
and  they  came  unto  " Kirjath-huzoth. 

40  And  Balak  offered  oxen  and 
sheep,  and  sent  to  Balaam,  and  to  the 
princes  that  were  with  him. 

41  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
morrow,  that  Balak  took  Balaam,  and 
brought  him  up  into  the  high  places 
of  Baal,  that  thence  he  might  see  the 
utmost  part  of  the  people. 


I 


1 

i 


The  Hebrew  word  is  a rare  one,  occurring 
only  once  again,  in  a verbal  form,  Jobxvi.  ii, 
but  its  sense  seems  clear  from  that  of  the 
cognate  Arabic  word.  Cf.  St  Peter’s  words, 
2 St  Pet.  ii.  16,  “ the  madness  of  the  prophet.” 

35.  Go  (with  the  men\  A command,  not 
a permission  merely.  Cf.  on  n).  20.  Balaam, 
no  longer  a faithful  servant  of  God,  was 
henceforth  overruled  in  all  his  acts  so  that 
he  might  subserve  the  Divine  purpose  as  an 
instrument. 

36.  a city  of  Moab\  Or,  Ir-Moab;  pro- 
bably the  same  with  Ar-Moab,  see  on  xxi.  15. 
As  Balaam  in  his  journey  would  avoid  the 
districts  occupied  by  the  Israelites,  he  must 
have  approached  this  city  from  the  east,  by 
the  course  of  the  Nahaliel ; and  in  the  name 
Balu’a,  still  borne  by  one  of  the  upper  branches 
of  this  stream,  there  is  perhaps  a reminiscence 
of  the  name  of  the  prophet. 

39.  Kiejath-huzotlS]  i.e.  “city  of  streets.” 
From  the  context,  apparently  within  Balak’s 
dominions,  and  therefore  south  of  the  Arnon. 
Hardly  however  far  south,  for  from  it,  on  the 
morrow,  the  company  proceeded  to  Bamoth- 
baal,  which  lay  north  of  the  Arnon.  It  was 
probably  a place  of  importance,  and  possibly 
that  of  Balak’s  residence.  As  such  it  is  per- 
haps mentioned  in  an  endorsement  on  an 
Egyptian  papyrus  now  in  the  British  Museum 


(Anastasi  iii.),  dating,  as  would  seem,  from 
the  reign  of  Merneptah.  That  endorsement, 
according  to  the  translation  of  it  given  in 
Heath’s  ‘Exodus  Papyri,’  p.  89,  is  to  the 
effect  that  on  a certain  day  of  a certain  year 
“there  set  out  a mission  to  Baal  (or  Bal)'‘*son 
of  Zippor  of  Huzoth,  which  he  appointed  to 
Hor.”  The  papyrus  is  mutilated  at  the  name 
Bal,  which  may  have  answered  more  fully  to 
Balak  than  now  appears.  Brugsch  confirms  the 
above  rendering  as  regards  the  personal  names, 
but  takes  the  city  not  for  Huzoth,  but  for  Gaza 
(‘Geogr.  Inschr.’  il.  p.  32).  However  this 
may  be,  all  the  conditions  implied  as  to  the 
site  of  Kirjath-huzoth  in  the  Scriptural  notice 
of  it  are  satisfied  by  the  ruins  of  Shlhan,  4 
miles  west  by  south  of  the  site  assigned  to  Ar 
or  Ir.  They  stand  on  a slight  but  insulated 
eminence,  and  form  a conspicuous  object  to 
all  the  country  round  (see  Irby  and  Mangles, 
p.  141,  who  wrongly  write  the  name  “ Sheikh 
Harn;”  also  Burckhardt,  p.  375,  and  De 
Saulcy).  And  this  is  probably  the  site  in- 
tended in  the  later  Targums,  which  speak  of 
Kirjath-huzoth  as  “the  great  city  which  is 
the  city  of  Sihon,  which  is  Birosha.” 

41.  the  high  places  of  Baar\  i.  e.  Bamoth- 
baal:  see  on  xxi.  19,  20. 

that  thence  he  might  see'\  Rather,  and 
thence  he  saw. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xxii.  5. 

Balaam  the  son  of  Beor']  The  character  of  but  has  been  very  variously  estimated.  It 
I this  extraordinary  man  has  to  be  inferred  seems  however  probable  that  he  was  from 

almost  exclusively  from  the  ensuing  narrative,  the  first  a worshipper  m some  sort  of  the  true 

■ 


NUMBERS.  XXII. 


738 

God ; and  doubtless  had  learned  some  elements 
of  pure  and  true  religion  in  his  home  in  the 
far  east,  the  cradle  of  the  ancestors  of  Israel, 
‘‘whence  Abraham  had  emigrated,  and  where 
Nahor  and  that  branch  of  Terah’s  family  re- 
mained,” Blunt,  ‘Undes.  Coin.’p.  85;  and  where 
we  know,  from  various  notices,  that  remains 
of  patriarchal  tradition  long  lingered.  Such 
superior  knowledge  doubtless  conduced  to 
Balaam’s  reputation  as  a prophet,  whilst  it 
was  not  clear  and  coherent  enough  to  deter 
him  from  employing  as  a trade  the  arts  of  the 
heathen  sorcerer.  The  recent  dealings  of  God 
with  Israel,  which  had  produced  a profound 
sensation  amongst  all  neighbouring  peoples 
(Ex.  XV.  14,  xviii.  i sqq. ; Josh.  ii.  9 sqq.) 
could  not  be  unknown  to  Balaam ; and  indeed 
the  intercourse  between  Mesopotamia  and 
Egypt,  as  indeed  amongst  the  peoples  of  the 
East  generally  (cf.  Blunt,  § 23),  was  consider- 
able and  continuous  in  those  times.  He  had, 
we  may  be  sure,  inquired  into  the  past  history, 
and  present  hopes  of  this  remarkable  nation  ; and 
we  find  him  accordingly  using  language  which 
reflects  that  of  the  Jewish  records  (cf.  xxiii.  12, 
and  Gen.  xiii.  16,  xxiv.  9,  and  Gen.  xlix.  9), 
and  implies  a knowledge  of  the  promises  made 
to  their  forefathers.  Above  all  we  find  him 
employing  on  occasion  the  most  Holy  Name. 
He  noted  and  believed  in  the  signs  and  won- 
ders which  ushered  in  the  new  dispensation ; 
and,  by  profession  a diviner,  he  coveted  a share 
in  those  marvellous  powers  which  he  saw 
associated  with  it.  But,  like  Simon  Magus, 
he  sought  spiritual  gifts  for  worldly  purposes. 
Though  prophesying,  doubtless  even  before 
the  ambassadors  of  Balak  came  to  him,  in 
the  name  of  the  true  God,  yet  prophecy 
was  still  to  him  as  before  a mere  business, 
not  a religion.  The  summons  of  Balak  proved 
to  be  a crisis  in  his  career.  It  gave  oppor- 
tunity for  immediate  contact  with  God’s 
people,  for  closer  intercourse  with  God  Him- 
self, and  thus  for  attaining  that  fulness  of 
prophetic  gifts  and  dignity,  to  which  he  would 
seem  to  have  aspired.  But  nearness  to  God, 
and  keen  prophetic  illumination,  could  not  of 
themselves  reclaim  the  worldly  heart  nor  con- 
vert the  stubborn  will.  He  yet  loved  the 
wages  of  unrighteousness  (cf.  Soph.  ‘Antig.’ 
1055,  TO  ^avTLKov  yap  irav  (piXdpyvpov  yeVof), 
and  strove  for  sake  of  them  to  break  away 
from  the  line  of  conduct  distinctly  prescribed 
to  him  by  God.  When  his  perversity  was  at 
length  overborne  by  irresistible  influence  from 
on  high,  and  the  gold  and  honours  of  Balak 
seemed  to  be  finally  lost,  he  became  reckless 
and  desperate;  and,  as  if  in  defiance,  counselled 
tlie  evil  stratagem  by  which  he  hoped  to  com- 
pass indirect  ly  that  ruin  of  God’s  people  which 
he  had  been  withheld  from  working  otherwise. 
He  thus,  like  Judas  and  Ahithophel,  set  in 
motion  a train  of  events  which  involved  his 
own  destruction.  This  explanation  of  Balaam’s 
character,  which  was  first  brought  out  clearly 


by  Hengstenberg  (‘Geschichte  Bileams’),  and 
has  been  adopted  by  Kurtz,  ‘Hist,  of  Old 
Covenant,’  III.  389  sqq.,  Keil,  Reinke  (‘Bei- 
trage,’  iv.  179 — 287),  &c.  is  more  consistent 
with  the  various  facts  apparent  in  the  narrative 
than  is  either  of  the  other  contradictory  vif^ws 
which  have  been  offered.  On  the  one  hand 
Philo,  Josephus,  and  most  of  the  Jewish 
authorities,  with  Origen,  St  Ambrose,  St 
Augustine,  Lyranus,  a Lapide,  &c.,  regard 
Balaam  as  “prophetam  non  Dei  sed  diaboli,” 
who  was  compelled  by  God  against  his  will 
to  bless  when  he  would  fain  both  then  and 
always  have  cursed.  This  view  was  the  one 
generally  accepted  by  the  earlier  Christian 
Fathers,  who  in  their  antagonism  to  the  heathen 
world  would  naturally  find  great  difficulty  in 
recognising  that  combination  of  genuine  en- 
lightenment from  God  with  Gentile  witchcraft 
which  seems  nevertheless  apparent  in  Balaam, 
and  gives  to  his  character  that  inconsistency 
and  complexity  which  so  strangely  mark  it. 
And  the  combination  was  indeed  one  which 
could  not  last.  The  two  elements  of  it  were 
essentially  incompatible,  and  Balaam  had  in 
the  event  to  make  his  choice  between  them. 
But  the  chapters  before  us  exhibit  him  at  the 
critical  juncture  when  he  stood  partly  on  the 
domain  of  Gentile  magic,  and  partly  upon 
that  of  true  revealed  religion  and  prophecy ; 
and  deliberately  proposed  to  m.aintain  his 
ground  upon  both.  Balaam  knew  and  con- 
fessed the  Lord  (Jehovah)  when  the  ambas- 
sadors of  Balak  first  came  to  him  (xxii.  8), 
and  was  not  backward  in  professing  obedience 
before  the  king  himself.  He  describes  himself 
as  one  who  “heard  the  words  of  God,”  “had 
the  knowledge  of  the  Most  High,”  “ saw  .the 
vision  of  the  Almighty.”  Obviously  then  he 
was  not  a mere  heathen  wizard. 

The  other  and  opposite  view  maintain^'d  by 
Tertullian  and  Jerome,  followed  by  Rupertus 
Duitius,  Deyling,  Buddeus,  &c.,  is  that  Balaam 
was  a holy  man  and  a true  prophet  who  fell 
through  avarice  and  ambition.  Yet  when 
summoned  by  Balak  he  resorts,  as  of  course, 
to  the  heathen  art  of  augury  (xxiii.  3,  5,  xxiv. 
i),  and  is  styled  (Josh.  xiii.  22)  “the  sooth- 
sayer” (bakkosem),  a word  never  used  in  the 
Bible  in  other  than  an  unfavourable  sense. 
“Soothsaying”  is  expressly  forbidden  (Deut. 
xviii.  10),  is  characterised  always  as  a deadly 
sin  (i  Sam.  xv.  23;  2 Kings  xvii.  17;  Ezek. 
xiii.  23),  and  as  the  mark  of  a false  prophet 
(Ezek.  xiii.  9 ; Jer.  xiv.  14,  &c.).  Accordingly 
the  “kosem”  is  distinguished  from  the  true 
prophet.  Is.  iii.  2.  This  view  then,  which 
possibly  originated  from  a Jewish  conjecture, 
that  Balaam  is  identical  with  the  Elihu  of  the 
book  of  Job,  may  unhesitatingly  be  dismissed. 

The  name  Balaam  (LXX.  BaXan/i;  Joseph. 
BnXapos  more  correctly  Bileam,  after  the 
Hebrew  pointing),  is  derived  from  iala,  “to 
devour,”  with  a formative  syllable  attached; 
and  signifies  “destroyer,”  or  “glutton.”  Less 


V.  I— 3-] 


NUMBERS.  XXIII. 


probable  is  the  derivation  “ bala-am,”  “ de- 
stroyer of  the  people.” 

In  Gen.  xxxvi.  32,  v^e  read  of  “Bela  son  of 
Beor,”  the  first  king  of  Edom.  The  name 
“Beor”  ("lyi  “to  burn  up”)  is  identical  with 
that  of  the  father,  or  possibly  ancestor,  of  the 
prophet;  and  “Balaam”  is  in  the  original 
identical  with  “Bela”  except  in  having  the 
afformative.  The  coincidence  seems  too  re- 
markable to  be  quite  accidental,  as  Knobel, 
Ewald,  and  others  have  hastily  pronounced  it. 
Does  it  point  to  a dynasty  from  Balaam’s 
native  country,  on  the  banks  of  the  great  river, 
reigning  in  patriarchal  times  over  tribes  on 
the  south-east  of  Canaan  ? 

The  name  Beor  is  written  Bosor  (Boo-op), 
2 Pet.  ii.  15,  and  this  implies  an  original 
an  Aramaic  equivalent  for  the  Hebrew 
the  Aramaic  V often  taking  the  place  of  the  He- 
brew V.  The  form  possibly  became  familiar  to 
St  Peter  during  his  residence  at  Babylon,  and 
suggests  the  probability  that  Arnmaic  tradi- 
tions were  still  current  respecting  Balaam  at 
the  Christian  era,  and  on  the  banks  of  the 
Euphrates.  Philo,  writing  at  a slightly  earlier 
date  in  Egypt,  describes  Balaam  as  an  adept  in 
every  branch  of  soothsaying,  who  attained  wide 
renown  by  his  successful  predictions  of  natural 
phenomena,  such  as  drought,  inundations, 
pestilence,  &c.  ‘De  Vita  Mosis,’  i.  Other 
widely  spread  traditions  identify  him  with 
Lokman,  whose  fables  are  a familiar  portion 
of  Arabic  literature,  the  iEsop  of  the  East, 
and  by  some  regarded  as  identical  with  ^sop 
himself.  Lokman  (cf.  Koran,  xxxi.),  whose 
name,  like  Balaam’s,  means  “devourer,”  is 
described  in  Arabic  writers  as  the  son  of 
Ba’iira,  i.e.  Beor.  The  Hebrew  book  of 
Henoch  states  that  Balaam  was  called  in 
Arabic  Loknin,  possibly  a misreading  for 
Lokman.  See'  especially  on  these  names,  the 
Introduction  to  Derenbourg’s  Edition  of 


Lokman’s  Fables,  §11.  ‘ De  la  personne  de 

Loqman’  (Asher,  Berlin  and  London,  1850). 

The  names  Balaam,  Beor,  Lokman  are  such 
as  would  be  given  by  popular  dread  to  wizards 
whose  curses  were  regarded  as  destructive;  a 
dread  which  it  would  be  the  interest  of  the 
magicians  themselves  to  encourage.  ‘ ‘ Balaam 
the  son  of  Beor  ” was  probably  of  a family  in 
which  the  mantic  art  was  hereditary. 

The  exact  situation  of  Pethor  is  uncertain. 
Balaam  came  “from  the  mountains  of  the  east” 
(xxiii.  7),  i.e.  from  Aram,  or  (Deut.  xxiii.  4) 
from  Mesopotamia;  and  Pethor  therefore  can- 
not be  placed  very  far  down  the  river.  It  was 
probably,  as  its  name  (derived  apparently 
from  “ins,  patbar,  signifying  “to  open”  or 
“reveal,”  and  used  of  the  interpretation  of 
dreams,  Gen.  xli.  8)  indicates,  a head-quarters 
of  the  oriental  Magi  (respecting  whom,  see  on 
Dan.  ii.  2,  St  Matt.  ii.  i),  who  were  wont 
to  congregate  in  particular  spots  (Strabo, 
XVI.  i).  Pethor  (LXX.  ^adovpa)  is  identified 
by  Knobel  with  ^adova-ac  (‘Zosim.’  iii,  14), 
a place  some  considerable  distance  south  of 
Circesium;  and  with  the  Bedavva  of  Ptolemy, 
V.  18.  6.  Both  these  names  Knobel  conjec- 
tures to  be  corruptions  of  Pethor,  and  identi- 
fies the  place  with  Jnab,  a name  in  the 
Arabic  of  similar  signification  with  Pethor  in 
Hebrew.  Anah  (“Anatha,”  ‘Ammian.  Mar- 
cell.’ xxiv.  I.  6),  is  described  in  Ritter,  ‘Erdk.’ 
xi.  716  sqq.,  and  appears  to  have  been  situated 
partly  on  one  side  of  the  river,  partly  on  the 
other,  and  partly  on  an  island  in  the  river,  in 
a fertile  and  well-protected  vale,  which  has 
certainly  for  ages  been  the  seat  of  a very 
ancient  heathen  cultus.  No  better  centre  could 
be  found  for  influencing  alike  the  Arabian 
tribes  on  the  east,  and  the  Aramaic  tribes  on 
the  west  bank  of  the  great  river. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

I,  13,  Balak' s sacrifice.  7,  Balaatn's 

parcible. 

AND  Balaam  said  unto  Balak, 
£\.  Build  me  here  seven  altars,  and 
prepare  me  here  seven  oxen  and  seven 
rams. 


2 And  Balak  did  as  Balaam  had 
spoken  ; and  Balak  and  Balaam  of- 
fered on  every  altar  a bullock  and  a 
ram. 

3 And  Balaam  said  unto  Balak, 
Stand  by  thy  burnt  offering,  and  I will 
go  : peradventure  the  Lord  will  come 


Chap.  XXIII.  1.  Build  me  here  senjen 
altars.,  &c.]  It  may  be  inferred  from  this  that 
Balaam,  after  the  general  custom  of  the  hea- 
then, had  been  wont  to  preface  his  divinations 
by  sacrifice.  Diodorus  notes  (il.  29),  that 
it  was  by  sacrifice  and  incantation  that  the 
Chaldeans  sought  to  avert  calamity  and  to  pro- 
duce prosperity.  In  the  number  of  the  altars 


regard  was  probably  had  to  the  number  of 
the  then  known  planets.  Yet  Balaam  evi- 
dently intended  his  sacrifice  as  an  offering  to 
the  true  God. 

3.  nvill  come  to  meet  me']  Balaam  appa- 
rently expected  to  mark  some  phenomenon  in 
the  sky  or  in  nature  below,  which  he  would  be 


740 


NUMBERS.  XXIIL 


[v.  4 — lo. 


to  meet  me  : and  whatsoever  he  shew- 

‘ Or,  eth  me  I v/ill  tell  thee.  And  " he 

he  went  1 • 1 1 

solitary.  Went  to  ail  high  place. 

4 And  God  met  Balaam  : and  he 
said  unto  him,  I have  prepared  seven 
altars,  and  I have  ofFered  upon  every 
altar  a bullock  and  a ram. 

5 And  the  Lord  put  a word  in 
Balaam’s  mouth,  and  said.  Return 
unto  Balak,  and  thus  thou  shalt  speak. 

6 And  he  returned  unto  him,  and, 
lo,  he  stood  by  his  burnt  sacrifice,  he, 
and  all  the  princes  of  Moab. 

7 And  he  took  up  his  parable,  and 
said,  Balak  the  king  of  Moab  hath 


brought  me  from  Aram,  out  of  the 
mountains  of  the  east,  sayings  Come, 
curse  me  Jacob,  and  come,  defy 
Israel. 

8 How  shall  I curse,  whom  God 
hath  not  cursed  ? or  how  shall  I defy, 
whom  the  Lord  hath  not  defied  ? 

9 For  from  the  top  of  the  rocks  I 
see  him,  and  from  the  hills  I behold 
him  : lo,  the  people  shall  dwell  alone, 
and  shall  not  be  reckoned  among  the 
nations. 

10  Who  can  count  the  dust 

Jacob,  and  the  number  of  the  fourth  my  soul, 
part  of  Israel?  Let  4ne  die  the 


able,  according  to  the  rules  of  his  art,  to  inter- 
pret as  a portent.  It  was  for  such  “auguries” 
(not  as  A.  V.  “enchantments”)  that  he  now 
departed  to  watch  ; cf.  xxiv.  i. 

an  high  place]  Heb.  s hep  hi.,  “a  bare  place 
on  the  hill,”  or  “a  scar;”  as  opposed  to  the 
bamah.^  the  high  place,  with  its  grove  of  trees. 

4.  God  met  Balaam]  God  (in  the  original 
“ Elohim,”  though  the  context  both  before  and 
after  has  “Jehovah;”  cf.  Introduction  to  Ge- 
nesis pp.  24,  25)  served  His  own  purposes 
through  the  arts  of  Balaam,  and  manifested  his 
will  through  the  agencies  employed  to  seek  it, 
dealing  thus  with  Balaam  in  an  exceptional 
manner.  For  to  God’s  own  people  auguries 
were  forbidden  (Lev.  xix.  26). 

I ha-ve  prepared  se-ven  altars]  The  sacrifices 
ofFered  are  alleged  by  Balaam  as  a ground  for 
looking  that  God  on  His  part  would  do  what 
was  expected  and  desired  by  the  donor.  The 
spirit  of  these  words  is  thoroughly  that  of  a 
heathen  worshipper  expecting  in  all  his  devo- 
tions his  “ quid  pro  quo:”  cf.  on  xxii.  15. 

Balaam’s  first  “Parable”  may  be  exhibited, 
somewhat  more  accurately  than  it  is  given  in 
the  A.  V.,  thus  : — 

•*  From  Aram  hath  Balak  brought  me. 

The  king  of  Moab  from  the  mountains  of 
the  east. 

Saying,  Come,  curse  me  Jacob, 

And  come,  menace  Israel. 

How  shall  I curse  whom  God  hath  not 
cursed  ? 

Or  how  shall  I menace  whom  God  hath  not 
menaced  ? 

For  from  the  top  of  the  rocks  I see  him. 
And  from  the  hills  I behold  him  : 

Lo,  it  is  a people  that  dwelleth  alone, 

And  that  is  not  reckoned  among  the  nations. 
Wlio  can  count  the  dust  of  Jacob,' 

And  the  number  of  tiie  offspring  of  Israel  r 
Let  me  die  the  deatli  of  the  righteous, 

And  be  my  last  estate  like  his  ! ” 


7.  Aram]  This  term,  wTich  signifies  simply 
“highland,”  denotes  the  whole  elevated  re- 
gion, from  the  north-eastern  frontier  of  Pales- 
tine to  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris.  The 
country  between  these  streams  was  specially 
designated  “ Aram-naharaim,”  or  “Aram  of 
the  tv^o  rivf'rs;”  the  Greeks  called  it  Mesopo- 
tamia ; and  here,  according  to  Deut.  xxiii.  4, 
was  Balaam’s  home.  Cf.  on  xxii.  5. 

9.  For  fro77i  the  top  of  the  rocks,  &c.] 
The  “for”  indicates  the  constraint  under 
which  Balaam  felt  himself.  He  had  been  met 
by  God  in  his  own  way ; from  the  cliff  he 
had  watched  for  the  expected  augury  ; and  by 
the  light  of  this  he  here  interprets,  according 
to  the  rules  of  his  art,  the  destiny  of  Israel. 
His  first  parables  are,  however,  not  strictly 
predictions ; nor  is  it  till  he  abandons  his 
auguries  (xxiv.  i),  and  has  the  future  revealed 
to  him  in  inward  vision  from  God  (ib.  4), 
that  he  rises  into  the  foreteller  of  that  which 
should  yet  come  to  pass. 

dnvell  alone]  i.  e.  apart  from  others,  undis- 
turbed by  their  tumults,  and  therefore  in  safety 
and  just  security.  Cf.  the  same  idea  in  the 
blessing  of  MosL,  Deut.  xxxiii.  28,  “Israel 
then  shall  dwell  in  safety  alone ; ” also  in  Jer. 
xlix.  31,  Micah  vii.  14,  and  perhaps  also  in 
Ps.  iv.  8.  This  tranquillity  was  realized  by 
the  Israelites  so  long  as  they  clave  to  God  as 
their  shelter  and  protection.  But  the  inward 
“dwelling  alone”  was  the  indispensable  condi- 
tion of  the  outward  “dwelling  alone,”  and  so 
soon  as  the  influence  of  the  heathen  world 
affected  Israel  internally,  the  external  power 
of  heathenism  prevailed  also  (Hengstenberg). 
Balaam  himself,  when  he  eventually  counselled 
the  attempt  to  tempt  the  people  into  sin,  acted 
upon  the  knowledge  that  God’s  blessing  and 
Israel's  prosperity  depended  essentially  on 
faithfulness  to  God. 

10.  the  fourth  part  of  Israel]  /.  e.  even 
each  one  of  the  four  camps  into  which  the 


NUMBERS.  XXIII. 


741 


V.  II 2 1.] 

death  of  the  righteous,  and  let  my 
last  end  be  like  his ! 

1 1 And  Balak  said  unto  Balaam, 
What  hast  thou  done  unto  me?  I 
took  thee  to  curse  mine  enemies, 
and,  behold,  thou  hast  blessed  thein 
altogether. 

12  And  he  answered  and  said. 
Must  I not  take  heed  to  speak  that 
which  the  Lord  hath  put  in  my 
mouth  ? 

13  And  Balak  said  unto  him. 
Come,  I pray  thee,  with  me  unto 
another  place,  from  whence  thou 
mayest  see  them : thou  shalt  see  but 
the  utmost  part  of  them,  and  shalt 
not  see  them  all ; and  curse  me  them 
from  thence. 

14  f And  he  brought  him  into  the 
, field  of  Zophim,  to  the  top  of  "Pis- 

gah,  and  built  seven  altars,  and  offer- 
ed a bullock  and  a ram  on  every 
altar. 

15  And  he  said  unto  Balak,  Stand 


here  by  thy  burnt  offering,  while  I 
meet  the  Lord  yonder. 

16  And  the  Lord  met  Balaam, 

and  ^put  a word  in  his  mouth,  and chap- 2 
said.  Go  again  unto  Balak,  and  say 
thus. 

17  And  v/hen  he  came  to  him,  be- 
hold, he  stood  by  his  burnt  offering, 
and  the  princes  of  Moab  with  him. 

And  Balak  said  unto  him.  What  hath 
the  Lord  spoken  ? 

18  And  he  took  up  his  parable, 
and  said,  Rise  up,  Balak,  and  hear; 
hearken  unto  me,  thou  son  of  Zippor : 

19  God  is  not  a man,  that  he 
should  lie;  neither  the  son  of  man, 
that  he  should  repent:  hath  he  said, 
and  shall  he  not  do  it?  or  hath  he 
spoken,  and  shall  he  not  make  it 
good  ? 

20  Behold,  I have  received  com- 
mandmcnt  to  bless  : and  he  hath  bless- 
ed ; and  I cannot  reverse  it. 

21  He  hath  not  beheld  iniquity  in 


host  of  Israel  was  divided  (see  ch.  ii.),  seemed 
to  swarm  with  innumerable  multitudes.  Pos- 
sibly Balaam  could  only  see  one  camp.  On  the 
rendering  see  note  at  end  of  the  chapter.  Balaam 
bears  testimony  in  this  verse  to  the  fulfilment 
of  the  promises  Gen.  xiii.  16,  xxviii.  14,  and 
that  in  terms  borrowed  from  the  promises 
themselves. 

the  righteous']  i.e.  not  Israel,  whose  “death” 
could  not  suitably  be  spoken  of,  but  “the 
righteous”  ancestors  of  Israel,  who  “died  in 
faith,  not  having  received  the  promises,  but 
having  seen  them  afar  off,”  Heb.  xi.  13.  With 
their  histories  Balaam  was  doubtless  familiar 
(see  last  note),  particularly  with  that  of 
Abraham,  “the  righteous  man”  whom  God 
had  “ raised  up  from  the  east  and  called  to  his 
foot”  (Is.  xli.  2). 

let  7ny  last  end  be  like  his]  Render  rather 
“ last  estate,”  for  the  reference  is  not  so  much 
to  the  act  of  death,  as  to  all  that  followed 
upon  it — to  the  future,  in  which  the  name 
and  influence  of  the  deceased  person  would  be 
perpetuated.  The  change  from  the  plural  to 
the  singular  number,  as  in  this  verse,  is  fre- 
quent in  Hebrew  poetry. 

11—13.  The  cliff  fi-om  vrhich  Balaam  had 
watched  for  the  augury  (yv.  3)  had  proba- 
bly commanded  a wider  view  than  the  spot 
on  which  the  altars  had  been  built  (gu.  i,  cf. 
xxii.  41).  Balak  therefore  seems  to  hope  that 
the  prophet’s  words,  “ Who  can  'count  the 


dust  of  Jacob,”  reflected  the  impression  con- 
veyed by  the  scene  before  him  at  the  moment 
of  the  augury;  and  so  that  the  sight  of  a 
mere  few  straggling  Israelites  in  the  utmost 
part  of  the  camp  might  induce  a different 
estimate  of  their  resources  and  prospects. 

14.  the  Jield  of  Zophim]  Or  “ of  watchers.” 
It  lay  upon  the  top  of  Pisgah,  north  of  the 
former  station,  and  nearer  to  the  Israelitish 
camp ; the  greater  part  of  which  was,  however 
probably  concealed  from  it  by  an  intervening 
spur  of  the  hill.  Beyond  the  camp  Balaam’s 
eye  would  pass  on  to  the  bed  of  the  Jordan. 
It  was  perhaps  a lion  cccning  up  in  his  strength 
from  the  swelling  of  that  stream  (cf.  Jer.  xlix. 
19)  that  furnished  him  with  the  augury  he 
awaited,  and  so  dictated  the  final  similitude  of 
his  next  parable. 

20.  I ha’ve  I'ecehaed  commandment  to  bless] 
Literally,  “ I have  received  to  bless.”  The 
reason  of  his  blessing  lay  in  the  augury  which 
he  acknowledged,  and  in  the  divine  overruling 
impulse  v.Lich  he  could  not  resist,  not  in  any 
“commandment”  in  words. 

21 — 23.  These  verses  may  be  better  ren- 
dered as  follows: — • 

“ No. iniquity  can  one  descry  in  Jacob, 

And  no  distress  can  one  see  in  Isivael : 

The  Lord  his  God  is  with  him, 

And  the  shout  of  a king  is  in  his  midst. 

God  brought  them  forth  out  of  Egypt : his 
strength  is  like  that  of  a wild  bull. 


742 


NUMBERS.  XXIII. 


[v.  2 2 — 27. 


Jacob,  neither  hath  he  seen  perverse- 
ness in  Israel:  'the  Lord  his  God  is 
with  him,  and  the  shout  of  a king  is 
among  them. 

chap.  24.  22  “^God  brought  them  out  of 

Egypt ; he  hath  as  it  were  the 
strength  of  an  unicorn. 

23  Surely  thei'e  is  no  enchantment 
sor, /«.  “against  Jacob,  neither  is  there  any 

divination  ao;ainst  Israel : accordino- 
to  this  time  it  shall  be  said  of  Ja- 
cob and  of  Israel,  What  hath  God 
wrought ! 

24  Behold,  the  people  shall  rise  up 
as  a great  lion,  and  lift  up  himself  as 


a young  lion : he  shall  not  lie  down 
until  he  eat  of  the  prey,  and  drink 
the  blood  of  the  slain. 

25  ^ And  Balak  said  unto  Balaam, 
Neither  curse  them  at  all,  nor  bless 
them  at  all. 

26  But  Balaam  answered  and  said 
unto  Balak,  Told  not  I thee,  saying. 
All  that  the  Lord  speaketh,  that  I 
must  do? 

27  And  Balak  said  unto  Balaam, 
Come,  I pray  thee,  I will  bring  thee 
unto  another  place ; peradventure  it 
will  please  God  that  thou  mayest 
curse  me  them  from  thence. 


Verily  there  is  no  augury  against  Jacob, 

And  no  soothsayer’s  token  against  Israel : 

In  due  time  shall  it  be  told  to  Jacob  and 
Israel  what  God  doeth! 

21.  The  words  which  the  A . V.  here  renders 
“iniquity”  and  “perverseness”  are  found 
together  again  Ps.  x.  7,  xc.  10,  and  elsewhere; 
and  import  wickedness  together  with  that  tri- 
bulation which  is  its  proper  result. 

the  shout\  The  word  is  used,  Lev.  xxiii.  24, 
to  describe  the  sound  of  the  silver  trumpets. 
The  “shout  of  a king”  will  then  refer  to  the 
jubilant  sounds  by  which  the  presence  of  the 
Lord  as  their  king  amongst  them  was  cele- 
brated by  Israel. 

22.  Cod']  The  name  of  God  with  which 
this  verse  begins,  and  which  recurs  at  the  close 
of  'V.  23,  is  not  the  ordinai'y  Elobim^  but  El^ 
which  implies  more  particularly  His  might. 

an  unicor7i]  Render  rather,  a wild  bull,  and 
see  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

23.  enchantment  ...  di^inatio7{\  More 
strictly  “augury”  and  “ soothsayer’s  token ” 
( uVi/KT/xof  and /Lxavrei'a,  LXX.):  on  the  former 
word  cf.  'v.  3 ; the  latter  {Jieseni)  imports  any 
kind  of  omen  that  was  superstitiously  ob- 
served. “Soothsayer”  (kosem)  is  the  term 
applied  to  Balaam,  Josh.  xiii.  22. 

The  verse  intimates  that  the  seer  was  at  last, 
through  the  overruling  of  his  own  auguries, 
compelled  to  own  what,  had  he  not  been 
blinded  by  avarice  and  ambition,  he  would 
have  discerned  before — that  there  was  an  in- 
disjmtable  interference  of  God  on  Israel’s  be- 
half, against  which  all  arts  and  efibrts  of  man 
must  prove  vain.  'I'he  margin  gives  “ in”  for 
“ against”  after  I.XX.,  Targums,  &c.  The 
original  will  bear  either  rendering  ; and  the 
sense  suggested  by  margin  (i.e.  that  the  sooth- 
sayer’s art  was  not  practised  in  Israel)  would 
doubtless  be  strictly  true  (cf.  Lev.  xix.  26), 


though  perhaps  hardly  so  apt  from  the  mouth 
of  Balaam,  just  after  his  vain  attempt  to  em- 
ploy soothsaying  against  Israel,  as  that  of  our 
present  text. 

according  to  this  time  it  shall  be  said  of 
Jacob']  Rather  in  due  time  it  shall  be  told 
to  Jacob,  &c.  The  sense  that  God  will, 
through  His  own  divinely  appointed  means 
{e.g.  the  Urim  and  Thummim),  reveal  to 
Israel,  as  occasion  may  require.  His  will  and 
purposes. 

24.  as  a great  lion]  See  on  •u.  14. 

28.  the  top  of  Peor]  Its  position,  north- 
ward from  Pisgah,  along  the  Abarim  heights, 
is  approximately  determined  by  the  extant 
notices  of  Beth-peor.  This  village  adjoined 
the  “ravine”  (Heb.  gai)^  which  is  (Deut.  hi. 
29,  iv.  46)  connected  with  the  Israelite  encamp- 
ment, and  (Deut.  xxxiv.  6)  with  the  burial- 
place  of  Moses.  The  place  retained  its  name, 
and  is  described  by  Eusebius  as  six  miles  from 
Livias  {i.e.  Bethram,  see  on  xxii.  i),  on  the 
ascent  towards  Heshbon.  The  ravine  of  Beth- 
peor  was  consequently  that  which  runs  down 
from  near  Heshbon  eastward  past  Beth-ram ; 
especially,  perhaps,  its  northern  tributary 
branch.  This  is  a rough  and  narrow  dell, 
watered  at  its  bottom  by  an  abundant  spring 
that  gushes  from  beneath  the  enclosing  rocks, 
and  is  overshadowed  by  the  gnarled  and  twisted 
boughs  of  some  of  the  largest  terebinths  that 
the  Holy  Land  contains  (Tristram,  ‘Land  of 
Israel,’  p.  542).  A hermit’s  cave — perhaps 
originally  sepulchral — may  be  seen  in  one  side 
of  the  ravine : at  its  upper  extremity  are  the 
ruins  of  a town  which  most  travellers  designate 
as  Na’ur;  Eli  Smith,  as  Ta’ur.  The  Arabic 
form  of  Peor  would  be  Fa’ur;  and  the  other 
names  may  possibly  be  but  corruptions  of  this. 

Jeshimon]  Or  the  waste,  in  the  great 
valley  below,  where  stood  Beth-jesimoth,  “ the 
house  of*  the  wastes.”  See  on  xxii.  i. 


V.  28 — 4-] 


NUMBERS.  XXIV. 


743 


28  And  Balak  brought  Balaam 
unto  the  top  of  Peor,  that  looketh 
toward  Jeshimon. 

29  And  Balaam  said  unto  Balak, 
Build  me  here  seven  altars,  and  pre- 


pare me  here  seven  bullocks  and 
seven  rams. 

30  And  Balak  did  as  Balaam  had 
said,  and  offered  a bullock  and  a ram 
on  every  altar. 


NOTES  on  Chap,  xxiii.  10,  22. 


10.  T/je  fourth  part  ofhrael'\  The  word 
is  perhaps  rather  to  be  rendered  “progeny,”  as 
Rashi,  Saad.,  Samar.,  Vulg.,  See.  The  LXX. 
has  dj]iJ.ovs,  which  probably  represents  a read- 
ing n^").  The  A.V.  has  the  support  of  On- 
kelos  and  the  Palestine  Targum.  The  sense 
thus  given,  though  adopted  by  Keil,  Bp. 
Wordsworth,  and  other  modern  commen- 
tators, savours  somewhat  of  that  proneness  to 
excessive  minuteness  which  marks  Jewish 
exegesis;  and  the  former  rendering  suits  better 
the  poetical  character  of  the  passage. 

22.  The  term  “unicorn”  was  adopted  by 
our  translators  from  LXX.,  which  renders  the 
Hebrew  by  fxouoKepcos-  It  is  obvious  how- 
ever from  Deut.  xxxiii.  17,  where  see  note, 
that  the  animal  in  question  was  two  horned,  for 
Moses  compares  the  house  of  Joseph  for  its 
warlike  strength  to  a and  the  twin  tribes 


of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  are  represented  by 
the  two  mighty  horns  of  the  beast.  The  DN"1 
must  not  be  confounded  with  the  “wild  ox  ” 
of  Deut.  xiv.  5,  or  the  “wild  bull”  of  Is.  li. 
20,  where  see  notes.  The  latter  is  the  oryx,  a 
species  of  antelope.  The  animal  named  by 
Balaam  in  the  text  as  an  apt  symbol  of  the 
strength  of  Israel  is  now  extinct,  and  is  the 
Bos  primigenius  of  naturalists,  the  Auerochs  of 
old  Germans,  the  Unis  of  Caesar,  who  gives 
a foiTnidable  account  of  its  size,  strength, 
speed,  and  ferocity,  ‘ De  Bello  Galileo,’  iv. 
29.  Accordingly  it  is  employed  to  figure  forth 
the  unsparing  fierceness  of  enemies,  Ps.  xxii. 
21 ; Is.  xxxiv.  7;  its  tall  horns  represent  exal- 
tation and  established  prosperity;  it  is  also 
spoken  of  Job  xxxix.  9 — 12  as  intractable  and 
untameable.  See  an  excellent  article,  Tristram, 

‘ Natural  History  of  the  Bible,’  pp.  146 — 150. 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 


I Balaam,  leaving  divinations,  prophesieth  the 
happiness  of  Israel.  10  Balak  in  anger  dis- 
misseth  him*  15  He  prophesieth  of  the  Star 
offacob,  and  the  destruction  of  some  nations. 


K 


ND  when  Balaam  saw  that  it 
pleased  the  Lord  to  bless  Is- 
“ chap.  23.  went  not,  as  at  other  " times, 

fjUeb.  t seek  for  enchantments,  but  he  set 
meeting  t^/his  face  toward  the  wilderness. 

2 And  Balaam  lifted  up  his  eyes, 


and  he  saw  Israel  abiding  in  his  tents 
according  to  their  tribes ; and  the 
spirit  of  God  came  upon  him. 

3 ‘^And  he  took  up  his  parable,  chap.  23, 
and  said,  Balaam  the  son  of  Beor  ^ ' 
hath  said,  and  the  man  ^ whose  eyes  ^ Heb. 

, . . , •'  'ioho  had 

are  open  hath  said  : /ds  eyes 

4 He  hath  said,  which  heard  the  nt^^opS. 
words  of  God,  which  saw  the  vision 

of  the  Almighty,  falling  intt?  a trance^ 
but  having  his  eyes  open : 


Chap.  XXIV.  1.  tonvard  the  <wilderness~\ 
i.  e.  to  the  plains  of  Moab,  where  Israel  was 
encamped.  The  verse  indicates  that  Balaam, 
in  despair  of  being  permitted  to  attain  his  own 
and  Balak’s  purpose  through  his  art,  no  longer 
looked  for  auguries;  but  simply  “lifted  up 
his  eyes,”  i.e.  gazed  over  the  camp  of  Israel 
that  stretched  before  him,  and  allowed  the 
spectacle  to  work  its  own  influence  upon  him. 

3.  qjuhose  eyes  are  open\  i.  e.  opened  in 
inward  vision,  to  discern  things  that  were 
hidden  from  ordinary  beholders. 

4.  falling  into  a trance,  but  ha-ving  his 
eyes  open']  On  the  “eyes  open,”  see  note  at 
end  of  the  chapter. 

The  “falling”  of  which  Balaam  speaks 


i 


was  (as  Vulg.  implies:  “qui  cadit,  et  sic 
aperiuntur  oculi”)  the  condition  under  which 
the  inward  opening  of  his  eyes  took  place. 
Balaam  had  (cf.  xxii.  8,  19)  sought  in  time 
past  to  learn  the  will  of  God  through  in- 
ward visions  as  well  as  by  “auguries.”  The 
“ falling”  is  not  that  of  one  awestruck  by  the 
surpassing  glory  revealed  to  him,  as  was  that  of 
Daniel  (viii.  17),  and  St  John  (Rev.  i.  17). 
Rather  does  it  indicate  the  force  of  the  Divine 
inspiration  overpowering  the  seer,  as  Saul 
(i  Sam.  xix.  24)  was  overpowered,  and  stripped 
off  his  clothes  before  Samuel,  and  “ fell  ” or 
“ lay  down  naked  all  that  day  and  all  that 
night.”  The  faithful  prophets  of  the  Lord  do 
not  appear  to  have  been  subject  to  these  vio- 
lent illapses.  In  Balaam  and  in  Saul  the  word 


744 


NUMBERS.  XXIV. 


[v-  5-13- 


5 How  goodly  are  thy  tents,  O Ja- 
cob, and  thy  tabernacles,  O Israel ! 

6 As  the  valleys  are  they  spread 
forth,  as  gardens  by  the  river’s  side, 
as  the  trees  of  lign  aloes  which  the 
Lord  hath  planted,  and  as  cedar  trees 
beside  the  waters. 

7 He  shall  pour  the  water  out  of 
his  buckets,  and  his  seed  shall  be  in 
many  waters,  and  his  king  shall  be 
higher  than  Agag,  and  his  kingdom 
shall  be  exalted. 

<■  chap.  23.  8 God  brought  him  forth  out  of 

Egypt  ; he  hath  as  it  were  the 
strength  of  an  unicorn : he  shall  eat 
up  the  nations  his  enemies,  and  shall 
break  their  bones,  and  pierce  the7n 
through  with  his  arrows. 

^ Gen.  49.  ^ couched,  he  lay  down  as  a 


lion,  and  as  a great  lion : who  shall 
stir  him  up.?  Blessed  is  he  that  bless- 
eth  thee,  and  cursed  is  he  that  curseth 
thee. 

10  fl  And  Balak’s  anger  was  kin- 
dled against  Balaam,  and  he  smote 
his  hands  together : and  Balak  said 
unto  Balaam,  I called  thee  to  curse 
mine  enemies,  and,  behold,  thou  hast 
altogether  blessed  them  these  three 
times. 

1 1 Therefore  now  flee  thou  to  thy 
place : I thought  to  promote  thee 
unto  great  honour ; but,  lo,  the  Lord 
hath  kept  thee  back  from  honour. 

12  And  Balaam  said  unto  Balak, 
Spake  I not  also  to  thy  messengers 
which  thou  sentest  unto  me,  saying, 

13  If  Balak  would  give  me  his 


of  God  could  only  prevail  by  first  subduing 
the  alien  will,  and  overpowering  the  bodily 
energies  which  the  will  ordinarily  directs. 

6.  as  the  I'alleys]  or  brooks;  with  re- 
ference possibly  to  the  four  parallel  brooks, 
running  westward  into  the  Jordan,  over  which 
the  camp  of  Israel  stretched,  and  by  which 
the  dispositions  of  its  various  parts  must  have 
been  to  some  extent  determined  (see  on 
xxii.  i). 

as  gardens  by  the  ringer  s side']  Balaam’s 
language  here  rellects  rather  the  famous  arti- 
ficial gardens  along  the  banks  of  his  own 
river,  the  Euphrates,  than  the  landscape  ac- 
tually before  him. 

as  the  trees  of  lign  aloes  <^vhich  the  Lord 
hath  pla7ited]  I'he  latter  words  contain  an  ap- 
parent reference  to  Paradise  (cf.  Gen.  ii.  8). 
'I'he  aloe,  imported  from  China  and  the  far 
distant  east,  furnished  to  the  ancients  one  of 
the  most  fragrant  and  precious  of  spices;  cf. 
Ps.  xlv.  8,  “All  thy  garments  smell  of  myrrh, 
aloes,  and  cassia;”  Prov.  vii.  17. 

as  cedar  trees  besides  the  cjjaters]  i.e.  as  the 
noblest  of  trees  branching  forth  in  the  fairest 
of  situations  : an  image  of  majestic  beauty,  as 
that  of  the  last  verse  was  of  rare  fecundity. 

7.  He  shall  pour  the  n.vater]  Rather  lie 
skall  stream  with  water. 

out  of  his  buckets]  Lit.  “from  his  two  buck- 
ets.” iialaiim’s  native  soil  was  ordinarily  irri- 
gated by  water  fetched  from  the  neighbouring 
Euphrates,  and  carried  in  buckets  suspended 
from  the  two  ends  of  a pole.  Winter  in  the 
East  is  the  first  essential  of  all  fertility.  Thus 
the  metaplior  would  import  that  Israel  should 
have  his  own  exuberant  and  unfailing  channels 
of  blessing  and  plenty.  But  the  prep,  may 


in  this  phrase,  as  in  the  latter  half  of  the  verse, 
be  the  sign  of  comparison;  and  the  passage 
would  thus  signify:  “ He  shall  flow  with  wa- 
ter more  plentifully  than  his  buckets:”  i.e.  Is- 
rael himself,  abundantly  fertilized,  shall  abound 
to  others  even  beyond  what  himself  has  re- 
ceived. The  words  would  thus  be  predictive 
of  the  future  benefits  which,  through  the  means 
of  Israel,  were  to  accrue  to  the  rest  of  the 
world. 

m inany  <rMaters]  i.e.  enjoy  the  benefit  of 
various  and  copious  waters.  Cf.  Jer.  x.  13. 

Hgag]  The  name,  apparently  hereditary  (cf, 
I S.  XV.)  to  the  ch.eftains  of  Amalek,  means 
“ high”  (cf.  the  English  “ Hugh”)  or,  as  Ara- 
bic analogy  suggests,  “ fiery.”  It  was  proba- 
bly of  the  royal  race  of  the  A gags  that  Ha- 
man,  “the  Agagite,”  (Esth.  iii.  i),  the  bitter 
enemy  of  the  jews  in  later  times,  was  descend- 
ed. The  words  point  to  the  Amalekite  king- 
dom as  highly  prosperous  and  powerful  at  the 
time  (cf.  u).  20) ; but  as  to  be  far  excelled  by 
the  future  glories  of  Israel.  The  Amalekites 
never  in  fact  recovered  their  crushing  defeat  by 
Saul,  I S.  XV.  2 sqq.,  though  they  appear  again 
as  foes  to  Israel  in  the  reign  of  David,  i S. 
xxvii.  and  xxx.  The  remnant  of  them  was  de- 
stroyed in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  i Chron.  iv. 
43- 

8.  The  earlier  part  of  this  verse  is  repeated 
from  xxiii'.  22;  but  is  followed  up,  as  in  ns,  7, 
by  words  of  prediction  which  are  wanting  in 
the  earlier  parable. 

his  enemies]  Literally,  and  here  more  ap- 
propriately, “those  that  beset  him  round.” 

break  their  bones]  Rather  (as  LXX.  and 
older  interpreters)  “suck  their  bones;”  i.e. 
empty  tht'm  of  their  marrow. 

11.  flee  thou]  Rather,  haste  thou;  cf. 


V.  14— 18.] 


NUMBERS.  XXIV. 


745 


house  full  of  silver  and  gold,  I cannot 
go  beyond  the  ’ commandment  of  the 
Lord,  to  do  either  good  or  bad  of 
mine  own  mind ; but  what  the  Lord 
saith,  that  will  I speak  ? 

14  And  now,  behold,  I go  unto 
my  people : come  therefore^  and  I will 
advertise  thee  what  this  people  shall 
do  to  thy  people  in  the  latter  days. 

15  ^ And  he  took  up  his  parable, 
and  said,  Balaam  the  son  of  Beor 
hath  said,  and  the  man  whose  eyes 
are  open  hath  said: 


16  He  hath  said,  which  heard  the 
wo^ds  of  God,  and  knew  the  know- 
ledge of  the  most  High,  which  saw 
the  vision  of  the  Almighty,  falling 
into  a trance^  but  having  his  eyes  open : 

17  I shall  see  him,  but  not  now: 
I shall  behold  him,  but  not  nio-h : 
there  shall  come  a Star  out  of  Jacob, 
and  a Sceptre  shall  rise  out  of  Israel, 
and  shall  "smite  the  corners  of  Moab, 
and  destroy  all  the  children  of  Sheth. 

18  And  Edom  shall  be  a posses- 
sion,  Seir  also  shall  be  a possession 


for  the  word  Gen.  xxvii.  43;  Cant.  viii.  14. 
No  threat  is  implied. 

14.  1 ’Will  ad'vertise  thee~\  Literally,  ac- 

cording to  the  Hebrew,  “I  will  advise  thee.” 
It  has  been  surmised,  especially  amongst  the 
Jewish  interpreters,  that  the  reference  is  to 
“the  counsel  of  Balaam”  alluded  to  xxxi.  16. 
The  V ulg.  actually  alters  the  text  to  this  sense, 
“ dabo  consilium  quid  populus  tuus  populo 
huic  faciat.”  Some  have  supposed  that  the 
particulars  of  this  advice  have  dropped  out  of 
the  succeeding  context,  or  been  purposely  with- 
held as  communicated  to  Balak  in  secret.  The 
A.V.  is  however  most  probably  right;  the 
word  “advise”  is  here  equivalent  to  “ad- 
vertise,” and  refers  to  the  ensuing  pro- 
phecy. 

16.  and  knew  the  knowledge  of  the  most 
High^  With  the  addition  of  these  words,  which 
point  to  the  greater  importance  and  the  more 
distinctly  predictive  character  of  what  follows, 
the  introduction  to  this  last  parable  is  the  same 
as  that  to  the  preceding  one. 

17.  I shall  see  him^  but  not  now,  &c.]  Bet- 
ter, I see  him,  though  he  he  not  now:  I 
behold  him,  though  he  be  not  nigh.  The 
tenses  are  as  in  xxiii.  9.  Balaam  there  spoke  of 
what  he  saw  in  fact  with  the  bodily  eye;  here 
he  describes  what  is  actually  before  him  in  in- 
ward vision. 

him~\  i.  e.  the  prince,  represented  in  the  suc- 
ceeding words  by  the  star  and  sceptre.  On 
these  the  prophetic  gaze  of  Balaam  is  fixed, 
not  on  the  people  encamped  on  the  plain  be- 
neath him.  The  use  of  the  pronoun  to  stand 
for  a person  not  yet  named  is  common  in  Ori- 
ental, especially  Arabic,  poetry. 

a Star]  The  star  has  amongst  all  nations 
served  as  a symbol  of  regal  power  and  splen- 
dour: cf.  Virgil,  ‘Eel.’  ix.  47,  Ecce  Dionsei 
processit  CjEsaris  astrum;  Hor.  ‘ Od.’  I.  xii. 
47,  Micat  inter  omnes  Julium  sidus.  The 
birth  and  future  glory  of  great  monarchs  were 
believed  by  the  ancients  to  be  heralded  by  the 


appearance  of  stars  or  comets:  e.g.  those  of 
Mithr dates  in  Justin,  ‘Hist.’  xxxvii.  2;  of 
Alexander  the  Great;  Curtius,  ix.  6,  8;  cf. 
Suet.  ‘ Jul.  Coes.’  Lxxxviii.  and  the  line  of  Ai- 
schylus,  ‘ Agam.’  6,  Xafinpovs  dvvdaras,  epTrpf- 
TTovras  aldepi.  The  same  idea  recurs  in  Scrip- 
ture, Is.  xiv.  12;  Dan.  viii.  10;  Rev.  i.  16,  20, 
ii.  I,  ix.  I.  How  current  it  was  amongst  the 
Jews,  and  accepted  too  as  a well  understood 
emblem  of  the  Messiah  in  particular,  is  strik- 
ingly illustrated  by  the  fact  that  the  well- 
known  pretender  in  the  reign  of  Hadrian 
adopted  the  name  of  Bar-cochab,  i.  e.  son  of  a 
star. 

the  corners  of  Moab]  Literally,  ‘ ‘ the  two 
sides  of  Moab,”  i.e.  the  length  and  breadth  of 
the  land:  cf.  Jer.  xlviii.  45. 

destroy  all  the  children  of  Sheth]  Rather, 
“overthrow  the  sons  of  tumult,”  i.e.  the  war- 
riors of  Moab,  whose  valour  and  fierceness  is 
frequently  referred  to  elsewhere  (cf.  Ex.  xv.  15  ; 
Is.  XV.  4,  xvi.  6,  &c.).  The  word  sheth  is 
connected  with  the  word  shaon  used  in  the  pa- 
rallel passage,  Jer.  xlviii.  45;  and  the  phrase 
Une  shaon  is  there  rightly  translated  “tumul- 
tuous ones,”  or  more  literally  in  marg.,  “chil- 
dren of  noise.”  (So  Gesen.,  Keil,  P'urst,  Mau- 
rer, Reinke,  &c.)  The  A.V.  has  followed 
the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  and  the  ancient  Versions 
generally  in  taking  the  word  sheth  here  as  a 
proper  name ; and  so  too  one  or  two  mo- 
dern scholars,  e.g.  Winzer,  who  conjectures 
that  it  is  the  name  of  a Moabitish  king.  Jew- 
ish authorities  (Onk.,  Rashi,  &c.)  refer  the 
word  to  Seth  the  son  of  Adam,  and  regard  the 
phrase  “sons  of  Sheth”  as  equivalent  to  “all 
mankind.”  Thus  the  passage  would  import 
that  “he,”  i.e.  the  ruler  that  should  arise  out 
of  Israel,  “should  rule  all  mankind.”  The 
verb  however  will  not  bear  the  sense  “rule;” 
and  on  the  whole  the  passage  of  Jeremiah,  so 
manifestly  borrowed  from  this,  seems  decisive 
as  to  its  import. 

18.  ■S't’/r]  The  older  name  of  the  mountain- 

land,  south  of  Moab,  and  east  of  the  Arabah, 
which  the  Ldomites  inhabited,  Gen.  xxxvi.  8 ; 


746 


NUMBERS.  XXIV. 


[v.  19. 

for  his  enemies;  and  Israel  shall  do  19  Out  of  Jacob  shall  come  he 
valiantly.  . that  shall  have  dominion,  and  shall 


Deut.  ii.  I,  &c.  The  southern  portion  of  it  is 
still  called  esh-Sherah,  perhaps  a corruption  of 
the  older  name. 

19.  ha^ve  dominion^  i.e.  acquire,  exercise, 
and  keep  dominion. 

destroy  him  that  remaineth  of  the  city]  i.  e. 
shall  destroy  those  of  every  city  that  had  pre- 
viously escaped.  The  phrase  is  peculiar  to 
this  place.  It  tersely  describes  a conqueror 
who  first  defeats  his  enemies  in  battle,  and  then 
hunts  out  the  fugitives  till  he  has  cut  off  all 
of  every  place.  (Cf.  i K.  xi.  16.) 

With  this  verse  ends  the  first  “parable”  of 
Balaam’s  last  prophetical  utterance.  It  fulfils 
the  Prophet’s  promise  in  •u.  14  to  foretell  to 
Balak  what  should  befall  his  people  at  the 
hands  of  Israel;  and  adds  also,  *1;.  18,  that 
Edom  should  share  the  fate  of  Moab.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  the  victories  of  David 
were  a partial  accomplishment  of  these  predic- 
tions, and  the  terms  in  wTich  they  are  men- 
tioned (cf.  2 S.  viii.  2,  13,  14,  reading  in  13 
“Edomites”  instead  of  “Syrians,”  see  note; 
I K.  xi.  15,  16;  Ps.  lx.  8)  seem  to  carry  on 
their  face  a reference  to  the  passage  before  us. 

It  is  however  no  less  clear  that  these  victo- 
ries do  not  exhaust  the  import  of  Balaam’s 
predictions.  For  he  emphatically  promises  to 
Israel  a complete  and  permanent  conquest  of 
Moab  and  Edom;  and  no  such  conquest  was 
achieved  by  David  or  any  of  his  successors. 
Indeed  in  the  days  of  the  Judges,  Eglon 
king  of  Moab  conquered  Jericho,  and  held 
the  southern  tribes  of  Israel  in  subjection  (see 
Judg.  iii.  12  sqq.,  and  notes);  Ehud  delivered 
his  own  land  from  the  Moabites ; but  we  do 
not  read  of  his  conquering  them  in  theirs, 
flence  Saul  again  found  the  Moabites  in  hos- 
tility I S.  xiv.  47  ; David  effected  for  a time  a 
complete  subjugation  of  Moab;  but  the  yoke 
would  seem  to  have  been  thrown  off  again  at 
the  disruption.  The  Moabite  stone  informs 
us  that  they  were  again  subdued  by  Omri, 
and  oppressed  by  him  and  his  successors  for 
40  years.  It  records  also  the  success  of  the 
revolt  of  Mesha,  alluded  to  2 K.  i.  i and  iii. 
4,  5.  Henceforth  the  Moabites,  though  de- 
feated by  Joram  (2  K.  iii.  21  sqq.),  suc- 
ceeded in  maintaining  their  independence,  and 
in  the  reign  of  Joash  appear  (2  K.  xiii.  20) 
even  to  have  waged  ofiensive  war  against  Israel. 
They  were  eventually  conquered  by  John  Hyr- 
canus,  R.c.  129,  and  merged  in  the  Jewish 
state.  So  too  the  lulomites  revolted  under  So- 
lomon (i  K.  xi.  i4.sq(i.);  and  under  Joram 
again,  and  more  successfully  (2  K.  viii.  2c); 
and  though  def-ated  by  Ama/iah  (2  K.  xiv. 
7)  and  by  U//,iah  (2  K.  xiv.  22),  were  never 
again  compleh-ly  subjugated.  Indcvd  in  the 


reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  17)  they  invaded 
Judah. 

Accordingly  we  find  in  the  prophets  the 
strain  of  Balaam  taken  up,  often  with  a manifest 
re-echo  of  his  very  words,  and  the  threats  of 
destruction  against  Moab  and ’Edom,  together 
with  the  promises  of  dominion  to  Jacob  over 
them  repeated,  centuries  of  course  after  the 
time  of  David:  cf.  as  to  Moab  Is.  xv.,  xvi.  i — 5, 
XXV.  10  sqq.;  Amos  ii.  i ; Zeph.  ii.  8 sqq.;  and 
as  to  Edom,  Is.  xxxiv.  5 sqq.,  Ixiii.  i — 6;  Jer. 
xlix.  7sqq, ; Lam.  iv.  21,  22;  Ezek.  xxv.  12 
sqq.;  Amos  ix.  ii,  12;  Obad.  17  sqq.  Both 
are  included  together  in  Is.  xi.  14,  a pro- 
phecy of  similar  import  as  to  these  two  peoples 
with  that  of  Balaam  in  the  text. 

It  is  further  apparent  that  Edom  and  Moab 
are  named  by  Balaam,  as  they  are  also  by  the 
prophets  (cf.  e.g.  Is.  xi.  14),  not  for  their  own 
sake  merely,  but  as  representatives  of  the 
heathen  nations  (goyeem^  cf.  xxiv.  8)  who 
were  hostile  to  the  Theocracy.  As  Jacob  then 
figures  as  a constant  type  of  the  kingdom  of 
Messiah  in  the  prophets,  so  too  do  Edom  and 
Moab  of  the  enemies  of  that  kingdom ; and  in 
the  threatened  ruin  of  Edom  and  Moab  is  in- 
dicated the  eventual  destruction  of  all  that  re- 
sist the  kingdom  of  God  in  its  power. 

The  adoption  of  the  name  of  Bar-cochab  by 
the  leader  of  the  last  rebellion  of  the  Jews  in 
the  reign  of  Hadrian  (cf.  on  2;.  17)  is  an  unde- 
niable proof  that  Balaam’s  magnificent  pro- 
mises were  regarded  by  the  Jews  themselves  at 
that  time  as  yet  awaiting  fulrilment,  though  the 
people  of  Moab  had  then  long  vanished  from 
the  theatre  of  history.  It  was  on  the  faith  of 
his  people  in  their  glorious  future,  as  sketched 
out  by  Balaam,  that  the  pretender  traded ; and 
their  disappointment,  when  their  hopes  were 
belied  by  his  defeat,  was  marked  by  their  alter- 
ing his  surname  to  Bar-coziba,  i.e.  “ Son  of 
Falsehood.” 

I'he  Star  and  Sceptre  of  the  prophecy  too, 
like  the  “Sceptre”  and  “Lawgiver”  of  Gen. 
xlix.  10,  point  naturally  rather  to  a line  of 
princes  than  to  an  individual;  or  rather  are 
emblems  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  generally. 
Thus  the  victories  of  David  and  his  successors, 
generation  after  generation  over  Edom  and 
Moab,  are  unquestionably  recurring  and  pro- 
gressive accomplishments  of  what  Balaam  fore- 
told; but  after  all  of  them  the  prophecy  yet 
reaches  fonvard  to  some  further  and  culmi- 
nating accomplishment;  and  that  too  in  “the 
latter  days,”  'v.  14,  the  ordinary  prophetic  de- 
signation for  the  time  of  the  Messiah  (cf.  Dan. 
X.  14). 

To  a Christian  the  connection  between  the 
star  and  sceptre  of  Balaam  and  the  star  of  the 
king  of  the  Jews,  which  the  wise  men  saw, 


V.  20,  21.] 


NUMBERS.  XXIV. 


747 


destroy  him  that  remaineth  of  the 
city. 

20  ^ And  when  he  looked  on 
Amalek,  he  took  up  his  parable,  and 


said,  Amalek  was  "the  first  of  the  na- 
tions;  but  his  latter  end  ^ shall  be  that  thenations 
he  perish  for  ever.  nl^rred 

2 1 And  he  looked  on  the  Kenites, 

Exod.  17.  8.  II  Or,  shall  be  eve7i  to  destruction. 


St  Matt.  ii.  a,  is  self-evident.  As  they  vs’-ere 
“wise  men  from  the  east,”  so  was  Balaam  also 
a “wise  man  from  the  east”  (cf.  xxiii.  7); 
and  the  tradition  that  they  were,  if  not  de- 
scendants, yet  fellow-countrymen,  of  Balaam, 
and  occupied  in  pursuits  kindred  to  his,  is 
probable  enough. 

Nor  is  it  any  valid  objection  to  urge  that 
Balaam  could  not  possibly  have  shared  in  the 
hopes  of  such  a kingdom  of  God,  dominant 
over  all  heathen  and  adverse  peoples,  as  is  seen 
here  to  be  implied  in  what  he  said.  The 
faithful  and  holy  prophets  of  God  themselves 
did  not  always  comprehend  the  full  bearings 
of  the  predictions  which  the  Spirit  of  God  de- 
livered through  them  (cf.  i St  Pet.  i.  ii).  In 
Balaam,  whose  mind  and  will  were  alien  from 
the  tenor  of  that  which  his  lips  spake,  this  was 
doubtless  far  more  decidedly  the  case.  The 
ti*ue  and  final  scope  of  his  words  must  be 
sought,  not  in  the  sense  he  would  himself  pro- 
bably have  assigned  to  them,  but  in  that  which 
was  beyond  question  permanently  associated 
with  them  by  God’s  people  from  that  time 
forward. 


20.  ^he7i  he  looked~\  i.e.  in  spirit,  as  he 
saw  the  star,  7;.  17. 

Amalek']  Cf.  Gen.  xxxvi.  l^  and  note. 

<iuas]  Rather  is.  The  copula  supplied 
should  be  in  the  present  tense. 

the  first  of  the  nations]  i.e.  pre-eminent 
amongst  the  neighbouring  nations : cf.  the  same 
expression  Amos  vi.  i.  Hence  the  force  of 
the  words,  n).  7,  “ higher  than  Agag,”  i.e.  than 
the  king  of  this  powerful  nation.  This  rank, 
due  to  the  warlike  prowess  of  the  tribe,  Ba- 
laam contrasts  with  its  approaching  downfall 
and  extinction.  The  Amalekites  attacked  Is- 
rael soon  after  their  passage  through  the  Red 
Sea,  Ex.  xvii.  8,  and  defeated  their  first  at- 
tempt at  an  invasion  of  Canaan,  Num.  xiv.  45. 
The  sense  given  by  the  margin,  “ first  amongst 
the  nations  that  warred  against  Israel,”  though 
supported  by  the  Targums  and  some  modern 
Commentators  {e-g.  Herxheimer,  Keil),  is 
forced,  and  fails  to  bring  out  the  antithes.s  on 
which  Balaam  lays  stress.  That  preferred  by 
Rosenm.,  Ewald,  Maurer,  &c.,  “ first  = most 
ancient  of  the  nations,”  is  contradicted  by  the 
genealogies  of  Genesis  xxxvi.  12,  according  to 
which  the  Amalekites  are  a branch  of  the 
Edomites. 

21.  the  Kenites]  First  mentioned,  Gen.  xv. 
19,  as  one  of  the  tribes  whose  territory  was 
promised  to  Abraham.  In  Judg.  i.  16,  where 


we  read  of  them  as  moving  with  the  children 
of  Judah,  to  establish  themselves  in  the  pas- 
tures south  of  Arad,  Moses’  father-in-law  is 
spoken  of  as  a Kenite;  cf.  Judg.  iv.  ii.  It 
appears  then,  since  Moses’  father-in-law  was  a 
prince  or  priest  of  Midian  (Exod.  ii.  17  sqq.), 
that  the  Kenites  must  have  been  of  Midianitish 
extraction,  and  so  descended  from  Abraham 
through  Keturah,  Gen.  xxv.  2. 

But  it  seems  unlikely  that  the  Kenites  of 
Gen.  XV.  19,  who  were  to  be  dispossessed  by 
the  descendants  of  Abraham,  are  identical  with 
those  of  whom  Balaam  speaks,  and  who  were, 
because  of  good  offices  rendered  at  the  time  of 
the  Exodus,  always  regarded  as  kinsmen  and 
friends  by  Israel  (cf.  i S.  xv.  6,  xxvii.  10). 
It  is  probable  rather  that  the  Kenites  of  Gen. 
XV.  19  were  a Canaanitish  people,  who  derived 
their  name  from  the  city  Kain,  which  fell 
eventually  within  the  borders  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah  (Josh.  xv.  27);  and  that  the  descend- 
ants of  Hobab,  who  appear  in  Judg.  i.  16  as 
making  war  in  this  very  district,  possessed 
themselves  of  this  city,  and  with  it  of  the 
name  Kenite  also.  This  they  would  seem  to 
have  already  done  when  Balaam  uttered  his 
prediction;  and  in  the  next  verse  it  is,  as  the 
margin  correctly  indicates,  not  of  the  Kenite, 
but  of  Kain  the  city,  that  he  speaks.  Nor  is 
it  surprising  to  find  them  in  possession  of  their 
new  abode  in  the  promised  land,  while  the 
Israelites  were  yet  in  their  tents.  It  may  well 
be  that  this  roving  band  of  Midianites  had 
already  entered  Canaan,  perhaps  along  the 
shores  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  by  routes  imprac- 
ticable for  the  huge  host  of  Israel,  and  had, 
as  a kind  of  advanced  guard,  made  beginning 
of  the  conquest  of  the  country. 

From  I Chr.  ii.  54,  -55,  we  learn  that  the 
Rechabites  were  a branch  of  the  Kenites ; and 
the  name  Salmaltes,  always  given  to  the  Ke- 
nites in  the  Targums,  connects  them  with  Sal- 
ma, the  son  of  Caleb,  there  mentioned.  Jer. 
XXXV.  shews  how  tenaciously,  for  many  cen- 
turies, they  held  fast  the  nomadic  habits  of 
their  race. 

Strong  is  thy  d-zueUing  place.,  and  thou  putt est 
thy  nest  in  a rock]  Render,  Strong  (or  firm) 
be  thy  dwelling-place,  and  put  thou 
thy  nest  in  the  rock  (or  cliff).  In  the 
Hebrew  there  is  h play  on  the  words  ken., 
“nest,”  and  Kain.,  the  name  of  the  Kenites’ 
abode.  This  nest  in  the  cliff  might  be  the 
city  of  Hazazon-tamar  or  Engedi,  if  that  be 
(as  is  likely)  the  “city  of  palm-trees,”  from 
which  they  went  subsequently  up,  Judg.  i.  16. 
But  there  is  another  site,  about  ten  miles  south 


748 


NUMBERS.  XXIV.  • 


[v.  2 2. 


and  took  up  his  parable,  and  said, 
Strong  is  thy  dwellingplace,  and  thou 
puttest  thy  nest  in  a rock. 


^ the  Kenite  shalpHeb. 

Kai7i, 


22  Nevertheless 

be  wasted,  “ until  Asshur  shall  carry 
tliee  away  captive. 

crQ  Ass/mr  carry  thee  away  captive  ? 


of  Engedi,  to  which  Balaam’s  words  would  be 
more  appropriate,  on  the  summit  of  the  cliff 
rising  perpendicularly  from  the  level  of  the 
western  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea,  where  was 
afterwards  built  the  city  of  Masada,  the  scene 
of  the  closing  tragedy  of  the  Jewish-Roman 
war.  It  is  not  likely  that  such  a natural  for- 
tress would  ever  have  been  unoccupied,  or 
even  excluded  from  a place  in  the  list  of  the 
cities  of  Judah,  Nor  is  there  any  site  in  the 
Holy  Land  which  a rude  but  warlike  people 
might  more  fittingly  designate  as  either  Ken, 
the  Nest,  or  Kain,  the  Possession. 

22.  Nevertheless  the  Kenite  shall  he  veasted^ 
&c.]  Render,  For  Kain  shall  surely  not 
he  destroyed  (lit.  “be  for  destruction”) 
until  Asshur,  &c. : cf.  note  at  end  of  chapter. 
The  words  are  not,  as  they  appear  in  A.  V.,  a 
prediction  of  evil  to  the  Kenites,  but  a pro- 
mise, on  the  contrary,  of  safety  to  be  long 
continued  to  them.  The  assurance  of  Moses 
to  Hobab,  “what  goodness  the  Lord  shall  do 
unto  us,  the  same  will  we  do  unto  thee”  (cf. 
X.  32),  is  in  substance  endorsed  by  Balaam. 
Another  and  later  pledge  of  Divine  favour 
was  granted  to  those  who  helped  to  conduct 
Israel  to  his  inheritance;  see  Jer.  xxxv.  19; 
and,  in  fact,  they  shared  the  fortune  of  God’s 
chosen  people  until  the  Captivity. 

23.  <^vhen  God  doeth  th}s~\  The  eventual 
carrying  away  of  the  allies  of  Israel  by  As- 
syria presented  itself  to  Balaam  as  the  ruin  of 
all  peace  and  safety  upon  earth.  His  thoughts 
were  fixed  on  the  fates  of  those  whom  he 
knew;  and  If  even  the  Kenites  might  not  be 
spared  in  the  end,  who  then  might?  One  pre- 
diction was  however  yet  wanting,  and  is  next 
given,  viz.  that  the  conquerors  of  the  Kenites 
should  fare  no  better  than  the  Kenites  them- 
selves. 

24.  Chittini]  i.e.  Cyprus,  the  nearest  of 
the  western  islands,  the  only  one  visible  from 
Palestine,  and  so  the  representative  to  Balaam 
and  to  Israel  of  all  those  unknown  western  re- 
gions across  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  from  which 
were  at  length  to  come  the  conquerors  of  the 
mighty  empires  of  the  East.  Cf.  Is,  xxiii.  i, 
12;  Jer.  ii.  10,  The  Vulgate  rendering  is  re- 
markable, “Venient  in  trieribus  de  Italia.”  In 
Dan.  xi.  30  however  Chittim  appears  to  be 
equivalent  to  Italy;  the  Targums  render  it  so 
several  times. 

Eber^  i.e.  not  as  Vulg.  and  LXX.,  “the 
Hebrews,”  but  generally  the  descendants  of 
Shem.  Of  these  Asshur  was  one  (cf.  Gen.  x. 


2T,  22),  and  is  here  specified  by  name,  since 
the  Assyrians  attained,  in  the  empires  of  Baby- 
lon and  Nineveh,  to  an  extraordinary  grandeur, 
and  were  destined  to  a most  signal  and  irre- 
trievable fall. 

he  also\  i.e.  the  conqueror  of  Asshur  and 
Eber  who  should  come  across  the  sea.  The 
pronoun  cannot  refer  to  Asshur  (as  Knobel), 
from  which  word  it  is  in  syntax  disconnected ; 
nor  yet  to  Eber,  whose  fate  has  been  already 
announced  along  with  that  of  Asshur.  To  the 
downfall  of  Asshur  and  of  Eber  there  is  ob- 
viously added  that  of  another,  and,  in  earthly 
might;  greater  empire;  but  as  the  historical 
events  which  unroll  themselves  before  the  Pro- 
phet’s spirit  become  more  distant  in  time,  they 
become  also  less  determinate  in  outline.-  It  is 
not  revealed  whence  the  blow  should  come 
that  should  overthrow  in  its  turn  the  power 
that  prevailed  over  the  great  monarchies  of  the 
East. 

It  is  evident  that  the  prophecy  now  before 
us  extends  its  view  far  beyond  the  latest  date 
that  has  ever  been  assigned  for  the  composition 
of  the  Pentateuch,  and  even  for  the  closing 
of  the  volume  of  the  Old  Testament.  The 
“ships  of  Chittim”  were  naturally  referred, 
in  the  days  of  the  Maccabees,  to  the  Mace- 
donian invasion  of  Asia  (cf.  i Macc.  i.  i, 
and  viii,  5);  nor  is  it  easy  to  see  how  any 
event  of  less  magnitude  can  adequately  inter- 
pret the  broad  prediction  of  affliction  to  As- 
shur and  Eber.  The  bearing  of  this  part  of 
the  prophecy  is  perhaps  adequately  represented 
in  the  well-known  “ ut  valesceret  Occidens,” 
i.e.  from  the  West  should  come  a power 
before  which  the  conquerors  of  the  East  should 
be  subdued.  But  beyond  this  we  have  a clear 
intimation  that  the  MTstem  Empire  itself, 
which  was  at  its  zenith  long  after  the  last  of 
the  Old  Testament  writers  had  lived  and 
died,  should  “perish  for  ever.”  It  is  not 
surprising  that  those  who  reject  all  actual 
prediction  of  future  events  should  have  pro- 
j)osed,  though  without  a shadow  of  proof,  to 
regard  w.  23,  24  as  a later  addition  to  the 
prophecy  of  Balaam, 

25.  returned  to  his  onvn  place']  Not  to  his 
own  land,  for  he  remained  amongst  the  Mi- 
dianites  to  plot  by  new  means  against  the  peo- 
ple of  God,  and  to  perish  in  his  sin  (xxxi.  8, 
16  (where  see  notes);  Rev.  ii.  14).  The 
phrase,  which  is  of  frequent  recurrenfe  (cf.  e.g. 
Gen.  xviii.  33,  xxxi.  55;  i S.  xxvi,  25;  2 S. 
xix.  39),  is  idiomatic,  meaning  merely  that 
Balaam  went  away  whither  he  would. 


NUMBERS.  XXIV.  XXV. 


749 


V.  23—2.] 


23  And  he  took  up  his  parable, 
and  said,  Alas,  who  shall  live  when 
God  doeth  this ! 

24  And  ships  shall  come  from  the 
coast  of  Chittim,  and  shall  afflict 


Asshur,  and  shall  afflict  Eber,  and  he 
also  shall  perish  for  ever. 

25  And  Balaam  rose  up,  and  went 
and  returned  to  his  place  : and  Balak 
also  went  his  way. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xxiv.  3,  and  22. 


3.  The  man  nvhose  eyes  ^juere  open']  Literally 
“the  man  opened  of  eye.”  The  expression  is 
further  explained  in  the  next  verse  “falling 
into  a trance,  but  having  his  eyes  open,”  where 
the  word  for  “open”  is,  however,  a different 
and  common  one. 

The  margin  gives  a different  rendering  to 
the  word  rendered  in  the  text  by  “open,” 
and,  referring  the  phrase  to  Balaam’s  past 
blindness  as  to  God’s  purpose,  renders  “who 
had  his  eyes  shut.”  Others,  adopting  the 
same  sense,  “shut,”  refer  the  term,  and  so  far 
more  correctly,  to  the  prophet’s  present  state. 
Balaam  would  thus  be  described  as  having  the 
outward  and  bodily  vision  closed  against  all 
external  things,  whilst  the  inner  sense  was,  on 
the  contrary,  ecstatically  active. 

The  word  is  very  rare.  The  only  other 
example  of  it  in  the  Bible  is  in  the  parallel 
phrase,  nj.  15.  Hence  the  doubt  about  its 
signification.  Gesen.  (‘  Thes.'  s.  v.)  prefers, 
though  not  very  decidedly,  the  sense  “closed.” 
So  Vulg.  (“obturatus”),  De  Wette,  Hupfeld, 
Keil,  Hengst.,  &c.  The  other  rendering, 
“unclosed,”  is  however  preferable;  and  is 
adopted  by  Jewish  authorities  generally;  by 
LXX.  opav)^  Saad.,  Maurer,  Fiirst, 

Wogue,  Knobel,  &c.  The  passage  of  the 
Mishna,  ‘Abod.  Sar.’  chap.  v.  (Surenhusius, 
‘ Mishna.’  IV.  pp.  385  sqq.)  seems  decisive. 
There  and  DHD  are  repeatedly  used  to- 

gether to  express  the  unstopping  and  closing 
again  of  a wine-jar. 

22.  Nenjertheless  the  Kenite  shall  he  nvasted^ 
until  Asshur  shall  carry  thee  away  captive] 
Marg.  “how  long  shall  it  be  ere  Asshur  carry 
thee  away  captive  ? ” 

Th'e  rendering  of  the  passage  depends  upon 


the  sense  assigned  to  the  particles  '3, 
translated  “nevertheless”  in  A.V.,  and  nO'i'y 
translated  by  “until.” 

To  the  former  two  particles  in  combination 
the  sense  of  “only”  is  assigned  in  this  verse 
by  Ewald,  ‘Ausf.  Lehr.’  p.  847,  as  in  Gen. 
xl.  14,  and  in  several  other  passages;  and  the 
sense  would  thus  be  “only  is  the  Kenite  for 
destruction  then  when,  &c.” 

But  it  is  probable  that  we  ought  in  this 
case  to  dissociate  the  particles,  as  is  in  effect 
done  in  the  Targums  of  Jerusalem  and  Pales- 
tine, and  by  Rashi,  and  give  to  each  its  own 
proper  force.  The  '3  will  thus  be  equivalent 
to  “for,”  and  the  have,  as  in  xiv.  23,  and 
often,  the  strong  negative  sense  which  it  bears 
in  oaths;  cf.  Ewald,  ‘Ausf.  Lehr.’  p.  846. 
So  substantially  Keil. 

Of  the  other  two  particles  HtD  is  ordinarily 
and  in  classical  Hebrew  interrogative ; and  the 
phrase  nfD"“iy  would  mean,  as  in  margin,  “how 
long?”  But  such  a sense,  though  retained  here 
by  some  commentators,  does  not  suit  the  con- 
struction; and  the  particle  HO  on  which  the 
question  turns  is  employed  by  Balaam,  xxiii.  % 
and  xxiii.  23,  in  a non-inten*ogative  sense.  In 
his  mouth  this  use  must  be  regarded  as  an 
Aramaism ; and  an  Aramaism  is  a token  of 
the  Hebrew  in  which  it  occurs  being  of  a very 
early  or  a very  late  date  (cf.  on  Gen.  xlix.  10). 
Examples  of  similar  uses  of  HD  in  Chaldee 
will  be  found  Dan.  ii.  22,  28,  iv.  32.  Thus 
the  phrase  will  mean  in  effect,  as  it 

is  correctly  rendered  by  A.  V.  “until.”  So 
as  regards  these  latter  two  particles  Keil ; and 
as  to  the  general  effect  of  the  passage  Knobel. 

Render  therefore  “for  Kain  shall  surely  not 
be  for  destruction  until  Asshur,  &c.” 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

1 Js7'ael  at  Shittim  commit  whoredom  and  idola- 
try. 6 Phinehas  killcth  Zitnri  and  Cozbi. 
10  God  thcrefo7'e  giveth  him  an  everlasting 
priesthood.  16  The  Midianites  are  to  be 
vexed. 


Shittim,  and  33* 

’ 49- 

commit 


to 


AND  Israel  abode  in  ^ 

£\_  the  people  began 
whoredom  with  the  daughters  of 
Moab. 

2 And  they  called  the  people  unto 


Chap.  XXV.  1.  Shittim]  An  abbreviation 
for  Abel-shittim;  see  on  xxii.  i. 

the  people  began  to  commit^  &c.]  The  re- 
cords of  the  neighbouring  cities  of  the  plain, 
and  the  circumstances  of  the  origin  of  Moab, 
Gen.  xix.  30  sqq.,  suggest  that  the  people 
VoL.  I. 


amongst  whom  Israel  was  now  thrown  were 
more  than  ordinarily  licentious. 

2.  And  they  called]  i.e.  “the  daughters 
of  Moab  called:”  the  verb,  and  the  ensuing 
“their,”  being  in  Hebrew  feminine. 

3B 


[v.  3—10. 


NUMBERS.  XXV. 


the  sacrifices  of  their  gods:  and  the 
people  did  eat,  and  bowed  down  to 
their  gods. 

3 And  Israel  joined  himself  unto 
Baal-peor:  and  the  anger  of  the 
Lord  was  kindled  against  Israel. 

4 And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
*Deut.  4.  ^Take  all  the  heads  of  the  people. 
Josh.  22.  and  hang  them  up  before  the  Lord 
"7-  against  the  sun,  that  the  fierce  anger 

of  the  Lord  may  be  turned  away 
from  Israel. 

5 And  Moses  said  unto  the  judges 
of  Israel,  Slay  ye  every  one  his  men 
that  were  joined  unto  Baal-peor. 

6 ^ And,  behold,  one  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  came  and  brought  unto 
his  brethren  a Midianitish  woman  in 
the  sighi  of  Moses,  and  in  the  sight 


of  all  the  congregation  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  who  were  weeping  before 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation. 

7 And  ^when  Phinehas,  the  son  of'^Ps.  los. 
Eleazar,  the  son  of  Aaron  the  priest,  fkac.  2. 
saw  A,  he  rose  up  from  among  the  54- 
congregation,  and  took  a javelin  in 

his  hand; 

8 And  he  went  after  the  man  of 
Israel  into  the  tent,  and  thrust  both 
of  them  through,  the  man  of  Israel, 
and  the  woman  through  her  belly. 

So  the  plague  was  stayed  from  the 
children  of  Israel. 

9 And  those  that  died  in  the^iCor.  la 
plague  were  twenty  and  four  thousand. 

10  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying. 


3.  joined  himself^  t.e.  by  taking  part  in 
the  sacrificial  meals  as  described  in  the  last 
verse,  Cf.  Exod.  xxxiv.  15;  i Cor.  x.  18. 
The  phrase  is  repeated,  5;  Ps.  cvi.  28.  The 
LXX.  and  Vulg.  render  “was  initiated;”  and 
correctly  as  to  the  effect  of  the  acts  described. 
The  worship  of  Baal  was  attended  with  the 
grossest  impurity,  indeed  partly  consisted  in 
it.  Cf.  Hos.  iv.  14,  ix.  10;  also  the  worship 
of  Mylitta,  Herod,  i.  187. 

Baal-peor']  i.  e.  the  Baal  worshipped  at  Peor, 
the  place  mentioned  xxiii,  28.  Hence  the  god 
him.self  is  styled  “Peor”  in  t8,  xxxi.  16; 
Josh.  xxii.  17;  and  the  ypot  “Beth-peor,” 
“ house  of  Peor,”  Deut.  iii.  29,  iv.  46.  Baal- 
peor  is  probably  to  be  identified  with  Che- 
mosh;  see  notes  on  xxi.  29,  and  xxxii.  37,  38. 

4.  Take  all  the  heads  of  the  people]  i.e.  as- 
semble the  chiefs  of  the  people  to  thee.  Cf. 
“ took  men,”  xvi.  i. 

hang  them]  i.e.  those  who  had  joined  them- 
selves to  Peor..  It  appears  from  the  command 
given  by  Moses  in  the  next  verse  that  the 
offenders  were  to  be  first  slain  by  the  hands  of 
“the  judges  of  Israel,”  and  afterwards  hung 
up  “against  the  sun”  (i.e.  publicly,  openly; 
cf.  2 Sam.  xii.  12)  as  an  aggravation  of  their 
punishment.  I'his  would  be  done  by  impaling 
the  body  or  fastening  it  to  a cross.  Cf.  Deut. 
xxi,  23,  note,  and  2 Sam.  xxi. 

5.  Slay  ye  e'very  one  his  meii]  The  judges 
were  each  to  kill  the  offenders  belonging  to  his 
own  jurisdiction. 

6.  a Midianitish  ivomari]  Lit.  “the  Mi- 
dianitish woman,”  the  particular  one  by  whom 
he  had  been  enticed.  From  -u.  15  it  appears 
that  she  was  the  daughter  of  Zur,  who  was  a 
“head  over  a people,  and  of  a chief  house  in 


Midian,”  and  is  mentioned  xxxi.  8 as  one  of 
the  five  kings  of  Midian  that  afterwards  pe- 
rished by  the  hands  of  the  Israelites.  Her  high 
rank  proves  that  Zimri  had  not  fallen  in  with 
her  by  mere  chance,  but  had  been  deliberately 
singled  out  by  the  Midianites  as  one  whom 
they  must  at  any  price  lead  astray.  The 
example  of  Zimri  is  doubtless  recorded  as  one 
of  the  most  memorable  and  characteristic  in 
itself,  as  well  as  because  it  gave  the  impulse  to 
the  act  of  Phinehas,  •u-u.  7,  8. 

nveeping  before  the  door  of  the  tabernacle] 
The  plague  (n).  9)  had  doubtless  already 
broken  out  among  the  people.  The  more  god- 
fearing had  already  assembled  at  the  door  of 
the  Tabernacle  of  God  (cf.  Joel  ii.  15 — 17)  to 
intercede  for  mercy,  when  Zimri  committed 
the  fresh  and  public  outrage  just  described. 

8.  into  the  tent]  Heb.  hakkuhhah:  the 
word  with  the  article  attached  to  it  has  passed 
through  the  Arabic  and  Spanish  into  our  lan- 
guage as  “ alcove.”  It  denotes  anything 
arched:  here,  the  inner  recess  in  the  tent,  fa- 
shioned archwise  (cf.  the  Latin  “ fomex,”  Juv. 
III.  156),  and  appropriated  as  the  sleeping- 
chamber  and  women’s  apartment. 

the  plague  was  stayed]  No  plague  had  as 
yet  been  mentioned;  but  it  appears  from  the, 
next  verse,  and  from  God’s  words  in  w ii, 
that  a divinely  sent  pestilence  was  raging  until 
the  wrath  of  God  was  appeased  by  the  act  of 
Phinehas.  The  term  “plague”  may  however 
be  understood  to  include  the  slaughter  wrought 
upon  the  offenders  by  “ the  judges,”  m.  5.  (Cf. 
for  such  sense  of  the  Flebrew  word,  i Sam. 
iv.  17 ; 2 Sam.  xvii.  9.) 

9.  twenty  and  four  thousand]  St  Paul 
(i  Cor.  X.  8)  says  “three  and  twenty  thou- 


V II— IS-] 


NUMBERS.  XXV. 


751 


^Ps.  106.  II  ^Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar, 
the  son  of  Aaron  the  priest,  hath 
turned  my  wrath  away  from  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  while  he  was  zealous 
for  my  sake  among  them,  that  I con- 
sumed not  the  children  of  Israel  in 
my  jealousy. 

/Ecdus.  12  Wherefore  say,  ^Behold,  I give 
fMac.  2.  unto  him  my  covenant  of  peace : 

13  And  he  shall  have  it,  and  his 
seed  after  him,  even  the  covenant  of 
an  everlasting  priesthood;  because  he 


sand,”  following  probably  the  Jewish  tradition 
which  deducted  one  thousand  as  the  number 
slain  by  the  hands  of  their  brethren. 

11.  hath  turned  my  ^rath  away'\  So  v. 
13  he  is  said  to  have  ‘ ‘ made  an  atonement  for 
the  children  of  Israel.”  The  signal  example 
thus  made  by  Phinehas  of  a leading  offender 
was  accepted  by  God  as  an  expiation  (lit.  in 
*1;.  13  “covering;”  see  on  the  typical  signifi- 
cance Lev.  i.  4),  and  the  exterminating  wrath 
which  had  gone  forth  against  the  whole 
people  was  arrested.  Cf.  the'  case  of  Achan, 
Josh.  vii.  and  Ps.  cvi.  30,  “ Then  stood  up 
Phinehas,  and  executed  judgment,  and  so  the 
plague  was  stayed.” 

The  act  of  Phinehas  must  be  regarded  as 
exceptional.  It  was  an  extraordinary  deed  of 
vengeance,  justified  by  the  singular  atrocity 
of  the  crime  which  provoked  it.  The  later 
Jews  rightly  appreciated  its  character,  though, 
whilst  guarding  the  application  of  a danger- 
ous precedent  by  minute  conditions,  they  lost 
the  spirit  of  it,  when  they  founded  on  it 
and  on  the  similar  act  of  Samuel  (i  Sam.  xv. 
33)  the  “jus  zelotyparum ;”  i.e.  the  right 
accorded  to  every  Jew  to  punish  summarily 
any  gross  and  flagrant  breach  of  Divine  law 
committed  in  his  presence.  Cf.  the  act  of 
Mattathias  (i  Macc.  ii.  24  sqq.)  in  slaying  a 
man  about  to  sacrifice  publicly  on  an  idola- 
trous altar,  and  the  praise  bestowed  upon  it 
v.  26,  “Thus  dealt  he  zealously  for  the  law 
of  God,  like  as  Phinees  did  unto  Zambri  the 
son  of  Salom.”  The  stoning  of  St  Stephen 
(Acts  vii.)  has  been  quoted  as  an  application 
of- the  “jus  zelotyparum.”  Our  Lord’s  ex- 
pulsion of  the  traffickers  from  the  Temple  is 
another,  characterized  however  by  abstinence 
from  all  violence  beyond  what  was  necessary  to 
vindicate  the  law. 

The  act  of  Phinehas  was  not  done  under 
the  commission  of  Moses  given  -v.  5.  Phinehas 
was  not  one  of  the  “chiefs”  or  “judges;” 
and  had  he  been  so,  could  only  have  been 
warranted  in  slaying  offenders  of  his  own 
tribe  of  Levi.  Nor  is  there  any  evidence,  un- 
less it  be  found  in  the  approval  of  the  deed 
afterwards,  that  he  was  bidden  by  extraordi- 


was zealous  for  his  God,  and  made  an 
atonement  for  the  children  of  Israel. 

14  Now  the  name  of  the  Israelite 
that  was  slain,  even  that  was  slain 
with  the  Midianitish  woman,  was 
Zimri,  the  son  of  Salu,  a prince  of  a 

^ chief  house  among  the  Simeonites.  t Heb. 

15  And  the  name  of  the  Midian-ySr?^"* 
itish  woman  that  was  slain^w^j  Coz- 

bi,  the  daughter  of  Zur;  he  was  head 
over  a people,  and  of  a chief  house  in 
Midian. 


nary  command  of  God  to  do  it.  It  was  its 
own  justification.  Its  merit  consisted  in  the 
evidence  it  gave  that  his  heart  was  right  before 
God.  He  was,  to  quote  the  text  of  -v.  ii 
ad  liter  am,  “ zealous  with  God’s  zeal,”  and 
abhorred  the  presumptuous  wickedness  of 
Zimri,  as  God  abhorred  it.  He  therefore 
risked  his  own  life  by  dealing  according  to 
their  deserts  with  two  influential  and  defiant 
evil  doers;  and  his  act,  done  in  the  face  of 
Moses  and  the  people,  and  for  them,  was  ac- 
cepted by  God  as  a national  atonement.  How 
thoroughly  the  nation  adopted  the  deed  is 
manifest  by  the  conspicuous  position  from 
henceforth  assigned  to  Phinehas  (cf.  xxxi.  6 ; 
Josh.  xxii.  13  sqq.),  and  by  the  fame  which 
attached  to  him  and  it  ever  afterwards.  On 
the  public  and  civil  aspects  of  the  subject  see 
Bp  Sanderson’s  Sermon  on  Ps.  cvi.  30,  ‘ Works,’ 
Oxford  Ed.,  II.  240  sqq.;  on  the  more  personal 
and  private,  Bp  Andrewes’  Sermon  on  the 
same  text,  Andrewes’  Sermons,  ‘ Lib.  of 
Anglo-Gath.  Theol.’  v.  223. 

12.  my  covenant  of  peace'\  Equivalent  to 
“ the  covenant  of  my  peace.”  God  establishes 
with  Phinehas  in  particular  that  covenant 
which  He  had  made  generally  with  all  his 
people ; and  among  its  blessings  peace  is  spe- 
cially mentioned,  because  of  the  peace  between 
God  and  the  congregation  which  Phinehas  had 
brought  about.  The  assurance  of  peace  with 
God  is  appropriately  bestowed  on  the  man 
who  had  regained  this  peace  for  others.  As  an 
additional  gift  there  is  assigned  to  him  and  his 
seed  for  ever  the  office  of  peace-making,  the 
legitimate  function  of  the  priesthood  (cf.  Eph. 
ii.  14);  and  the  covenant  was  thus  to  him  a 
covenant  not  only  of  peace  but  of  life  (cf. 
Mai.  ii.  5).  It  is  not  the  high-priesthood  that 
is  here  exclusively  intended:  to  this  Phinehas 
had  not  as  yet  succeeded,  for  his  father  Eleazar 
was  still  alive.  Yet  after  he  had  become  high- 
priest,  the  office,  with  a short  interruption 
from  the  days  of  Eli  to  those  of  David,  when 
for  unknown  reasons  it  was  filled  by  the  de- 
scendants of  his  uncle  Ithamar,  was  perpetuated 
in  the  line  of  Phinehas ; nor  indeed  is  it  known 
to  have  departed  from  that  line  again  until  the 

3 B 2 


2 


NUMBERS.  XXV.  XXVI.  [v.  16-5. 


16  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

• 31-  17  ^ Vex  the  Midianites,  and  smite 

them : 

18  For  they  vex  you  with  their 
wiles,  wherewith  they  have  beguiled 
you  in  the  matter  of  Peor,  and  in  the 
matter  of  Cozbi,  the  daughter  of  a 
prince  of^Midian,  their  sister,  which 
was  slain  in  the  day  of  the  plague  for 
Peor’s  sake. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


I The  su}?i  of  all  Israel  is  taken  in  the  plains  of 
A/oab.  5 2 The  law  of  dividing  a??iong  them 
the  inheritance  of  the  land.  57  The  families 
and  number  of  the  Levites.  63  None  were 
left  of  them  which  were  numbered  at  Sinai^ 
but  Caleb  and  Joshua, 


K 


N D it  came  to  pass  after  the 
plague,  that  the  Lord  spake 


unto  Moses  and  unto  Eleazar  the  son 
of  Aaron  the  priest,  saying, 

2 Take  the  sum  of  all  the  congre- 
gation of  the  children  of  Israel,  "^from 
twenty  years  old  and  upward,  through- 
out their  fathers’  house,  all  that  are 
able  to  go.  to  war  in  Israel. 

3 And  Moses  and  Eleazar  the 
priest  spake  with  them  in  the  plains 
of  Moab  by  Jordan  near  Jericho, 
saying, 

4 Take  the  sum  of  the  people.,  from 
twenty  years  old  and  upv/ard;  as  the 
Lord  “^commanded  Moses  and  the 
children  of  Israel,  which  went  forth 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt. 

5 ^ ^Reuben,  the  eldest  son  of  Is- 
rael : the  children  of  Reuben ; Hanoch, 
of  whom  cometh  the  family  of  the  Ha- 


chap. 

3- 


chap. 


^Gen.  46. 


Exod.  6. 


14. 


Chron.  5. 


typical  priesthood  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  was 
merged  in  the  actual  priesthood  of  the  Saviour 
of  mankind. 

17.  Vex  the  AUdianites~\  On  the  relations 
between  the  Midianites  and  the  Moabites,  cf. 
xxii.  2 and  note.  As  the  Israelites  are  to  “vex 
the  Midianites”  alone,  it  may  be  inferred  that 
though  the  licentious  rites  of  the  Moabites  had 
furnished  the  occasion,  yet  it  was  the  Midian- 
ites in  particular  that  had  been  the  active 
agents  in  corrupting  the  people.  Cf.  on  v.  i ; 
and,  for  the  execution  of  this  command, 
ch.  xxxi. 

Chap.  XXVI.  Census  in  the  Plains  of  Aloah. 

This  mustering  of  the  Tribes  was  imme- 
diately preparatory  to  the  war  against  Midian, 
and  to  the  invasion  of  Canaan  which  shortly 
followed.  With  a view  also  to  an  equitable 
allotment  of  the  land  to  be  conquered  (cf. 
nj.  54)  the  numbers  of  the  several  tribes  are 
taken  according  to  their  families. 

1.  after  the  plague']  These  words  serve  to 
show  approximately  the  date  at  which  the 
census  was  taken,  and  intimate  the  reason  for 
the  great  decrease  in  numbers  which  was  found 
to  have  taken  place  in  certain  tribes.  Cf.  Deut. 
iv.  3 and  on  oj.  5 of  this  chapter. 

3,  4.  There  is  an  ellipsis  in  the  beginning 
of  oj.  4,  which  is  probably  rightly  supplied 
by  the  ICnglish  Version  from  as.  2.  The 
LXX.  takes  the  last  clause  of  -u.  4 as  a kind 
of  title  to  the  catalogue  which  follows  in  this 
sense;  And  the  children  of  Israel  which  went 
forth  from  the  land  of  Egypt  were  those 
whose  names  follow. 

5 sqq.  The  tribes  are  mentioned  in  the 
same  order  as  in  the  earlier  census,  ch.  i.,  ex- 


cept that  Manasseh  here  precedes  Ephraim; 
probably  as  being  now  the  larger  tribe.  The 
following  table  shows  the  numbers  of  the 


tribes  at  each  census 

At  .Sinai. 

In  the  Plains 
of  Moab. 

Reuben  

.46,500 

4.3,730 

Simeon  

•59^300 

22,200 

Gad  

•45,650 

40,500 

Judah 

.74,600 

76,500 

Issachar  

.54,400 

64,300 

Zebulun 

.57,400 

60,500 

Ephraim 

.40,500 

32,500 

Manasseh  ... 

.32,200 

52,700 

Benjamin  ... 

•35,400 

45,600 

Dan  

.62,700 

64,400 

Asher 

.41,500 

53,400 

Naphtali 

•53,400 

45,400 

Seven  of  the  tribes,  of  which  are  the  three 
belonging  to  the  camp  of  J udah,  shew  an  in- 
crease of  numbers ; and  five,  among  whom  are 
the  three  belonging  to  the  camp  of  Reuben, 
shew  a decrease.  The  greatest  increase  of  any 
one  tribe  is  in  Manasseh:  see  on  xxxii.  42. 
The  most  remarkable  decrease  is  in  Simeon, 
which  now  shews  less  than  half  its  former 
strength.  To  this  tribe  Zimri,  the  chief  of- 
fender in  the  recent  transgression,  belonged 
(xxv.  14).  Probably  his  tribesmen  generally 
had  followed  his  example,  and  had  accordingly 
suffered  most  severely  in  the  plague.  See 
further  on  as.  12.  In  the  parting  blessing  of 
Moses,  uttered  at  no  great  inteival  from  this 
date,  the  tribe  of  Simeon  alone  is  omitted. 
Respecting  the  round  numbers  which  the  cen- 
sus shews,  see  on  Deut.  xxxiii.  On  the  odd 
thirty  in  the  tribe  of  Reuben  see  i.  20  sqq. 
and  the  note. 

Each  tribe  is,  in  the  ensuing  catalogue,  re- 
presented as  subdivided  into  certain  chief  fami- 


V.  6— IS-] 


NUMBERS.  XXVI. 


753 


nochites:  of  Pallu,  the  family  of  the 
Palluites : 

6 Of  Hezron,  the  family  of  the 
Hezronites:  of  Carmi,  the  family  of 
the  Carmites. 

7 These  ar^  the  families  of  the 
Reubenites:  and  they  that  were 
numbered  of  them  were  forty  and 
three  thousand  and  seven  hundred 
and  thirty. 

8 And  the  sons  of  Pallu ; Eliab. 

9 And  the  sons  of  Eliab  j Nemuel, 
and  Dathan,  and  Abiram.  This  /s 
that  Dathan  and  Abiram,  which  were 
famous  in  the  congregation,  who 

^chap  i6.  ^strove  against  Moses  and  against 
Aaron  in  the  company  of  Korah, 

. when  they  strove  against  the  Lord  : 

10  And  the  earth  opened  her 
mouth,  and  swallowed  them  up  to- 


gether with  Korah,  when  that  com- 
pany died,  what  time  the  fire  devour- 
ed two  hundred  and  fifty  men:  and 
they  became  a sign. 

11  Notwithstanding  the  children 
of  Korah  died  not. 

12  ^ The  sons  of  Simeon  after 
their  families  : of  Nemuel,  the  family 
of  the  Nemuelites:  of  Jamin,  the 
family  of  the  Jaminites:  of  Jachin, 
the  family  of  the  Jachinites: 

13  Of  Zerah,  the  family  of  the 
Zarhites  : of  Shaul,  the  family  of  the 
Shaulites. 

14  These  are  the  families  of  the 
Simeonites,  twenty  and  two  thousand 
and  two  hundred, 

15  ^ The  children  of  Gad  after 
their  families:  of  Zephon,  the  family 
of  the  Zephonites:  of  Haggi,  the  fa- 


lies.  The  families  of  all  the  tribes,  excluding 
the  Levites,  number  fifty-seven.  The  ancestral 
heads  after  whom  these  families  are  named 
correspond  nearly  with  the  grandchildren  and 
great-grandchildren  of  Jacob,  enumerated  in 
Gen.  xlvi.  Both  lists  consist  mainly  of  grand- 
children of  Jacob,  both  contain  also  the  sam.e 
two  grandchildren  of  Judah,  and  the  same 
two  grandchildren  of  Asher.  It  appears  then 
that  the  document  in  Genesis  must  be  regarded 
as  a list,  not  of  those  who  went  down  in  their 
own  persons  with  Jacob  into  Egypt,  but  of 
those  whose  names  were  transmitted  to  their 
posterity  of  the  date  of  the  Exodus  as  the 
heads  of  Israelitish  houses,  and  who  may  thus 
be  reckoned  the  early  ancestors  of  the  people. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  regard  each  house  as 
consisting  of  actual  lineal  descendants  only ; or 
yet  as  comprising  always  all  the  descendants 
of  the  ancestor  whose  name  it  bears.  In  some 
cases,  probably,  families  attached  themselves  to 
more  powerful  households  to  which  they  were 
akin,  and  became  merged  in  them,  and  so  lost 
all  separate  name  and  place.  It  is  likely,  e.g. 
that  Dan  had  many  children,  and  many 
branches  of  descendants,  notwithstanding  that 
they  were  all  comprised,  by  estimation,  in  the 
family  of  the  one  son  known  to  us.  In  other 
cases,  where  new  families  sprang  up  and  took 
their  name  from  leaders  of  a younger  genera- 
tion, the  family  named  after  the  older  ancestor 
would  consist  only  of  such  remnant  of  his 
descendants  as  had  not  become  incorporated  in 
the  younger  families;  e.g.  in  the  tribe  of 
Ephraim  the  Shuthalhites  appear  to  have  ab- 
sorbed the  Eranites,  although  the  latter  were 
actually  descended,  through  Eran,  from  Shu- 
thelah.  A variety  of  circumstances  would 


naturally  tend  to  bring  into  prominence  some 
branches  of  the  same  parent  stock,  and  to 
throw  others  into  the  background. 

10.  together  ^ith  Korah']  i.e.  they  were 
engulphed  at  the  same  time  that  Korah  perish- 
ed; for  Korah  himself  appears  to  have  died 
amongst  the  two  hundred  and  fifty  incense 
offerers  at  the  door  of  the  Tabernacle,  not 
with  Dathan  and  Abiram  (cf.  on  xvi.  3 a 
and  35). 

11.  the  children  of  Korah  died  not]  Cf. 
'v.  58.  Samuel  the  prophet  was  of  this  family 
according  to  i Chr.  vi.  22  sqq.;  and  Heman, 
“the  king’s  seer,”  i Chr.  xxv.  5,  the  first  of 
the  three  Levites  to  whom  David  intrusted  the 
managem.ent  of  the  vocal  and  instrumental 
music  of  the  Temple  services,  i Chr.  vi.  33. 
Several  of  the  Psalms  appear  from  the  titles 
to  have  been  composed  for  the  sons  of  Korah : 
cf.  titles  of  Ps.  xlii.,  xliv.,  xlv.,  &c. 

12.  Nemuel]  So  i Chron.  iv.  24.  In  Gen. 
xlvi.  10,  Ex.  vi.  15,  Jemuel.  The  variation, 
like  other  similar  ones  which  follow,  seems 
due  merely  to  error  of  transcription. 

Jamin]  So  in  Gen.  xlvi.  10,  Ex.  vi.  15.  In 
I Chron.  iv.  24,  Jarib. 

The  earlier  list  enumerates  Ohad  among 
the  sons  of  Simeon.  As  this  name  does  not 
appear  either  here  or  in  Chronicles,  it  is  pro- 
bable that  his  family  had  become  extinct.  They 
may  have  been  carried  off"  in  the  recent  plague : 
possibly  were  “the  chief  house  among  the 
Simeonites,”  of  which  Zimri  had  been  prince. 

]3.  Zerah]  So  in  Chronicles;  but  in  Gen. 
list  Zohar,  with  a different  initial  letter. 

15 — 18.  Zephon;  Ozni ; Arod.]  In  Gen. 
xlvi.  16,  Ziphion;  Ezbon;  Arodi. 


754 


NUMBERS.  XXVI. 


[v.  16—34. 


mily  of  the  Haggites : of  Shuni,  the 
family  of  the  Shunites  : 

16  Of  Ozni,  the  family  of  the 
Oznites : of  Eri,  the  family  of  the 
Erites : 

17  Of  Arod,  the  family  of  the 
Arodites : of  Areli,  the  family  of  the 
Arelites. 

18  These  are  the  families  of  the 
children  of  Gad  according  to  those 
that  were  numbered  of  them,  forty 
thousand  and  five  hundred. 

^ Gen.  38.  19  ^ ^The  sons  of  Judah  zaere  Er 

& 4.6. 12.  and  Onan : and  Er  and  Onan  died  in 
the  land  of  Canaan. 

20  And  the  sons  of  Judah  after 
their  families  were;  of  Shelah,  the  fa- 
mily of  the  Shelanites  : of  Pharez,  the 
family  of  the  Pharzites : of  Zerah,  the 
family  of  the  Zarhites. 

21  And  the  sons  of  Pharez  were; 
of  Hezron,  the  family  of  the  Hez- 
ronites : of  Hamul,  the  family  of  the 
Hamulites. 

22  These  are  the  families  of  Ju- 
dah according  to  those  that  were 
numbered  of  them,  threescore  and 
sixteen  thousand  and  five  hundred. 

23  ^ Of  the  sons  of  Issachar  after 
their  families:  (^Tola,  the  family  of 
the  Tolaites:  of  Pua,  the  family  of 
the  Punites: 

24  Of  Jashub,  the  family  of  the 
Jashubites  : of  Shimron,  the  family  of 
the  Shimronites. 

25  These  are  the  families  of  Issa- 
char accordino;  to  those  that  were 


numbered  of  them,  threescore  and  four 
thousand  and  three  hundred. 

26  ^ (y  the  sons  of  Zebulun  after 
their  families : of  Sered,  the  family  of 
the  Sardites:  of  Elon,  the  family  of 
the  Elonites : of  Jahleel,  the  family 
of  the  Jahleelites. 

27  These  are  the  families  of  the 
Zebulunites  according  to  those  that 
were  numbered  of  them,  threescore 
thousand  and  five  hundred. 

28  ^ The  sons  of  Joseph  after 
their  families  were  Manasseh  and 
Ephraim. 

29  Of  the  sons  of  Manasseh:  of 
-^Machir,  the  family  of  the  Machir--^J°®^- ^7. 
ites : and  Machir  begat  Gilead : of  Gi- 
lead come  the  family  of  the  Gileadites. 

30  These  are  the  sons  of  Gilead : 
of  Jeezer,  the  family  of  the  Jee- 
zerites : of  Helek,  the  family  of  the 
Helekites : 

31  And  of  Asriel,  the  family  of 
the  Asrielites : and  of  Shechem,  the 
family  of  the  Shechemites  : 

32  And  of  Shemida,  the  family  of 
the  Shemidaites : and  of  Hepher,  the 
family  of  the  Hepherites. 

33  ^ And  ^Zelophehad  the  son  of  i" chap.  27. 
Hepher  had  no  sons,  but  daughters: 

and  the  names  of  the  daughters  of 
Zelophehad  were  Mahlah,  and  Noah, 

Hoglah,  Milcah,  and  Tirzah. 

34  These  are  the  families  of  Ma- 
nasseh, and  those  that  were  number- 
ed of  them,  fifty  and  two  thousand 
and  seven  hundred. 


23 — 25.  Pud\  Heb.  Puvah,  as  in  Gen. 
xlvi.  13.  Slightly  otherwise  in  i Chron.  vii. 
I.  Jashub:  so  in  Chronicles;  but  in  Genesis 
Job.  Shimron:  so  in  Genesis;  in  Chronicles 
Shimrom. 

29.  Gilead]  He  was  the  grandfather  of 
Zelophehad  (xxvii.  i),  and  belonged  there- 
fore to  a generation  which  had  now  quite  passed 
away.  Amid  some  confusion,  occasioned  by 
the  manner  in  which  the  records  were  copied, 
the  genealogy  of  i Chron.  vii.  14  sqq.  reveals 
to  us  the  fact  that  cither  the  mother  or  grand- 
mother of  Gilead  was  an  Aramite.  For  this 
reason  doubtless  he  was  named  after  the  terri- 
tory which  formed  the  frontier  between  Aram 
and  Canaan,  the  territory  wherein  Laban  the 


Aramite  and  Jacob  the  inheritor  of  the  pro- 
mises had  finally  parted.  (Gen.  xxxi.  25,  47.) 
These  associations  probably  suggested  the 
special  allotment  in  the  district  of  Gilead  to 
the  Machirites  (xxxii.  40),  as  being  the  dis- 
trict from  which  their  ancestress  had  sprung, 
and  which  had  given  its  name  to  the  head  of 
their  families.  It  was,  however,  only  a small 
part  of  the  territory  usually  known  as  Gilead 
that  was  occupied  by  any  of  the  Manassite 
families:  their  inheritance  in  that  direction 
was,  in  the  main,  the  land  of  Bashan.  For 
the  further  use  of  Gilead  as  a personal  name, 
see  Judg.  xi.  i,  2.  Gen.  xliv.  gives  no  record 
of  the  names  of  the  children  of  Manasseh  and 
Ephraim. 


V.  35— 54-] 


NUMBERS.  XXVI. 


755 


35  ^ These  are  the  sons  of  Eph-  after  their  families:  of  Jimna,  tJie 
raim  after  their  families:  of  Shuthe-  family  of  the  Jimnitcs:  of  Jesui,  the 
lah,  the  family  of  the  Shuthalhites : of  family  of  the  Jesuites:  of  Beriah,  the 
Becher,  the  family  of  the  Bachrites:  family  of  the  Beriites. 

ofTahan,  the  family  of  the  Tahanites.  45  Of  the  sons  of  Beriah  : of  He- 

36  And  these  are  the  sons  of  her,  the  family  of  the  Heberites: 

Shuthelah:  of  E ran,  the  family  of  the  of  Malchiel,  the  family  of  the  Mal- 
Eranites.  chielites. 

37  These  are  the  families  of  the  46  And  the  name  of  the  daughter 
sons  of  Ephraim  according  to  those  of  Asher  was  Sarah. 

that  were  numbered  of  them,  thirty  47  These  are  the  families  of  the 
and  two  thousand  and  five  hundred,  sons  of  Asher  according  to  those  that 
These  are  the  sons  of  Joseph  after  were  numbered  of  them;  who  were 
their  families.  fifty  and  three  thousand  and  four 

38  ^ The  sons  of  Benjamin  after  hundred.  • 

their  families:  of  Bela,  the  family  of  48  ^ Of  the  sons  of  Naphtali  after 
the  Belaites:  of  Ashbel,  the  family  of  their  families:  of  Jahzeel,  the  family 
the  Ashbelites  : of  Ahiram,  the  family  of  the  Jahzeelites  : of  Guni,  the  fa- 
of  the  Ahiramites:  mily  of  the  Gunites  : 

39  Of  Shupham,  the  family  of  the  49  Of  Jezer,  the  family  of  the  Je- 

Shuphamites  : of  Hupham,  the  family  zerites  : of  Shillem,  the  family  of  the 
of  the  Fluphamites.  Shillemites. 

40  And  the  sons  of  Bela  were  Ard  50  These  are  the  families  of  Naph- 

and  Naaman:  of  Ard^  the  family  of  tali  according  to  their  families:  and 
the  Ardites:  and  of  Naaman,  the  they  that  were  numbered  of  them 
family  of  the  Naamites.  were  forty  and  five  thousand  and  four 

41  These  are  the  sons  of  Benjamin  hundred. 

’after  their  families:  and  they  that  51  These  were  the  numbered  of 
were  numbered  of  them  were  forty  the  children  of  Israel,  six  hundred 
and  five  thousand  and  six  hundred.  thousand  and  a thousand  seven  hun- 

42  ^ These  are  the  sons  of  Dan  dred  and  thirty. 

after  their  families:  of  Shuham,  the  52  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
family  of  the  Shuhamites.  These  Moses,  saying, 

are  the  families  of  Dan  after  their  53  Unto  these  the  land  shall  be  di- 
families. vided  for  an  inheritance  according  to  ^ chap.  33. 

43  All  the  families  of  the  Shuham-  the  number  of  names.  f lieb. 

ites,  according  to  those  that  were  54  To  many  thou  shalt  ^ give  the 
numbered  of  them,  were  threescore  more  inheritance,  and  to  few  thou 

and  four  thousand  and  four  hundred.  shalt  ^give  the  less  inheritance:  to  dhninish 

44  ^ Of  the  children  of  Asher  every  one  shall  his  inheritance  be 


38 — 41.  The  list  of  Benjamite  families  does 
not  accord  with  the  list  in  Genesis.  See  note 
on  Gen.  xlvi.  21;  and  on  i Chron.  vii.  6 — 12. 
The  names  Shupham  and  Hupham  appear  in 
Gen.  xlvi.  21  as  Muppim  and  Huppim;  in 
I Chron.  vii.  12  as  Shuppim  and  Huppim,  in 
I Chron.  viii.  5 as  Shephuphan  and  Huram. 

42.  Shuhani]  Elsewhere  Hushim  (Gen. 
xlvi.  23;  I Chron.  vii.  12). 

44 — 47.  The  names  of  the  Asherites 
correspond  to  those  of  Gen.  xlvi.  17,  except 
that  the  Ishuah  of  that  list  is  wanting.  The 


name  is  possibly  due  to  an  error  of  a tran- 
scriber, whose  eye,  after  he  had  copied  three 
letters  of  the  following  name  Isui,  reverted  to 
the  final  letter  of  the  preceding  Jimnah.  Sarah 
(2;.  46)  is  merely  another  form  of  the  name 
Serah  of  Gen.  Lc. 

51.  The  total  number  of  the  male  adult 
Israelites,  exclusive  of  the  Levites,  is  601,  730; 
shewing  a decrease  of  1820  from  the  number 
at  Sinai.  Yet  the  present  census  would  have 
exhibited  an  increase  had  it  not  been  for  the 
recent  plague. 


756 


NUMBERS.  XXVI.  [v.  55-65- 


given  according  to  those  that  were 
numbered  of  him. 

55  Notwithstanding  the  land  shall 
< chap.  33-  be  ^'divided  by  lot:  according  to  the 
josh.  II.  names  of  the  tribes  of  their  fathers 
&‘i4. 2.  they  shall  inherit. 

56  According  to  the  lot  shall  the 
possession  thereof  be  divided  between 
many  and  few. 

-^Exod.  6.  57  ^ -^And  these  are  they  that 

16, 17, 18,  numbered  of  the  Levites  after 

their  families : of  Gershon,  the  family 
of  the  Gershonites : of  Kohath,  the 
family  of  the  Kohathites  : of  Merari, 
the  family  of  the  Merarites. 

58  These  are  the  families  of  the 
Levites : the  family  of  the  Libnites, 
the  family  of  the  Hebronites,  the 
family  of  the  Mahlites,  the  family  of 
the  Mushites,  the  family  of  the  Ko- 
rathites.  And  Kohath  begat  Amram. 

59  And  the  name  of  Amram’s  wife 
^Exod.  2.  '^Jochebed,  the  daughter  of  Levi, 
& 6. 20.  whom  her  mother  bare  to  Levi  in 

Egypt : and  she  bare  unto  Amram 
Aaron  and  Moses,  and  Miriam  their 
sister. 

60  And  unto  Aaron  was  born 


Nadab,  and  Abihu,  Eleazar,  and 

Ithamar. 

61  And  ^Nadab  and  Abihu  died,  ^ 
when  they  offered  strange  fire  before  3.  4. 

, T ^ ° I Chron. 

the  Lord.  24. 2. 

62  And  those  that  were  numbered 
of  them  were  twenty  and  three  thou- 
sand, all  males  from  a month  old  and 
upward : for  they  were  not  numbered 
among  the  children  of  Israel,  because 
there  v/as  no  inheritance  given  them 
among  the  children  of  Israel. 

63  f These  are  they  that  were 
numbered  by  Moses  and  Eleazar  the 
priest,  who  numbered  the  children  of 
Israel  in  the  plains  of  Moab  by  Jor- 
dan near  Jericho. 

64  But  among  these  there  was  not 
a man  of  them  whom  Moses  and 
Aaron  the  priest  numbered,  when 
they  numbered  the  children  of  Israel 
in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai. 

65  For  the  Lord  had  said  of  them. 

They  shall  surely  die  in  the  wild- 'g^hap.  14. 
erness.  And  there  was  not  left  a i Cor.  10. 
man  of  them,  save  Caleb  the  son  of 
Jephunneh,  and  Joshua  the  son  of  ^ 

Nun. 


56.  According  to  the  lot^  &c.]  The 
general  situation,  though  not  the  extent  of  the 
various  tribal  territories,  was  to  be  determined 
by  lot.  The  land  therefore  could  not  be 
mapped  out  into  territories  till  after  the  lots 
had  been  drawn.  This  method  was  doubtless 
adopted  not  only  in  order  to  preclude  jealou- 
sies and  disputes,  but  also  that  the  several 
tribes  might  regard  the  territories  as  deter- 
mined for  them  by  God  Himself;  cf.  Prov. 
xvi.  33. 

58.  Of  these  Levite  families,  the  Lib- 
nites belonged  to  the  branch  of  Gershon,  the 
Hebronites  and  Korathites  or  more  correctly 
Korahites  (Heb.  “the  Korhite  family,”  i.e. 
the  family  of  Korah),  to  that  of  Kohath,  and  the 
Mahlites  and  Mushites  to  that  of  Merari:  see 
iii.  ai,  27,  33,  xvi.  i.  Of  the  other  families 
named  in  ch.  iii.  the  Shimites  would  seem  to 
be  now  extinct,  or  to  have  been  incorporated 
with  the  Inbnites;  and  the  Uzzielites,  if  they 
still  survived,  in  like  manner  with  another  of 
the  Kohathite  families.  The  I zeharites  of  iii. 


2 7 were  probably  now  all  known  as  Korathites, 
Korah  being  the  son  of  Izhar;  and  of  the 
Amramites,  who  consisted  of  Moses  and  Aaron 
and  their  descendants,  with  Miriam,  we  have 
an  account  in  the  ensuing  verses. 

59.  nvhom  her  mother  hare']  Literally 
“whom  she  bare;”  the  subject  is  wanting  and 
the  verb  is  in  the  feminine  gender.  The  text 
is  probably  imperfect  here.  See  Note  at  end 
of  the  chapter. 

62.  The  total  number  of  male  Levites, 
23,000,  shews  an  increase  of  1000  on  the 
number  at  Sinai  (iii.  39).  It  is  doubtless  to 
be  taken  as  a round  number;  and,  as  before, 
includes  the  male  children  from  a month  old 
and  upward,  as  well  as  the  male  adults. 

64.  there  ^vas  not  a man]  Indeed  it 
appears  from  Deut.  ii.  14 — 15  that  the  genera- 
ration  numbered  at  the  former  census  had 
perished  before  the  host  crossed  the  brook 
Zered.  Eleazar  is  here  accounted  as  one  of  the 
enumeration ; see  'v.  63,  and  cf.  xiv.  24  and  note. 


V.  I,  2.] 


NUMBERS.  XXVII. 


757 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xxvi.  59. 


The  mode  of  filling  up  the  ellipse  adopted 
by  the  A.  V.,  though  supported  by  most 
authorities  ancient  and  modern,  is  merely  con- 
jectural. It  is  too  quite  without  parallel;  for 
in  I Kings  i.  6 quoted  by  Ewald,  ‘ Ausf.  Lehr.’ 
§ 294,  and  Keil,  as  a similar  case,  the  missing 
name  can  easily  be  supplied  from  the  preceding 
verse.  It  seems  most  likely  that  several  words 
have  fallen  out  of  the  text  in  this  place.  On 
comparing  the  Levite  families  here  named  with 
iii.  18 — 20,  Ex.  vi.  17  sqq.,  those  of  Shimei 
and  Uzziel  are  omitted;  and  the  latter  family 
at  any  rate  was  neither  extinct  nor  obscure: 
cf.  Ex.  vi.  22,  Lev.  x.  4.  Moreover  Jochebed 
the  mother  of  Moses  could  not  be  strictly  the 


daughter  of  Levi,  for  three  centuries  must  have 
intervened  between  the  death  of  Levi  and  the 
birth  of  Moses,  see  on  Ex.  ii.  i.  Amram  and 
Jochebed  were  then  descendants  of  Levi,  pro- 
bably seven  or  eight  generations  removed. 
Michaelis,  Geddes,  and  Boothroyd  take  the 
Hebrew  pronoun  as  a proper  name, 

“whom  Atha  bare:”  Knobel,  after  Vulg.,  Jar- 
chi,  Onk.,  Arab.  &c.,  proposes  to  alter  the 
pointing,  and  to  take  the  verb  as  a passive 
“who  was  bom.”  In  the  face  of  the  strong 
probability  that  the  text  is  very  imperfect,  and 
in  the  absence  of  means  for  restoring  it,  con- 
jectures as  to  what  the  proper  sense  may  be 
are  wholly  useless. 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

I The  daughters  of  Zelophehad  sue  for  an  in- 
kei'itance.  6 The  law  of  inherdtances.  12 
Moses,  behig  told  of  his  death,  sueth  for  a 
successor.  18  Joshua  is  appointed  to  succeed 
him. 

Then  came*  the  daughters  of 
"Zelophehad,  the  son  of  He- 
joi,h  17. 3.  pher,  the  son  of  Gilead,  the  son  of 
Machir,  the  son  of  Manasseh,  of  the 


families  of  Manasseh  the  son  of  Jo- 
seph : and  these  are  the  names  of  his 
daughters;  Mahlah,  Noah,  and  Hog- 
lah,  and  Milcah,  and  Tirzah. 

2 And  they  stood  before  Moses, 
and  before  Eleazar  the  priest,,  and 
before  the  princes  and  all  the  congre- 
gation, by  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation,  saying. 


I 

'i 

\ . 


Chap.  XXVII.  The  command  given  xxvi. 
52  sqq.  to  divide  the  land  among  the  people 
“according  to  the  number  of  the  tribes  of  their 
fathers,”  suggests  the  petition  of  the  daughters 
of  Zelophehad  now  brought  before  Moses 
(ww.  I — 6);  and  the  decision  in  this  case  leads 
to  a general  enactment  respecting  the  right  of 
inheritance  when  a man  died  and  left  only 
daughters  behind  him.  This  law  is  after- 
wards supplemented  by  certain  restrictions  as 
to  the  marriage  of  such  heiresses  (xxxvi).  It 
is  obvious  that  these  successive  enactments 
grew  out  of  emergencies  which  presented  them- 
selves when  the  questions  connected  with  the 
taking  possession  of  Canaan  came  actually  to  be 
encountered,  and  hold  thus  their  natural  place 
and  order  in  the  closing  chapters  of  Numbers. 
The  preparations  for  taking  possession  of  the 
land . being  thus  completed,  the  approaching 
death  of  Moses,  who  was  not  to  enter  it  (xx. 
12),  is  announced  (w-v.  12 — 14),  and  his  suc- 
cessor solemnly  appointed  (yw.  15 — 23). 

1.  the  daughters  of  Zelophehad,  the  son  of 
Hep  her,  the  son  of  Gilead]  Cf.  on  xxvi.  29. 

It  does  not  appear  that  women  in  Israel 
had,  up  to  the  present  time,  enjoyed  any  dis- 
tinct right  of  inheritance.  Yet  a father,  whe- 
ther sons  had  been  born  to  him  or  not,  had 
the  power,  either  before  or  at  his  death,  to 
cause  part  of  his  estate  to  pass  to  a daughter ; 
in  which  case  her  husband  married  into  her 


family  rather  than  she  into  his,  and  the  chil- 
dren were  regarded  as  of  the  family  from  which 
the  estate  had  come.  Thus  Machir,  ancestor 
of  Zelophehad,  although  he  had  a son  Gilead, 
left  also,  as  is  probable,  an  inheritance  to  his 
daughter,  the  wife  of  Hezron  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  by  reason  of  which  their  descendants, 
among  whom  was  Jair,  were  reckoned  as  be- 
longing to  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  (i  Chron.  ii. 
21  sqq.,  Num.  xxxii.  41).  Thus  Sheshan 
also,  who  had  no  sons,  married  his  daughter 
to  his  Egyptian  servant  Jarha,  and  so  had  by 
them  a long  line  of  posterity  (i  Chron.  ii. 
34  sqq.).  Other  eastern  nations  had  like  cus- 
toms. The  daughters  of  Laban  complain  of 
having  no  “portion  or  inheritance  in  their 
father’s  house”  (Gen.  xxxi.  14),  intimating 
apparently  that  Laban  might  have  given  them 
such  had  he  so  pleased,  and  thus  bound  their 
husband  by  ties  that  would  have  prevented 
him  leaving  his  father-in-law.  So  of  the 
daughters  of  Job  it  is  specially  noted  that 
“their  father  gave  them  inheritance  among 
their  brethren”  (Job  xlii.  15). 

2.  by  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation] The  place  of  solemn  assembly  of 
the  elders;  for  when  in  xi.  16,  26,  they  are 
said  to  go  out  to  the  tabernacle,  it  is  the 
entrance  of  the  tabernacle  that  is  meant  (com- 
pare xii.  4 and  5).  It  was  however  hardly  to 
the  seventy  elders  that  the  daughters  of  Zelo- 


758  NUMBERS.  XXVII.  [v.  s-U- 


^ chap.  14. 

35. 

& 26.  64, 

65. 


tHeb. 

dwiinish- 

cd. 


3 Our  father  ^died  in  the  wilder- 
ness, and  he  was  not  in  the  cornpany 
of  them  that  gathered  themselves  to- 
gether against  the  Lord  in  the  com- 
pany of  Korah ; but  died  in  his  own 
sin,  and  had  no  sons. 

4 Why  should  the  name  of  our 
father  be  Mone  away  from  among 
his  family,  because  he  hath  no  son? 
Give  unto  us  therefore  a possession 
among  the  brethren  of  our  father. 

5 And  Moses  brought  their  cause 
before  the  Lord. 

6 ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

7 The  daughters  of  Zelophehad 
speak  right : thou  shalt  surely  give 
them  a possession  of  an  inheritance 
among  their  father’s  brethren ; and 
thou  shalt  cause  the  inheritance  of 
their  father  to  pass  unto  them. 

8 And  thou  shalt  speak  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  saying.  If  a man 
die,  and  have  no  son,  then  ye  shall 
cause  his  inheritance  to  pass  unto  his 
daughter. 

9 And  if  he  have  no  daughter, 
then  ye  shall  give  his  inheritance 
unto  his  brethren. 

10  And  if  he  have  no  brethren. 


then  ye  shall  give  his  inheritance 
unto  his  father’s  brethren. 

1 1 And  if  his  father  have  no  bre- 
thren, then  ye  shall  give  his  inhe- 
ritance unto  his  kinsman  that  is  next 
to  him  of  his  family,  and  he  shall 
possess  it : and  it  shall  be  unto  the 
children  of  Israel  a statute  of  judg- 
ment, as  the  Lord  commanded  Mo- 
ses. 

12  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, ^Get  thee  up  into  this  mount  Deut.  32. 
Abarim,  and  see  the  land  which  I have 

given  unto  the  children  of  Israel. 

13  And  v/hen  thou  hast  seen  it, 
thou  also  shalt  be  gathered  unto  thy 
people,  as  ^ Aaron  thy  brother  was chap.  20. 
gathered. 

14  For  ye  ^rebelled  against  my 'chap.  20. 
commandment  in  the  desert  of  Zin, 

in  the  strife  of  the  congregation,  to 
sanctify  me  at  the  water  before  their 
eyes:  that  is  the  water  of  Meribah-^^xod.  17. 
in  Kadesh  in  the  wilderness  of  Zin. 

15  ^ And  Moses  spake  unto  the 
Lord,  saying, 

16  Let  the  Lord,  the  God  of  the 
spirits  of  all  flesh,  set  a man  over  the 
congregation, 

17  Which  may  go  out  before 


phehad  made  suit ; but  rather  to  the  princes, 
the  heads  of  tribes  and  of  families,  who  were 
making  the  census  under  the  superintendence 
of  Moses  and  Eleazar. 

3.  but  died  in  his  own  sin~\  i.e.  perished 
under  the  general  sentence  of  exclusion  from 
the  land  of  promise  passed  on  all  the  older 
generation,  but  limited  to  that  generation  alone. 
It  had  been  declared  at  the  period  ot  that  sen- 
tence (xiv.  31)  that  “their  little  ones  should 
enter  in,  to  know  the  land  which  their  fathers 
had  despised;”  and  by  virtue  of  this  declara- 
tion the  daughters  of  Zelophehad  claim  that 
their  fatlrer’s  sin  should  not  be  visited  upon 
them,  I'here  would  have  been  less  ground 
for  the  claim  had  Zelophehad  shared  in  any  of 
the  other  special  rebellions;  for  it  was  the 
general  rule  of  God’s  govemment  in  such  cases 
that  the  children  should  bear  the  consequences 
of  their  fathers’  iniquity. 

4,  d've  unto  kj]  As  representing  our 
father;  that  so  he,  through  us  his  representa- 
tives, may  enjoy  a like  inheritance  with  his 
brethren. 

12.  mount  Abarim']  The  host  had  crossed 


these  heights  already  on  its  march  (xxi.  ao 
and  note)  ; and  it  was  from  them  too  that  Ba- 
laam had  made  his  second  attempt  to  curse 
the  people  (xxiii.  14). 

Moses’  charge  to  Joshua,  Deut.  xpi.  23, 
must  have  been  subsequent  to  the  appointment 
of  Joshua  recorded  in  this  chapter.  It  is  pro- 
bable then  that  the  commands  now  given  to 
Moses  stand  in  their  proper  chronological 
place  here.  Moses’  ascent  of  the  mount  and 
his  death  there  are  recorded,  Deut.  xxxii.  48 
sqq.,  xxxiv.  1—4.  The  closing  scenes  of  his 
life,  the  war  against  Midian,  aind  the  rehearsal 
of  the  law  in  Deut.,  which  occupy  the  rest 
of  the  Pentateuch,  appear  thus  to  be  narrated 
in  the  order  in  which  they  occurred. 

14.  that  is  the  water  of  Meribah^  &c.] 
These  words  look  like  a gloss;  and  popibly 
found  their  w^ay  into  the  text  though  originally 
written  in  the  margin. 

16.  the  God  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh] 
An  acknowledgment  that  man,  who  is  but 
flesh  (cf.  Gen.  vi.  3),  is  of  himself  helpless; 
and  “lives  and  moves  and  has  his  being”  in 
God  (cf.  Acts  xvii.  28):  hence  suitably  em- 


V.  i8-2.]  numbers.  XXVII.  XXVIII. 


759 


them,  and  which  may  go  in  before 
them,  and  which  may  lead  them  out, 
and  which  may  bring  them  in ; that 
the  congregation  of  the  Lord  be  not 
as  sheep  which  have  no  shepherd. 

1 8 ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto 
Moses,  Take  thee  Joshua  the  son  of 
Nun,  a man  in  whom  is  the  spirit, 
and  lay  thine  hand  upon  him ; 

19  And  set  him  before  Eleazar  the 
priest,  and  before  all  the  congrega- 
tion ; and  give  him  a charge  in  their 
sight. 

20  And  thou  shalt  put  so7ne  of 
thine  honour  upon  him,  that  all  the 
cono;reo;ation  of  the  children  of  Israel 
may  be  obedient. 

21  And  he  shall  stand  before 
Eleazar  the  priest,  who  shall  ask 

F-.xod.28.  counsel  for  him  Rafter  the  judgment 
of  Urim  before  the  Lord:  at  his 
word  shall  they  go  out,  and  at  his 


word  they  shall  come  in,  both  he, 
and  all  the  children  of  Israel  with 
him,  even  all  the  congregation. 

22  And  Moses  did  as  the  Lord 
commanded  him : and  he  took  Jo- 
shua, and  set  him  before  Eleazar  the 
priest,  and  before  all  the  congregation : 

23  And  he  laid  his  hands  upon 
him,  and  gave  him  a charge,  as  the 
Lord  commanded  by  the  hand  of 
Moses. 

CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

I Offerhigs  ai'e  io  be  observed.  3 The  continual 
burnt  offering.  9 The  offering  on  the  sabbath, 

1 1 on  the  nezu  moons,  16  at  the  pass  oyer,  26 
in  the  day  of  first/ ruits. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
iX  saying, 

2 Command  the  children  of  Israel, 
and  say  unto  them.  My  offering,  and 
my  bread  for  my  sacrifices  made  by  t Heb. 
fire,  for  ^ a sweet  savour  unto  me, 


ployed  here  to  introducb  an  entreaty  that  God 
would  not  leave  the  congregation  without  a 
guide  and  leader,  and  in  xvi.  a 2 as  preface  to 
an  intercession  that  the  whole  people  should 
not  suffer  for  the  sin  of  a few. 

18.  in  <whom  is  the  spirit']  (Cf.  Gen. 
xli.  38.)  Joshua  was  endowed  by  God  with 
the  requisite  spiritual  qualifications  for  the 
office.  Moses  however  was  to  lay  his  hands 
upon  him,  both  in  order  to  confer  formal  and 
public  appointment,  and  also,  as  it  would 
seem  from  Deut.  xxxiv.  9 (“Joshua  was 
full  of  the  spirit  of  wisdom,  for  Moses  had 
laid  his  hands  upon  him”),  to  confirm  and 
strengthen  the  spiritual  gifts  already  bestowed. 
The  previous  reception  of  the  inner  grace  did 
not  dispense  with  that  of  the  outward  sign; 
cf.  the  case  of  Cornelius,  Acts  x.  44 — 48; 
and  St  Paul’s  baptism  after  his  miraculous 
conversion,  Acts  ix.  18. 

20.  of  thine  honour]  i.e.  of  thy  dignity 
and  authority.  Joshua  was  constituted  forth- 
with vice-leader  under  Moses,  by  way  of  in- 
troduction to  his  becoming  chief  after  Moses’ 
death.  The  transference  of  this  honour  to 
Joshua  is  not  parallel  to  the  communication 
of  the  spirit  which  rested  upon  Moses  to  the 
seventy  elders  in  xi.  17,  25;  for  though  Moses, 
in  elevating  Joshua  to  his  new  office,  did  not 
part  with  any  of  his  own  spiritual  gifts,  he  yet 
necessarily  shared  henceforward  with  another 
that  power  which  hitherto  he  had  exercised 
alone. 

21.  And  he  shall  stand  before  Eleazar 
the  priest,  &c.]  Joshua  was  thus  to  be  inferior 


to  what  Moses  had  been.  For  Moses  had 
enjoyed  the  privilege  of  unrestricted  direct  in- 
tercourse with  God:  the  other,  like  all  future 
rulers  of  Israel,  was  to  ask  counsel  mediately, 
through  the  high-priest,  and  those  means  of 
enquiring  of  God  wherewith  the  high-priest 
was  entrusted.  Such  counsel  Joshua  seems 
to  have  omitted  to  seek  when  he  concluded  his 
hasty  treaty  with  the  Gibeonites.  Joshua  ix. 
3 sqq. 

judgment  of  Urim]  See  on  Exod.  xxviii.  30. 

Chap.  XXVIII.  Ordinance  of  the  daily 
offering  {yao.  i — 8) ; and  of  the  Sabbath  (gvnj. 
9 — 10),  monthly  {ynj.  ii — 15),  and  festal  of- 
ferings fvnj.  16 — 31).  The  daily  offering  had 
been  already  commanded  (Ex.  xxix.  38),  and 
no  doubt  additional  offerings  had  become  cus- 
tomary on  festivals.  But  no  such  elaborate 
system  as  is  here  prescribed  was  or  could  pos- 
sibly have  been  observed  in  the  wilderness:  cf. 
Deut.  xii.  8,  9.  The  regulations  of  this  and 
the  next  chapter  therefore  point  to  the  imme- 
diate prospect  of  that  settlement  in  Canaan 
which  alone  could  enable  the  Israelites  to  obey 
them.  Cf.  the  ordinances  in  ch.  xv. 

2.  My  offering,  and  my  bread,  &c.]  Or, 
my  offering,  even  my  bread,  &c.  The 
word  for  offering  is  here  korban  (cf.  St  Mark 
vii.  ii),  a term  in  itself  of  quite  general  im- 
port, but  often  especially  applied,  as  apparently 
in  this  instance,  to  the  meat-offeping  which  ac- 
companied the  sacrifices.  This  meat-offering 
connected  itself,  from  its  very  nature,  with  the 
life  of  the  Israelites  in  Canaan,  not  with  their 
life  in  the  wilderness;  and  it  was  annexed  to 


760  NUMBERS.  XXVIII.  [v.  3-12- 


shall  ye  observe  to  offer  unto  me  in 
their  due  season. 

3 And  thou  shalt  say  unto  them, 
"g^xod.29.  <»"rhis  is  the  offering  made  by  fire 

which  ye  shall  offer  unto  the  Lord; 
two  lambs  of  the  first  year  without 
^ continual 

burnt  offering. 

4 The  one  lamb  shalt  thou  offer 
in  the  •morning,  and  the  other  lamb 
shalt  thou  offer  ^ at  even ; 

two  ^ And  a tenth  part  of  an  ephah 
^ L'ev.T‘i.  of  flour  for  a ^ meat  offering,  mingled 
^ Exod.  29.  the  fourth  part  of  an  ‘^hin  of 

beaten  oil. 

6 It  is  a continual  burnt  offering, 
which  was  ordained  in  mount  Sinai 
for  a sweet  savour,  a sacrifice  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

7 And  the  drink  offering  thereof 
shall  be  the  fourth  part  of  an  hin 
for  the  one  lamb:  in  the  holy  place 
shalt  thou  cause  the  strong  wine  to 


the  animal  sacrifices  as  a token  that  the  people 
must  dedicate  to  God  their  property  and  the 
fruits  of  their  labour  as  well  as  their  own  per- 
sons. See  on  xv.  and  Lev.  xxi.  6. 

3 — 8.  The  daily  offering,  as  already 

enjoined  at  Sinai,  Ex.  xxix.  38 — 42.  It  is 
peculiar  to  the  present  passage  that  the  liquor 
of  the  drink-offering  is  described  in  'v.  7 as 
“strong  wine;”  Heb.  shechar^  a term  usually 
employed  to  describe  strong  drink  other  than 
wine  {e.g.  Lev.  x.  9).  The  Targum  here 
understands  it  of  old  wine.  But  the  explana- 
tion probably  is  that  the  Israelites  in  the  wil- 
derness had,  m their  lack  of  wine,  substituted 
shechar  made  from  barley  for  it.  Of  barley 
they  had  doubtless  been  able  to  grow  suffi- 
cient for  their  needs.  They  had  thus  ob- 
served the  spirit,  though  not  the  letter  of  the 
ordinance,  and  their  practice  hitherto  would 
naturally  betray  itself  in  the  language  now  em- 
ployed by  Moses.  There  are  but  few  injunc- 
tions in  the  Pentateuch  respecting  drink-ofi'er- 
ings.  They  are  named  in  Lev.  only  in  chap, 
xxiii. ; and  seem  generally  to  be  assumed  rather 
than  specified.  From  the  present  passage  we 
gather  that  they  were  to  be  offered  by  being 
poured  “in  the  holy  place,”  not,  as  some 
render,  “with  a holy  vessel.”  It  has  been 
inferred,  from  Josephus,  ‘Antiq.’  III.  10,  and 
Ecclus.  1.  15,  that  they  were  poured  round 
the  foot  of  the  altar.  Others  (Kurtz  ‘Sacri- 
ficial Worship  of  the  Old  Testament,’  pp.  301 
— 303,  Clark’s  Transl.)  maintain  that  the  drink- 
offering  was  pourcxl  on  the  altar,  and  so  upon 


be  poured  unto  the  Lord  for  a drink 
offering. 

8 And  the  other  lamb  shalt  thou 
offer  at  even:  as  the  meat  offering 
of  the  morning,  and  as  the  drink 
offering  thereof,  thou  shalt  offer  zV, 
a sacrifice  made  by  fire,  of  a sweet 
savour  unto  the  Lord. 

9 ^ And  on  the  sabbath  day  two 
lambs  of  the  first  year  without  spot, 
and  two  tenth  deals  of  flour  for  a 
meat  offering,  mingled  with  oil,  and 
the  drink  offering  thereof : 

10  Ulus  is  the  burnt  offering  of 
every  sabbath,  beside  the  continual 
burnt  offering,  and  his  drink  offering. 

11  *[I  And  in  the  beginnings  of 
your  months  ye  shall  offer  a burnt 
offering  unto  the  Lord;  two  young 
bullocks,  and  one  ram,  seven  lambs 
of  the  first  year  without  spot; 

12  And  three  tenth  deals  of  flour 
for  a meat  offering,  mingled  with 


the  flesh  of  the  sacrifice  by  which  the  altar  was 
covered.  In  favour  of  this  view  Ex.  xxx.  9 is 
referred  to,  which  by  forbidding  effusion  on 
the  altar  of  incense  seems  to  recognize  it  on 
the  altar  of  sacrifice. 

9 — 10.  The  Sabbath-offering,  not  pre- 
viously enjoined,  consisted  of  two  lambs, 
properly  accompanied,  in  addition  to  the  re- 
gular daily  offering. 

11 — 15.  The  new-moon  offering  also  is  here 
commanded  for  the  first  time.  The  observance 
of  the  new  moon  had  been  enjoined  at  Sinai 
when  the  directions  were  given  for  making  the 
silver  trumpets,  x.  10.  That  they  were  ob- 
served by  the  Israelites  in  later  times  appears 
from  various  notices,  e.g.  i Sam.  xx.  5 ; a 
Kings  iv.  23;  i Chr.  xxiii.  31;  Col.  ii.  16. 
The  offering  consisted  of  two  bullocks,  a ram, 
and  seven  lambs,  accompanied  as  prescribed 
in  XV.  I — 12.  There  was  added  a goat  as  a 
sin-offering;  and  this,  though  mentioned  last, 
would  seem  in  fiict  to  have  been  offered  first, 
since  in  all  actually  recorded  cases  the  sin- 
offering  invariably  preceded  the  burnt-offering 
(Ex.  xxix;  Lev.  v,  viii,  ix,  xiv,  xvi).  A 
more  definite  interpretation  was  put  by  this 
ordinance  upon  that  of  xv.  22 — 26.  The  sin- 
offering,  which  had  been  there  contemplated  in 
cases  where  a sin  had  been  committed  igno- 
rantly without  the  knowledge  of  the  congre- 
gation, was  henceforth  not  to  be  offered  merely 
at  discretion,  as  circumstances  might  seem  to 
require,  but  to  be  regularly  repeated,  not  less 
frequently  than  once  a month. 


V.  13—28.] 


76i 


NUMBERS.  XXVIII. 

oil,  for  one  bullock;  and  two  tenth  20  And  their  meat  offering  shall 
deals  of  flour  for  a meat  offering,  be  of  flour  mingled  with  oil : three 
mingled  with  oil,  for  one  ram ; tenth  deals  shall  ye  offer  for  a bullock, 

13  And  a several  tenth  deal  of  and  two  tenth  deals  for  a ram ; 


flour  mingled  with  oil  for  a meat 
offering  unto  one  lamb;  for  a burnt 
offering  of  a sweet  savour,  a sacrifice 
made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

14  And  their  drink  offerings  shall 
be  half  an  hin  of  wine  unto  a bul- 
lock, and  the  third  part  of  an  hin 
unto  a ram,  and  a fourth  part  of  an 
hin  unto  a lamb:  this  is  the  burnt 
offering  of  every  month  throughout 
the  months  of  the  year. 

15  And  one  kid  of  the  goats  for  a 
sin  offering  unto  the  Lord  shall  be 
offered,  beside  the  continual  burnt 
offering,  and  his  drink  offering. 

rfEsod.i2.  16  ^And  in  the  fourteenth  day  of 

Lev.  23. 5.  the  first  month  is  the  passover  of  the 
Lord. 

17  And  in  the  fifteenth  day  of  this 
month  is  the  feast:  seven  days  shall 
unleavened  bread  be  eaten. 

"Lev. 23.  18  In  the  ^ first  day  shall  be  an 

holy  convocation ; ye  shall  do  no 
manner  of  servile  work  therein: 

19  But  ye  shall  offer  a sacrifice 
made  by  fire  for  a burnt  offering 
unto  the  Lord  ; two  young  bullocks, 
and  one  ram,  and  seven  lambs  of  the 
first  year:  they  shall  be  unto  you 
without  blemish; 


16 — 25.  The  Passover  offering  was  the 
same  as  that  of  the  new  moon,  and  was  re- 
peated on  each  of  the  seven  days  of  the  festival, 
thus  marking  the  importance  and  the  solemnity 
of  the  occasion.  The  details  of  the  offering 
had  not  been  previously  prescribed;  but  the 
command  for  an  holy  convocation  on  the  first 
and  last  days  of  the  festival  appears  in  Lev. 
xxiii.  7,  8. 

26 — 31.  The  festival  offering  at  the  season 
of  firstfruits  was  to  be  offered  on  one  day 
only ; and  was  the  same  with  that  of  the  new 
moon  and  passover.  It  nearly  though  not 
entirely  accords  with  the  sacrificial  offering 
prescribed  Lev.  xxiii.  18  sqq.,  as  an  accom- 
paniment to  the  offering  of  the  loaves  of  first- 
fruits.  There  and  here’  the  sin-offering  is 
the  same,  and  the  seven  lambs  of  the  burnt- 
offering  also.  But  instead  of  the  two  bullocks 
and  one  ram  of  Numbers,  two  rams  and  one 
bullock,  with  the  further  addition  of  two  lambs 


21  A several  tenth  deal  shalt  thou 
offer  for  every  lamb,  throughout  the 
seven  lambs : 

22  And  one  goat  for  a sin  offering, 
to  make  an  atonement  for  you. 

23  Ye  shall  offer  these  beside  the 
burnt  offering  in  the  morning,  which 
is  for  a continual  burnt  offering. 

24  After  this  manner  ye  shall  offer 
daily,  throughout  the  seven  days,  the 
meat  of  the  sacrifice  made  by  fire, 
of  a sweet  savour  unto  the  Lord  : 
it  shall  be  offered  beside  the  conti- 
nual burnt  offering,  and  his  drink 
offering. 

25  And  on  the  seventh  day  ye 
shall  have  an  holy  convocation;  ye 
shall  do  no  servile  work. 

26  ^ Also  in  the  day  of  the  first- 
fruits,  when  ye  bring  a new  meat 
offering  unto  the  Lord,  after  your 
weeks  be  out^  ye  shall  have  an  holy 
convocation;  ye  shall  do  no  servife 
work  : 

27  But  ye  shall  offer  the  burnt 
offering  for  a sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord  ; two  young  bullocks,  one  ram, 
seven  lambs  of  the  first  year; 

28  And  their  meat  offering  of  flour 
mingled  with  oil,  three  tenth  deals 


for  a peace-offering,  are  specified  m Leviticus. 
The  discrepancy  in  the  number  of  bullocks 
and  rams  is  due  perhaps  to  a corruption  of 
the  text ; and  the  peace-offering,  as  being  merely 
an  ordinary  concomitant  of  tile  wave-loaves, 
might  be  on  this  very  account  omitted  from 
the  passage  before  us,  which  prescribes  only 
the  general  offerings  of  the  festival,  and  not 
the  special  ones  connected  with  any  particular 
ceremony  observed  at  it.  It  is  unlikely  that 
two  extensive  sets  of  sacrifices,  nearly  identical 
in  their  details,  should  have  been  offered  on 
the  same  day,  and  yet  that  the  command  en- 
joining each  should  make  no  reference  to  the 
other.  The  distinction  between  the  two  is 
indeed  recognised  by  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  iii. 
10.  6),  who,  however,  in  computing  the 
‘Aggregate  of  the  animals  specified  in  the  two 
passages  errs  as  to  the  number  of  rams.  But 
his  statement  probably  represents  only  his  own 
opinion:  and  even  the  practice  of  the  Jews 


762 


NUMBERS.  XXVIII.  XXIX.  [v.  29-12. 


unto  one  bullock,  two  tenth  deals  unto 
one  ram, 

29  A several  tenth  deal  unto  one 
lamb,  throughout  the  seven  lambs ; 

30  And  one  kid  of  the  goats,  to 
make  an  atonement  for  you. 

31  Ye  shall  offer  them  beside  the 
continual  burnt  offering,  and  his  meat 
offering,  (they  shall  be  unto  you  with- 
out blemish)  and  their  drink  offerings. 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

1 The  offering  at  the  feast  of  trumpets,  7 at  the 
day  of  afflicting  their  souls,  1 3 and  on  the 
eight  days  of  the  feast  of  tabernacles.  ^ 

AND  in  the  seventh  month,  on  the 
±\_  first  day  of  the  month,  ye  shall 
have  an  holy  convocation;  ye  shall 
»Lev.  2v  do  no  servile  work:  ""it  is  a day  of 
^4-  ' blowing  the  trumpets  unto  you. 

2 And  ye  shall  offer  a burnt  offer- 
ing for  a sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord  ; one  young  bullock,  one  ram, 
and  seven  lambs  of  the  first  year 
without  blemish  : 

3 And  their  meat  offering  shall  be 
^ flour  mingled  with  oil,  three  tenth 
deals  for  a bullock,  and  two  tenth 
deals  for  a ram, 

4 And  one  tenth  deal  for  one  lamb, 
throughout  the  seven  lambs: 

5 And  one  kid  of  the  goats  for  a 
sin  offering,  to  make  an  atonement 
for  you  : 


after  the  captivity  would  not  be  decisive  as  to 
the  true  meaning  of  the  Mosaic  law. 

Chap.  XXIX.  1—6.  Ordinance  of  the 
Feast  of  Trumpets.  This  was  to  be  observed 
on  the  opening  day  of  that  month  within 
which  the  Great  Oay  of  the  Atonement  and 
the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  fell  (cf.  Lev.  xxiii. 
23  sqq.).  The  offering  consisted  of  one  bul- 
lock, one  rain,  and  seven  lambs,  with  a goat 
for  a sin-offering,  in  addition  to  the  usual  new- 
moon  offering  (cf.  xxviii.  11),  and  to  the  regu- 
lar daily  offering.  The  special  offering  for 
the  day  anticipated  that  of  the  Great  Day  of 
Atonement. 

7—11.  The  offering  on  the  Great  Day  of 
Atonement  was  the  same  with  that  just  speci- 
fied. The  sin-offering  included  in  this  offering 
was  independent  of  the  sin-offerings  which 
formed  the  great  ceremonies  of  the  day,  as 
descrilx'd  in  Lev.  xvi.  It  differed  from  the 
offering  made  on  the  days  of  the  Passover, 
and  on  the  day  of  first-fruits,  inasmuch  as 


6 Beside  the  burnt  offering  of  the 
month,  and  his  meat  offering,  and 
the  daily  burnt  offering,  and  his  meat 
offering,  and  their  drink  offerings,  ac- 
cording unto  their  manner,  for  a sweet 
savour,  a sacrifice  made  by  fire  unto 
the  Lord. 

7 And  ^ ye  shall  have  on  the  b Lev.  16. 
tenth  day  of  this  seventh  month  an  27. 
holy  convocation  ; and  ye  shall  afflict 

your  souls  : ye  shall  not  do  any  work 
therein  : 

8 But  ye  shall  offer  a burnt  offer- 
ing unto  the  Lord  for  a sweet  savour ; 
one  young  bullock,  one  ram,  and  seven 
lambs  of  the  first  year;  they  shall  be 
unto  vou  without  blemish : 

9 And  their  meat  offering  shall 
be  of  flour  mingled  with  oil,  three 
tenth  deals  to  a bullock,  and  two 
tenth  deals  to  one  ram, 

10  A several  tenth  deal  for  one 
lamb,  throughout  the  seven  lambs  : 

1 1 One  kid  of  the  goats  for  a sin 
offering;  beside  the  sin  offering  of 
atonement,  and  the  continual  burnt 
offering,  and  the  meat  offering  of  it, 
and  their  drink  offerings. 

12  ^ And  on  the  fifteenth  day  of 
the  seventh  month  ye  shall  have  an 
holy  convocation ; ye  shall  do  no  ser- 
vile work,  and  ye  shall  keep  a feast 
unto  the  Lord  seven  days  : 


it  included  only  one  bullock  instead  of  t\yo. 
The  reason  of  this  distinction  is  not  certain. 
Possibly  since  the  bullock  was  preeminently 
the  animal  of  agriculture,  the  offering  of  bul- 
locks on  God’s  altar  was  most  in  keeping  at 
those  feasts  dedicated  more  especially  to  an 
acknowledgment  of  the  blessings  bestowed  in 
the  realm  of  nature.  Such  was,  peculiarly,  the 
aim  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  when  the 
offering  of  a very  large  number  of  bullocks 
was  commanded;  cf.  'v.  13.  The  day  of 
Atonement  had  a very  different  signification ; 
and  on  it  one  bullock  only  was  offered  for  the 
people;  though  another  was  enjoined  as  a sin- 
offering  for  the  priest  (cf.  Lev.  xvi.  ii  sqq.). 

12 34.  Feast  of  Tabernacles:  cf.  Lev. 

xxiii.  33  The  offerings  required  at  this 

feast  were  the  largest  of  all.  They  amounted  to 
fourteen  rams,  ninety-eight  lambs,  and  no  less 
than  seventy  bullocks;  being  twice  as  many 
lambs  and  four  times  as  many  bullocks  as  en- 
joined for  the  Passover.  The  Feast  of  Taber- 


V-  13— 32-] 


NUMBERS.  XXIX. 


763 


13  And  ye  shall  offer  a burnt  of- 
fering, a sacrifice  made  by  fire,  of  a 
sweet  savour  unto  the  Lord;  thir- 
teen young  bullocks,  two  rams,  and 
fourteen  lambs  of  the  first  year;  they 
shall  be  without  blemish  : 

14  And  their  meat  offering . 

he  of  flour  mingled  with  oil,  three 
tenth  deals  unto  every  bullock  of  the 
thirteen  bullocks,  two  tenth  deals  to 
each  ram  of  the  two  rams, 

15  And  a several  tenth  deal  to  each 
lamb  of  the  fourteen  lambs : 

16  And  one  kid  of  the  goats  for 
a sin  offering;  beside  the  continual 
burnt  offering,  his  meat  offering,  and 
his  drink  offering. 

17  ^ And  on  the  second  day  ye 
shall  offer  twelve  young  bullocks,  two 
rams,  fourteen  lambs  of  the  first  year 
without  spot : 

18  And  their  meat  offering  and 
their  drink  offerings  for  the  bullocks, 
for  the  rams,  and  for  the  lambs,  shall 
be  according  to  their  number,  after 
the  manner  : 

19  And  one  kid  of  the  goats  for 
a sin  offering;  beside  the  continual 
burnt  offering,  and  the  meat  offering 
thereof,  and  their  drink  offerings. 

20  ^ And  on  the  third  day  eleven 
bullocks,  two  rams,  fourteen  lambs  of 
the  first  year  without  blemish ; 

21  And  their  meat  offering  and 
their  drink  offerings  for  the  bullocks, 
for  the  rams,  and  for  the  lambs,  shall 
he  according  to  their  number,  after 
the  manner : 

22  And  one  goat  for  a sin  offer- 
ing; beside  the  continual  burnt  offer- 


ing, and  his  meat  offering,  and  his 
drink  offering. 

23  H And  on  the  fourth  day  ten 
bullocks,  two  rams,  and  fourteen  lambs 
of  the  first  year  without  blemish  : 

24  Their  meat  offering  and  their 
drink  offerings  for  the  bullocks,  for 
the  rams,  and  for  the  lambs,  shall  be 
according  to  their  number,  after  the 
manner  : 

25  And  one  kid  of  the  goats  for  a 
sin  offering;  beside  the  continual  burnt 
offering,  his  meat  offering,  and  his 
drink  offering. 

26  ^ And  on  the  fifth  day  nine  bul- 
locks, two  rams,  and  fourteen  lambs 
of  the  first  year  without  spot : 

27  And  their  meat  offering  and 
their  drink  offerings  for  the  bullocks, 
for  the  rams,  and  for  the  lambs,  shall 
be  according  to  their  number,  after 
the  manner  : 

28  And  one  goat  for  a sin  offer- 
ing ; beside  the  continual  burnt  offer- 
ing, and  his  meat  offering,  and  his 
drink  offering. 

29  ^ And  on  the  sixth  day  eight 
bullocks,  two  rams,  and  fourteen  lambs 
of  the  first  year  without  blemish  : 

30  And  their  meat  offering  and 
their  drink  offerings  for  the  bullocks, 
for  the  rams,  and  for  the  lambs,  shall 
be  according  to  their  number,  after 
the  manner : 

31  And  one  goat  for  a sin  offer- 
ing ; beside  the  continual  burnt  offer- 
ing, his  meat  offering,  and  his  drink 
offering. 

32  And  on  the  seventh  day  se- 
ven bullocks,  two  rams,  and  four- 


nacles  was  especially  one  of  thankfulness  to 
God  for  the  gift  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  and 
the  quantity  and  the  nature  of  the  offerings  (see 
on  'vn).  7 — ii)  were  determined  accordingly. 

32.  on  the  seventh  day  seven  bullocks'^  By 
this  coincidence,  as  also  by  the  total  amount 
(seventy)  of  the  bullocks  sacrificed  during  the 
feast,  stress  is  laid  on  the  number  seven,  the 
holy  symbolical  covenant  number,  by  way  of 
intimation  that  the  mercies  of  the  harvest  ac- 
crued by  virtue  of  God’s  covenant.  It  would 
seem  that  the  number  of  bullocks  sacrificed  on 
the  preceding  days  of  the  feast  (thirteen  on 


the  first  day,  v.  13,  twelve  the  second  day, 
V.  17,  &c.)  is  adjusted  simply  to  obtain  the 
coincidence  before  us  on  the  seventh  day.  Bahr 
however  (‘Symb.’  ii.  p.  616)  sees  in  the 
gradually  decreasing  number  a reference  to 
the  moon,  which  was  full  on  the  first  day  of 
the  feast,  and  of  course  was  waning  during 
the  after  days;  Knobel  regards  the  same 
arrangement  as  marking  the  transition  to  the 
non-festal  months  of  the  year  which  followed 
this  feast : whilst  Bishop  Wordsworth  conjec- 
tures that  the  gradual  evanescence  of  the  law 
till  the  time  of  its  absorption  in  the  Gospel  is 
here  presignified  in  the  law  itself. 


764 


NUMBERS.  XXIX.  XXX. 


Iv.  33—2. 


teen  lambs  of  the  first  year  without 
blemish  : 

33  And  their  meat  offering  and 
their  drink  ofterings  for  the  bullocks, 
for  the  rams,  and  for  the  lambs,  shall 
be  according  to  their  number,  after 
the  manner  : 

34  And  one  goat  for  a sin  offer- 
ing ; beside  the  continual  burnt  of- 
fering, his  meat  offering,  and  his 
drink  offering. 

35  ^1  On  the  eighth  day  ye  shall 
Le^.  23.  have  a solemn  assembly  : ye  shall  do 

no  servile  work  therein: 

36  But  ye  shall  offer  a burnt  of- 
fering, a sacrifice  made  by  fire,  of 
a sweet  savour  unto  the  Lord  : one 
bullock,  one  ram,  seven  lambs  of  the 
first  year  without  blemish ; 

37  Their  meat  oftering  and  their 
drink  offerings  for  the  bullock,  for 
the  ram,  and  for  the  lambs,  shall  be 
according  to  their  number,  after  the 
manner : 

38  And  one  goat  for  a sin  offer- 


35 — 38.  The  feast  of  tabernacles  was 
closed  by  an  eighth  day  solemnity : see  on  Lev. 
xxiii.  36.  The  offerings  prescribed  for  it  were 
the  same  with  those  appointed  for  the  F east  of 
Trumpets  and  the  Day  of  Atonement.  The 
solemnities  of  the  month  thus  terminated,  as 
a whole,  with  the  same  sicrifices  with  which, 
three  weeks  before,  they  had  been  introduced ; 
and  the  Day  of  Atonement,  even  though  suc- 
ceeded by  the  rejoicings  of  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, thus  left  its  impress  on  the  whole  month. 
Cf.  on  'vn:.  I — 6. 

39.  for  your  burnt  offerings'^  It  is  gram- 
matically uncertain  whether  these  and  the  suc- 
ceeding words  are  to  be  connected  with  ‘ ‘ vows 
and  free-will  offerings,”  or  with  the  offerings 
“in  the  set  feasts,”  or  with  both.  But  since  in 
this  and  the  last  chapter  no  peace-offerings  are 
required  at  the  set  feasts,  it  would  seem  that 
the  reference  is  to  the  free-will  offerings  only. 

Chap.  XXX.  1 — 16.  The  regulations  here 
laid  down  respectingthe  validity  and  obligation 
of  vows  appropriately  follow  those  given  in  the 
preceding  context  respecting  sacrifices,  since 
a large  proportion  of  vows  would  always  relate 
to  the  presentation  of  such  offering.  Rules 
had  already  been  given  (Lev.  xxvii,)  for  the 
estimation  of  things  vowed  to  God.  It  is  pro- 
bable that  thisfresli  legislation  dealing  specially 
with  vows  made  by  persons  in  a state  of  tute- 
lage, was  occasioned  by  some  case  of  practical 


ing ; beside  the  continual  burnt  offer- 
ing, and  his  meat  offering,  and  his 
drink  offering. 

39  These  things  ye  shall  " do  unto  b Or,  ofer.^ 
the  Lord  in  your  set  feasts,  beside 

your  vows,  and  your  freewill  offer- 
ings, for  your  burnt  offerings,  and 
for  your  meat  offerings,  and  tor  your 
drink  offerings,  and  for  your  peace 
ofterings. 

40  And  Moses  told  the  children 
of  Israel  according  to  all  that  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses. 

CHAPTER  XXX. 

I Votvs  are  not  to  be  broken.  3 The  exception 

of  a maid's  voiv.  6 Of  a wife's.  9 Of  a I 

widoxv’s,  or  her  that  is  divorced. 

AND  Moses  spake  unto  the  heads 
of  the  tribes  concerning  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  saying.  This  is  the 
thing  which  the  Lord  hath  com- 
manded. 

2 If  a man  vow  a vow  unto  the 
Lord,  or  swear  an  oath  to  bind 
his  soul  with  a bond ; he  shall  not 


difficulty  that  had  recently  arisen;  and  it  is 
addressed  by  Moses  to  “the  heads  of  the 
tribes”  -v.  I,  who  would  in  their  judicial 
capacity  have  to  determine  questions  on  these 
subjects;  and  would  also  represent  the  class 
specially  interested  in  obtaining  relief,  where 
they  might  think  fit  to  claim  it,  from  vows 
made  by  persons  in  their  families  who  had  no 
independent  means.  Four  examples  are  taken : 
(i)  that  of  a maid  in  her  father’s  house,  noao. 
3 — 5 ; (a)  that  of  a woman  betrothed  though 
not  yet  married,  aso).  6 — 9 ; (3)  that  of  a widow 
or  divorced  woman,  as.  9 ; (4)  that  of  a wife 
in  her  husband’s  house  {yv.  10 — 14).  Other 
instances  {e.  g.  that  of  a vow  made  by  a widow) 
are  not  mentioned,  but  would  obviously  be 
determined  by  the  principles  laid  down  in  those 
here  given. 

There  is  no  provision  in  the  chapter  for 
annulling  vows  made  by  boys  and  young  men ; 
from  which  it  has' been  inferred  that  the  vows 
of  males  were  in  all  cases  and  circumstances 
binding. 

2.  asonv  a asovo  unto  the  Lord.,  or  S'voear  an 
oath  to  bind  his  soul  <vuith  a bond~\  The  “vow” 
(Heb.  neder)  was  positive;  the  “bond”  (Heb. 
issar')  negative  or  restrictive.  By  a vow  a 
man  engaged  to  dedicate  something  to  God, 
or  to  accomplish  some  work  for  Him : by  a 
bond  he  debarred  himself  from  some  privilege 
or  enjoyment.  A vow  involved  an  obligation 
to  do : a bond,  an  obligation  to  forbear  doing. 


! 


V.  3-12.]  NUMBERS.  XXX. 


765 


»Heb.  ^ break  his  word,  he  shall  do  accord- 
(>rc/hue,  proceedeth  out  of  his 

mouth: 

3 If  a woman  also  vow  a vow  un- 
to the  Lord,  and  bind  herself  by  a 
bond,  being  in  her  father’s  house  in 
her  youth; 

4 And  her  father  hear  her  vow, 
and  her  bond  wherewith  she  hath 
bound  her  soul,  and  her  father  shall 
hold  his  peace  at  her  : then  all  her 
vows  shall  stand,  and  every  bond 
wherewith  she  hath  bound  her  soul 
shall  stand. 

5 But  if  her  father  disallow  her 
in  the  day  that  he  heareth  ; not  any 
of  her  vows,  or  of  her  bonds  where- 
with she  hath  bound  her  soul,  shall 
stand : and  the  Lord  shall  forgive 
her,  because  her  father  disallowed  her. 

6 And  if  she  had  at  all  an  hus- 
,iieb.  band,  when  ^ she  vowed,  or  uttered 
'Zxfufon  ought  out  of  her  lips,  wherev/ith  she 

bound  her  soul ; 

7 And  her  husband  heard  /V,  and 


held  his  peace  at  her  in  the  day 
that  he  heard  it : then  her  vows 
shall  stand,  and  her  bonds  wherewith 
she  bound  her  soul^shall  stand. 

8 'But  if  her  husband  disallowed 
her  on  the  day  that  he  heard  it; 
then  he  shall  make  her  vow  which 
she  vowed,  and  that  which  she  ut- 
tered with  her  lips,  wherewith  she 
bound  her  soul,  of  none  effect : and 
the  Lord  shall  forgive  her. 

9 But  every  vow  of  a widow,  and 
of  her  that  is  divorced,  wherewith 
they  have  bound  their  souls,  shall 
stand  against  her. 

10  And  if  she  vowed  in  her  hus- 
band’s house,  or  bound  her  soul  by 
a bond  with  an  oath ; 

1 1 And  her  husband  heard  7V,  and 
held  his  peace  at  her,  and  disallowed 
her  not ; then  all  her  vows  shall 
stand,  and  every  bond  wherewith  she 
bound  her  soul  shall  stand. 

12  But  if  her  husband  hath  ut- 
terly made  them  void  on  the  day  he 


•The  Nazarlte  vow  however  is  called  in  vi.  2 
neder^  because  though  including  certain  absti- 
nences it  contained  also  the  positive  element ; 
for  the  Nazarite  was  bound  to  let  his  hair 
grow. 

3.  being  in  her  father'’ s house  'in  her  youth'] 
Modern  Jewish  authorities  teach  that  the  con- 
trol here  given  to  the  parent  ceased  when  the 
girl  attained  the  age  of  twelve  years.  There  is 
however  no  trace  of  such  limitation.  It  was 
not  ordinarily  till  her  betrothal  or  marriage, 
that  the  female  passed  (some  suppose  by 
purchase)  from  the  power  of  her  father  to 
that  of  her  husband  (compare  Michaelis, 

‘ Laws  of  Moses,’  Art.  83). 

^ 4.  hear  her  ‘now]  It  would  almost  neces- 

sarily  be  brought  to  his  knowledge  when  the 
f time  for  the  performance  of  it  arrived,  if  not 
! , sooner. 

i ■ * 

;■  5.  the  Lord  shall  forg'rve  her]  i.e.  shall 

[ ; remit  the  obligation.  Cf.  the  use  of  the  same 

y verb  in  2 K.  v.  18. 

: ■ 6.  ylnd  'if  she  had  at  all  an  husband^  ^hen 

she -vonved^  &c.]  Rather,  And  if  she  shall 
f at  all  be  an  husband’s,  and  her  vows 
",  shall  be  upon  her,  or  a rash  utterance 
of  her  lips,  wherewith  she  hath  bound 
her  soul.  The  “at  all”  intimates  that  the 
case  of  a girl  betrothed  but  not  yet  actually 
married  is  here  especially  contemplated.  Among 
the  Jews  the  ceremonv  of  betrothal  was  hardly 
; VoL.  I. 


less  important  than  that  of  marriage,  which, 
in  the  case  of  a virgin,  it  usually  preceded  by 
ten  months  or  a year.  After  betrothal,  a 
woman  continued  to  reside,  till  the  period  of 
her  marriage  arrived,  in  her  father’s  house ; but 
her  property  was  from  that  time  forward  vested 
in  her  husband,  and  she  was  so  far  regarded 
as  personally  his,  that  an  act  of  faithlessness 
to  him  was,  like  adultery,  punishable  with 
death  (Deut.  xxii.  23,  24).  Hence  his  right 
to  control  her  vows  even  before  he  actually 
took  her  home  as  his  wife.  The  vows  might 
have  been  made  either  previously  or  sub- 
sequently to  betrothal ; but  in  either  case  her 
future  husband,  under  whose  control  she 
passed  with  these  vows  upon  her,  might  disallow 
them.  It  would  seem  that  even  the  father’s 
express  sanction  of  his  unbetrothed  daughter’s 
vow  did  not  affect  the  husband’s  power,  after 
her  betrothal,  of  disallowing  it.  To  have  given 
the  father  a power  to  ratify  it  absolutely  might 
have  either  involved  a wrong  to  a future  hus- 
band, or  else  have  interfered  with  the  girl’s 
prospects  of  marriage. 

uttered  ought  out  of  her  lips]  Lit.  “ the  ^ 
rash  utterance  of  her  lips.”  The  word  here 
used  is 'not  found  elsewhere,  and  imports  an 
utterance  made  without  reflection.  The  allu- 
sion to  such  'rash  vows  indicates  perhaps  that 
they  were  not  uncommon;  perhaps  it  was  a 
case  of  this  kind  which  led  to  legislation  on 
the  whole  subject. 

3 c 


NUMBERS.  XXX.  XXXI. 


[v.  13—3. 


heard  them ; then  whatsoever  proceed- 
ed out  of  her  lips  concerning  her 
vows,  or  concerning  the  bond  of  her 
soul,  shall  not  stand : her  husband 
hath  made  them  void  ; and  the  Lord 
shall  forgive  her. 

13  Every  vow,  and  every  binding 
oath  to  afflict  the  soul,  her  husband 
may  establish  it,  or  her  husband  may 
make  it  void. 

14.  But  if  her  husband  altogether 
hold  his  peace  at  her  from  day  to 
day ; then  he  establisheth  all  her 
vows,  or  all  her  bonds,  which  are 
upon  her : he  confirmeth  them,  be- 
cause he  held  his  peace  at  her  in  the 
dav  that  he  heard  them. 

'15  But  if  he  shall  any  ways  make 
them  void  after  that  he  hath  heard 
them-,  then  he  shall  bear  her  iniquity. 

16  I'hese  are  the  statutes,  which 


Chap.  XXXI.  The  command  of  xxv.  17 
is  now  ordered  to  be  executed,  and  a war  of 
vengeance  against  Midian  is  undertaken.  This 
war  and  the  transactions  connected  with  it  are 
narrated  in  this  chapter ; and  would  seem  to 
have  occurred  immediately  before  those  closing 
addresses  of  Moses  to  the  people  which  foiTU 
the  book  of  Deuteronomy.  See  Introd.  § III. 
10,  II.  The  result  of  this  war  completed 
and  secured  the  conquest  of  the  promised  land 
east  of  Jordan. 

2.  the  Midianitei\  The  Moabites  are  not 
included.  It  would  thus  seem  that  it  vras  the 
Midianites,  and  they  only,  who  deliberately  set 
themselves  to  work  the  corruption  of  Israel. 

3.  Avenge  the  Lord  of  Midian]  The  very 
words  in  which  the  command  is  given  show 
that  the  war  against  the  Midianites  was  no 
ordinary  one.  It  was  indeed  less  a war  than 
the  execution  of  a divine  sentence  against 
a most  guilty  people.  The  Midianites  had 
corrupted,  and,  so  far  as  in  them  lay,  ruined 
God’s  people,  body  and  soul ; and  had  done 
this  knowing,  as  after  the  overruling  by  God 
of  Balaam’s  attempts  to  curse  Israel  they  must 
have  known,  that  in  doing  it  they  were  openly 
rebelling  against  God.  From  God  then  a no 
less  open  retribution  overtakes  them.  The 
employment  in  this  work  of  so  small  a number 
of  Israelites  as  12,000  (-u.  4)  against  the  whole 
numerous  nation  of  Midian;  the  selection  of  an 
equal  number  from  each  tribe  irrespective  of 
its  warlike  strength;  the  appointment  of  Phi- 
neas,  famous  for  his  zeal  against  the  very  sin 
to  which  the  Midianites  had  tempted  Israel, 
to  take  the  lead  in  the  war  with  “the  holy 


the  Lord  commanded  Moses,  be- 
tween a man  and  his  wife,  between 
the  father  and  his  daughter,  being  yet 
in  her  youth  in  her  father’s  house. 

CHAPTER  XXXI. 

I The  Alidianites  are  spoiled,  and  Balaam 
slain.  13  Afoses  is  wroth  with  the  officers, 
for  saving  the  wot7ien  alive.  19  How  the 
soldiers,  with  their  captives  and  spoil,  are  to 
be  purified.  25  The  proportion  whereby  the 
prey  is  to  be  divided.  48  The  vohmtaiy  obla- 
tibfi  tmto  the  treasury  of  the  Lord. 

And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 

. saying, 

2 "Avenge  the  children  of  IsraeD  chap.  25. 
of  the  Midianites  : afterward  shalt 
thou  ‘^be  gathered  unto  thy  people.  * chap.  27. 

3 And  Moses  spake  unto  the  peo- 
pie,  saying.  Arm  some  of  yourselves 
unto  the  war,  and  let  them  go  against 
the  Midianites,  and  avenge  the  Lord 
of  Midian. 


instruments  and  trumpets”  (v.  6);  and  the  ex- 
traordinary preservation  (v.  49)  of  all  those 
engaged;  are  tokens  that  on  this  occasion,  no 
less  than  when  the  cities  of  the  plain  were 
destroyed  by  fire  from  heaven,  the  hand  of 
God  directed  the  stroke.  It  is  but  analogous 
to  His  general  dealings  to  scourge  the  Midian- 
ites through  the  instrumentality  of  their  own 
victims. 

Doubtless  there  were  many  amongst  the 
Midianites  who  were  personally  guiltless  as 
regards  Israel.  But  the  rulers  deliberately 
adopted  the  counsel  of  Balaam  against  Israel, 
and  their  behests  had  been  but  too  readily 
obeyed  by  their  subjects.  The  sin  therefore 
was  national,  and  the  retribution  could  be  no 
less  so.  And  such  a judgment  must  neces- 
sarily fall  on  the  whole  people  indiscriminately. 
It  is  also  in  this  particular  case  obvious  that 
to  spare  the  male  children  would  have  pre- 
pared for  Israel  in  a few  years  a nation,  of 
implacable  foes. 

No  doubt  a general  license  to  slay  at  pleasure 
could  hardly  have  been  given  without  demoral- 
izing those  employ^!.  But  the  commission  of 
the  Israelites  in  the  text  must  not  be  so  con- 
ceived. They  had  no  discretion  to  kill  or  to 
spare.  They  were  bidden  to  exterminate  with- 
out mercy,  and  brought  back  to  their  task 
(•v.  14)  when  they  shewed  signs  of  flinching 
from  it.  The  discharge  of  a painful  duty  like 
this  would  no  more  necessarily  tend  to  make 
the  Israelites  cruel  than  a military  execution 
does  our  own  soldiers.  It  was  however  a pre- 
paration for  other  duties  of  the  like  kind  which 
awaited  them ; a proof  by  experiment  that  they 
had  no  alternative  in  such  matters  except  to 


V.  4— 14-]  NUMBERS.  XXXI. 


767 


iHeb.  4 *Of  every  tribe  a thousand, 
^and  of  a throughout  all  the  tribes  of  Israel, 
SSw  shall  ye  send  to  the  war. 
fa  tribe.  5 So  there  were  delivered  out  of 
the  thousands  of  Israel,  a thousand 
of  every  tribe,  twelve  thousand  armed 
for  war. 

6 And  Moses  sent  them  to  the 
war,  a thousand  of  every  tribe,  them 
and  Phinehas  the  son  of  Eleazar  the 
priest,  to  the  war,  with  the  holy  in- 
struments, and  the  trumpets  to  blow 
in  his  hand. 

7 And  they  warred  against  the 
Midianites,  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses ; and  they  slew  all  the  males. 

8 And  they  slew  the  kings  of  Mi- 
dian,  beside  the  r6st  of  them  that 

Tosh.  13.  were  slain;  namely^  ^Evi,  and  Re- 
kem,  and  Zur,  and  Hur,  and  Reba, 
five  kings  of  Midian  : Balaam  also 
the  son  of  Beor  they  slew  with  the 
sword. 

9 And  the  children  of  Israel  took 
all  the  women  of  Midian  captives. 


fultil  the  commands  of  God;  an  awful  but 
doubtless  salutary  manifestation,  as  was  after- 
wards the  slaughter  of  the  Canaanites,  to  which 
that  of  Midian  is  in  all  essential  respects  similar 
(cf.  on  Josh.  X.  Note  at  end  of  chapter),  of 
God's  wrath  against  sin ; and  a type  of  the 
future  extermination  of  sin  and  sinners  from 
His  kingdom.  See  on  the  whole  subject  Heng- 
stenberg,  ‘Authentic,’  ii.  471  sqq.;  Reinke, 

‘ Beitrage,’  i.  351;  Graves,  ‘On  Pentateuch,’ 
Partin.  Lecture  i.;  Macdonald,  ‘On  the  Pen- 
tateuch,’ II.  60  sqq. 

5.  'were  deli^eref]  Or,  “were  told  off.” 
The  Hebrew  word  is  used  in  -z;.  16  in  a some- 
what different  sense,  but  is  not  found  elsewhere. 
Cf.  on  u.  16. 

6.  Phinehas]  He  was  marked  out  as  the 
fitting  director  of  the  expedition  by  his  conduct 
(cf.  ch.  XXV.)  in  the  matter  of  Zimri  and  Cozbi. 

'With  the  holy^  instruments.,  and  the  trumpets] 
Or  rather,  “with  the  holy  instruments,  to  wit, 
the  trumpets,”  for  the  trumpets  themselves 
seem  to  be  the  instruments  intended. 

8.  And  they  slew  ...that  were  slain]  Our 
translators  have  not  exhibited  the  distinction 
between  the  two  Hebrew  words  here  em.ployed. 
Render  thus:  And  the  kings  of  Midian 
they  put  to  death,  heside  those  that 
fell  in  the  battle;  namely,  &c.  From 
which  it  would  seem  that  beside  these  five,  put  ’ 
to  death  after  the  battle,  there -were  other  Mi- 
dianitish  kings  who  perished  fighting ; and  also 


and  their  little  ones,  and  took  the 
spoil  of  all  their  cattle,  and  all  their 
flocks,  and  all  their  goods. 

10  And  they  burnt  all  their  cities 
wherein  they  dwelt,  and  all  their 
goodly  castles,  with  fire. 

11  And  they  took  all  the. spoil, 
and  all  the  prey,  both  of  men  and  of 
beasts. 

12  And  they  brought  the  captives, 
and  the  prey,  and  the  spoil,  unto 
Moses,  and  Eleazar  the  priest,  and 
unto  the  congregation  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  unto  the  camp  at  the  plains 
of  Moab,  which  are  by  Jordan  ttear 
Jericho. 

13  ^ And  Moses,  and  Eleazar  the 
priest,  and  all  the  princes  of  the  con- 
gregation, went  forth  to  meet  them 
without  the  camp. 

14  And  Moses  was  wroth  with  the 
officers  of  the  host,  with  the  cap- 
tains over  thousands,  and  captains 
over  hundreds,  which  came  from  the  t Heb. 

^ battle.  <’/ 


that  Balaam  did  not  fall  in  battle,  but  was 
judicially  executed.  From  Josh.  xiii.  21  it 
appears  that  the  five  chieftains  here  mentioned 
were  vassals  of  Sihon  the  Amorite.  Cf.  on 
xxii.  2.  The  name  of  one  of  them,  Rekem, 
was  bestowyd  by  the  Jews  of  later  times 
upon  the  city  of  Petra;  the  coincidence  is 
however  in  all  likelihood  accidental.  On 
Balaam  cf.  on  xxiv.  25. 

10.  their  goodly  castles]  Render  rather, 
both  here  and  in  Gen.  xxv.  16,  hamlets. 
The  LXX.  renders  eVavXety,  “pastoral  en- 
closures.” The  word  is  derived  from  a word 
(/or)  signifying  “a  row”  or  “ range”  (cf.  Ezek. 
xlvi.  23);  and  probably  indicates  those  col- 
lections of  rude  dwellings,  made  of  stones  piled 
one  on  another  and  covered  with  tent-cloths, 
which  are  used  by  the  Arabs  to  this  day;  and 
which  are  frequently  mentioned  as  douars 
in  narratives  of  the  French  campaigns  in 
Algeria.  These  dwellings  would  be  formed 
usually  m a circle.  Cf.  the  word  “Hazeroth  ” 
and  note  on  xi.  35.  ’ 

11.  all  the  spoil.,  and  all  the  prey]  The 
latter  word  refers  to  the  captives  and  live- 
stock : the  former  to  the  ornaments  and  other 
effects.  In  i Sam.  xv.  19  however  the  Amalekite 
live-stock  is  included  under  the  general  term 
of  “spoil.” 

12.  by  Jordan  near  'Jericho]  Literally 
“ by  the  Jericho  Jordan.”  Cf.  on  xxii.  i. 


3C2 


768 


NUMBERS.  XXXI. 


[v.  15—32. 


1 5 And  Moses  said  unto  them,  Have 
ye  saved  all  the  women  alive? 
chap.  25.  16  Behold,  these  caused  the  chil- 

<^’2 Pet. 2.  dren  of  Israel,  through  the  ^counsel 
of  Balaam,  to  commit  trespass  against 
the  Lord  in  the' matter  of  Peor,  and 
there  was  a plague  among  the  congre- 
gation of  the  Lord. 

yjudg.  21.  17  Now  therefore -^kill  every  male 

among  the  little  ones,  and  kill  every 
woman  that  hath  known  man  by  lying 
tHeb.  with  ^ him. 

a male.  wom.en  children, 

that  have  not  known  a man  by  lying 
with  him,  keep  alive  for  yourselves. 

19  And  do  ye  abide  without  the 
camp  seven  days:  whosoever  hath  kill- 

^chap.  19.  ed  any  person,  and  ^whosoever  hath 
n,  &c.  touched  any  slain,  purify  both  your- 
selves and  your  captives  on  the  third 
day,  and  on  the  seventh  day. 

20  And  purify  all  your  raiment, 
t Heb.  and  all  ^ that  is  made  of  skins,  and  all 
viefit,  or,  work  of  goats’  hair^  and  all  things 

made  of  wood. 

21  ^ And  Eleazar  the  priest  said 
unto  the  men  of  war  which  went  to 
the  battle.  This  is  the  ordinance  of 
the  law  which  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses  ; 

22  Only  the  gold,  and  the  silver, 
the  brass,  the  iron,  the  tin,  and  the 
lead, 

23  Every  thing  that  may  abide  the 
fire,  ye  shall  make  it  go  through  the 
fire,  and  it  shall  be  clean : neverthe- 
less it  shall  be  purified  with  the  water 
of  separation : and  all  that  abideth  not 
the  fire  ye  shall  make  go  through  the 
water. 


24  And  ye  shall  wash  your  clothes 
on  the  seventh  day,  and  ye  shall  be 
clean,  and  afterward  ye  shall  come 
into  the  camp. 

25  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

26  Take  the  sum  of  the  prey 
^'that  was  taken,  both  of  man  and 
beast,  thou,  and  Eleazar  the  priest,  UvUy. 
and  the  chief  fathers  of  the  congre- 
gation : 

27  And  divide  the  prey  into  two 
parts  ; between  them  that  took  the 
war  upon  them,  who  went  out  to 
battle,  and  between  all  the  congre- 
gation : 

28  And  levy  a tribute  unto  the 
Lord  of  the  men  'of  war  which  went 
out  to  battle : one  soul  of  five  hun- 
dred, both  of  the  persons,  and  of  the 
beeves,  and  of  the  asses,  and  of  the 
sheep  : 

29  Take  it  of  their  half,  and  give 
it  unto  Eleazar  the  priest,  for  an 
heave  oftering  of  the  Lord. 

30  And  of  the  children  of  Israel’s 
half,  thou  shalt  take  one  portion  of 
fifty,  of  the  persons,  of  the  beeves,  of 

the  asses,  and  of  the  “flocks,  of  2\\iOT,gaat 
manner  of  beasts,  and  give  them  unto 
the  Levites,  which  keep  the  charge  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  Lord. 

31  And  Moses  and  Eleazar  the 
priest  did  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

32  And  the  booty,  being  the  rest 
of  the  prey  which  the  men  of  war 
had  caught,  was  six  hundred  thou- 
sand and  seventy  thousand  and  five 
thousand  sheep. 


16.  caused... to  commit  trespass'\  On  this 
verse  see  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

19.  and  your  capti'ves'\  Their  captivity 
rendered  them  to  some  extent  a constituent 
part  of  the  Israelitish  people.  Like  the  warriors 
therefore  they  needed  purification. 

on  the  third  day.,  and  on  the  seventh  day~\ 
According  to  the  law  set  forth  in  xix.  12. 

22.  brass']  Render  copper  ; Cf.  on  Gen. 
V.  22.  'I'he  verse  is  curious  as  illustrating 
the  variety  of  metals  in  use  at  this  early  date 
for  domestic  purposes.  All  these  metals  were 
common  in  I'-gypt  centuries  before  the  date 
of  the  Exodus. 


29.  an  heave-rjfertng]  Render  simply  an. 
offering,  and  cf.  on  xviii.  24.  The  verb 
from  which  the  word  here  rendered  “heave- 
offering” is  derived,  is  rightly  translated  “levy” 
in  V.  28. 

32.  Render  rather,  “And  the  prey”  (i.e. 
the  live  prey,  the  word  being  the  same  as  in 
ii)  “in  addition  to  the  plunder  which  the 
men  of  war  seized,  &c.”  The  “plunder”  of 
this  verse  is  that  named  “spoil”  in  -u.  ii,  and 
described  more  particularly  in  v.  50. 

The  numbers  of  sheep,  beeves,  as.ses,  and 
persons  taken  are  given  in  this  and  following 
verses  in  round  thousands.  Hence  the  Lord’s 


V.  33—52-] 


NUMBERS.  XXXI. 


769 


33  And  threescore  and  twelve  thou- 
sand beeves, 

34  And  threescore  and  one  thou- 
sand asses, 

35  And  thirty  and  two  thousand 
persons  in  all,  of  women  that  had  not 
known  man  by  lying  with  him. 

36  And  the  half,  which  was  the 
portion  of  them  that  went  out  to 
war,  was  in  number  three  hundred 
thousand  and  seven  and  thirty  thou- 
sand and  five  hundred  sheep: 

37  And  the  Lord’s  tribute  of  the 
sheep  was  six  hundred  and  threescore 
and  fifteen. 

38  And  the  beeves  were  thirty  and 
six  thousand  ; of  which  the  Lord’s 
tribute  was  threescore  and  twelve. 

39  And  the  asses  were  thirty  thou- 
sand and  five  hundred ; of  which  the 
Lord’s  tribute  was  threescore  and  one. 

40  And  the  persons  were  sixteen 
thousand  ; of  which  the  Lord’s  tri- 
bute was  thirty  and  two  persons. 

41  And  Moses  gave  the  tribute, 
which  was  the  Lord’s  heave  offering, 
unto  Eleazar  the  priest,  as  the  Lord 
commanded  Moses. 

42  And  of  the  children  of  Israel’s 
half,  which  Moses  divided  from  the 
men  that  warred, 

43  (Now  the  half  that  pertained 
unto  the  congregation  was  three  hun- 
dred thousand  and  thirty  thousand  and 
seven  thousand  and  five  hundred  sheep. 


44  And  thirty  and  six  thousand 
beeves, 

45  And  thirty  thousand  asses  and 
five  hundred, 

46  And  sixteen  thousand  persons;) 

47  Even  of  the  children  of  Israel’s 
half,  Moses  took  one  portion  of  fifty, 
both  of  man  and  of  beast,  and  gave 
them  unto  the  Levites,  which  kept 
the  charge  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
Lord  ; as  the  Lord  commanded  Mo- 
ses. 

48  ^ And  the  officers  v/hich  were 
over  thousands  of  the  host,  the  cap- 
tains of  thousands,  and  captains  of 
hundreds,  came  near  unto  Moses  : 

49  And  they  said  unto  Moses,  Thy 
servants  have  taken  the  sum  of  the 
men  of  war  which  are  under  our 

^ charge,  and  there  lacketh  not  one  t Heb. 
man  of  us. 

50  We  have  therefore  brought  an 
oblation  for  the  Lord,  what  every 
man  hath  ^gotten,  of  jewels  of  gold,  t Heb. 
chains,  and  bracelets,  rings,  earrings, 

and  tablets,  to  make  an  atonement 
for  our  souls  before  the  Lord. 

51  And  Moses  and  Eleazar  the 
priest  took  the  gold  of  them,  even  all 
wrought  jewels. 

52  And  all  the  gold  of  the  ^ offer-  ^Heb. 
ing  that  they  offered  up  to  the  Lord,  offering. 
of  the  captains  of  thousands,  and  of  the 
captains  of  hundreds,  was  sixteen  thou- 
sand seven  hundred  and  fifty  shekels. 


tribute  {y’v.  29,  37,  38,  &c.),  being  the  five-  the  work,  and  hence  the  free-will  oblation  of 
hundredth  part  of  the  half,  comes  out  also  in  50. 

round  numbers.  Probably  indeed  this  tribute,  50.  chains^  i.e.  “armlets,”  as  in  2 Sam. 
set  apart  at  the  time,  formed  the  basis  of  the  i.  10.  • , 

subsequent  record;  and  upon  it  the  warriors’  rings']  Specially,  “finger-rings,”  or  “seal- 
share,  and  the  general  totals,  were  calculated  rings;”  cf.  Ex.  xxxv.  22. 
by  multiplication.  The  enormous  amount  tablets]  Worn  suspended  from  the  neck ; 
both  of  live  stock  and  of  personal  ornament  see  ibid. 

was  characteristic  of  the  Midianites.  When  to  make  an  atonement  for  our  souls  before 
they  invaded  Israel  in  the  days  of  the  Judges,  the  Lord]  Gf.  Ex.  xxx.  ii — 16.  The  atone- 
their  wealth  was  still  of  the  same  kind  (Judg.  ment  was  not  for  any  special  offence  com- 
vi.  5,  viii.  24  sqq.).  The  Bedouins,  notwith-  mitted  (which  would  have  called  for  a sacri- 
standing  their  wild  nomadic  life,  retain  their  fice  of  blood-shedding),  but  rather  like  the 
ancestral  love  of  finery  to  this  present  day.  half-shekel  given  at  the  census  in  Ex.  /.  c.,  was 

an  acknowledgment  of  having  received  un- 
49.  there  lacketh  not  one  man  of  us]  There  deseiwed  mercies.  These,  if  unacknowledged, 
is  no  mention  of  any  resistance  on  the  part  of  would  have  entailed  guilt  on  the  soul, 
the  Midianites.  Probably  they  were  routed  by  52.  sixteen  thousand  seven  hundred  and 
a sudden  attack.  The  Israelites  saw  in  this  ffty  shekels]  In  value  about  20,000/.  See  on 
a proof  that  the  Lord  had  been  with  them  in  vii.  84  sqq. 


770 


NUMBERS.  XXXI.  XXXII. 


[v.  S3— 9- 


53  ( For  the  men  of  war  had  taken  of  thousands  and  of  hundreds,  and 

spoil,  every  man  for  himself.)  brought  it  into  the  tabernacle  of  the 

54  And  Moses  and  Eleazar  the  congregation,  for  a memorial  for  the 
priest  took  the  gold  of  the  captains  children  of  Israel  before  the  Lord. 


53.  This  verse  seems  to  imply  that  the  plunder.  Of  course  besides  the  gold  there 
soldiers,  as  distinct  from  the  officers  (cf.  •v.  would  be  much  spoil  of  less  precious  materials ; 
49),  did  not  make  any  offering  from  their  see  'vnj.  20,  22. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xxxi.  16. 


The  word  here  ("iDD)  is  the  one  to  which 
attention  was  drawn  at  -r.  5.  It  means  literally 
“to  deliver,”  or  “give;”  and  so  to  commu- 
nicate or  teach.  Arab,  eduxit,  prodire 


fecit,  incitavit,  Freytag.  Here  the  passage 
more  closely  rendered  would  run:  “became 
to  the  children  of  Israel  for  a cause”  (or 
“incitement,”  Dr  Lee,  ‘Lex.’  sub  v.)  “of 
treachery  to  the  Lord.” 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 

I The  Reiibenitcs  and  Gadites  sue  for  their  in- 
heritance on  that  side  Jordan.  6 Moses  re- 
proveth  thejn.  16  They  offer  him  conditions 
to  his  content.  33  Moses  assigneth  them  the 
land.  39  They  conquer  it. 

N'  OW  the  children  of  Reuben 
and  the  children  of  Gad  had  a 
very  great  multitude  of  cattle  : and 
when  they  saw  the  land  of  Jazer,  and 
the  land  of  Gilead,  that,  behold,  the 
place  was  a place  for  cattle ; 

2 The  children  of  Gad  and  the 
children  of  Reuben  came  and  spake 
unto  Moses,  and  to  Eleazar  the  priest, 
and  unto  the  princes  of  the  congre- 
gation, saying, 

3 Ataroth,  and  Dibon,  and  Jazer, 
and  Nimrah,  and  Heshbon,  and  Elea- 
leh,  and  Shebam,  and  Nebo,  and  Beon, 
4 Even  the  country  which  the 
Lord  smote  before  the  congregation 


of  Israel,  is  a land  for  cattle,  and  thy 
servants  have  cattle : 

5 Wherefore,  said  they,  if  we 
have  found  grace  in  thy  sight,  let  this 
land  be  given  unto  thy  servants  for 
a possession,  and  bring  us  not  over 
Jordan. 

6 ^ And  Moses  said  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Gad  and  to  the  children  of 
Reuben,  Shall  your  brethren  go  to 
war,  and  shall  ye  sit  here  ? 

7 And  wherefore  ^ discourage  ye 
the  heart  of  the  children  of  Israel 
from  going  over  into  the  land  which 
the  Lord  hath  given  them  ? 

8 Thus  did  your  fathers,  when  I 
sent  them  from  Kadesh-barnea  to  see 
the  land. 

9 For  ‘^when  they  went  up  unto^c^^p- 
the  valley  of  Eshcol,  and  saw  the 
land,  they  discouraged  the  heart  of 


Chap.  XXXI  I.  The  record  of  the  last 
war  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan  is  followed  by 
the  assignment  of  the  lands  already  conquered 
to  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad  and  to  cer- 
tain families  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh. 

1.  the  land  of  Jazer']  Cf.  on  xxi.  32.  This 
district,  although  included  in  the  land  of  Gilead, 
seems  to  have  had  especial  attractions  for  the 
Israelitish  settlers;  and  hence  possibly  the  pre- 
vious and  special  notice  of  its  occupation  after 
the  victory  of  Jahaz.  It  was  moreover  the  first 
district  in  Gilead  which  the  Israelites  invaded. 

a place  for  cattle']  All  travellers  in  Gilead, 
the  modern  Helka,  bear  witness  to  its  richness 
as  compared  with  the  country  to  the  west  of 
the  Jordan.  Its  general  character  is  that 
of  an  upland  pasture,  undulating  and  thickly 


timbered.  In  the  last  respect  its  northern 
portions  excel  its  southern ; but  for  fertility  of 
soil  the  southern  province  is  preferred  by  the 
Arabs,  in  whose  lips  it  has  passed  into  a pro- 
verb: “Thou  canst  not  find  a country  like 
the  Belka.”  Cf.  Tristram,  ‘.Land  of  Israel,’ 
p.  541  sqq. 

3.  Respecting  the  places  here  mentioned 
see  on  -w.  34 — 38.  Shebam  is  the  same  with 
Shibmah:  Beon  with  Baal-meon. 

8.  your  fathers]  The  generation  of  the 
Exodus  was  now  substantially  extinct.  Cf. 
xxvi.  64,  65. 

Kadesh-barnea]  On  the  site  of  Kadesh, 
see  Note  at  end  of  ch.  xiii. : on  Barnea,  see 
Note  at  end  of  this  chapter. 


V.  10 28.] 


NUMBERS.  XXXII. 


771 


the  children  of  Israel,  that  they  should 
not  go  into  the  land  which  the  Lord 
had  given  them. 

10  And  the  Lord’s  anger  was  .kin- 
dled the  same  time,  and  he  sware, 
saying, 

1 1 Surely  none  of  the  men  that 
f-chap.  14.  came  up  out  of  Egypt,  '^from  twenty 
28, 29.  years  old  and  upward,  shall  see  the 

land  which  I sware  unto  Abraham, 
unto  Isaac,  and  unto  Jacob;  because 
i Heb.  they  have  not  ^ wholly  followed  me : 
^afuAi.  12  Save  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephun- 
neh  the  Kenezite,  and  Joshua  the 
son  of  Nun:  for  they  have  wholly 
followed  the  Lord. 

13  And  the  Lord’s  anger  was  kin- 
dled against  Israel,  and  he  made  them 
wander  in  the  wilderness  forty  years, 
until  all  the  generation,  that  had  done 
evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  was 
consumed. 

14  And,  behold,  ye  are  risen  up 
in  your  fathers’  stead,  an  increase  of 
sinful  men,  to  augment  yet  the  fierce 
anger  of  the  Lord  toward  Israel. 

15  For  if  ye  turn  away  from  after 
him,  he  will  yet  again  leave  them  in 
'the  wilderness ; and  ye  shall  destroy 
all  this  people. 

16  ^ And  they  came  near  unto 
him,  and  said.  We  will  build  sheep- 
folds  here  for  our  cattle,  and  cities  for 
our  little  ones  ; 

17  But  we  ourselves  will  go  ready 
armed  before  the  children  of  Israel, 
until  we  have  brought  them  unto 
their  place:  and  our  little  ones  shall 
dwell  in  the  fenced  cities  because  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  land. 

18  We  will  not  return  unto  our 
houses,  until  the  children  of  Israel 


have  inherited  every  man  his  inhe- 
ritance. 

19  For  we  will  not  inherit  with 
them  on  yonder  side  Jordan,  or  for- 
ward ; because  our  inheritance  is  fallen 
to  us  on  this  side  Jordan  eastward. 

20  H And  Moses  said  unto  them,  ^ Josh.  i. 
If  ye  will  do  this  thing,  if  ye  will  go 
armed  before  the  Lord  to  war, 

21  And  will  go  all  of  you  armed 
over  Jordan  before  the  Lord,  until 
he  hath  driven  out  his  enemies  from 
before  him, 

22  And  the  land  be  subdued  be- 
fore the  Lord  : then  afterward  ye 
shall  return,  and  be  guiltless  before 
the  Lord,  and  before  Israel ; and 
this  land  shall  be  your  possession  be- 
fore the  Lord. 

23  But  if  ye  will  not  do  so,  be- 
hold, ye  have  sinned  against  the 
Lord  : and  be  sure  your  sin  will  find 
you  out. 

24  Build  you  cities  for  your  little 
ones,  and  folds  for  your  sheep  ; and 
do  that  v/hich  hath  proceeded  out  of 
your  mouth. 

25  And  the  children  of  Gad  and 
the  children  of  Reuben  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying.  Thy  servants  will  do 
as  my  lord  commandeth. 

26  Our  little  ones,  our  wives,  our 
flocks,  and  all  our  cattle,  shall  be 
there  in  the  cities  of  Gilead  : 

27  ^But  thy  servants  will  pass  over,  Josh.  4. 
every  man  armed  for  war,  before  the 
Lord  to  battle,  as  my  lord  saith. 

28  So  concerning  them  Moses  com- 
manded Eleazar  the  priest,  and  Jo- 
shua the  son  of  Nun,  and  the  chief 
fathers  of  the  tribes  of  the  children  of 
Israel : 


12.  the  Kenezite]  Cf.  i Chron.  iv.  13 
sqq. ; and  ch.  xiii.  6 and  note. 

19.  on  yonder  side  'Jordan... on  this  side 
Jordan]  The  expressions  in  the  Hebrew 
differ  but  slightly  (me-eber  lay-yarden — me-eber 
hay-yarden].  And  in  nu  32  the  latter  is  actually 
used  of  the  district  west  of  Jordan,  though 
here  applied  to  that  east  of  it.  The  terms  are 
therefore  used  with  some  laxity  (cf.  on  Deut. 
i.  i),  and  are  here  accordingly  defined  by  the 
addition  of  “forward”  and  “eastward”  re- 
spectively. 


23.  be  sure  your  sin  nvill  Jind  you  out]  Lit. 
“know  ye  of  your  sin  that  it  will  find  you 
out.”  Moses  implies  that  their  sin  would 
eventually  bring  its  own  punishment  along 
with  it. 

27.  before  the  Lord]  i.e.  immediately  in 
front  of  the  sacred  tokens  of  the  Lord’s  pre- 
sence; cf.  X.  18 — 21. 

28.  Moses  commanded]  Moses  gives  the 
necessary  instructions  to  those  intrusted  with 
the  duty  of  making  the  partition  (cf.  xxxiv. 
17  sqq.).  It  was  only  when  the  nine  and  a 


772 


NUMBERS.  XXXIL 


[v.  29—36. 


29  And  Moses  said  unto  them,  If 
the  children  of  Gad  and  the  children 
of  Reuben  will  pass  with  you  over 
Jordan,  every  man  armed  to  battle, 
before  the  Lord,  and  the  land  shall 
be  subdued  before  you  ; then  ye  shall 
o;ive  them  the  land  of  Gilead  for  a 
possession  : 

30  But  if  they  will  not  pass  over 
with  you  armed,  they  shall  have  pos- 
sessions among  you  in  the  land  of 
Canaan. 

31  And  the  children  of  Gad  and 
the  children  of  Reuben  answered, 
saying,  As  the  Lord  hath  said  unto 
thy  servants,  so  will  we  <^o. 

32  We  will  pass  over  armed  before 
the  Lord  into  the  land  of  Canaan, 


that  the  possession  of  our  inheritance 
on  this  side  Jordan  may  be  ours. 

33  And  ^Moses  gave  unto  them,  ^ Deut.  3. 
even  to  the  children  of  Gad,  and  to  jih.  13  8. 
the  children  of  Reuben,  and  unto  half 

the  tribe  of  Manasseh  the  son  of  Jo- 
seph, the  kingdom  of  Sihon  king  of 
the  Amorites,  and  the  kingdom  of 
Og  king  of  Bashan,  the  land,  with 
the  cities  thereof  in  the  coasts,  even 
the  cities  of  the  country  round  about. 

34  ^ And  the  children  of  Gad 
built  Dibon,  and  Ataroth,  and  Aroer, 

35  And  Atroth,  Shophan,  and  Jaa- 
zer,  and  Jg^behah, 

36  And  Beth-nimrah,  and  Beth- 
haran,  fenced  cities : and  folds  for 
sheep. 


half  tribes  received  their  inheritance  in  western 
Canaan,  that  the  two  tribes  and  a half,  having 
fulfilled  the  conditions,  required  of  them,  for- 
mally entered  into  possession  of  Gilead  and 
Bashan,  t.’.  32;  cf.  Deut.  iii.  12 — 20.  Then 
too,  no  doubt,  the  boundaries  of  their  respec- 
tive allotments  were  determined. 

33.  half  the  tribe  of  Manasseh~\  This  half 
tribe,  consisting,  as  appears  from  'uv.  39  sqq., 
of  ihe  families  of  Machir,  is  here  mentioned 
for  the  first  time.  It  would  seem  that  Moses, 
when  assigning  to  the  pastoral  tribes  the  in- 
heritance which  they  desired,  took  opportunity 
at  the  same  time  to  appropriate  to  these 
Manassites  specially  the  district  they  had 
already  subdued.  Thus  the  whole  of  the 
conquered  country  was  provisionally  dis- 
posed of,  and  the  forwardness  and  valour 
<)f  the  Machirites  rewarded.  It  seems  clear 
from  v.  39  and  Josh.  xvii.  i,  that  the  claims 
of  the  Alachirites  arose  simply  out  of  their 
exploits. 

34  — 36.  Settlements  formed  forthwith  by 
the  Gadites.  The  cities  here  named  fall  into 
three  groups. 

34.  The  leading  city  of  the  first  group  is 
Diboii,  cf.  xxi.  30;  called,  from  the  possession 
which  the  Gadites  now  took  of  it,  Dibon-gad, 
xxxiii.  45,  46.  It  lay  four  miles  north  of  the 
Arnon;  and  its  extensive  ruins  still  bear  the 
name  Dhiban.  It  was  here  that  the  Moabite 
stone  was  discovered  by  the  Rev.  T.  Klein, 
in  1868.  According  to  a very  probable  re- 
storation of  two  letters  missing  at  the  end  of 
the  first  line  of  the  inscription  on  the  stone, 
Chemoshgad  t = “he  whose  good  fortune  is 
Chemosh,”  cf.  Baal-gad,  Josh.  xi.  17),  the 
father  of  Mesha,  was  a I)ibonite.  Dibon  is 
reckoned  as  a Reulx'uite  town.  Josh,  xiii.  9 ; 
whilst  in  Isa.  xv.  2 and  Jer.  xlviii.  18,  22,  it  is 


spoken  of  as  Moabite.  Occupied  on  the  first 
acquisition  of  the  territory  by  the  Gadites,  and 
assigned  by  Joshua  to  the  Reubenites,  it  was 
eventually  recaptured  by  the  Moabites,  in  whose 
hands  it  remained,  Ataroth^  i.e.  “crowns,” 
now  the  ruin  Attarus,  on  the  hill  to  which  it 
gives  its  name,  was  seven  miles  north-west  of 
Dibon,  Aroer ^ now  Arair,  also  in  ruins,  lay 
between  Dibon  and  the  Amon,  on  the  brink 
of  the  precipitous  ravine  through  which  that 
torrent  flows.  It  must  not  be  confounded 
with  the  Aroer  which  fell  permanently  to  the 
Gadites,  in  front  of  Rabbath- Ammon,  Josh, 
xiii.  25. 

35.  Atroth^  Sbophan\  Write  Atroth- 
Shophan,  z.c.  Atroth,  or  Ataroth  of  Shophan, 
or  “of  the  burrow.”  The  addition  is  made 
to  distinguish  this  Ataroth  from  the  one 
named  in  the  verse  preceding,  from  which  it 
was  probably  not  far  distant.  The  four  cities 
now  named  may  be  styled  the  Dibon  settle- 
ment. 

Jaazer']  Or  Jazer.  See  on  i;.  i.  This  city 
with  the  neighbouring  Joghehah^  now  Jebeiha, 
a ruined  place  seven  miles  to  the  north-east, 
formed  the  second  group. 

36.  The  third  Gadite  settlement  lay  in 
the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  to  the  west  of  the 
preceding,  with  which  it  may  possibly  have 
been  connected.  It  comprised  the  cities  of 
Beth-nimrah^  otherwise  Nimrah,  and  Beth- 
haran:  see,  for  both,  on  xxii.  i.  The  latter 
cf  these  lay  within  the  ground  covered  by  the 
Israclitish  camp,  and  therefore  can  hardly 
have  been  occupied  by  the  Gadites  till  the 
host  crossed  the  Jordan. 

The  Jaazer  and  Jordan  settlements  were 
eventually  confirmed  to  the  Gadites  as  part  of 
their  inheritance,  which  from  them  stretched 
away  northwards.  But  their  Dibon  settle- 


V.  37— 4I-] 


NUMBERS.  XXXII. 


773 


37  And  the  children  of  Reuben  built 
Heshbon,  and  Elealeh,and  Kirjathaim, 

38  And  Nebo,  and  Baal-meon, 
(their  names  beino;  chano-ed.)  and 

ly  names  bhibiiiah  : aiid  ^ gave  other  names  un- 
to  the  cities  which  they  builded. 

/cln  39  children  of  -^Machir  the 

23.  son  of  Manasseh  went  to  Gilead,  and 


took  it,  and  dispossessed  the  Amorite 
which  was  in  it. 

40  And  Moses  gave  Gilead  unto 
Machir  the  son  of  Manasseh;  and  he 
dwelt  therein. 

41  And  ^Jair  the  son  of  Manasseh  ^Deut.  3.. 
went  and  took  the  small  towns  there- 
of, and  called  them  Havoth-jair. 


ment,  v/hich  was  cut  off  from  the  others, ‘must 
have  passed  into  the  possession  of  Reuben:’ 
see  Josh,  xiii,  16,  17. 

37,  38.  The  Reubenites  established  them- 
selves more  compactly  than  the  Gadites. 
Their  central  city  was  the  old  • Amoritish 
capital,  Heshbon:  see  on  xxi.  25.  They  occu- 
pied also  Elealeh^  now  el-’Al,  a mile  to  the 
north-east ; Nebo^  probably  three  miles  to  the 
south-west  (see  on  xxi.  20) ; and  Baal-meon^ 
now  apparently  Myun  (seeBurckhardt,  p.  365), 
nearly  two  miles  to  t^e  south.  The  names  of 
the  last  two  cities  they  endeavoured  to  change, 
probably  on  account  of  their  idolatrous  cha- 
racter. Of  Nebo,  Jerome  (on  Isa.  xv.  2)  says : 
“ In  Nebo  erat  Chamos  idolum  consecratum, 
quod  alio  nomine  Baal-phegor  appellatur.” 
It  was  retaken  by  Mesha,  circ.  895  b.c.,  as 
the  Moabite  stone  records ; and  hence  we  find 
it  spoken  of  by  Isaiah,  xv.  2,  and  by  Jeremiah, 
xlviii.  I,  as  a Moabite  town:  cf.  on  xxi.  29. 
Beon  {y.  3),  or  Beth-meon  (Jer.  xlviii.  23), 
may  be  the  name  by  which  Baal-meon  was 
replaced.  The  cities,  however,  still  bore  in  the 
days  of  the  prophets  their  old  designations; 
cf.  Is.  XV.  2,  Ezek.  xxv.  9.  Baal-meon  indeed 
would  seem  to  have  fallen  into  the  hands  of 
the  Moabites  before  the  days  of  Mesha,  who 
speaks  of  himself  as  having  there  built  a 
. temple,  no  doubt  to  Chemosh,  and  as  having 
fortified  the  town.  He  would  seem  to  have 
made  it  the  stronghold  from  which  as  a 
basis  he  operated  in  his  later  conquests.  See 
Schlottmann,  ‘Die  Siege.  Mesas,’  pp.  16,  17. 
Of  the  remaining  two  cities  of  the  Reubenite 
settlement,  Kirjathaim^  which  is  mentioned 
between  Elealeh  and  Nebo,  has  been  sought 
three  miles  south  of  Heshbon,  in  the  ruins 
known  as  et-Teim.  The  ancient  name,  which 
signifies  “the  double  city,”  may  perhaps  by  a 
false  etymology  have  been  written  Kir-iathaim, 
have  lost  its  initial  syllable  in  course  of  time, 
and  been  corrupted  into  its  modern  form. 
According  to  Eusebius  Kiriathaim  is  to  be 
found  in  the  site  now  called  Kureiyat,  on  the 
mountain,  close  to  Ataroth;  but  this  would 
have  lain  within  the  southern  Gadite  settle- 
ment, and  would  not  have  been  occupied  as 
yet  by  the  Reubenites.  Lastly,  Shibmah,  more 
properly  Sibmah,  famous  at  a later  period  for 
its  vines,  cf.  Isa.  xvi.  8,  still  leaves  the  trace  of 
its^ame  in  the  ruins  es-Sameh,  four  miles  east 


of  Heshbon.  Thus  all  these  Reubenite  cities 
clustered  round  Heshbon;  and,  allowing  a fair 
space  round  each,  the  extent  of  the  Reubenite 
settlement  would  be  about  one-tenth,  of  the 
extent  of  their  eventual  inheritance.  They 
probably  at  the  partition  retained  all  these 
cities  with  the  exception  of  Heshbon  itself, 
which,  passing  to  the  Levites,  was  thenceforth 
reckoned  as  within  the  tribe  of  Gad. 

It  is  obvious  that  neither  the  Reubenites 
nor  the  Gadites  were  the  founders  of  the 
cities  of  which  they  thus  took  possession,  and 
which  the  text  describes  them  as  “building.” 
They  probably  fortified  them,  for  the  first 
time  or  afresh,  so  as  to  render  them  places  of 
safety  for  their  families  during  the  campaigns 
on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan;  and  provided 
them  with  all  conveniences  for  their  flocks 
and  herds. 

39.  the  children  of  Machir']  Machir,  the 
son  of  Manasseh,  was  long  since  dead:  even 
his  sons  had  been  brought  up  upon  Joseph’s 
knees  (Gen.  1.  23).  But  the  renown  ac- 
quired by  his  descendants  raised  his  family 
almost  to  the  dignity  of  a tribe;  and  the 
Machirites  are  in  the  next  verse  styled  Machir, 
just  as  the  children  of  Judah,  or  of  Ephraim 
are  often  spoken  of  as  Judah  or  Ephraim. 
So  in  Judg.  V.  14  Machir  is  coupled  with 
Ephraim  and  Zebulun. 

nvent]  i.e.  “had -gone:”  the  statement  is 
preparatory  to  the  ensuing  record  of  the  grant 
to  them  of  the  land  they  had  won. 

Gilead]  More  strictly  part  of  north  Gilead; 
which,  though  inhabited  by  the  Amorites,  had 
belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Og.  Respecting 
this  use  of  the  name  Gilead  for  the  territory 
of  the  Machirites,  see  on  xxvi.  29. 

41.  fair]  On  his  pedigree  cf.  on  xxvii.  i. 
He  was,  through  his  father’s  mother,  a de- 
scendant' of  Machir,  though  not  of  Gilead; 
but  while  reckoned,  on  her  account,  a Manassite, 
he  traced  up  his  ancestry  in  the  male  line  to 
the  more  illustrious  family  of  Judah.  His 
own  exploits — he  was  the  conqueror  of  Argob, 
Deut.  iii.  14 — gave  new  lustre  to  his  name; 
and  the  fame  of  the  family  is  attested  by  the 
history  of  Jair  the  Israelitish  judge,  doubtless 
a descendant ; perhaps  also  by  the  mention  of 
Jairus,  St  Luke  viii.  41,  the  ruler  of  the  syna- 
gogue at  the  neighbouring  city  of  Capernaum. 


774 


NUMBERS.  XXXIL  [v.  42. 

42  And  Nobah  went  and  took  and  called  it  Nobah,  after  his  own 
Kenath,  and  the  villages  thereof,  name. 


Ha’voth-jair']  That  is,  the  villages,  or  rather 
groups  of  tents,  or  “kraals,”  of  Jair.  The 
term  probably  springs  from  an  Arabic  root, 
signifying  “to  collect;”  and  suggests  that  the 
“towns”  in  question  had  peculiar  charac- 
teristics. The  original  “havoth-jair”  were 
twenty-three  in  number,  i Chron.  ii.  22:  in 
the  days  of  the  younger  Jair,  to  whom  they 
probably  descended  by  inheritance,  they  either 
had  increased  to  thirty,  or  were  reckoned  at 
that  round  number,  Judg.  x.  4.  The  western 
Israelites  had  however  but  an  imperfect  know- 
ledge of  this  district,  which  was  moreover 
crowded  with  towns.  The  Arabs  reckon 
more  than  1000  now  deserted  towns  in  the 
Hauran  alone.  (See  Buckingham  and  Seetzen, 
in  Knobel,  in  loc.)  Hence  the  appellation 
Havoth-jair  was  sometimes  extended  to  more 
distant  portions  of  the  Machirite  domain;  to 
Argob  with  its  threescore  fortified  cities,  the 
very  reverse,  in  their  structure,  of  “havoth;” 
and  to  Kenath,  of  which,  42,  not  Jair  but 
Nobah  was  the  conqueror  (see  Deut.  iii.  14; 
Josh.  xiii.  30;  I Chron.  ii.  23).  This  in- 
accuracy as  to  a remote  district  may  be 
illustrated  by  our  use  of  the  name  Connaught, 
originally  the  territory  of  the  sept  of  the 
McNaughts,  but  now  denoting  the  whole 
western  province  of  Ireland. 

42.  Nobah']  Scripture  mentions  him  no 
more,  but  he  is  the  hero  of  various  extra- 
vagant legends  in  the  Samaritan  Book  of 
Joshua;  which  may  possibly  in  part  have 
sprung  out  of  authentic  local  traditions. 

Kenath]  Now  Kenawat,  an  important  site 
near  the  southern  extremity  of  the  tract  el- 
Lejah,  and  on  the  western  slopes  of  the 
mountains  of  the  Hauran.  Its  ruins,  chiefly 
however  of  the  Roman  era,  attest  its  former 
grandeur;  and  extend  for  about  a mile  along 
the  precipitous  bank  of  a deep  and  wild  ravine. 
I'he  country  round  is  richly  wooded.  The 
city  is  apparently  called  Nobah  after  its  con- 
queror in  Judg.  viii.  11  ; but  this  name,  as  in 
other  cases,  fell  ere  long  into  disuse,  and  the 
old  name  has  held  its  ground  to  this  day. 

The  notices,  both  Scriptural  and  traditional, 
of  the  conquest  of  north-eastern  Gilead  and 


Bashan  by  the  Machirites,  plainly  intimate 
that  it  was  effected  by  a few  chiefs  of 
great  military  prowess,  who  overran  rapidly 
a far  larger  district  than  they  could  colonize. 
The  tribe  of  Manasseh  was  the  least  nume- 
rous of  all  at  Sinai,  and  only  stood  sixth 
in  the  census  recently  held  (chap,  xxvi.) ; 
yet  it  eventually  received  on  the  west  of 
Jordan  a territory  as  large  on  the  average  as 
fell  to  the  other  tribes,  beside  the  district  here 
allotted  to  the  Machirites.  The  father  of  Jair, 
however,  Segub,  was  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
(i  Chron.  ii.  21,  22,  cf.  ch.  xxvii.  i,  and 
note);  and  it  is  likely  that  the  Manassite 
leaders  induced  many  of  the  more  adventurous 
of  this,  and  some  possibly  of  other  tribes,  to 
join  them  in  their  enterprise  against  Bashan. 
The  remarkable  notice  in  Josh.  xix.  34  (see 
note)  points  to  a settlement  of  the  children  of 
J udah  as  then  existing  in  the  very  district  in 
question;  and  thus  too  the  fact,  recorded 
Josh.  xix.  9,  that  the  main  body  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  proved  insufficient  to  occupy  the 
inheritance  assigned  to  them,  may  be  ac- 
counted for. 

It  appears  from  Josh.  xiii.  13  (see  note) 
that  the  Machirites  did  not  exterminate  the 
whole  population  of  this  district.  Probably 
they  destroyed  (cf.  xxi.  35)  only  the  domi- 
nant heathen  tribe  through  which  Og  held 
sway,  and  merely  put  to  tribute  the  sub- 
ject race  or  races,  as  Og  had  done  before. 
The  conquest  of  the  district  east  of  Jordan 
seems  never  to  have  been  so  effectually  accom- 
plished as  that  on  the  other  side.  It  was 
indeed  no  part  of  the  inheritance  originally  pro- 
mised (cf.  xxxiv.  I — 15),  and  was  first  swept 
away  by  the  storm  of  heathen  invasion  (i  Chr.  • 

V.  2^- 

During  the  troublous  times  of  the  Judges 
the  eastern  Manassites  rendered  good  ser- 
vice to  the  nation;  cf.  Judg.  v.  14.  Gideon, 
and  probably  Jephthah,  were  of  this  tribe, 
and  reflect  in  a later  generation  the  warlike 
and  adventurous  spirit  which  Jair  and  Nobah 
exhibited  in  the  days  of  Moses.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  apathy  of  the  pastoral  tribes  of 
Reuben  and  Gad  is  more  than  once  censured 
(Judg.  V.  15—17,  viii.  4—9)- 


NOTE  on  Chap,  xxxii.  8. 


Kadesh  Barnea.  The  meaning  of  the  term 
Barnea  is  uncertain.  In  xxxiv.  4 the  LXX. 
renders  KriS/jy  rov  Bapvi^,  which  suggests  the 
notion  that  Barnea  was  regarded  as  a man’s 
name.  Elsewhere  however  the  LXX.  gives 
Kddrjs  Bapvrj.  EUrst  proposes,  yir'l3=  “Son 


of  Wandering:”  i.e.  Bedouin.  But  the  word 
"121  in  the  sense  of  “Son”  does  not  occur  in 
the  Pentateuch.  Others  prefer  to  take  "121  as 
from  "1"13,  and  render  it  “country”  or 
“land,”  as  it  is  probably  to  be  rendered  in 
Job  xxxix.  4.  I'he  other  half  of  the  '^ord 


V.  I— 15-] 


NUMBERS.  XXXIII. 


775 


(VIJ)  is  derived  from  a word  signifying  to 
“move  to  and  fro,”  or  “to  be  shaken.” 
Possibly  the  name  carries  the  tradition  of  some 
great  natural  convulsion  which  happened  in 
the  district.  Have  we  an  allusion  to  Barnea, 


understood  according  to  the  last  derivation, 
in  Ps.  xxix.  8:  “The  Lord  shaketh  the 
wilderness  of  Cades”?  The  Hebrew  word 
however  there  used  is  not 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

I Txoo  and  forty  joxirxicys  of  the  Israelites.  50 
The  Canaanites  are  to  be  destroyed. 

These  are  the  journeys  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  which  went 
forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  with 
their  armies  under  the  hand  of  Moses 
and  Aaron. 

2 And  Moses  wrote  their  goings 
out  according  to  their  journeys  by 
the  commandment  of  the  Lord  : and 
these  are  their  journeys  according  to 
their  goings  out. 

<iFxod.  12.  3 And  they  ^departed  from  Ra- 

meses  in  the  first  month,  on  the  fif- 
teenth day  of  the  first  month ; on  the 
morrow  after  the  passover  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  went  out  with  an  high 
hand  in  the  sight  of  all  the  Egyp- 
tians. 

4 For  the  Egyptians  buried  all 
l^eir  firstborn,  which  the  Lord  had 
smitten  among  them : upon  their  gods 
also  the  Lord  executed  judgments. 

5 And  the  children  of  Israel  re- 
moved from  Rameses,  and  pitched  in 
Succoth. 

^Exod.13.  6 And  they  departed  from  ‘^Suc- 

coth,  and  pitched  in  Etham,  which  is 
in  the  edge  of  the  wilderness. 

7  And  they  removed  from  Etham, 


and  turned  again  unto  Pi-hahiroth, 
which  is  before  Baal-zephon:  and 
they  pitched  before  Migdol. 

8 And  they  departed  from  before 
Pi-hahiroth,  and  ^passed  through  the Exod.  xs. 
midst  of  the  sea  into  the  wilderness, 

and  went  three  days’  journey  in  the 
wilderness  of  Etham,  and  pitched  in 
Marah. 

9 And  they  removed  from  Marah, 

and  ^came  unto  Elim:  and  in  ElimT^^®^- 
were  twelve  fountains  of  water,  and 
threescore  and  ten  palm  trees;  and 
they  pitched  there. 

10  And  they  removed  from  Elim, 
and  encamped  by  the  Red  sea. 

11  And  they  removed  from  the 
Red  sea,  and  encamped  in  the  ^wil- 
derness  of  Sin. 

12  And  they  took  their  journey 
out  of  the  wilderness  of  Sin,  and  en- 
camped in  Dophkah. 

13  And  they  departed  from  Doph- 
kah, and  encamped  in  Alush. 

14  And  they  removed  from  Alush, 

and  encamped  at -^Rephidim,  where  y-Exod.  xv. 
was  no  water  for  the  people  to 
drink. 

15  And  they  departed  from  Rephi- 

dim,  and  pitched  in  the  ^wilderness  .rExod.  19, 
of  Sinai. 


Chap.  XXXIII.  1—49.  The  history  of 
the  Wandering  in  the  Desert  is  closed  by  a 
list  of  the  places  occupied  by  the  Israelite 
encampment  from  the  exodus  to  the  arrival  at 
the  Jordan.  This  list  was  written  out  by 
Moses  at  God’s  command  (‘v.  2),  doubtless 
as  a memorial  of  God’s  providential  care  for 
His  people  throughout  this  long  and  trying 
period.  On  it  see  Introd.  § 4. 

3.  Rameses]  See  on  Ex.  i.  ii  and  xii.  37. 

4.  buried]  Rather,  were  burying. 

5.  Succoth]  See  on  Ex.  xii.  37. 

6.  Etham]  Cf.  on  Ex.  xiv.  2. 


8.  Pi-hahiroth]  Hebr.  “Hahiroth;”  but 
perhaps  only  by  an  error  of  transcription. 
The  omitted  “pi”  is  however  only  a com- 
mon Egyptian  prefix.  See  on  Ex.  xiv.  2. 

qjoilderness  of  Etham]  i.  e.  that  part  of  the 
great  wilderness  of  Shur  which  adjoined 
Etham:  cf.  on  Ex.  xv.  22  and  ch.x.  12.  The  list 
of  stations  up  to  that  at  Sinai  agrees  with  the 
narrative  of  Exodus  except  that  we  have  here 
mentioned  {y.  10)  an  encampment  by  the  Red 
Sea,  and  two  others,  Dophkah  and  Alush 
(yn).  12 — 14),  which  are  there  omitted.  On 
these  places,  and  on  the  route  followed  by  the 
■Israelites  from  the  Red  Sea  to  Sinai,  see  on 
Ex.  XV.  Note  at  end  of  chapter. 


776 


NUMBERS.  XXXIII. 


[v.  Iff— 30. 


16  And  they  removed  from  the 

* chap.  II.  desert  of  Sinai,  and  pitched  ^at  “Ki- 
rrhatis,  broth-hattaavah. 

17  And  they  departed  from  Ki- 

* chap.  II.  broth-hattaavah,  and  * encamped  at 

Hazeroth. 

18  And  they  departed  from  Haze- 
roth, and  pitched  in  Rithmah. 

19  And  they  departed  from  Rith- 
mah, and  pitched  at  Rimmon-parez. 

20  And  they  departed  from  Rim- 
mon-parez, and  pitched  in  Libnah. 

21  And  they  removed  from  Lib- 
nah, and  pitched  at  Rissah. 

22  And  they  journeyed  from  Ris- 
sah, and  pitched  in  Kehelathah. 


23  And  they  went  from  Kehela- 
thah, and  pitched  in  mount  Shapher. 

24  And  they  removed  from  mount 
Shapher,  and  encamped  in  Haradah. 

25  And  they  removed  from  Hara- 
dah, and  pitched  in  Makheloth. 

26  And  they  removed  from  Mak- 
heloth, and  encamped  at  Tahath. 

27  And  they  departed  from  Ta- 
hath, and  pitched  at  Tarah. 

28  And  they  removed  from  Tarah, 
and  pitched  in  Mithcah. 

29  And  they  went  from  Mithcah, 
and  pitched  in  Hashmonah. 

30  And  they  departed  from  Hash- 
monah, and  '^encamped  at  Moseroth. 


16,  17.  See  on  xi.  35. 

18.  Rithmab]  The  name  of  this  station  is 
derived  from  retetn^  the  broom-plant,  the  “ju- 
niper” of  the  A.V.;  see  on  xiii.  26.  This 
must  be  the  same  encampment  as  that  which 
is  said,  xiii.  26,  to  have  been  at  Kadesh. 

19.  Rimmon-parez]  Or  rather  Rimmon- 
perez,  i.e.  “ Rimmon  (i.e.  the  Pomegranate) 
of  the  Breach.”  The  ievmperez  is  used  either 
of  hostile  irruption  (Ps.  cxliv.  14)  or  (cf. 
Perez-uzzah,  2 Sam.  vi.  8)  of  the  outbreak  of 
God’s  wrath  (Job  xvi.  14).  Possibly  the  en- 
campment of  Rimmon-perez  witnessed  some 
signal  manife-station  of  Divine  anger.  It  may 
have  been  here  that  the  sedition  of  Korah 
occurred. 

From  this  verse  to  'u.  36  the  stations  named 
are  those  visited  during  the  years  of  penal 
wandering.  The  determination  of  their  posi- 
tions is  difficult,  because  during  this  period 
there  was  no  definite  line  of  march  pursued. 
Some  identifications  are  rendered  probable  by 
modern  research,  which  may  hereafter  suggest 
others.  All  indications  thus  far  seem  to  show 
that  the  Israelites  during  this  period  did  not 
overstep  the  boundaries  of  the  Wilderness  of 
Paran  (as  defined  x.  12),  except  to  pass  along 
the  adjoining  valley  of  the  Arabah.  Over  the 
ridges  of  Paran  then  it  is  probable  that  for 
many  years  the  people  spread,  while  the  taber- 
nacle and  organized  camp  moved  about  from 
place  to  place  amongst  them  (cf.  on  xx.  i). 

20.  Libnah]  Probably  the  Laban  of  Dent, 
i.  I (where  see  note),  and  situated  on  or  near 
either  the  Elanitic  gulf  or  the  Arabah.  The  name 
is  perhaps  preser\ed,  though  in  a corrupted 
form,  in  el-iieyaneh,  the  designation  of  a part 
of  the  mountain-plateau  and  adjacent  valley, 
on  the  west  of  the  Arabah,  north  of  Ezion- 
geber.  The  Hebrew  name  signifies  “white- 
ness:” the  modem  Arabic,  “ the  distinct.”  It 


is  by  some  connected  with  the  white  poplar 
tree,  which  possibly  grew  abundantly  in  the 
neighbourhood.  If  so  derived,  this  and  the 
two  preceding  names  of  stations  have  been 
all  suggested  by  some  natural  feature  of  vege- 
tation. See  Stanley,  ‘S.  and  P.’  p.  521. 

21.  Rissah]  This  may  perhaps  be  identi- 
fied with  the  Rasa  of  the  Roman  tables; 
which,  being  about  30  miles  from  Elath  on 
the  road  to  Jerusalem,  must  have  lain  on  the 
plateau  of  the  wilderness,  near  to  the  hill  now 
known  as  Ras-el-Ka’a,  “ Head  of  the  plain,” 
north-west  of  Ezion-geber,  and  west  or  south- 
west of  el-Beyaneh. 

22.  Kehelathah]  i.e.  “assembling.”  The 
name  was  evidently  given  to  the  station  by  the 
Israelites  themselves;  and  is  not  likely  to  have 
been  locally  preserved.  See  on  xx.  i. 

23.  moimt  Shapher]  Probably  either  the 
hill  now  known  as  Jebel-esh-Shureif,  about 
40  miles  north-west  of  Ras-el-Ka’a  (see  on 
ver.  2t)  ; or  else  that  known  as  Jebel-Sherafeh, 
a rocky  promontory  on  the  western  shore  of 
the  Elanitic  gulf,  near  the  southern  limit  of 
the  Tih.  The  former  is,  from  its  position, 
the  more  likely  (see  von  Schubert,  ii.  p.  372). 

24.  Haradah]  Prqbably  W ady-el-Kha- 
raizeh,  about  15  miles  south-east  of  Jebel- 
esh-Shureif. 

25.  Makheloth]  “Assemblies”  or  “con- 
gregations:” a kindred  name  to  Kehelathah, 
•v.  22. 

28.  Mithcah]  The  name  (=“  sweetness :” 

cf.  with  “bitterness”)  probably  points 

to  the  excellence  of  the  water  at  this  station. 

29.  Hashmonah]  Probably  the  Heshmon 
of  Josh.  XV.  27,  one  of  “the  uttermost  cities 
of  the'  tribe  of  the  children  of  Judah  toward 
the  coast  of  Edom  southward;”  and  which 
therefore,  like  another  of  the  same  cities, 


V.  31—34  ]* 


NUMBERS.  XXXIII. 


31  And  they  departed  from  Mose- 
roth,  and  pitched  in  Bene-jaakan. 

32  And  they  removed  from  Bene- 
jaakan,  and  encamped  at  Hor-ha- 
gidgad. 


33  And  they  went  from  Hor-hagid- 
gad,  and  pitched  in  Jotbathah* 

34  And  they  removed  from  Jot- 
bathah,  and  encamped  at  Ebro- 
nah. 


Kedesh,  may  well  have  lain  without  the  natu- 
ral frontier  of  the  Holy  Land,  in  the  extreme 
north  of  the  wilderness.  Such  is  the  actual 
situation  of  the  fountain  Ain  Hash,  in  the 
north-west  of  the  Arabah ; where  there  is  said 
to  be  a natural  pool  filled  with  sweet  living 
water,  surrounded  by  much  verdure,  and  with 
traces  of  ruins  (Robinson,  ‘ Bib.  Res.’  ii.  119; 
Wilton,  ‘Negeb,’  pp.  izi  sqq.). 

30.  Moseroth']  For  this  plural  form  of 
the  name  we  have,  Deut.  x.  6,  the  simple 
Moserah  (A.  V.  Mosera).  It  would  seem 
from  that  passage  that  the  station  lay  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  mountain  on  which 
Aaron  died;  cf.  on  xx.  22.  It  was  perhaps 
opposite  to  it,  on  the  western  side  of  the 
Arabah,  under  the  mountain-bluff,  now  known 
as  el-Makrah.  Some  have  thought  indeed  that 
the  name  is  perpetuated  in  that  of  the  hill 
Maderah,  much  further  north,  an  isolated 
mount  of  singular  shape,  forming  the  point 
of  separation  between  Wady-el- Fikreh  and 
the  lower  portion  of  Wady-el- Marrah  (see  on 
xxxiv.  3 sqq.).  This  hill  is  about  a mile  in 
circumference,  steep,  and  perfectly  bare.  It 
consists  in  part  of  a brittle  mixture  of  chalk 
and  sandstone,  in  part  of  Strata  of  earth,  which 
might,  by  reason  of  their  colour  and  forma- 
tion, be  easily  taken  for  ashes  baked  together.. 
At  its  foot  lie  an  astonishing  quantity  of  large* 
lens-shaped  stones,  such  as  are  also  found  near 
the  southern  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea.  Arab 
tradition  relates  that  a city  once  stood  on  this 
spot,  and  that  for  the  sins  of  its  inhabitants  it 
was  destroyed  by  the  fall  of  these  stones  from 
heaven  (Seetzen,  iii.  pp.  14  sqq.);  or,  accord- 
ing to  another  account,  that  the  earth  en- 
gulphed  the  inhabitants  alive,  and  that  the  hill 
subsequently  rose  up  as  a monument  of  God’s 
displeasure.  It  is  remarkable  enough  that  the 
name  Moserah  itself  signifies  chastisement. 
Yet  the  resemblance  of  the  n'ames  Maderah 
and  Moserah  is  not  strong  enough  to  warrant 
our  setting  aside  the  tradition  which  fixes  the 
scene  of  Aaron’s  death  further  south;  and  the 
principal  interest  of  the  Arab  stories  relating 
to  the  place  lies  in  the  reminiscences  which 
they  may  contain  of  the  destruction  of  Sodom 
and  of  the  fate  of  Dathan  and  Abiram. 

31.  Bene-jaakari]  i.e.  “the  children  of 
Jaakan ;”  in  Deut.  x.  6 “ Beeroth  (/. e.  the  nvelh') 
of  the  children  of  Jaakan.”  It  is  there  stated 
that  “the  children  of  Israel  took  their  journey 
from  Beeroth  of  the  children  of  Jaakan  to 
Mosera;”  whilst  here  Mosera,  or  Moseroth, 


is  placed  first.  There  is  nothing  improbable 
in  the  supposition  that  the  Israelites  during 
their  long  wanderings  visited  these  places  twice, 
though  Moses  in  this  succinct  list  of  stations 
nafnes  each  of  them  only  once.  The  order 
here  given  (Moseroth,  Bene-jaakan)  is  per- 
haps that  followed  in  the  first  march  toward 
Canaan ; whilst  the  reverse  order  of  Deut. 
x.  6 (Bene-jaakan,  Mosera)  may  have  been 
adopted  in  the  fortieth  year  when  the  march 
was  differently  directed.  The  verse  in  Deut. 
is  however  evidently  a fragment,  and  probably 
a gloss;  and  its  authority  consequently  un- 
certain. 

Bene-jaakan]  like  many  places  in  the  east, 
derives  its  name  from  a tribe  once  settled  in  it. 
Jaakan,  or  Akan,  was  a Horite,  of  the  race 
of  the  old  inhabitants  of  Mount  Seir,  Gen. 
xxxvi,  27,  I Chron.  i.  42;  and  the  wells  of 
his  tribe  may  have  been  those  to  which  they 
repaired  after  their  expulsion  by  the  Edomites 
from  their  earlier  homes.  They  may  be  iden- 
tical with  the  wells  of  sweet  water  ijow  known 
as  el-Mayein,  which,  lying  up  high  among 
the  hills,  more  than  60  miles  due  west  of 
Mount  Hor,  would  be  likely  to  be  visited  by 
the  Israelites  either  immediately  before  or  after 
their  encampment  at  Moserah.  Schwarz  con- 
jectures that  the  name  Jaakan  may  itself  be 
perpetuated,  in  a corrupted  form,  in  en-Nakah, 
“ the  she-camel,”  the  designation  now  be- 
stowed upon  the  important  mountain  to  which 
the  wells  el-Mayein  are  contiguous. 

3*2.  Hor-hagidgad]  If  the  initial  Hebrew 
letter  be  Kbeth  (as  in  Tex.  Recep.,  Syr.,  and 
later  Targum)  the  name  will  denote  “the 
Cavern  of  Gidgad;”  if  He  (as  some  few  MSS., 
Samaritan  text,  earlier  Targ.,  LXX.,  Vulg. 
read)  it  will  denote  “the  Summit  of  Gidgad” 
(see  on  XX.  22).  In  Deut.  x.  7 we  read  simply 
Gudgodah  or  Gudgod.  The  corresponding 
Arabic  term  jedjad  signifies  a hard  and  level 
tract,  and  would  be  strictly  applicable  to  the 
summit  of  one  of  the  mountain-ranges  in 
the  wilderness.  Some,  misled  by  the  English 
orthography  of  the  Arabic,  have  thought  to 
find  this  station  in  Wady  Ghadhaghidh,  “the 
Valley  of  Diminutions,”  about  forty-five  miles 
north-north-west  of  the  head  of  the  Elanitic 
gulf;  but  there  is  no  real  correspondence  in 
the  letters  of  this  name  to  those  of  Gidgad. 

33.  Jotbathah]  i.  e.  “ Goodness in  Deut. 
x^.  7,  “ Jotbath  (Hebr.  Jotbathah')^  a land  of 
rivers  of  waters.”  This  place  is  perhaps  to 
be  identified  with  Wady  Tabah,  six  miles 


778 


NUMBERS.  XXXIII. 


35  And  they  departed  from  Ebro- 
nah,  and  encamped  at  Ezion-gaber. 

36  And  they  removed  from  Ezion- 
/ chap.  20.  gaber,  and  pitched  in  the  ^wilderness 

of  Zin,  which  is  Kadesh. 
w chap.  20.  And  they  removed  from  Ka- 

desh, and  pitched  in  mount  Hor,  in 
the  edge  of  the  land  of  Edom. 

« chap.  20.  38  And  "Aaron  the  priest  went  up 

Deut.  32.  into  mount  Hor  at  the  conimand- 
ment  of  the  Lord,  and  died  there, 
in  the  fortieth  year  after  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  were  come  out  of  the 


h 35—42. 

land  of  Egypt,  in  the  first  day  of  the 
fifth  month. 

39  And  Aaron  was  an  hundred 
and  twenty  and  three  years  old  when 
he  died  in  mount  Hor. 

40  And  ‘’king  Arad  the  Canaanite,  <’chap. 
which  dwelt  in  the  south  in  the  land 

of  Canaan,  heard  of  the  coming  of 
the  children  of  Israel. 

41  And  they  departed  from  mount 
•^Hor,  and  pitched  in  Zalmonah.  /chap. 

42  And  they  departed  from  Zal- 
monah,  and  pitched  in  Punon. 


south-west  of  the  head  of  the  Elanitic  gulf; 
where  is  a broad  plain  running  down  to  the 
sea,  containing  many  palm-trees  and  tama- 
risks, and  well  supplied  with  water  (see 
Burckhardt,  p.  507;  also  Laborde,  and  Ro- 
binson, ‘ B.  R.’  I.  160,  who  writes  the  name 
Taba’). 


34.  Ehronab']  i.  e.  “passage.”  This  station 
apparently  lay  on  the  shore  of*  the  Elanitic 
gulf,  at  a point  where  the  ebb  of  the  tide  left 
a ford  across.  Hence  the  later  Targum  renders 
the  word  “ fords.” 

35.  Ezion-gaber]  More  properly  Ezion- 
geber,  i.e.  “giant’s  backbone.”  The  earlier 
half  of  this  name  is  preserved  to  us,  though  the 
English  orthography  conceals  the  correspond- 
ence of  the  Hebrew  and  Arabic  forms,  in  that 
of  Wady  Ghadhyan,  a valley  running  east- 
ward into  the  Arabah  some  miles  north  of  the 
present  head  of  the  Elanitic  gulf.  A salt 
marsh  which  here  overspreads  a portion  of  the 
Arabah  may  be  taken  as  indicating  the  limit 
to  which  the  sea  anciently*  reached;  and  we 
may  thus  infer  the  existence  here  in  former 
times  of  an  extensive  tidal  haven,  at  the  head 
of  which  the  city  of  Ezion-geber  stood.  The 
mouth  of  the  haven  was  guarded,  on  the 
eastern  side,  by  the  no  less  well-known  city  of 
Elath:  on  the  western  side,  directly  opposite 
to  Elath,  was  probably  the  site  of  Ebronah 
(t’.  35).  I'he  name  occurs  on  an  Egyptian 
papyrus  of  the  19th  Dynasty — as  that  of  a 
fortress  of  some  importance  under  Raineses  II. 
See  Chabas,  “ Voyage  d’un  Egyptien,”  p.  284. 
He  says,  “ Aszium.  C’est  ainsi  que  les  Arabes 
nomment  de  nos  jours  un  petit  groupe  de 
huttes  ombragces  par  des  palmiers,  situees  a 
I’extremitc  septentrionale  du  Bahr  Agabah.” 
It  was  at  E/ion-geber  that  from  the  time 
of  Solomon  onward  th.e  Jewish  navy  was 
constructed  (i  Kings  ix.  26,  xxii.  49).  Its 
importance  naturally  decreased  as  the  haven 
was  destroyed  by  that  gradual  retirement 
of  the  water,  of  which  other  examples  have 
be*en  observed  by  travellers  along  the  shores 


of  the  Red  Sea.  The  site  of  the  city  _was 
unknown  to  Josephus,  who,  with  disre- 
gard of  all  probability,  transferred  it  more 
than  four  hundred  miles  further  south,  to  the 
Egyptian  port  of  Berenice  (‘  Ant.’  Vlll.  6.  4). 
Yet  at  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  of  our 
era  we  still  find  it  mentioned,  under  the  name 
“ Ad  Dianam,”  evidently  a Latin  corruption 
of  the  Arabic  Ghadhyan,  as  a station  on  the 
Roman  road  between  Aila  (Elath)  and  Rasa 
(see  on  -u.  21),  sixteen  Roman  miles  from 
each;  and  as  marking  the  point  at  which  the 
branch  road  ran  off,  by  the  east  of  Mount 
Seir,  to  Petra.  Later  mention  is  made  of 
Ezion  by  two  Arabian  geographers,  Makrizy 
and  Muhammed  Ibn  Ahmed  (Ritter,  xiv. 
pp.  52 — 4);  but  as  they  give  the  name  in  its 
Jewish  rather  than  in  its  Arabic  form,  it  is 
likely  that  their  acquaintance  with  it  was  purely 
historical. 

37—40.  See  on  xx.  22 — xxi.  3;  and  re- 
specting the  chronology,  Introd.  § 3.  The 
notice  that  Aaron  was  a hundred  and  twenty- 
three  years  old  at  his  death  in  the  fortieth 
year  of  the  Exodus  accords  with  the  notice  of 
Ex.  vii.  7,  that  he  was  eighty-three  years  old 
when  he  stood  before  Pharaoh. 

41.  Zalmonah]  No  doubt  a station  on  the 
march  from  Kadesh  round  the  land  of  Edom. 
The  name  has  by  some  been  derived  from 
zelem^  “image;”  and  this  has  been  assigned 
as  the  place  where  the  brazen  serpent  was  set 
up.  Von  Raumer  thinks  it  the  same  with 
Ma’an,  otherwise  Alam  Ma’an,  east  of  Petra, 
one  of  the  largest  villages  on  the  Mekka  pil- 
grim-route, well  supplied  with  water  and  sur- 
rounded by  gardens  and  vineyards ; where  the 
Israelites  might,  like  the  pilgrims  of  the  present 
day,  have  conveniently  trafficked  with  the  in- 
habitants for  provisions. 

42.  Punon]  By  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in 
the  ‘ Onomasticon,’  identified  with  the  Pinon 
of  Gen.  xxxvi.  41,  which  they  regard  as  the 
name  of  a ducal  city  rather  than  of  a person ; 


V.  43— S6.] 


NUMBERS.  XXXIII. 


779 


43  And  they  departed  from  Pu- 
non,  and  pitched  in  Oboth. 

44  And  they  departed  from  Oboth, 
.r  aritl  pitched  in  “Ije-abarim,  in  the 

border  of  Moab. 

45  And  they  departed  from  lim, 
and  pitched  in  Dibon-gad. 

46  And  they  removed  from  Dibon- 
gad,  and  encamped  in  Almon-dibla- 
thaim. 

47  And  they  removed  from  Al- 
mon-diblathaim,  and  pitched  in  the 
mountains  of  Abarim,  before  Nebo. 

48  And  they  departed  from  the 
mountains  of  Abarim,  and  pitched  in 
the  plains  of  Moab  by  Jordan  near 
Jericho. 

49  And  they  pitched  by  Jor- 
dan, from  Beth-jesimoth  even  unto 

^Tke plains  ” ^ Abel-shittim  in  the  plains  of 
of  Shit-  Moab. 

/chap.  25.  50  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 

Moses  in  the  plains  of  Moab  by  Jor- 
dan near  Jericho,  saying, 

51  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 

^Deut.  7.  say  unto  them,  ^When  ye 

Josh.  II.  are  passed  over  Jordan  into  the  land 

of  Canaan ; 

52  Then  ye  shall  drive  out  all  the 


inhabitants  of  the  land  from  before 
you,  and  destroy  all  their  pictures, 
and  destroy  all  their  molten  images, 
and  quite  pluck  down  all  their  high 
places : 

53  And  ye  shall  dispossess  the  in- 
habitants  of  land,  and  dwell  there- 
in : for  I have  given  you  the  land  to 
possess  it. 

54  And  -^ye  shall  divide  the  land 
by  lot  for  an  inheritance  among  your 
families : and  to  the  more  ye  shall 
^ give  the  more  inheritance,  and  to 

the  fewer  ye  shall  ^ give  the  less  in-  HJUniJrit- 
heritance : every  man’s  inheritance  Vn%. 
shall  be  in  the  place  where  his  lot 
falleth ; according  to  the  tribes  of  auce. 
your  fathers  ye  shall  inherit. 

55  But  if  ye  will  not  drive  out 
the  inhabitants  of  the  land  from  be- 
fore you ; then  it  shall  come  to  pass, 
that  those  which  ye  let  remain  of 
them  shall  be  ^pricks  in  your  eyes,  ^ Josh.  23. 
and  thorns  in  your  sides,  and  shall  judg.  2. 3. 
vex  you  in  the  land  wherein  ye 
dwell. 

56  Moreover  it  shall  come  to  pass, 
that  I shall  do  unto  you,  as  I thought 
to  do  unto  them. 


and  further  with  the  Phieno  of  their  own  day, 
a place  notorious  as  the  penal  abode  of  con- 
victs who  were  sent  thither  to  labour  in  the 
neighbouring  copper-mines.  This  identification 
is  corroborated  by  the  form  in  LXX. 

The  place  lay  between  Petra  and  Zoar,  pro- 
bably near  the  Roman  road  which  connected 
those  places.  As  this  road,  which  is  still 
visible  (see  Irby  and  Mangles,  p.  115),  ran 
considerably  to  the  right  of  what  would  have 
been  the  direct  line  of  march,  it  may  be  that 
Phamo  lay  east  of,  rather  than  within,  the 
territory  of  Edom.  It  is  there  that  we  should 
naturally  seek  for  Punon ; and  if  the  pilgrim- 
station  el-Ahsa  represent  the  ancient  Oboth 
(see  on  kxi.  10),  the  site  of  Punon  may  co- 
incide with  that  of  Kala’at  Aneizeh,  inter- 
mediate to  el-Ahsa  and  Ma’an.  Seetzen,  when 
at  Maderah,  learnt  the  existence  of  a ruined 
castle  Fen  an  (iii.  p.  17),  which  Arabic  form 
of  name  would  correspond  to  the  Hebrew 
Punon;  but  the  locality  of  this  castle  is  not 
as  yet  ascertained. 

43 — 47.  See  on  xxi.  10 — zo. 

46.  Dibon-gad]  This  halt  was  apparently 


the  same  as  that  which  in  xxi.  19  bears  the 
name  of  Bamoth : see  note  there. 

48,  49.  See  on  xxii.  i. 

50 — xxxvi.  13.  This  last  portion  of  the 
book  concludes  the  record  of  the  long  wander- 
ing of  the  people  by  certain  directions  respect- 
ing that  conquest  and  allotment  of  the  Promised 
Land,  with  which  the  wandering  terminated. 
These  regulations  are  divided  into  two  sections 
by  the  re-insertion  at  xxxv.  i of  the  introduc- 
tory formula  with  which  xxxiii.  50  opens.  Of 
these  portions  the  former  contains  commands 
concerning,  (i)  the  extermination  of  the  Ca- 
naanitish  nations,  xxxiii.  50 — 56:  (2)  the 
boundaries  of  the  Promised  Land,  xxxiv. 

I — 15  ; (3)  the  names  of  the  men  who  should 
allot  the  land,  xxxiv.  16 — 29. 

50 — 56.  The  expulsion  of  the  Canaanites 
and  the  destruction  of  their  monuments  of 
idolatry  had  been  already  enjoined.  Ex.  xxiii.  , 
24,  33,  xxxiv.  13;  and  2;.  34  is  substantially  a 
repetition  from  xxvi.  53 — 55.  But  the  solemn 
warning  of  'w.  53,  56  is  new.  A call  for  it 
had  been  furnished  by  their  past  transgressions 


780 


NUMBERS.  XXXIV. 


[v-  1—5- 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

I The  borders  of  the  land.  16  The  names  of 
the  men  which  shall  divide  the  land. 

AN D the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying, 

2 Command  the  children  of  Israel, 
and  say  unto  them.  When  ye  come 
into  the  land  of  Canaan;  (this  ts  the 
land  that  shall  fall  unto  you  for  an 
inheritance,  the  land  of  Canaan 
with  the  coasts  thereof;) 

Josh.  15.  2 Then  ^your  south  quarter  shall 

be  from  the  wilderness  of  Zin  along 


by  the  coast  of  Edom,  and  your  south 
border  shall  be  the  outmost  coast  of 
the  salt  sea  eastward: 

4 And  your  border  shall  turn  from 
the  south  to  the  ascent  of  Akrabbim, 
and  pass  on  to  Zin:  and  the  going 
forth  thereof  shall  be  from  the  south 
to  Kadesh-barnea,  and  shall  go  on  to 
Hazar-addar,  and  pass  on  to  Azmon : - 

5 And  the  border  shall  fetch  a 
compass  from  Azmon  unto  the  river 
of  Egypt,  and  the  goings  out  of  it 
shall  be  at  the  sea. 


in  the  matter  of  Baal-peor,  by  their  imperfect 
fulfilment,  at  the  first,  of  Moses’  orders  in  the 
Midianitish  war;  and  perhaps  by  the  indul- 
gence of  the  Machirites  to  those  whom  they 
conquered  in  Bashan  (cf.  on  xxxii.  42). 

Chap.  XXXIV.  The  next  section,  (w, 
I — 15,  see  on  xxxiii.  50)  treats  of  the  bound- 
aries of  the  land  of  inheritance ; which  will  be 
seen  greatly  to  exceed  those  of  the  territory 
actually  conquered.  On  the  limits  of  the 
Holy  Land,  see  further  on  Gen.  xv.  18 — 21; 
Ex.  xxiii.  31;  Dent.  xi.  24. 

2.  the  land  of  Canaan']  The  name  Canaan 
is  here  restricted  to  the  territory  west  of  the 
J ordan. 

3 — 5. Render:  Then  your  south  quarter 
shall  extend  from  the  wilderness  of 
Zin  which  resteth  upon  the  side  of 
Edom.  And  your  south  border  shall 
start  from  the  extremity  of  the  salt 
sea  on  the  east;  and  your  border 
shall  turn  on  the  south  to  Maaleh- 
akrabbim,  and  shall  pass  on  toward 
Zin,  and  the  extent  of  its  reach  on 
the  south  shall  be  to  Kadesh-barnea; 
and  it  shall  reach- forth  thence  to 
Hazar-addar,  and  shall  pass  on  to 
Azmon,  and  from  Azmon  the  border 
shall  turn  to  the  river  of  Egypt,  and 
its  reach  shall  be  to  the  sea. 

The  first  few  words  set  forth  in  general 
terms  the  southern  boundary,  which  is  more 
exactly  described  in  the  following  sentence. 
The  details  of  its  course  are  more  fully  given, 
Josh.  XV.  I — 4;  for  the  southern  confines 
of  Judah  there  described  were  in  effect  the 
southernmost  portion  of  Canaan.  These  ac- 
counts will  be  best  illustrated  by  a description, 
.based  upon  the  explorations  of  modem  tra- 
vellers, of  the  nature  of  the  boundary. 

It  commenced  at  the  Dead  Sea.  Of  the 
broad  and  desolate  valley  by  which  the  de- 
pressed bed  of  that  sea,  shut  in  by  cliffs  on 


both  sides,  is  protracted  toward  the  south,  the 
first  few  miles,  comprised  under  the  general 
name  of  the  Ghor,  present  little  else  than  a tract 
of  marshy  jungle.  A deep  narrow  glen,  de- 
scending from  the  south-west,  enters  this  tract 
at  its  south-west  corner ; it  is  called  W ady-el- 
Fikreh,  bearing,  perhaps,  in  its  name  the  only 
remaining  vestige  of  the  ancient  city  of  Epi- 
cierus.  The  course  of  this  valley  forms  the 
natural  division  between  the  land  of  promise 
and  the  desert.  On  its  left  side,  as  one  ascends 
it,  the  hills  are,  though  utterly  barren,  com- 
paratively low ; but  on  the  right  it  is  flanked 
all  the  way  by  a steep  mountain-wall  varying 
from  about  700  to  1000  feet  in  height,  to  the 
north  of  which  rise  ranges  of  much  greater 
elevation.  The  route  from  Petra  to  Hebron 
mounts  this  precipice  at  a point  about  fourteen 
miles  from  the  mouth  of  Wady  el-Fikreh,  by 
a long  winding  track,  appropriately  designated 
the  “Pass  of  the  Bare  Rock,”  Nakb  es-Safah; 
and  attesting  by  its  difficulty  how  formidable 
was  the  rampart  which  the  land  of  Canaan 
here  presented  to  an  invader.  About  three 
miles  further  up  the  valley,  on  its  left  bank, 
stands  the  isolated  hill  of  Maderah  (see  on 
xxxiii.  30),  rising,  citadel-like,  in  the  form  of 
a truncated  cone,  to  a height  of  about  500 
feet.  Here  the  head  of  the  watercourse  of 
Wady  el-Fikreh  is  reached.  But  the  valley 
itself  is  continued  in  the  same  south-western 
direction,  under  the  name  of  Wady  el-Marrah; 
the  watercourse  of  which,  passing  south  of 
the  hill  of  Maderah,  runs  eastward,  not  like 
Wady  el-Fikreh  into  the  Ghor,  but  into  the 
higher  level  of  the  Arabah.  The  upper  part 
of  Wady  el-Marrah  is,  however,  grander  and 
more  striking  than  Wady  el-Fikreh.  Not  only 
do  the  hills  of  Canaan  rise  as  precipitously 
and  in  greater  elevation  on  the  right,  jutting 
forth  in  huge  irregular  promontories  or  bas- 
tions of  naked  rock;  but  on  the  other  side, 
the  hills  of  the  wilderness  (which  in  this  part 
are  known  as  Jebel  el-Marrah)  become  more 
lofty,  and  present  in  their  terrific  ruggedness 
an  aspect  which  English  travellers  describe  as 


V.  6 — 8.] 


NUMBERS.  XXXIV. 


6  And  as  for  the  western  border, 
ye  shall  even  have  the  great  sea  for 
a border:  this  shall  be  your  west 
border. 


7 And  this  shall  be  your  north 
border:  from  the  great  sea  ye  shall 
point  out  for  you  mount  Hor: 

8 From  mount  Hor  ye  shall  point 


that  of  a confused  chaos  of  matter  once  in  a 
boiling  state  and  whilst  so  suddenly  solidified. 
To  the  F'rench  traveller  Callier  the  great  depth 
of  the  valley  appeared  extraordinary  in  a dis- 
trict where  the  watercourses  are  often  so 
shallow  as  to  be  scarcely  recognizable.  The 
direction  of  this  valley  continues  nearly  straight 
for  about  ten  miles  above  Maderah,  up  to  a 
wild  ascent  on  the  Canaanitish  side  called 
Nakb  Kareb.  In  this  we  may  recognize,  by 
the  resemblance  of  name,  the  ancient  Maaleh- 
akrabbim  or  “Scorpion  Pass,”  The  literal 
Arabic  rendering  of  Akrabbim,  “scorpions,” 
would  be  Akarib ; and  to  this  the  modern 
name  of  the  ascent  comes  very  near.  Here  the 
Wady  el-Marrah  turns  southward,  and  pro- 
bably loses  itself  among  the  hills,  which  remain 
as  yet  unexplored,  ITose  hills  must  have 
belonged  to  “the  wilderness  of  Zin;”  and  Ka- 
desh-barnea  (see  note  at  end  of  Chapter  xiii,), 
which  is  “in  the  wilderness  of  Zin,”  will  be,  as 
the  text  implies,  the  southernmost  point  of  the 
southern  boundary.  That  wilderness  however 
was  probably  of  wide  extent,  and  comprised 
the  whole  rugged  mountain  region  south  of 
Wady  el-Marrah  and  Wady  el-Fikreh,  as  far 
east  as  the  Arabah,  If  this  be  so,  it  was 
separated  by  the  Arabah  only  from  the  moun- 
tains of  Edom ; and  might  thus  be  fairly  de- 
scribed in  the  text  as  resting  upon  the  side  or 
flank  of  the  latter  territory.  It  is  possible  that  it 
may  have  derived  its  name  from  an  Edomitish 
city.  On  the  declivity  of  a commanding  hill, 
within  the  ancient  territory  of  Edom,  there  yet 
stands  an  important  village  bearing  the  name 
Dhana,  which,  in  its  Arabic  orthography, 
corresponds  etymologically  to  Zin,  Burckhardt 
wrongly  regarded  Dhana  as  the  Thana  or 
Thoana  of  Ptolemy;  which  should  however 
rather  be  identified  with  the  modern  eth- 
Thawaneh  (cf.  Robinson,  ‘ B,  R,’  ii,  i68). 
There  seems  no  just  reason  why  a neigh- 
bouring part  of  the  wilderness  across  the 
Arabah  might  not  be  named  from  this  in 
the  same  way  that  a part  of  the  wilderness 
east  of  the  Red  Sea  was  named  from  the 
Egyptian  city  of  Etham  (see  on  xxxiii,  8), 
And  if  the  wilderness  of  Zin,  although  not 
strictly  belonging  to  Edom,  were  yet  thus 
regarded  as  connected  with  it,  the  fact  would 
help  to  account  for  the  way  in  which  the 
southern  cities  of  Judah  are  described  as 
lying  “toward  the  coast  of  Edom ”\ Josh, 

XV,  2l),  • 

Erom  Kadesh,  if  we  regard  it  as  identical 
with  the  present  Ain  el-Weibeh,  westward  to 
the  River,  or  Brook  of  Egvpt,  now  Wady  el- 
VOL.  I. 


Arish  (see  on  x,  12),  is  a distance  of  about 
seventy  miles.  In  this  intei*val  the  book  of 
Numbers  names  two  points  of  the  boundary- 
line: Hazar-addar  and  Azmon,  The  book  of 
Joshua  for  Hazar-addar  substitutes  Hezron 
and  Addar  (A,  V,  Adar)^  the  former  being 
perhaps  the  general  name  of  a district  of  Ha- 
zers^  or  nomad  hamlets  (see  on  Dent,  ii,  23), 
of  which  Addar  was  one : and,  before  carry- 
ing the  line  to  Azmon,  speaks  of  its  turning 
to  “ the  Karkaa  ” (see  on  Josh,  xv,  3),  That 
so  many  points  are  named  in  so  short  a line 
is  due  perhaps  to  the  familiarity  which  the 
Israelites  had  acquired  with  the  district  during 
the  period  of  their  encampment  at  Kadesh,  It 
is  probable,  though  from  geographical  rather 
than  etymological  considerations,  that  Hazar- 
addar  is  to  be  sought  at  Ain  el-Kudeirat,  on 
the  northern  side  of  the  ridge  which  here  forms 
the  natural  demarcation  between  Canaan  and 
the  desert.  The  fountain  is  still  the  source 
of  fertility  to  the  neighbouring  fields.  Azmon 
is  identified  in  the  later  Jewish  Targum  with 
Kesam,  the  modern  Kasaimeh,  a group  of 
springs  situate  in  the  north  of  one  of  the  gaps 
in  the  ridge,  and  a short  distance  west  of  Ain 
el-Kudeirat. 

The  junction  of  the  boundary  line  with 
“the  River  of  Egypt,”  will  fall  near  the  spot 
now  called  el-Kasaby.  Here  that  important 
M^atercourse,  coming  down  from  the  south, 
bends  suddenly  to  the  west,  and  forms  a deep 
and  narrow  gorge  between  the  last-mentioned 
ridge  on  the  north,  and  the  mountain  Helal 
on  the  south.  Its  ultimate  direction,  after 
emerging  from  this  gorge,  is  north-west;  and 
it  enters  “the  great  sea”  at  the  point  where 
was  eventually  built  the  frontier  city  of  Rhino- 
corura,  now  el  Arish. 

6.  for  a border]  Literally,  “ with  its 
border;”  i.e.  “with  the  border  which  it 
makes.” 

7 — 9.  The  northern  border.  On  the 
“mount  Hor,”  cf.  on  xx.  22.  Here  the  name 
denotes  the  whole  western  crest  of  Mount 
Lebanon,  eighty  miles  in  length,  commencing 
east  of  Zidon,  and  terminating  with  the  point 
immediately  above  the  entrance  of  Hamath 
(cf.  on  xiii.  21).  To  the  southern  end  of 
this  range  a frontier-line  would  have  to  be 
drawn  from  the  Mediterranean  Sea;  and  som.e 
illustration  of  the  description  in  the  text  may 
be  gained  from  the  circumstance  that  the 
great  river  between  Tyre  and  Zidon,  along 
whose  westward  bend  such  a line  might  be 
drawn,  still  bears  a name,  Kasimiyeh,  i.  t. 

3 ^ 


782 


NUMBERS.  XXXIV. 


[v.  9 — 12. 


out  your  border  unto  the  entrance  of 
Hamath ; and  the  goings  forth  of  the 
border  shall  be  to  Zedad ; 

9 And  the  border  shall  go  on  to 
Ziphron,  and  the  goings  out  of  it 
shall  be  at  Hazar-enan : this  shall  be 
your  north  border. 

10  And  ye  shall  point  out  your 
east  border  from  Hazar-enan  to  She- 
pham : 


“ boundary-stream.”  It  is  possible  indeed 
(see  Josh.  xix.  28,  &c.)  that  the  border  was 
intended  to  comprise  Zidon  as  well  as  Tyre; 
but  this  is  not  clear ; and  neither  of  them  was 
in  fact  ever  acquired  by  Israel.  The  more 
northern  portion  of  the  Phenician  plain  was 
not  within  the  limits,  though  the  entire  district 
of  Coele-Syria,  between  the  western  and  eastern 
ranges  of  Lebanon,  was  so.  Yet  this  district 
did  not  fall  into  possession  of  the  Israelites  till 
the  days  of  David  and  Solomon ; and  even 
then  they  ruled  over  it  rather  than  occupied  it. 
The  extreme  point  in  the  northern  border  of  the 
land,  as  laid  down  by  Moses,  was  the  city  of  Ze- 
dad, now  a large  village,  still  bearing  its  ancient 
name  (Sadad),  about  thirty  miles  east  of  the 
entrance  of  Hamath.  Hence  the  border  turned 
back  south-westward  to  Ziphron,  now  Zifran. 
This  place,  not  to  be  confounded  with  ez 
Za'feraneh,  near  Hamath,  has  not  been  as  yet 
visited  by  modern  travellers,  but  is  reported  to 
lie  about  forty  miles  north-east  of  Damascus, 
near  the  road  to  Palmyra,  and  to  contain  exten- 
sive ruins.  It  is  probable  that  from  Ziphron 
to  flazar-enan,  “the  fountain  village,”  the 
course  of  the  border  would  be  still  south- 
westward  or  westward ; and  there  is  no  place 
with  which  Hazar-enan  may  be  better  con- 
jecturally  identified  than  with  Ayun  ed-Dara, 
a fountain  situate  in  the  very  heart  of  the 
great  central  chain  of  Antilibanus;  the  lofti- 
est peaks  of  which  rise  up  in  stern  grandeur 
around  on  every  side  (Porter,  ‘Damascus,’ 
pp.  332  sqq.  Its  position  in  Van  de  Velde’s 
map  is  lat.  33°  49',  long.  36"  12',  and  ruins 
are  marked  at  the  spot).  The  eastern  portion 
of  the  northern  border  thus  formed  a great 
north-eastward  loop,  so  as  to  include  all  the 
declivities,  both  western  and  eastern,  of  the 
northern  part  of  the  Antilibanus  range;  return- 
ing however  to  the  crest  of  that  range  at 
Hazar-enan,  and  thus  excluding  the  plain  of 
Damascus  together  with  the  valleys  which  de- 
scend toward  it. 

10  12.  7'he  eastern  border,  as  here  de- 

scrib('d,  must  be  understood  to  commence  at 
that  point  from  which  the  boundary  line  pur- 
sued an  uninterruptedly  southward  course; 
and  its  general  direction  may  be  determined 


11  And  the  coast  shall  go  down 
from  Shepham  to  Riblah,  on  the  east 
side  of  Ain;  and  the  border  shall  de- 
scend, and  shall  reach  unto  the  ^ side 
of  the  sea  of  Chinnereth  eastward  : 

12  And  the  border  shall  go  down 
to  Jordan,  and  the  goings  out  of  it 
shall  be  at  the  salt  sea  : this  shall  be 
your  land  with  the  coasts  thereof 
round  about. 


from  the  physical  features  of  the  country,  not- 
withstanding some  uncertainty  as  to  details. 
It  ran  at  first  along  the  mountain  crest.  She- 
pham, the  first  point  after  Hazar-enan,  is  un- 
known. Of  the  next,  all  that  is  certain  is  that 
it  could  not  have  been  Riblah  in  the  land  of 
Hamath,  which  lay  outside  the  northern  border 
described  in  the  preceding  verses.  But  probably 
the  true  name  in  this  passage  is  not  Riblah  at 
all.  The  Hebrew  letters  of  the  word,  dis- 
engaged from  the  Jewish  vowel-marks,  are 
liRBLii;  and  if  the  final  h be  “Hi?  locale” 
(our  English  “ward”),  the  name  may  then 
be  read  Har-bel  (LXX.  ’Ap/S^Xa),  i.e.  “the 
Mountain  of  Bel;”  the  Har-baal-hermon  of 
Judg.  iii.  3.  Bel,  for  Baal,  is  merely  an  Ara- 
maism  (cf.  Is.  xlvi.  i),  and  was  probably  the 
form  employed  by  the  Aramaic  population 
that  dwelt  in  those  districts.  No  more  strik- 
ing landmark  could  be  set  forth  than  the  sum- 
mit of  Hermon,  the  southernmost  and  by  far 
the  loftiest  peak  of  the  whole  Antilibanus 
range,  rising  to  a height  of  ten  thousand  feet, 
and  overtopping  every  other  mountain  in  the 
Holy  Land ; yet  not  so  inaccessible  but  that  it 
was  crowned  by  heathen  zeal  with  a sanctuary  / 
of  Baal,  of  which  the  ruins,  consisting  of  foun- 
dations of  walls  and  of  heaps  of  hewn  stones, 
still  remain.  Should  however  the  phrase  “go 
down  from  Shepham”  be  deemed  inconsistent 
with  the  greater  elevation  of  Hermon,  the  land- 
mark before  us  may  still  be  identified  with  one 
of  those  numerous  sanctuaries  with  which  both 
ancient  testimony  and  modern  exploration  shew 
the  sides  as  well  as  the  summit  of  the  moun- 
tain to  have  been  covered.  In  any  case  it  is 
unlikely  that  the  landmark  named  Judg.  iii.  3 
would  be  omitted  here.  This  is  here  described 
as  “on  the  east  side  of  Ain,”  literally  “the 
Ain,”  i.e.  fountain.  This  Ain  is  understood 
by  Jerome  and  the  later  Targums  of  the 
fountain  of  the  Jordan;  and  it  is  in  the  plain 
at  the  south-western  foot  of  Hermon  that  the 
two  most  celebrated  sources  of  that  river,  those 
of  Daphne  and  of  Paneas,  are  situate,  while 
from  the  western  slopes  of  the  same  mountain 
there  issue  the  streams  by  which  its  remaining 
and  longest  branch  is  fed.  * 

7Te  border  next  descended  to  the  “sea  of 
Chinnereth,”  better  known  by  its  later  name 


V.  13— 1 8.] 


NUMBERS.  XXXIV. 


783 


13  And  Moses  commanded  the 
children  of  Israel,  saying,  This  is  the 
land  which  ye  shall  inherit  by  lot, 
which  the  Lord  commanded  to  give 
unto  the  nine  tribes,  and  to  the  half 
tribe : 

chap.  32.  ‘^For  the  tribe  of  the  children 

fsh.  14.2,  of  Reuben  according  to  the  house  of 
their  fathers,  and  the  tribe  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Gad  according  to  the  house 
of  their  fathers,  have  received  their 
inheritance ; and  half  the  tribe  of  Ma- 
nasseh  have  received  their  inheritance  : 


15  The  two  tribes  and  the  half 
tribe  have  received  their  inheritance 
on  this  side  Jordan  near  Jericho  east- 
ward, toward  the  sunrising. 

16  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 

17  These  are  the  names  of  the 
men  which  shall  divide  the  land  unto 

you:  ‘^Eleazar  the  priest,  and  Joshua^ Josh.  iq. 
the  son  of  Nun. 

18  And  ye  shall  take  one  prince  of 
every  tribe,  to  divide  the  land  by  in- 
heritance. 


of  Gennesaret,  which  is  suppossd  to  be  only 
a corruption  of  Chinnereth.  It  is  not  de- 
scribed as  following  the  line  of  the  Jordan; 
and  the  intention  was  probably  that  it  should 
run  parallel  to  it,  along  the  line  of  hill  about 
ten  miles  further  east,  bending  so  as  to  strike 
the  lake  on  its  north-east  side  or  shoulder.  It 
may  be  that  the  Manassite  leaders  had  already 
overrun  some  of  the  ground  which  it  would 
thus  comprise  (see  on  xxxii.  42);  but  that  the 
inheritance  of  Naphtali  was  not  bounded  by 
the  Jordan  on  the  east  may  be  inferred  from  the 
sites  of  some  of  the  Naphtalite  cities,  as  Razor 
and  Migdal-el  (Josh.  xix.  36,  38),  as  well  as 
from  the  assertion  of  Josephus  (‘Ant.’  v.  22). 
On  the  other  hand,  from  the  Lake  of  Gennesa- 
ret to  the  Dead  Sea,  the  Jordan  would  have 
formed  the  natural  frontier,  had  not  the  terri- 
tory of  Gilead  been  already  assigned  to  the 
pastoral  tribes. 

10.  point  out  your  border']^  Lit.  “measure 
off,”  or  “mark  out.” 

12.  <vjith  the  coasts  thereof  round  about\ 
i.  e.  as  defined  by  its  coasts,  or  borders,  round 
about. 

14, 15.  hause  received  their  inherit ance'\  Cf. 
on  xxxii.  28,  33.  The  territory  on  the  east 
of  the  Jordan  had  been  assigned,  as  a whole, 
to  Reuben,  Gad,  and  Machir,  though  not  yet 
partitioned  among  them. 

on  this  side  fordan  near  Jericho']  Literally, 
“on  this  side  of  the  Jericho  Jordan,”  as  at 
xxii.  I,  xxvi.  3,  63,  xxxiii.  48,  50.  The  ex- 
pression here  is  remarkable,  because  applied 
not,  as  elsewhere,  to  a limited  space,  but  to 
the  whole  territory  of  the  two-and-a-half  tribes. 
Yet  it  is  appropriate  enough,  for  it  was  by  the 
passage  of  the  Jordan  at  Jericho  that  all  the 
remaining  inheritance  would  have  to  be  reached. 
It  is  too,  geographically,  more  accurate  than 
would  have  been  the  simple  phrase  ‘ ‘ on  this 
side  of  the  Jordan,”  for  (cf.  on  w.  10 — 12) 
the  Jordan  did  not  divide  the  western  and 
eastern  tribes  throughout  the  whole  of  its 


course.  It  may  be  here  observed  that  the 
effect  of  the  conquest  on  the  east  of  the  J ordan 
would,  had  the  whole  of  the  promised  terri- 
tory fallen  into  I sraelitish  ' possession,  have 
been  not  only  to  add  greatly  to  the  extent  of 
the  Israelitish  domain,  but  also  to  environ  on 
three  sides  the  territory  of  Damascus.  His- 
torically this  was  never  brought  to  pass  till 
Damascus  itself  became  tributary  to  Israel, 
and  probably  the  settlement  of  so  many  of  the 
Israelites  in  Gilead  and  Bashan  was  not  with- 
out its  influence  in  inducing  the  rest  to  view 
the  southern  expanse  of  Canaan  as  sufficient 
for  their  needs,  and  so  to  leave  Hermon,  Goele- 
Syria,  and  Zedad,  unconquered. 

16 — 29.  Appointment  of  princes  from  the 
Ten  Tribes  to  divide  the  land  just  described. 
The  positions  of  the  several  inheritances  were 
to  be  determined  by  lot;  but  their  dimensions 
were  proportioned  to  the  wants  of  the  tribes  to 
which  they  fell.  Thus  the  limits  of  each  were 
to  be  marked  out  after  the  lot  had  determined 
to  which  tribe  it  belonged,  and  for  the  due  and 
fair  adjustment  of  the  limits  the  presence  of  a 
representative  from  each  tribe  was  requisite. 
Of  the  representatives  now  selected  through 
Moses  beforehand,  who  were  all  princes,  i.e. 
heads  of  chief  families,  in  their  respective  tribes 
(see  on  xiii.  2),  Caleb  alone,  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  is  otherwise  known  to  us  (see  on  xiii. 
4*sqq.).  The  order  in  which  the  tribes  are 
named  is  peculiar  to  this  passage.  If  they  be 
taken  in  pairs,  Judah  and  Simeon,  Benjamin 
and  Dan,  Manasseh  and  Ephraim,  Zebulun 
and  Issachar,  Asher  and  Naphtali,  the  order 
of  the  pairs  agrees  with  the  order  in  which  the 
allotments  in  the  Holy  Land,  taken  also  in 
couples,  followed  each  other  in  the  map  from 
south  to  north.  Moreover,  these  pairs  are 
formed  of  two  tribes  otherwise  mutually  con- 
nected, except  only  that  which  consists  of 
Benjamin  and  Dan;  and  even  these  two  had 
been  next  each  other  in  the  order  of  march, 
and  probably  were  still  contiguous  in  their 
encampments  (see  on  ch.  ii.). 


3 D 2 


784 


NUMBERS.  XXXIV.  XXXY. 


[v.  19 — 6. 


19  And  the  names  of  the  men  are 
these:  Of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  Caleb 
the  son  of  Jephunneh. 

20  And  of  the  tribe  of  the  children 
of  Simeon,  Shemuel  the  son  of  Am- 
mihud. 

21  Of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  Eli- 
dad  the  son  of  Chislon. 

22  And  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of 
the  children  of  Dan,  Bukki  the  son 
of  Jogli. 

23  The  prince  of  the  children  of 
Joseph,  for  the  tribe  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Manasseh,  Hanniel  the  son 
of  Ephod. 

24  And  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of 
the  children  of  Ephraim,  Kemuel  the 
son  of  Shiphtan. 

25  And  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of 
the  children  of  Zebulun,  Elizaphan 
the  son  of  Parnach. 

26  And  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of 
the  children  of  Issachar,  Paltiel  the 
son  of  Azzan. 

27  And  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of 
the  children  of  Asher,  Ahihud  the 
son  of  Shelomi. 

28  And  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of 
the  children  of  Naphtali,  Pedahel  the 
son  of  Ammihud. 

29  These  are  they  whom  the  Lord 
commanded  to  divide  the  inheritance 
unto  the  children  of  Israel  in  the  land 
of  Canaan. 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 

I Eight  a7id forty  cities  for  the  Levites  with  their 
suburbs,  aiid  measure  thereof  6 Six  of  them 
are  to  be  cities  of  refuge,  g The  laros  of 
murder.  3 1 No  satisfaction  for  ffitn'der. 

And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses 
in  the  plains  of  Moab  by  Jordan 
near  Jericho,  saying, 

2  Command  the  children  of  Is- "" 
rael,  that  they  give  unto  the  Levites 
of  the  inheritance  of  their  possession 
cities  to  dwell  in ; and  ye  shall  give 
also  unto  the  Levites  suburbs  for  the 
cities  round  about  them. 

3  And  the  cities  shall  they  have  to 
dwell  in  ; and  the  suburbs  of  them 
shall  be  for  their  cattle,  and  for  their 
goods,  and  for  all  their  beasts. 

4  And  the  suburbs  of  the  cities, 
which  ye  shall  give  unto  the  Levites, 
shall  reach  from  the  wall  of  the  city 
and  outward  a thousand  cubits  round 
about. 

5  And  ye  shall  measure  from  with- 
out the  city  on  the  east  side  two 
thousand  cubits,  and  on  the  south 
side  two  thousand  cubits,  and  on  the 
west  side  two  thousand  cubits,  and 
on  the  north  side  two  thousand  cu- 
bits ; and  the  city  shall  be  in  the 
midst : this  shall  be  to  them  the 
suburbs  of  the  cities. 

6  And  among  the  cities  which  ye 
shall  give  unto  the  Levites  there  shall 


Chap.  XXXV.  1 — xxxvi.  13.  These  chap- 
ters constitute  the  second  division  of  those 
final  regulations  v^hich  complete  the  book : cf. 
on  xxxiii.  50.  They  contain  (i)  the  appoint- 
ment of  cities  for  the  residence  of  the  Levites, 
‘i"p.  I— -8;  (2)  the  nomination  of  Cities  of 
Refuge,  t’t;.  9 — 34;  (3)  enactments,  supple- 
mentary to  those  of  xxviii.  6 sqcp,  and  relating 
to  the  marriage  of  heiresses,  xxxvi.  i — 13. 

2.  suburbs']  Render  rather  (with  Gesen., 
Knob.,  Keil,  &c.)  “pasture-grounds.” 

3.  for  thciiy  cattle,  and  for  their  goods, 
and  for  all  their  beasts]  More  strictly,  “ for 
their  large  cattle,  for  their  sheep  and  goats, 
and  for  all  their  beasts  whatsoever  they  be.” 

5.  from  rNithout  the  city]  Render,  with- 
out the  city.  T'he  demarcation  here  intended 
would  run  parallel  to  the  wall  of  the  city, 
outside  which  it  was  made.  The  object  was 


apparently  to  secure  that  the  preceding  provision 
should  be  fairly  and  fully  carried  out.  The 
“suburb”  would  thus  extend  for  a distance 
of  a thousand  cubits,  or  nearly  one-third  of  a 
mile  from  the  M^all.  There  might  be  danger, 
especially  with  the  in-egular  forms  which  the 
sites  of  cities  might  assume,  and  with  the  phy- 
sical obstacles  presented  by  the  surrounding 
ground,  that  neighbouring  proprietors  would 
deem  the  suburb  sufficient  if  it  measured  a 
thousand  cubits  in  some  directions,  not  in 
others ; in  which  case  it  might  be  occasionally 
restricted  to  a very  small  area.  To  guard 
against  this,  it  was  ordained  that  the  suburb 
should,  alike  on  north,  south,  east,  and  west, 
present,  at  a distance  of  a thousand  cubits 
from  the  wall,  a fi'ont  not  less  than  two 
thousand  cubits  in  length;  and,  by  joining 
the  extremities  of  these  measured  fronts  ac- 
cording to  the  nature  of  the  ground,  a suffi- 
cient space  for  the  Levites  would  be  secured. 


Joeh. 


V.  7— 13-] 


NUMBERS.  XXXV. 


785 


^Deut.  4.  ^six  cities  for  refuge,  which  ye 
Josh.  20. 2.  shall  appoint  for  the  manslayer,  that 
t Heb.^‘  he  may  flee  thither  : and  ^to  them  ye 
'yf^shair’^  shall  add  forty  and  two  cities. 
give.  j So  all  the  cities  which  ye  shall 

give  to  the  Levites  shall  be  forty  and 
eight  cities  : them  shall  ye  give  with 
their  suburbs. 

8  And  the  cities  which  ye  shall 
give  shall  be  of  the  possession  of  the 
children  of  Israel  : from  them  that 
have  many  ye  shall  give  many  ; but 
from  them  that  have  few  ye  shall  give 
few  : every  one  shall  give  of  his  cities 
iHeb.  unto  the  Levites  according  to  his  in- 
^£'riiT'  heritance  which  ^ he  inheriteth. 


9 H And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

10  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them,  <^When 

be  come  over  Jordan  into  the  land  Josh.  20. 2. 
of  Canaan  ; 

1 1 Then  ye  shall  appoint  you  cities 
to  be  cities  of  refuge  for  you ; that 
the  slayer  may  flee  thither,  which 
killeth  any  person  ^ at  unawares. 

12  And  they  shall  be  unto  you 
cities  for  refuge  from  the  avenger ; 
that  the  manslayer  die  not,  until  he 
stand  before  the  congregation  in  judg- 
ment. 

13  And  of  these  cities  which  ye 


6.  among  the  cities']  The  construction  here 
is  confused  and  irregular.  See  Note  at  end  of 
the  chapter. 

The  general  sense  however  is  plain;  viz. 
that  the  Levitical  cities  shall  be  forty-eight 
altogether,  of  which  six  shall  be  Cities  of 
Refuge,  for  the  purposes  described  in  -v'v. 
9 — 34.  The  passage  might  be  rendered  thus : 
“As  to  the  cities  which  ye  shall  give  to  the 
Levites,  ye  shall  give  six  cities,  &c.” 

The  Levitical  cities  were  in  an  especial  man- 
ner the  Lord’s,  and  therefore  the  places  of 
refuge,  where  the  manslayer  might  remain  un- 
der the  protection  of  a special  institution  devised 
by  Divine  mercy,  were  appropriately  selected 
from  amongst  them.  No  doubt  also  the  Priests 
and  Levites  would  be  fittest  persons  to  admi- 
nister the  law  in  the  doubtful  cases  which 
would  be  sure  to  occur:  cf.  on  t'.  24. 

8.  from  them  that  hanse  many  ye  shall  ginse 
many^  &c.]  Nine  cities  were  eventually  given 
to  the  Levites  from  the  large  joint  inheritance 
of  Judah  and  Simeon;  three  were  taken  from 
the  territory  of  Naphtali,  and  the  other  tribes 
gave  each  four  apiece. 

10.  When  ye  be  come  onser  Jordan]  The 
three  cities  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  were 
afterwards  set  apart  by  Moses  himself,  Deut. 
iv.  41 — 43.  See  on  Deut.  xix.  8 sqq. 

12.  the  avenger]  Heb.  goeh  a term  of 
which  the  original  import  is  uncertain.  The 
very  obscurity  of  its  etymology  testifies  to  the 
antiquity  of  the  office  which  it  denotes.  That 
office  rested  on  the  principle  of  Gen.  ix.  6, 
“whoso  sheddeth  man’s  blood,  by  man  shall 
his  blood  be  shed.”  In  an  unsettled  state  of 
society  the  execution  of  justice  was  necessarily 
left  in  private  hands.  The  lowest  stage  of 
national  development  is  where  every  one  as- 
sumes the  right  of  avenging  alleged  misdeeds  at 
his  discretion;  and  it  was  therefore  already 


an  upward  step  when  prevailing  custom  re- 
stricted this  right  to  certain  persons,  who, 
although  wielding  no  public  authority,  were 
yet  invested,  ipso  facto.,  for  the  time  being, 
with  a public  character.  It  was  in  such  a 
spirit  that  the  unwritten  code  of  the  east  con- 
ceded to  the  nearest  kinsman  of  a murdered 
man  the  right  of  avenging  the  blood  that  had 
been  shed.  He  was  permitted  to  kill  the 
murderer,  without  notice,  openly  or  secretly, 
wheresoever  he  might  find  him.  Such  rude 
justice  necessarily  involved  grave  evils.  It  gave 
no  opportunity  to  the  person  charged  with 
crime  of  establishing  his  innocence;  it  recog- 
nized no  distinction  between  murder,  man- 
slaughter, and  accidental  homicide;  it  per- 
petuated family  blood-feuds,  the  avenger  of 
blood  being  liable  to  be  treated  in  his  turn  as 
a murderer  by  the  kinsman  of  the  man  whom 
he  had  slain.  These  grievances  could  not  be 
removed  as  long  as  there  was  no  central 
government  strong  enough  to  vindicate  the 
law ; but  they  might  be  mitigated ; and  to  do 
this  was  the  object  of  the  institution  in  the 
text : an  institution  already  promised  in  gene- 
ral terms  by  God,  Ex.  xxi.  13. 

Among  the  Arab  tribes,  who  are  under  the 
control  of  no  central  authority,  the  practice 
of  blood-revenge  subsists  in  full  force  to  the 
present  day.  The  law  of  the  Koran  limits  the 
right  of  demanding  satisfaction  to  cases  in 
which  a man  has  been  unjustly  smitten,  and 
forbids  the  kinsman  of  the  deceased  to  avenge 
his  blood  on  any  other  than  the  actual  mur- 
derer. But  these  restrictions  are  generally  dis- 
regarded in  practice  by  the  Arabs. 

12.  the  congregation]  i.e.  local  court,. con- 
sisting of  the  elders  of  the  city  (Josh.  xx.  4). 
Two  terms  {kdhal  and  eydah)  are  rendered 
“congregation”  in  the  A.  V.  The  former 
word  denotes  properly  the  general  assembly  of 
the  people ; the  latter,  which  is  here  employed, 


[v.  14—25. 


786  NUMBERS.  XXXV. 


f^Exod.  21. 
14. 


t Ileb. 
with  a 
sto/ie  0/ 
the  hand. 


shall  give  six  cities  shall  ye  have  for 
refuge. 

14  Ye  shall  give  three  cities  on 
this  side  Jordan,  and  three  cities  shall 
ye  give  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  which 
shall  be  cities  of  refuge. 

15  These  six  cities  shall  be  a re- 
fuge, both  for  the  children  of  Israel, 
and  for  the  stranger,  and  for  the  so- 
journer among  them  : that  every  one 
that  killeth  any  person  unawares  may 
flee  thither. 

16  "^And  if  he  smite  him  with  an 
instrument  of  iron,  so  that  he  die,  he 
is  a murderer : the  murderer  shall 
surely  be  put  to  death. 

17  And  if  he  smite  him  ^with 
throwing  a stone,  wherewith  he  may 
die,  and  he  die,  he  is  a murderer : 
the  murderer  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death. 

18  Or  if  he  smite  him  with  an 
hand  weapon  of  wood,  wherewith  he 
may  die,  and  he  die,  he  is  a mur- 
derer : the  murderer  shall  surely  be 
put  to  death. 

19  The  revenger  of  blood  himself 


shall  slay  the  murderer : when  he 
meeteth  him,  he  shall  slay  him. 

20  ^But  if  he  thrust  him  of  hatred,  -fDeut.  19. 
or  hurl  at  him  by  laying  of  wait,  that  , 

he  die ; 

21  Or  in  enmity  smite  him  with 
his  hand,  that  he  die  : he  that  smote 
him  shall  surely  be  put  to  death  ; for 
he  is  a murderer : the  revenger  of 
blood  shall  slay  the  murderer,  when 
he  meeteth  him. 

22  But  if  he  thrust  him  suddenly 
•'^without  enmity,  or  have  cast  upon-^Exod.  21. 
him  any  thing  without  laying  of  wait, 

23  Or  with  any  stone,  wherewith 
a man  may  die,  seeing  him  not,  and 
cast  it  upon  him,  that  he  die,  and 
was  not  his  enemy,  neither  sought 
his  harm : 

24  Then  the  congregation  shall 
judge  between  the  slayer  and  the  re- 
blood according  to  these 

25  And  the  congregation  shall  de- 
liver the  slayer  out  of  the  hand  of 
the  revenger  of  blood,  and  the  con- 
gregation shall  restore  him  to  the  city 


venger  or 
judgments 


means  simply  any  appointed  gathering;  and 
so,  though  occasionally  used  for  the  general 
assembly,  is  used  with  propriety  here  of  a select 
representative  body. 

16.  instrument  of  iron~\  i.e.  a tool;  iron 
was  not  at  this  date  used  for  arms.  Cf.  note 
on  Deut.  iii.  ii, 

19.  'when  he  meeteth  him~\  Provided,  of 
course,  it  were  without  a city  of  refuge. 

20.  But\  Rather,  now.  This  and  the  fol- 

lowing verses  limit  the  application  of  'w.  16— 
19  to  cases  in  which  a man  has  slain  with 
malice  aforethought.  It  had,  e.g.  been  laid 
down  in  <1;,  1 7 that  to  hurl  a stone  at  another 
and  cause  his  death  thereby  was  murder;  yet 
'V.  23  declares  this  not  to  be  murder  if  he 
who  hurled  the  stone  sought  not  thereby  his 
neighbour’s  harm.  The  sense. of  16 — 25 

might  then  be  exhibited  thus:  “whereas  it  is 
laid  down  that  to  take  another  man’s  life  by 
any  means  soever  is  murder,  and  exposes  the 
murderer  to  the  penalty  of  retaliation;  now 
therefore  be  it  known  that,  if  the  deed  be  done 
in  enmity,  it  is  in  truth  very  murder,  and  the 
murderer  shall  be  slain ; but  if  it  be  not  done 
in  enmity,  then  the  congregation  shall  interpose 
to  stay  the  avenger  s hand.” 


24.  shall  judge  between']  i.  e.  shall  autho- 
ritatively intervene  so  as  to  protect  the  slayer 
from  the  avenger.  It  is  the  case  of  the  innocent 
slayer  that  is  here  contemplated.  The  expres- 
sion “to  judge”  often  denotes  not  the  mere 
hearing  of  the  cause  but  the  actual  redress  of 
the  wrong  sustained  {e.g.  Ps.  x.  18).  It  is 
evident  that  in  a doubtful  case  there  would 
necessarily  have  to  be  a judicial  decision  as  to 
the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the  person  who  claimed 
the'  right  of  asylum;  as  is  indeed  implied  in 
‘V.  12. 

25.  and  he  shall  abide  in  if\  Thus  the 
homicide  was  safe  only  within  the  walls  of  his 
city  of  refuge.  He  became  therefore  a virtual 
exile  from  his  home;  was  debarred  from  the 
tillage  of  his  paternal  fields,  and  lost  th/e 
revenues  which  would  have  accrued  from 
such  tillage.  The  city  which  afforded  him 
shelter  was  in  some  measure  a place  of  con- 
finement to  him.  The  provisions  here  made 
serve  to  mark  the  gravity  of  the  act  of  man- 
slaughter, even  when  not  premeditated;  and 
the  inconveniences  attending  on  them  fell,  as  is 
right  and  fair,  upon  him  who  committed  the 
deed. 

unto  the  death  of  the  high  priest]  The  aton- 
ing death  of  the  Saviour  cast  its  shadow  before 


V.  26—34-] 


NUMBERS.  XXXV. 


787 


of  his  refuge,  whither  he  was  fled  : 
and  he  shall  abide  in  it  unto  the  death 
of  the  high  priest,  which  was  anoint- 
ed with  the  holy  oil. 

26  But  if  the  slayer  shall  at  any 
time  come  without  the  border  of  the 
city  of  his  refuge,  whither  he  was  fled  ; 

27  And  the  revenger  of  blood  find 
him  without  the  borders  of  the  city 
of  his  refuge,  and  the  revenger  of 

f Heb.  blood  kill  the  slayer  ; ^ he  shall  not 
shaftf  be  guilty  of  blood  : 
iohhn.  28  Because  he  should  have  re- 
mained in  the  city  of  his  refuge  until 
the  death  of  the  high  priest:  but  after 
the  death  of  the  high  priest  the  slayer 
shall  return  into  the  land  of  his  pos- 
session. 

29  So  these  things  shall  be  for  a 
statute  of  judgment  unto  you  through- 
out your  generations  in  all  your  dweil- 
ings. 

30  Whoso  killeth  any  person,  the 


murderer  shall  be  put  to  death  by  the 
^ mouth  of  witnesses : but  one  witness  -^-Deut.  17. 
shall  not  testify  against  any  person  to  & 19. 15. 
cause  him  to  die. 

31  Moreover  ye  shall  take  no  sa- 2 Cor.  13. 
tisfaction  for  the  life  of  a murderer,  Heb.  10. 
which  is  ^guilty  of  death  : but  he  f 
shall  be  surely  put  to  death. 

32  And  ye  shall  take  no  satisfac- 
tion for  him  that  is  fled  to  the  city  of 
his  refuge,  that  he  should  come  again 
to  dwell  in  the  land,  until  the  death 
of  the  priest. 

33  So  ye  shall  not  pollute  the  land 
wherein  ye  are : for  blood  it  deflleth 
the  land  : and  ^ the  land  cannot  be 
cleansed  of  the  blood  that  is  shed  be  no  cxpi- 
therein,  but  by  the  blood  of  him  that  %TL{d. 
shed  it. 

34  Defile  not  therefore  the  land 
which  ye  shall  inhabit,  wherein  I 
dwell : for  I the  Lord  dwell  among 
the  children  of  Israel. 


on  the  statute-book  of  the  Law  and  on  the  an- 
nals of  Jewish  history.  The  High-Priest,  as  the 
head  and  representative  of  the  whole  chosen 
family  of  sacerdotal  mediators,  as  exclusively 
entrusted  with  some  of  the  chief  priestly  func- 
tions, as  alone  privileged  to  make  yearly  atone- 
ment within  the  Holy  of  Holies,  and  to  gain, 
from  the  mysterious  Urim  and  Thummim, 
special  revelations  of  the  will  of  God,  was, 
preeminently,  a type  of  Christ.  And  thus  the 
death  of  each  successive  high-priest  presignified 
that  death  of  Christ  by  which  the  captives 
were  to  be  freed,  and  the  remembrance  of 
transgressions  made  to  cease.  Whether  at 
each  high-priest’s  death  all  existing  blood-feuds 
were  to  terminate,  even  in  those  cases  in  which 
no  shelter  had  been  sought  in  a city  of  refuge, 
is  not  stated.  No  doubt,  however,  the  merciful 
provisions  of  this  law  would  ameliorate  gene- 
ral practice  in  many  particulars  which  the 
letter  of  its  ordinance  did  not  reach. 

30.  by  the  mouth  of  <witne3ses\  i.  e.  two 
witnesses,  at  the  least  (cf.  Deut.  xvii.  6,  &c.). 
The  provisions  of  this  and  the  following  verses 
protect  the  enactments  of  this  chapter  from 
abuse.  The  Cities  of  Refuge  were  not  intended 
to  exempt  a criminal  from  deserved  punish- 
ment, as  did  the  asylums  of  the  Greeks  and 
Romans,  and  the  sanctuaries  of  mediaeval 
Europe. 

31.  no  satisfaction']  Rather  ransom,  as 
in  Ex.  xxi.  30,  where  see  note.  In  the  Koran 
the  acceptance  of  ransom  is  expressly  sanction- 
ed; nay,  blood-revenge  seems  to  be  contem- 


plated only  as  a last  resource,  after  the  demand 
for  pecuniary  compensation  has  been  refused. 
The  Arabs  vary  in  their  practice  in  reference 
to  this  matter.  Some  will  waive  the  right  of 
retaliation  on  receipt  of  a fine,  others  account 
the  acceptance  of  such  blood-money  as  dis- 
honourable (see  Niebuhr,  ‘Travels’  i.  pp. 
28 — 31).  The  permission  to  make  compensa- 
tion for  murders  undoubtedly  mitigates,  in 
practice,  the  system  of  private  retaliation ; 
but  it  does  so  by  sacrificing  the  principle 
which  is  the  basis  of  that  retaliation  itself. 
Resting  ultimately  upon  the  law  of  God,  that, 
“whosoever  sheddeth  man’s  blood,  by  man 
shall  his  blood  be  shed,”  it  bids  men  rest. con- 
tent with  a convenient  evasion  of  that  law, 
and  converts  the  authority  given  to  men  to 
act  as  God’s  ministers,  in  taking  life  for  life, 
into  a warrant  for  enabling  the  kinsmen  of 
a murdered  man  to  make  gain  out  of  his 
murder. 

32.  for  him  that  is  fled  to  the  city  of  his 
refuge]  A fine  for  an  accidental  homicide  is 
forbidden;  for  though  not  so  derogatory  to 
the  primeval  law  as  a fine  for  murder,  it  would 
equally  cause  the  kinsman  to  profit  by  that 
which  he  ought  to  deplore,  and  would  defeat' 
the  higher  object  of  the  various  provisions  of 
the  law  of  refuge,  especially  in  their  typical 
bearing. 

34.  for  I the  Lord  d'well^  &c.]  An  em- 
phatic protest  against  all  enactment  or  relaxa- 
tion of  laws  by  men  for  their  own  private  con- 
venience. 


788 


,v.  I — 9. 


NUMBERS.  XXXVI. 

NOTE  on  Chap.  xxxv.  6. 

The  A.  V.  is  probably  wrong  in  taking  the  with  which  he  proceeds;  and  then  in  'v.  8 
particle  as  a preposition.  It  appears  to  resumes  once  more  with  “cities”  instead  of 
be  only  the  sign  of  the  accusative.  The  writer  completing  the  construction  of  -v.  6.  The 
intending  to  add  a verb  governing  “cities,”  three  verses  are  really  one  sentence, 
omits  to  do  so  amongst  the  various  clauses 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

I The  incotivenlence  of  the  inheritance  of  daugh- 
ters 5 is  remedied  by  marrying  in  their  oian 
tribes,  7 lest  the  hiheritance  should  be  removed 
from  the  tribe.  10  The  daughters  of  Zelofhe- 
had  marry  their  father's  brothers'  sons. 

And  the  chief  fathers  of  the  fa- 
^ milies  of  the  children  of  Gilead, 
the  son  of  Machir,  the  son  of  Ma- 
nasseh,  of  the  families  of  the  sons  of 
Joseph,  came  near,  and  spake  before 
•Moses,  and  before  the  princes,  the 
chief  fathers  of  the  children  of  Israel : 
chap.  27.  2 And  they  said,  ^The  Lord  com- 

josh.  17. 3.  manded  my  lord  to  give  the  land  for 
an  inheritance  by  lot  to  the  children 
of  Israel : and  my  lord  was  command- 
ed by  the  Lord  to  giv^e  the  inherit- 
ance of  Zelophehad  our  brother  unto 
his  daughters. 

3  And  if  they  be  married  to  any  of 
the  sons  of  the  other  tribes  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  then  shall  their 
» inheritance  be  taken  from  the  inhe- 
ritance of  our  fathers,  and  shall  be 
•put  to  the  inheritance  of  the  tribe 
f iieb.  whereunto  they  are  received  : so 
//ley  shall  it  be  taken  from  the  lot  of  our 
shall  be.  inheritance. 

4  And  when  the  jubile  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  shall  be,  then  shall 


Chap.  XXXVI.  1 — 13.  Provisions  for 
preventing  any  portion  of  the  inheritance  of 
one  tribe  passing  to  another  through  the  mar- 
riage of  an  heiress.  The  necessity  for  regulating 
this  arose  out  of  the  ordinance  of  xxviii.  6 — ii, 
which  permitted  the  daughters  of  an  Israelite 
dying  without  male  issue  to  inherit  their  father’s 
property.  And  as  it  was  on  the  suit  of  the 
daughters  of  Zelophehad  that  that  earlier  ordi- 
nance had  been  promulgated,  so  now  it  was 
on  the  suit  of  the  chiefs  of  the  Machirites,  of 
whom  Zelophehad  had  been  one,  that  a sup- 
plemental enactment  is  made,  directing  that 
heiresses  should  marry  within  their  own  tribe. 
'I'he  Machirites  doubtless  foresaw  the  loss 
which,  but  for  the  provisions  of  the  text,  would 
be  likely  to  fall  on  their  tribal  inheritance. 


their  inheritance  be  put  unto  the  in- 
heritance of  the  tribe  whereunto  they 
are  received  : so  shall  their  inherit- 
ance be  taken  away  from  the  inherit- 
ance of  the  tribe  of  our  fathers. 

5 And  Moses  commanded  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  according  to  the  word 
of  the  Lord,  saying.  The  tribe  of  the 
sons  of  Joseph  hath  said  well. 

6 This  is  the  thing  which  the 
Lord  doth  command  concerning  the 
daughters  of  Zelophehad,  saying.  Let 
them  ^ marry  to  whom  they  think 

best ; “^only  to  the  family  of  the  tribe  ^Xob.  1.9. 
of  their  father  shall  they  marry. 

7 So  shall  not  the  inheritance  of 
the  children  of  Israel  remove  from 
tribe  to  tribe  : for  every  one  of  the 
children  of  Israel  shall  Teep  himself 
to  the  inheritance  of  the  tribe  of  his  the, 
hithers. 

8 And  every  daughter,  that  pos- 
sesseth  an  inheritance  in  any  tribe  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  shall  be  wife 
unto  one  of  the  family  of  the  tribe  of 
her  father,  that  the  children  of  Israel 
may  enjoy  every  man  the  inheritance 
of  his  fathers. 

9 Neither  shall  the  inheritance  re- 
move from  one  tribe  to  another  tribe ; 
but  every  one  of  the  tribes  of  the 


4.  be  taken  a^vay'^  i.e.  be  permanently 
taken  away.  I’he  jubilee  year,  by  not  restoring 
the  estate  to  the  tribe  to  which  it  originally 
belonged,  would  in  effect  confirm  the  alienation. 
There  were,  moreover,  cases  in  which  it  would 
not  merely  confirm  it,  but  even  cause  it.  A 
tribe  might  have  purchased  an  heiress’  estate, 
in  order  to  prevent  the  loss  of  it  at  her  mar- 
riage; the  jubilee  would  annihilate  the  title  of 
the  purchaser,  without  annihilating  the  transfer 
of  the  rights  of  the  vendor  to  her  husband; 
and  to  him  the  estate  would  thus  eventually 
pass.  The  Machirites  in  effect  represent  that 
the  jubilee,  as  the  law  at  present  stood,  would 
certainly  not  avail  to  benefit  them  in  the  case 
in  question,  but  rather  might  positively  injure 
them. 


V.  10—13.] 


NUMBERS.  XXXVI. 


789 


children  of  Israel  shall  keep  himself 
to  his  own  inheritance. 

10  Even  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses,  so  did  the  daughters  of  Ze- 
lophehad  : 

cchap.  27.  II  “^For  Adahlah,  Tirzah,  and 
Floglah,  and  Milcah,  and  Noah,  the 
t Heb.  daughters  of  Zelophehad,  were  mar- 
that  were  ried  unto  their  father’s  brothers’  sons  : 
/[imiiies.  12  And  they  were  married  Mnto 


the  families  of  the  sons  of  Manas- 
seh  the  son  of  Joseph,  and  their  in- 
heritance remained  in  the  tribe  of  the 
family  of  their  father. 

13  These  are  the  commandments 
and  the  judgments,  which  the  Lord 
commanded  by  the  hand  of  Moses 
unto  the  children  of  Israel  in  the 
plains  of  Moab  by  Jordan  near  Je- 
richo. 


11.  unto  their  father's  brothers'  sons']  Or  so  restricted;  in  Jer.  xxxii.  12  it  seems  to 
more  generally,  “unto  the  sons  of  their  kins-  mean  an  uncle’s  son,  a cousin-german, 
men.”  Though  the  Hebrew  term  ordinarily  13.  the  commandments  and  the  judgments] 
denotes  a father’s  brother,  yet  it  is  not  always  Cf.  Deut.  vi.  i. 


I 


DEUTERONOMY 


INTRODUCTION. 


PAGE 

I.  Title 790 

II.  Contents  and  Chronology  ....  ib. 

III.  Style  and  Characteristics  . . .791 


I.  ordinary  name  of  the  book  is 

derived,  through  the  LXX.  (Aev- 
TcpovoixLov)  and  Vulgate  (^Deuteronomium)^ 
from  the  one  sometimes,  employed  by 
the  Jews,  mishneh  hattorah^  “repetition  of 
the  law.”  This  name  was  probably  sug- 
gested by  the  text  xvii.  18,  in  which  the 
expression  mishneh  hattorah  hazzoth^  ren- 
dered in  A. V.  “a  copy  of  this  law,”  was 
anciently  construed  as  referring  to  Deu- 
teronomy only.  This  is  probably  not 
the  right  sense  of  the  phrase,  (see  note 
in  loc.)^  but  the  title  borrowed  from  it 
indicates  correctly  enough  the  character 
and  contents  of  the  book.  From  another 
point  of  view  some  of  the  Rabbinical 
wi  iters  have  styled  Deuteronomy  sepher 
idcakhoth,  “the  Book  of  Reproofs,”  see 
on  i.  I ; whilst  others  denoted  this  as 
they  did  the  other  books  of  Scripture  by 
the  first  two  Hebrew  words  occurring  in 
it,  elleh  hadcrbhdrim. 

II.  The  contents  of  Deuteronomy 
consist  (i)  of  three  addresses  to  the  peo- 
ple delivered  by  Moses  in  the  eleventh 
month  of  the  fortieth  year  after  the  Ex- 
odus (chapters  i. — xxx.);  and  (2)  of  cer- 
tain final  acts  and  words  of  Moses,  viz. 
the  solemn  appointment  of  his  successor 
(xxxi.),  his  Song  (xxxii.),  and  Blessing 
(xxxiii.),  which  together  with  the  account 
of  his  death  (xxxiv.)  form  an  appropriate 
conclusion  to  the  book  and  to  the  whole 
Pentateuch. 

The  bulk  of  Deuteronomy  thus  consists 


IV.  Relation  to  preceding  books  and  to 

the  rest  of  Scripture  . . . .791 

V . Authorship  and  Date  of  Composition  792 

of  the  three  addresses,  the  first  contained 
in  i.  6 — iv.  40;  the  second  in  v.  i — xxvi. 
19;  the  third  in  xxvii.  i — xxix.  29.  Of 
these  the  first  (i.  6 — iv.  40)  is  introduc- 
tory and  preparatory.  In  it  Moses  re- 
minds the  people  of  the  protecting  guid- 
ance under  which  they  had  passed  from 
the  bondage  of  Egypt  to  the  border  of 
the  Promised  Land  where  they  then 
stood,  and  of  their  own  repeated  acts  of 
ingratitude  and  rebellion  against  God, 
which  had  been  punished  by  their  long 
wandering  in  the  desert.  He  conjures 
them  to  take  warning  from  the  past,  and 
to  resolve  henceforth  on  a strict  obedi- 
ence, that  so  they  might  not  lose  the 
blessings  which  were  now  just  within 
their  reach.  The  second,  and  by  far  the 
longest  speech  (v.  i — xxvi.  19)  carries 
the  exhortation  into  details.  It  contains 
a practical  exposition  of  the  whole  law 
in  its  incidence  on  the  people,  and 
dwells  earnestly,  as  the  several  precepts 
are  reviewed,  on  the  sanctions  of  reward 
and  punishment  annexed  to  them  by 
God.  This  portion  commences  with  a 
rehearsal  of  the  Ten  Commandments 
(v.  6 — 2t),  the  basis  and  essence  of  the 
whole  Mosaic  system,  and  proceeds  to 
develope  and  apply  more  particularly 
the  principles  of  the  First  Table  (v.  22 — 
xi.  32).  Next  follows,  in  what  may  be 
described  as  the  second  half  of  the 
speech  (xii.  i — xxvi.  32),  a declaration 
and  enforcement  of  various  particular 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY.  791 


statutes  and  regulations.  These,  though 
handled  with  that  freedom  of  arrange- 
ment which  suits  the  purposes  of  the 
orator,  yet  group  themselves  on  the 
whole  into  (i)  laws  concerning  religion 
(xii.  I — xvi.  17);  (2)  laws  concerning 
the  administration  of  justice,  the  powers 
and  privileges  of  public  officers,  &c.  (xvi. 
18 — xxi.  23);  and  (3)  laws  relating  to 
private  and  social  rights  and  duties 
(xxii.  I — xxvi.  19).  The  third  speech 
(xxvii. — XXX.)  relates  to  the  solemn  re- 
newal of  the  covenant  which  is  directed 
in  it,  and  recites  severally  and  emphati- 
cally the  Blessings  and  the  Cursings 
which  will  follow  respectively  upon  ob- 
servance and  breach  of  the  law. 

The  second  and  much  the  shorter  part 
of  the  book,  containing  the  thirty-first  and 
three  following  chapters,  was  probably 
added  to  the  rest  by  Joshua,  or  some 
other  duly  authorized  prophet  or  leader 
of  the  people,  after  the  death  of  Moses. 
Its  characteristics  are  discussed  in  the 
notes  on  those  chapters.  The  three  ad- 
dresses which  constitute  seven-eighths  of 
the  contents  of  Deuteronomy  present 
some  marked  features  requiring  general 
notice  here. 

These  addresses  reflect  very  clearly 
the  circumstances  which  attended  their 
delivery.  They  were  spoken  within  the 
space  of  a very  few  days.  It  was  on  the 
tenth  day  of  the  first  month  of  the  forty- 
first  year  after  the  exodus  that  the  people 
passed  over  the  Jordan,  and  commenced 
the  conquest  of  Canaan  under  Joshua 
(Josh.iv.  19).  Thirty  days  had  been  pre- 
viously spent  in  the  mourning  after  the 
death  of  Moses  (Deut.  xxxiv.  8).  On  the 
other  hand,  the  commencement  of  the 
first  of  the  three  addresses  is  expressly 
fixed  by  Deut.  i.  3 for  the  first  day  of  the 
eleventh  month  in  the  fortieth  year.  It 
is  thus  evident  that  the  delivery  of  these 
speeches,  and  likewise  the  utterance  of 
the  Song  and  Blessing,  and  the  trans- 
action of  the  closing  events  of  Moses’  life, 
must  all  be  placed  chronologically  in  the 
first  ten  days  of  that  eleventh  month. 

III.  Accordingly  the  speeches  exhibit 
an  unity  of  style  and  character  which  is 
strikingly  consistent  with  such  circum- 
stances. They  are  pervaded  by  the 
same  vein  of  thought,  the  same  tone  and 
tenor  of  feeling,  the  same  peculiarities  of 


conception  and  expression.  They  ex- 
hibit matter  which  is  neither  document- 
ary nor  traditional,  but  conveyed  in  the 
speaker’s  own  words. 

Their  aim  is  strictly  hortatory;  their 
style  earnest,  heart-stirring,  impressive, 
in  passages  sublime,  but  throughout  rhe- 
torical; they  keep  constantly  in  view  the 
•circumstances  then  present  and  the  crisis 
to  which  the  fortunes  of  Israel  had  at 
last  been  brought.  Moses  had  before 
him  not  the  men  to  whom  by  God’s  com- 
mand he  delivered  the  law  at  Sinai,  but 
the  generation  following  which  had  grown 
up  in  the  wilderness.  Large  portions  of 
the  law  necessarily  stood  in  abeyance 
during  the  years  of  wandering;  and  of 
his  present  hearers  many  must  have  been 
strangers  to  various  prescribed  observ- 
ances and  ordinances,  and  those  not  un- 
important ones  (see  on  Josh.  v.  2 sqq., 
and  notes  and  reff.).  Now  however  on 
their  entry  into  settled  homes  in  Canaan 
a thorough  discharge  of  the  various  obli- 
gations laid  on  them  by  the  covenant 
would  become  imperative;  and  it  is  to 
this  state  of  things  that  Moses  addresses 
himself.  He  speaks  to  hearers  neither 
wholly  ignorant  of  the  law,  nor  yet  fully 
versed  in  it.  Much  is  assumed  and 
taken  for  granted  in  his  speeches;  again, 
on  other  matters  he  goes  into  detail, 
knowing  that  instruction  in  them  was 
needed.  Sometimes  too  opportunity  is 
taken  of  promulgating  regulations  which 
are  supplementary  or  auxiliary  to  those 
of  the  preceding  books;  some  few  modi- 
fications suggested  by  longer  experience 
or  altered  circumstances  are  now  made; 
and  the  whole  Mosaic  system  is  com- 
pleted by  the  addition  of  several  enact- 
ments in  chapters  xii. — xxvi.  of  a social, 
civil,  and  political  nature.  These  would 
have  been  wholly  superfluous  during  the 
nomadic  life  of  the  desert  ; but  now  when 
the  permanent  organization  of  Israel  as 
a nation  was  to  be  accomplished,  they 
could  not  be  longer  deferred.  Accord- 
ingly the  legislator,  at  the  command  of 
God,  completes  his  great  work  by  sup- 
plying them.  Thus  he  provides  civil  in- 
stitutions for  his  people  accredited  by 
the  same  Divine  sanctions  as  had  been 
vouchsafed  to  their  religious  rites. 

IV.  It  is  then  not  quite  accurate  to 
speak  of  Deuteronomy  as  merely  a reca- 


792 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


pitulation  of  things  commanded  and  done 
in  the  preceding  books ; nor  yet  as  pro- 
perly a compendium  and  summary  of  the 
law.  Large  and  important  sections  of  the 
Mosaic  code  are  unnoticed  in  the  book. 
Still  less  is  it  a manual  compiled  for  the 
instruction  of  those  wholly  ignorant  of 
the  law.  The  phrase  used  in  i.  5 (see 
note  on  i.  3 — 5)  exactly  indicates  both 
the  task  which  Moses  undertook  in  the 
closing  month  of  his  life,  and  the  rela- 
tion of  this  book  to  the  preceding  ones. 
Having  long  ago  propounded  his  formal 
legislative  decrees,  he  now  undertakes 
to  explain  and  elucidate  them;  he  de- 
velops their  spirit  and  aim;  he  endea- 
vours to  impress  on  those  for  whom  they 
were  designed  the  advantages  of  observ- 
ing, and  the  evils  of  neglecting  them. 
It  is  thus  quite  in  keeping  that  the  va- 
rious commandments  are  given  in  Deu- 
teronomy as  injunctions  of  Moses,  and 
not,  as  before,  directly  in  the  name  of 
God.  Deuteronomy  is  an  authoritative 
and  inspired  commentary  on  the  Law; 
serving  in  some  respects  also  as  a sup- 
l)lement  and  codicil  to  it^ 

The  preceding  books  displayed  Moses 
principally  in  the  capacity  of  legislator 
or  annalist.  Deuteronomy  sets  him  be- 
fore us  in  that  of  a prophet.  And  he  not 
only  warns  and  teaches  with  an  authority 
and  energy  which  the  sublimest  pages  of 
the  Four  Greater  Prophets  cannot  surpass, 
but  he  delivers  some  of  the  most  notable 
and  incontrovertible  predictions  to  be 
found  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  pro- 
phecy in  xviii.  18  (see  note)  respecting 
the  prophet  like  unto  himself  had  no 
doubt  its  partial  verifications  in  succes- 
sive ages,  but  its  terms  are  satisfied  in 
none  of  them.  The  prospect  opened  by 
it  advances  continually  until  it  finds  its 
rest  in  the  Messiah,  who  stands  alone  as 
the  only  complete  counterpart  of  Moses, 
and  the  greater  than  he.  Chapter  xxviii. 
furnishes  another  and  no  less  manifest 
example.  The  punishments  there  de- 

^ Tlie  Synopsis  Sacrce  Scripturcc  ascribed  to 
St  Atlianasius  descriljes  very  clearly  the  relation 
of  I )euteronorny  to  the  preceding  books  : eV  ailrw 
'Mwvffrj'!  diVTfpoL  Kai  hiecrdcprfcre  irdvra  ir po(iprip.iva, 
ev  T€  Trj'Vi^oQip,  Kal  tu  AevLTiKU,  Kal  To7s'Api6ixoiS, 
vop-ipd  T€  Kal  oiKai(vp.aTa  Kal  irpoaTaypiaTa’  Kal 
VTrop.Lp.ur}(TKtTai  iraXiv  top  \a6v  'iva  (pvXd^r]  avrd. 
Athanasii  Opera,  Vol.  ii.  p.  71.  Paris  Edit. 
1627. 


nounced  are  so  minutely  and  pointedly 
specified,  and  were  on  record,  whatever 
opinion  be  adopted  about  the  age  and 
authorship  of  Deuteronomy,  so  many 
centuries  before  the  destruction  of  the 
Jewish  Commonwealth  by  the  Romans 
which  so  strikingly  realized  them,  that 
the  argument  derived  from  such  predic- 
tion and  fulfilment  cannot  be  gainsayed 
or  evaded.  It  is  true  that  the  whole 
prophecy  is  conditional.  The  people 
had  blessings  as  well  as  cursings  set  be- 
fore them,  and  might  choose  whichever 
they  would  (xxx.  19).  But  there  is 
throughout  ch.  xxviii.,  as  in  other  pas- 
sages {e.g.  xxix.)  where  this  alternative 
is  set  forth,  a far  greater  stress  and  ful- 
ness apparent  in  the  penal  clauses;  and 
thus  there  is  contained  in  the  very  pro- 
phecy Itself  on  its  first  delivery  a clear 
foretokening  of  the  future  result.  Indeed 
Moses,  in  xxxi.  29  sqq.  expressly  says 
that  the  people  would  after  his  death  so 
act  as  to  bring  these  judgments  upon 
themselves.  And  his  Song  in  xxxii. 
indicates  vividly  a long  series  of  trans- 
gressions and  consequent  retributions, 
ending  in  the  rejection  of  Israel  by  God. 
Beyond  this  however  lies  a distant  epoch 
when  mercy  should  eventually  triumph 
over  justice,  and  embrace  the  Gentile  no 
less  than  the  Jew  within  the  blessings  of 
the  Covenant  (xxxii.  43,  see  note).  Thus 
does  Moses,  in  the  very  act  of  completing 
his  own  institutions,  foretell  the  eventual 
termination  of  them,  and  their  absorp- 
tion into  a wider  range  of  dispensations. 
Thus  did  the  great  legislator  both  him- 
self gain  some  glimpses  of  the  vast  future 
which  lay  behind  the  enactments  he  was 
commissioned  to  deliver,  and  put  on 
record  also  both  promises  and  threats 
which  could  not  but  excite  amongst  his 
people  expectations  and  speculations  as 
to  the  form  which  the  events  thus  fore- 
shadowed by  him  would  take.  Deute- 
ronomy is  then,  as  St  Jerome  (Ep.  ad 
Paulinum,  Opera,  Vol.  iii.  p.  3,  Edit. 
Paris,  1546)  describes  it,  ‘‘Secunda  lex 
et  evangelicas  legis  praeparatio.  Nonne 
sic  habet  ea  quae  priora  sunt  ut  tamen 
nova  sunt  omnia  de  veteribus?” 

V.  As  regards  authorship  it  is  generally 
allowed  that  Deuteronomy  must,  in  sub- 
stance, have  come  from  one  hand.  The 
Song  and  the  Blessing  have  indeed  been 


THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY. 


793 


regarded  by  some  as  independent  poems 
which  the  writer  found  and  incorporated 
into  his  work.  But  on  the  whole  the 
processes  applied  by  many  writers  so 
freely  to  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch,  the 
processes  of  disintegration  and  partition 
of  contents  amongst  a number  of  sup- 
posed writers  of  different  dates,  have 
been  admitted  to  be  not  applicable  to 
Deuteronomy.  The  book  in  fact  pre- 
sents, the  last  four  chapters  excepted, 
an  undeniable  unity  in  style  and  treat- 
ment ; it  is  cast,  so  to  speak,  in  one 
mould ; its  literary  characteristics  are 
such  that  we  cannot  believe  the  compo- 
sition of  it  to  have  been  spread  over  any 
long  period  of  time. 

These  facts  are  in  full  accord  with  the 
traditional  view  which  ascribes  the  book 
to  Moses.  This  vie*\v  however  many 
modern  critics  and  commentators  un- 
hesitatingly reject.  These  writers  are 
too  generally  agreed  that  the  author 
of  Deuteronomy,  whoever  he  was,  did 
not  write  any  large  portions  of  the  pre- 
ceding books,  though  some  think  that 
he  was  the  one  who  reduced  them  to 
their  present  shape,  and  completed  his 
work  by  adding  to  it  this  original  com- 
position. It  is  indeed  asserted  to  be 
“ one  of  the  most  certain  results  of  mo- 
dern criticism”  (Colenso,  ‘Pent.’ Vol.  iii. 

§ 863),  that  Deuteronomy  was  written  in 
the  later  period  of  the  Jewish  moimrchy; 
and  consequently  long  after  the  main 
part  of  the  Pentateuch,  to  which  it  forms 
a kind  of  appendix  or  peroration. 

Yet  several  scholars  who  have  adopted 
this  self-same  method  of  investigation, 
and  who  have  a high  reputation  for  learn- 
ing and  acuteness,  have  maintained,  on 
the  contrary,  that  Deuteronomy  is  more 
ancient  than  any  other  part  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. They  observe  that  the  legislative 
element  in  Deuteronomy  is  exhibited  in 
a simpler  and  more  subjective  form  than 
in  the  preceding  books,  and  hold  that 
the  matter-of-fact  and  systematic  pre- 
scriptions of  Exodus  and  Leviticus  were 
evolved  at  a later  date  out  of  the  prophe- 
tic discourses  of  Deuteronomy.  Views 
of  this  sort  have  been  maintained  by  Van 
Bohlen,  Vater,  Vatke,  George,  P.euss,  and 
by  Dr  S.  Davidson  in  Horne’s  ‘Introduc- 
tion,’ Vol.  II.  (1856),  though  he  has  sub- 
sequently abandoned  that  view  in  his 


Introd.  to  the  Old  Test.  (1862).  It  is  true 
that  other  authorities  of  the  same  school 
have  treated  this  decision  with  scanty 
respect ; but  how  little  warrant  there  is,  on 
the  principles  of  the  so-called  “ higher 
criticism  at  least,  for  this  summary”  judg- 
ment, is  apparent  by  the  fact  that  Kue- 
nen,  whose  work  on  the  Pentateuch  is 
one  of  the  most  recent  and  by  no  means 
the  least  learned,  whilst  not  yet  adopting 
outright  the  opinion  of  Van  Bohlen,  &c., 
confesses  that  “gradually  the  conviction 
has  settled  on  his  mind  that  there  is 
more  truth  in  the  views  of  these  last  than 
is  recognized  by  the  defenders  of  the 
former  view.”  (Kuenen  on  the  ‘ Pen- 
tateuch,’ translated  by  Colenso,  pp.  192, 
193.)  More  recently  still  Kalisch  in  his 
commentary  on  Leviticus,  Part  I.  pub- 
lished in  1867,  whilst  allowing  that  “the 
author  of  Deuteronomy  had  before  him 
full  outlines  of  the  narrative  and  legisla- 
tion of  the  three  middle  books”  of  the 
Pentateuch,  is  nevertheless  decidedly  of 
opinion  that  “the  elaborate  system”  of 
sacrifices,  &c.  laid  down  in  Leviticus  was 
developed  on  the  basis  afforded  by 
Deuteronomy ; and  of  course  rejects  on 
the  whole  the  views  of  those  “ who  claim 
a higher  antiquity”  for  those  middle 
books,  pp.  44  sqq. 

In  truth  no  more  convincing  proof 
could  be  afforded  that  the  method  of 
criticism  in  question  is  untrustworthy 
than  the  results  of  its  application  to 
Deuteronomy.  The  older  scholars,  Ge- 
senius,  de  Wette,  Ewald,  Bleek,  &c.  un- 
hesitatingly affirmed  that  Deuteronomy 
was  written  long  after  the  rest  of  the 
Pentateuch  was  extant  in  its  present 
shape.  The  newer  school  sees  no  less 
certainly  in  Deuteronomy  the  primaeval 
quarry  out  of  which  the  writers  concern- 
ed in  the  production  of  the  preceding 
books  drew  their  materials. 

Out  of  this  conflict  of  opinions  one 
inference  may  safely  be  drawn.  The 
allegation  so  positively  made  that  the 
very  style  of  Deuteronomy  betrays  its 
late  origin  is  arbitrary  and  baseless.  No 
doubt  the  book  is  written  in  a very  dif- 
ferent manner  from  the  preceding  ones ; 
yet  the  parallelisms  between  it  and  them 
both  in  ideas  and  expressions  are  nei- 
ther few  nor  insignificant  (cf.  for  instance 
Deut.  xxviii.  with  Lev.  xxvi.  throughout), 


794 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


as  any  one  who  will  turn  to  the  refer- 
ences in  the  margin  and  notes  for  a few 
consecutive  chapters  will  easily  ascer- 
tain. And  the  fact  that  the  book  con- 
sists mainly  of  three  speeches  addressed 
by  Moses  to  the  people  in  immediate 
view  of  his  own  death  and  their  entrance 
into  Canaan  sufficiently  explains  its  lite- 
rary characteristics.  Naturally  the  mat- 
ter thus  orally  set  forth  is  given  in  more 
sustained,  flowing,  and  rhetorical  lan- 
guage than  would  be  employed  when 
laws  were  to  be  promulgated,  passing 
events  chronicled,  or  ancient  transactions, 
already  perhaps  enshrined  in  tradition 
or  document,  incorporated  into  a con- 
nected historical  work.  It  is  to  be 
observed  also  that  all  the  classes  of  ar- 
chaisms, whether  in  vocabulary  or  gram- 
matical forms,  which  have  been  pointed 
out  as  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  of 
the  Pentateuch  (see  Introd.  to  Pent.  pp. 

1 8,  19)  are  found  in  Deuteronomy,  and 
some  of  them  frequently. 

The  writings  of  Jeremiah  often  strik- 
ingly recall  passages  of  Deuteronomy. 
The  prophet  repeatedly  employs  words 
and  phrases  which  are  characteristic  of 
Deuteronomy.  Numerous  illustrations 
and  examples  are  given  by  Colenso  on 
‘Pent.’  § 556 ; and  there  is  also  at  times 
(the  reffi  given  in  margin  and  notes  to 
i)eut.  xxviii.  and  xxxii.  will  supply  illus- 
trations) a remarkable  similarity  of  gene- 
ral style  and  treatment.  These  resem- 
blances are  neither  few  nor  insignificant. 
It  is  needless  in  this  place  to  demon- 
strate their  existence  and  importance, 
which  are  now  admitted  on  all  hands. 
The  question  to  be  considered  here  is, 
how  are  they  to  be  accounted  for  ? 

Those  who  regard  Deuteronomy  as 
the  work  of  Moses  can  explain  them  at 
once.  The  priest  of  Anathoth  would 
have  made  the  Law  his  study  from  his 
childhood,  and  his  modes  of  thought  and 
expression  would  naturally  be  greatly 
influenced  by  that  law,  and  more  so  than 
those  of  the  non-priestly  prophets.  Of 
all  i)arts  of  the  Pentateuch  Deuteronomy 
would  in  the  calamitous  days  of  Jere- 
miah come  home  to  the  prophet’s  mind 
with  most  frequency  and  force.  The 
sins  which  Deuteronomy  specially  de- 
nounces were  in  Jeremiah’s  days  most 
rife  and  gross  in  Israel;  the  retributive 


judgments  denounced  as  a consequence 
in  the  same  book  were  lighting  on  the 
people  before  his  eyes;  topics  of  com- 
fort there  were  none  except  those  splendid 
though  distant  promises  which  in  spite  of 
its  predominating  tone  of  warning  and 
threatening  break  so  wonderfully  through 
the  prophecies  of  Deuteronomy  (see 
above,  § IV.).  What  wonder  then  that 
Jeremiah’s  utterances  should  so  often 
sound  like  an  echo  of  Deuteronomy; 
that  his  denunciations,  as  did  those  of  his 
contemporary  Huldah  (cf  2 Kings  xxii. 
16  sqq.  with  Deut.  xxix.  2 sqq.),  should 
fall  into  the  strains  of  this  book  ; or  that 
his  topics  of  consolation  should  recall 
the  reassuring  words  with  which  {e.g.  in 
XXX.)  the  severity  of  God’s  judgment  is 
tempered  even  in  the'law  ? 

It  would  be  a yet  stronger  reason  why 
this  of  all  the  then  existing  sacred  writ- 
ings should  have  exerted  a special  in- 
fluence on  Jeremiah  if  the  book  dis- 
covered in  his  days  in  the  Temple  by 
the  High  Priest  Hilkiah,  and  brought 
again  to  the  knowledge  of  the  king  and 
people  after  having  been  banished  from 
public  sight  and  use  for  nearly  sixty 
years  during  the  two  preceding  reigns, 
were  ascertained  to  be  the  book  of  I)eu- 
teronoiny  only*.  But  if  we  hold  the  other 
view,  that  “the  book  of  the  law”  found 
by  Plilkiah  in  the  house  of  the  Lord 
(2  Kings  xxii.  8)  was  the  original  copy 
of  the  Pentateuch  deposited  by  order  of 
Moses  in  the  ark  (cf  Deut.  xxxi.  9.  26), 
as  the  peculiar  expression  used  about  it 
2 Chron.  xxxiv.  14  (where  see  note),  cer- 
tainly seems  to  suggest,  yet  even  so  the 
narrative  of  2 Kings  xxii.  xxiii.  makes  it 
apparent  that  it  was  Deuteronomy  above 
ail  portions  of  the  law  which  pricked  the 
consciences  of  king  and  people.  For 
Deut.  xxviii,  and  xxix.  seem  plainly  to  be 
referred  to  in  2 Kings  xxii.  13,  16,  17, 
xxiii.  2,  3,  &c. ; and  the  special  measures 

^ St  Chrysostom  clearly  regarded  “the  book 
of  the  law”  found  by  Hilkiah  as  identical  with 
Deuteronomy;  for,  speaking  of  the  destruction 
of  many  sacred  books  at  the  Captivity,  he  pro- 
ceeds : Kat  rL  nepi  Trjs  aixiJ-oikwcrias ; Kai 

yap  Trpo  rijs  at’xAtctAwcrtas  iroWa  r](pdi/LcrTO 
tQv  'lovdaiiiiP  eis  iaxdTrjp  dcre^eiau  e^OKaXdvToiv. 
Kat  6rj\ov  (K  Tov  t^Xovs  rijs  Terdprrjs  t<3p  Bacrt- 
XeitSp’  TO  yap  Aevrepovop-Lov  p,6Xii  ttov  euprjTaL  iv 
Koirpta  KaTaKexoJ(rp.4pop.  (Chrysost.  Op.  X.  54, 
ed.  iiened.). 


THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY. 


795 


of  reform  actually  adopted  by  Josiah  are 
those  enjoined  by  Deuteronomy,  and 
more  fully  and  emphatically  there  than 
anywhere  else  (cf.  2 Kings  xxiii.  5 — 25, 
with  Deut.  xii.  2,  3;  xvi.  xviii.,  &c.).  It 
is  probable  too  that  Jeremiah  and  Hil- 
kiah  were  related*;  and  it  is  at  any  rate 
certain  that  they  were  friends  and  fellow- 
labourers  in  the  restoration  of  religion 
eftected  under  Josiah;  and  thus  the  pro- 
phet would  be  one  of  the  very  first  to 
be  informed  of  Hilkiah’s  discovery  as  he 
would  naturally  be  one  of  the  most  in- 
tensely moved  by  it^  The  coincidences 
then  between  Deuteronomy  and  the  pro- 
phecies of  Jeremiah  are  only  what  might 
be  expected  from  the  known  circum- 
stances of  Jewish  history.  Their  exist- 
ence, so  far  from  furnishing  any  kind  of 
argument  against  the  Mosaic  origin  of 
the  Pentateuch,  rather  suggests  confirm- 
ation of  the  traditional  view.  All  the 
circumstances  considered  it  would  have 
been  pi'o  tanto  a reason  for  misgivings 
about  the  authenticity  of  Deuteronomy 
if  a great  prophet  of  the  times  and  in  the 
circumstances  of  Jeremiah  had  not  mani- 
fested much  of  the  spirit  and  power  of 
Deuteronomy. 

Further,  whilst  the  language  of  Jere- 
miah unquestionably  indicates  an  ac- 
quaintance with  the  book  of  Deuterono- 
my, it  is  yet  apparent,  if  linguistic  consi- 
derations are  to  decide,  that  the  author 
of  Deuteronomy  and  of  the  prophecies 

^ Jeremiah  speaks  of  himself  as  “the  son  of 
Ililkiah.”  But  this  was  hardly  Hilkiah  the  High- 
priest  ; for  had  he  been  so,  he  would  have  been  so 
styled:  and  the  priests  of  Anathoth  were  (i  Kings 
ii.  26)  of  the  house  of  Abiathar,  which  had  been 
deposed  from,  the  high-priesthood  by  Solomon. 
The  name  Hilkiah  too  was  common.  But  when 
we  note  (cf.  Jer.  xxxii.  7,  with  2 Kings  xxii.  14) 
that  Shallum  the  uncle  of  Jeremiah  was  ap- 
parently the  husband  of  Huldah  the  prophetess, 
and  that  Ahikam,  Jeremiah’s  protector  (Jer. 
xxvi.  24)  was  with  Huldah  one  of  Ililkiah’s 
coadjutors  in  the  work  of  reform  (2  Chron. 
xxxiv.  20),  it  seems  likely  that  there  was  some 
affinity  between  the  prophet  and.the  High-priest. 

2 It  has  not  been  deemed  necessary  to  discuss 
the  coarse  hypothesis  of  Von  Bohlen,  although  it 
was  not  long  ago  revived  in  this  country,  that 
Hilkiah  wrote  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  himself, 
and  then  pretended  to  have  discovered  it  as  an 
autograph  of  Moses  in  the  Temple.  This  view 
has  been  latterly  discarded  as  untenable  even  by 
the  most  advanced  adherents  of  “modern  criti- 
cism:” see  e.g.  Davidson,  ‘Introd.  to  O.  T.’ 
PP-  385,  3S6. 


which  pass  under  the  name  of  Jeremiah 
were  neither  identical  nor  contemporary. 
The  resemblances  between  the  two  books 
are  on  the  surface,  easy  to  notice,  and 
at  first  sight  are  very  striking.  A more 
minute  scrutiny  of  the  language  of  the 
writings  under  comparison  will  make  it 
manifest  that  whilst  there  is  in  various 
passages  of  the  later  document  a distinct 
imitation  or  repetition  of  the  earlier*,  yet 
that  the  two  are  in  date,  associations, 
idioms,  and  vocabulary  as  distinct  as  any 
two  other  writers  in  the  Old  Testament. 
After  the  complete  and  exhaustive  dis- 
cussion of  this  subject  by  Koenig  (‘Altes- 
tamentl.  Studien,’  Part  ii.)  which  has  never 
been  and  cannot  be  answered,  lengthened 
argument  on  this  point  is  needless  h The 

^ This  is  in  fact  one  of  the  characteristics  of 
Jeremiah,  who  frequently  reproduces  both  the 
thoughts  and  words  of  older  prophets. 

^ Phrases  and  words  of  constant  use  in  Jere- 
miah are  absent  from  Deut.  altogether : e.  g. 

and  'inX  which  are  found  above 
a hundred  times  iu  Jeremiah.  Had  these  phrases 
been  familiar  to  the  writer  of  Deut.  he  could 
hardly  have  altogether  omitted  to  use  them. 
The  like  may  be  said  of  the  phrase  “The  word 
of  the  Lord  came  to  me,”  which  with  slight 
variations  is  frequent  in  Jeremiah;  also  of  the  ex- 
pressions “Lord  of  hosts”  {Sabaoth),  “house  of 
Jacob,”  and  “house  of  Israel. ” The  expressions 
“virgin  of  Israel,”  “ the  virgin  daughter  of  my 
people,”  &c.,  are  again  and  again  used  by  the 
prophet  figuratively  for  the  whole  nation,  and  are 
not  so  used  in  Deut.;  on  the  contrary  the  first  of 
them  occurs  in  Deut.  xxii.  19,  in  its  primary 
sense.  The  favourite  combination  of  the  prophet 
“ to  root  out,  and  to  pull  down,  and  to  destroy, 
and  to  thi'ow  down,  and  to  plant,  &c.”  (cf.  Jer. 
i.  10  with  marginal  references)  is  not  found  in 
Deut.,  suitable  as  it  is  to  the  themes  handled  in 
that  book  ; and  the  like  remark  is  true  of  the 
other  combination  “the  sword,  the  famine,  and 
the  pestilence,”  found  repeatedly  in  Jer.  Cf.  xiv. 
18,  xviii.  21,  xxi.  7,  9.  &c. 

On  the  contrary  in  Deut.  the  writer  constantly 
speaks  of  and  to  the  people  as  “ Israel”  simply, 
which  Jeremiah  never  does  : the  phrase  he  so 
constantly  uses  of  observing  the  law,  “hear  and 
do”  (cf.  e.g.  Deut.  v.  27)  is  strange  to  Jeremiah; 
the  Deuteronomistic  phrase  “to  cleave  to  the 
Lord”  (cf.  e.g.  Deut.  x.  20)  is  not  found  in  Jer. 
though  it  would  often  have^^suited  his  purpose 
well.  The  phrases  nUT'  and  its  cognates 
(see  Deut.  i.  45,  vi.  25,  &c.),  and  the  expressions 
“to  be  afraid  of  the  face  of,”  and  others  con- 
nected with  such  verbs  as  to  “fear”  and  “to 
make  to  fear”  (see  Deut.  i.  17,  xviii.  22,  &c.) 
do  not  occur  in  Jer.,  but  with  like  ideas  other 
words  are  used.  The  passages  in  Deut.  which 
refer  to  the  exodus  and  the  wonderworks  which 
accompanied  it  are  so  many  and  conspicuous  as 
to  be  a distinct  trait  of  the  book.  The  later 
prophet  handles  the  same  subject  once  in  a 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


796 

priest  of  Anathoth  reproduced  in  many 
particulars  the  warnings  and  the  teach- 
ings of  Moses;  and  under  circumstances 
different  in  some  respects  but  remarkably 
similar  in  others,  had  a like  prophetical 
burden  from  God  laid  upon  him  to  deli- 
ver to  the  people.  The  view  of  the  J ews 
that  J eremiah  was  “ the  prophet  like 
unto  Moses”  of  Deuteronomy  xviii.  15 
(cf.  St  John  i.  20  sqq.),  is  rather  short  of 
the  truth  than  wide  of  it. 

Various  texts  from  the  book  have  been 
adduced  as  proofs  that  it  was  not  com- 
posed by  the  author  of  the  books  pre- 
ceding it.  These  contain  deviations  from 
the  earlier  narrative,  additions  to  it,  or 
assumed  inconsistencies  with  it;  and  have 
been  alleged  both  from  the  legislative 
and  from  the  historical  contents  of  the 
book.  No  doubt  some  of  these  are  im- 
portant, and  require  careful  considera- 

similar  strain,  but  then  with  very  dififerent 
phraseology:  cf.  Deut.  iv.  34,  xi.  2,  3,  xvii.  19, 
xxvi.  8,  &c.  with  Jer.  xxxii.  20,  2\.  The  phrases 
characteristic  of  Deut.  respecting  the  unity  of 
tlie  Sanctuary  are  only  found  in  one  or  two 
passages  of  the  prophet  vdiere  he  is  evidently 
alluding  to  Deut.  (cf.  Deut.  xii.  5,  14,  18,  &c., 
xiv.  ■23,  24,  25,  XV.  20,  &c.,  Avith  Jer.  vii.  7,  12). 

Similar  results  appear  from  comparing  the 
two  books  in  respect  of  grammatical  peculiari- 
ties, such  as  inflections,  syntax,  &c. ; e.g.  the 
pronoun  of  the  3rd  person  is  in  Deut.  almost 
always  DH,  in  Jer.  nDH  : in  Deut.  Ave  have  re- 
peatedly in  Jer.  always  DyU  ; 

in  Jer.  the  dative  Avith  the  prep.  ^ stands  several 
times  instead  of  the  accusative  Avith  in 

Deut.  never:  in  Jer.  the  use  of  the  infinitive 
absolute  folloAved  by  the  finite  verb  Avith  the 
conj.  1 is  very  frequent  and  characteristic:  in 
Deut.  it  is  very  rare;  and  the  same  infinitive, 
Avliich  is  commonly  used  by  Jer.  in  other  peculiar 
turns  of  expression  {e.g.  vii.  13,  25,  xi.  7,  xii. 
17,  &c.)  is  not  found  at  all  so  used  in  Deut. 

The  Aramaisms  in  Jer.  are  very  numerous  and 
of  very  various  kinds  ; Aramaic  Avords,  Aramaic 
meanings  of  Avonls,  Aramaic  inflexions,  termina- 
tions, constructions,  &c.  These,  as  all  Avriters  on 
Jeremiah  Avho  discuss  the  original  text  admit, 
indicate  that  the  IlebrcAV  of  his  day  Avas  no 
longer  pure  and  sound.  Such  peculiarities  are 
altogether  Avanting  in  Deut.  Avith  the  exception 
of  the  Aramaisms  alleged  in  xxxii  and  xxxiii. 
'I'hese  are  liowever  not  many  in  number,  nor  are 
tliey  all  unquestionable ; they  are  too  to  be  ex- 
plained on  quite  a different  principle  from  that 
Avliich  ajiplies  to  the  many  and  manifest  Ara- 
maisms of  Jeremiah. 

Jt  Avill  be  understood  that  the  above  are  only 
a few  selected  by  way  of  example  from  the 
copious  lists  of  Koenig,  Avho  has  examined 
and  compared  the  language  of  the  Iaao  liooks 
thoroughly,  chapter  by  chapter,  almost  verse  by 
verse. 


tion  and  explanation;  but  upon  the  whole 
list  one  or  two  general  remarks  must  be 
made. 

Be  it  noted  in  the  first  place  that  there 
is  nothing  in  ^^Deuteronomy  which  posi- 
tively contradicts  anything  in  the  earlier 
books.  This  is  now  generally  admitted 
(e.g.  by  Von  Lengerke  and  Davidson); 
and  it  is  an  important  admission,  for  it 
can  be  demonstrated  that  the  author  of 
Deuteronomy  had  the  preceding  books 
before  him  with  their  contents  as  we 
now  have  them,  and  knew  them  welT. 
How  then  is  it  credible  that  the  Deu- 
teronomist  “ was  a late  writer  who  com- 
posed his  work  centuries  after  the  rest 
of  the  Pentateuch  was  written,  and  passed 
it  off  as  a Mosaic  document  ?”  For  such  a 
forger  would  certainly  have  anxiously  re- 
moved all  such  seeming  discrepancies  as 
those  in  question ; and  when  combining 
his  new  work  with  the  old  would  have 
brought  the  two  into  a self-evident  har- 
mony, either  by  making  the  necessary 
modifications  in  his  own  materials,  or  by 
erasures  from  the  pre-existing  ones.  The 
very  occurrence  then  of  the  phenomena 
in  question,  arising  on  a comparison  of 
Deuteronomy  with  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
and  Numbers,  striking  as  those  pheno- 
mena are,  and  just  because  they  are 
striking,  is  a pyima  facie  token  of  authen- 
ticity. No  one  but  the  original  legislator 
and  historian  would  deal  with  his  sub- 
ject in  this  free  and  independent  spirit. 

Again,  many  of  the  supposed  contra- 
dictions vanish  or  admit  of  easy  explana- 
tion if  we  bear  in  mind  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  speeches  contained  in 

^ There  are  repeated  references  expressed  or 
implied  to  laAvs  already  given : cf.  Deut.  xviii.  2 
with  Num.  xviii.  20:  Deut.  xxiv.  Avith  Lev.  xiii. 
and  xiv.:  Deut.  xiv.  3—20  Avith  Lev.  xi.:  Deut. 
xvi.  Avith  Ex.  xxxiv.  22,  Lev.  xxiii.  15,  16,  34, 
30 : Deut.  xxii.  9 — ti  Avith  Lev.  xix.  19,  &c. 
The  language  in  Avhich  the  same  transactions  are 
described  is  often  borroAved  from  the  earlier 
books  or  evidently  modelled  after  them  ; cf. 
Deut.  ix.  12  Avith  Ex.  xxxii.  7,  8:  Deut.  vii.  20 
Avith  Ex.  xxiii.  28  : Deut.  vii.  22  Avith  Ex.  xxiii. 
29,  30.  In  fact,  as  Davidson  (Introd.  to  O.  T. 
I.  389)  alloAvs,  “almost  e\’ery  chapter  presents 
some  indication,  hoAvever  slight,  that  Avritten 
documents”  {i.e.  the  four  preceding  books) 
“Avere  employed  by  him.”  A very  numerous 
and  absolutely  convincing  list  of  references  in 
Deut.  to  the  ])receding  books  and  citations  from 
them  is  given  by  Koenig,  ‘ Alt.  Studien.’  II. 
126 — 146. 


THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY. 


797 


this  book  were  delivered.  The  legislation 
about  Tithes  is  a most  important  instance. 
Lev.  xxvii.  30 — 34  prescribes  that  a tenth 
of  all  the  produce  of  animals  and  of  the  • 
land  should  be.  the  Lord’s;  and  Num. 
xviii.  20  sqq.  appropriates  this  tenth  for 
the  support  of  the  Levites;  who  again 
are  to  give  a tenth  of  their  tenth  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  priests,  Num.  xviii. 
26  sqq.  But  in  Deut.  xii.  6,  .17,  the  tithes, 
evidently  from  v.  17  the  vegetable  ones, 
are  alluded  to  as  one  of  the  sources  from 
which  the  sacrificial  meals  at  the  sanc- 
tuary are  to  be  supplied  : in  xiv.  22 
sqq.  strict  levying  of  this  tithe  is  en- 
joined, and  commutation  of  it  provided 
for  where  the  sanctuary  was  far  away, 
with  a view  to  the  money  being  applied 
to  the  same  sacrificial  feasts  : in  xiv. 
28,  29  directions  are  given  for  hold- 
ing in  every  third  year  a feast  off  this 
tithe  at  home  instead  of  at  the  Sanctu- 
ary ; and  finally  in  xxvi.  1 2 sqq.  a so- 
lemn form  of  declaration  and  prayer  is 
prescribed  which  is  to  be  rehearsed  be- 
fore the  Lord  in  each  third  year  when 
the  cycle  of  tithe  obligations  would  be 
completed.  These  regulations  of  Deu- 
teronomy (see  the  foot-notes  on  the  pas- 
sages) undoubtedly  are  altogether  differ- 
ent from  those  of  the  preceding  books 
upon  the  subject,  but  they  are  neither 
inconsistent  with  them,  nor  do  they  su- 
persede them.  They  refer  one  and  all 
not  to  the  general  and  first  tithe  of  all 
produce  both  animal  and  vegetable,  but  to 
the  second  and  additional  tithe  taken  on 
the  increase  of  the  field  only.  This  lat- 
ter was  not  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
priests  and  Levites,  but  for  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  sacred  feasts,  in  each  first 
and  second  year  at  the  Sanctuary,  in  the 
third  year  at  home.  The  priests  and 
Levites  were  indeed  to  be  invited  to 
partake,  as  in  each  third  year  were  the 
stranger,  the  fatherless,  and  the  widow ; 
but  the  purpose  of  these  meals  (cf.  the 
agapse  of  the  New  Test.),  which  are  not 
instituted  by  Deuteronomy,  but  only  re- 
gulated, was  not  to  furnish  a maintenance 
for  the  priests  and  Levites,  but  to  pro- 
mote charity  and  brotherly  feeling,  and 
to  gather  the  religious  life  and  associa- 
tions of  the  people  round  the  Sanctuary 
(see  on  xi.  5).  There  appears  to  be  no 
express  mention  in  Deuteronomy  of  the 
VoL.  I. 


first  tithe,  out  of  which  the  priests  and 
Levites  were  to  be  supported.  This 
as  of  familiar  and  established,  we  might 
say  primoeval,  obligation  (cf.  Gen.  xiv. 
20,  xxviii.  22)  is  taken  for  granted  on  all 
hands.  Yet  the  reason  for  which  the 
first  tithe  was  appointed  by  God  to  the 
Levites  is  mentioned  x.  9,  xviii.  i,  2 ; 
and  no  doubt  that  Levitical  tithe  was 
understood  to  be  meant  by  the  repeated 
declaration  respecting  Levi,  that  “ the 
Lord  is  his  inheritance:”  for  the  tithe 
is  emphatically  “the  Lord’s:”  cf.  Lev. 
xxvii.  30  sqq.;  Num.  xviii.  20,  21;  Mai. 
iii.  8h 

Connected  with  this  subject  is  that  of 
the  relative  position  of  the  priests  and 
Levites  as  exhibited  in  the  other  books 
and  in  Deuteronomy.  In  the  three  mid- 
dle books  of  the  Pentateuch  the  priests 
are,  it  is  said,  carefully  distinguished  from 
the  Levites ; the  duties  of  the  latter  are 
subordinate,  such  as  erecting  and  taking 
down  the  Tabernacle,  carrying  it  and  its 
furniture,  &c. ; in  short  the  Levites  are 
to  minister  to  the  priests  (Num.  iii.  5 sqq., 
and  iv.)  as  the  priests  to  God  (Ex.  xxviii.  1, 
xxix.  I,  etc.).  But  in  Deuteronomy  no 
such  distinction  between  the  two  orders 
is  observed.  On  the  contrary,  language 
applied  in  the  earlier  books  to  the 
priests  only  is  used  of  the  Levites,  and 
functions  limited  before  to  the  former 
are  now  assigned  to  the  latter  also  : cf. 
Deut.  X.  8,  9,  where  the  duty  of  blessing 
the  people  is  assigned  to  the  tribe  of 
Levi,  with  Num.  vi.  23 — 27,  where  the 
same  duty  seems  limited  to  the  priests 

^ Some  commentators  insist  that  one  and  the 
same  tithe  must  be  meant  throughout  Lev., 
Num.,  and  Deut.  (so  Knobel,  Ewald,  David- 
son, Colenso,  &c.);  and  infer  from  the  discre- 
pancies which  arise  on  this  assumption  between 
the  last  book  and  the  former  a difference  of 
authorship,  date,  &c.  But  how  could  the  Deu- 
teromist  expect  his  work  to  be  received  as  Mo- 
saic whilst  allowing  such  a glaring  inconsis- 
tency to  remain  between  his  own  precepts  and 
those  of  the  earlier  legislation?  Nor  is  it  possi- 
ble to  regard  Deut.  as  providing  a substitute  for 
an  earlier  tithe  system  which  had  fallen  into 
abeyance.  To  meet  the  wants  of  the  Levites  mere- 
ly by  occasional  feasts  to  which  they  were  to  be 
invited,  would  be  to  mock  their  poverty  rather 
than  to  relieve  it.  Moreover,  the  second  and 
third  tithe  (which  was  but  another  application  of 
the  second  tithe  in  each  third  year)  were  as  a 
matter  of  fact  paid  by  the  later  Jews  in  addition 
to  the  first  tithe;  see  on  xxvi.  12. 

3E 


INTRODUCTION  TO 


798 


alone : and  Dent,  xviii.  7,  where  “ min- 
istering in  the  name  of  the  Lord”  is 
attributed  to  the  Levite,  with  Ex.  xxviii. 
xxix.  where  this  office  is  referred  to  as  a 
priestly  one.  It  is  noted  too  that  in  the 
earlier  books  the  priests  are  spoken  of 
as  the  “ sons  of  Aaron,”  never  “the  sons 
of  Levi in  Deuteronomy,  on  the  con- 
trary, we  do  not  read  of  “sons  of  Aaron,” 
but  always  of  “ sons  of  Levi,”  or  “ Le- 
vites,”  or  “priests  the  Levites.”  Finally, 
Deuteronomy  when  noticing  (xi.  6)  the 
rebellion  of  Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram, 
significantly  omits  the  name  of  the  Levite 
Korah,  though  he  was  evidently  the  ring- 
leader. From  all  this  the  inference  is  con- 
fidently drawn  that  the  marked  distinction 
which  obtained  in  early  times  between 
the  priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  and  the 
other  Levites,  had  by  the  date  of  “the 
Deuteronomist”  disappeared ; and  that 
in  his  eyes  Korah  committed  no  sin  in 
“ seeking  the  priesthood.”  It  is  further 
inferred,  that  this  important  elevation  of 
the  status  of  the  Levite,  which  is  nowhere 
commented  upon  in  the  historical  books 
but  simply  appears  from  the  language  of 
Deuteronomy  as  an  accomplished  fact, 
can  only  have  taken  place  gradually  and 
in  a long  series  of  years ; and  that  con- 
sequently Deuteronomy  was  written  very 
much  later  than  the  date  which  belongs 
to  Exodus  and  the  two  following  books'. 
“ It  is,”  it  has  been  said,  “impossible  to 
believe  that  any  writer  should  have  so 
suddenly  changed  his  form  of  expression 
in  such  a case  as  this,  in  the  very  short 
interval  of  a few  days  or  weeks  at  most, 
between  the  last  act  recorded  in  the 
book  of  Numbers  and  the  first  in  Deu- 
teronomy.” 

In  reply  it  is  to  be  noted,  in  the  first 
place,  that  the  description  of  the  priests 
as  the  “ sons  of  Aaron”  does  not  occur 
in  the  latter  part  of  Numbers  at  all,  but 
only  in  the  first  fourteen  chapters.  Now 
Num.  i. — xiv^  belong  to  the  second  year 
of  the  Exodus ; Deuteronomy  to  the 
fortieth.  Consequently  there  is,  accord- 

^ It  is  worth  while  to  note  that  the  alleged 
identification  of  priests  and  Levites  in  Deut.  is 
brought  forward  i)y  George  as  a proof  that  Deut. 
is  nuich  older  than  the  middle  books  of  the 
Pentateuch ; the  division  of  the  sacred  caste  into 
priests  and  Levites,  which  is  recognized  in  Exo- 
dus and  Numbers,  being  assumed  to  be  a later 
development:  cf.  liiihr,  ‘Symb.’  ii.  p.  7.  ' 


ing  to  the  narrative  of  these  bvo  books 
themselves,  not  a very  short  interval,  but 
a space  of  more  than  thirty-eight  years 
in  which  this  change  of  phraseology 
might  have  obtained  currency. 

But  in  truth  the  change  in  question  is 
readily  explained  without  supposing  that 
the  priests  Avere  at  all  less  generally 
styled  “sons  of  Aaron”  at  the  time  of 
the  conquest  of  Canaan  tlian  they  were 
at  that  of  the  exodus.  Moses  in  Deutero- 
nomy is  not  prescribing  the  several  func- 
tions and  privileges  of  the  various  orders 
of  clergy,  as  he  has  to  do  in  the  preced- 
ing books.  He  is  addressing  the  people, 
and  when  he  has  occasion  to  mention 
the  clergy  it  is  only  in  a general  way,  in 
reference  broadly  to  their  relation  and 
duties  towards  the  body  of  the  nation. 
Hence  he  (as  does  also  the  writer  of  the 
Book  of  Joshua,  cf.  Josh.  iii.  3,  viii.  33) 
very  naturally  disregards  for  the  time  the 
difference  of  orders  amongst  the  clergy, 
which  was  not  to  his  purpose,  apd  as- 
cribes priestly  and  Levitical  functions 
indifferently  to  the  tribe  of  Levi, — to 
which  as  the  priests  were  of  course 
Levites  these  functions  really  belonged. 
So  too  in  xi.  7 (where  see  note)  no  men- 
tion is  made  of  Korah  because  it  was  to 
the  rebellions  of  the  people  against  God, 
and  not  to  that  of  the  Levites  against 
the  priesthood,  that  Moses  wished  his  • 
hearers  to  attend  (see  notes  on  xi.  7,  and 
Num.  xvi.  i).  The  discrepancies  there- 
fore between  Deuteronomy  and  the  ear- 
lier books  are  in  this  particular  superficial 
only.  They  are  at  once  explained  by  the 
familiar  consideration  that  he  who  speaks 
to  a large  and  mixed  audience  will  take 
care,  if  he  knows  his  business,  to  shun 
irrelevant  details  and  distinctions.  It 
is  however  incidentally  made  apparent 
that  the  difference  between  the  priests 
and  Levites  was  quite  understood  by 
the  writer  of  Deuteronomy;  see  e.g.  on 
xviii.  I. 

Other  particular  objections  are  dis- 
cussed in  the  notes  upon  the  several 
passages  which  have  suggested  them ; 
e.g.  that  based  on  the  prescription  of 
Num.  xviii.  17  respecting  the  firstlings 
when  compared  with^Deut.  xv.  19  sqq., 
is  dealt  with  in  the  latter  passage;  that  on 
the  supposed  abstraction  in  Deuteronomy 
of  certain  perquisites  allowed  to  the  Le- 


THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY. 


799 


vites  by  the  earlier  legislation  in  the  note 
on  xviii.  3 ; that  on  the  supposed  allusion 
to  Solomon’s  temple  in  xi.  5 ; that  on 
the  enactments  respecting  a king  and  a 
prophetical  order  in  the  notes  at  the  end 
of  chapters  xvii.  and  xviii.  No  doubt 
several  of  the  enactments  in  Deuteronomy 
are  not  found  in  the  preceding  books. 
But  these  additions  do  not  betray  another 
and  a later  hand  than  that  which  gave 
the  original  code.  They  are  one  and  all 
such  as  are  supplementary  or  explana- 
tory of  earlier  laws,  and  might  well  be 
suggested  by  a short  experience  of  the 
working  of  those  laws  ; or  such  as  would 
have  been  premature  or  impracticable 
during  the  wandering  in  the  wilderness, 
but  became  necessary  when  the  people 
was  about  to  settle  down  in  Canaan  : cf. 
note  at  the  beginning  of  ch.  xii.  on  xii. 
7.  The  occurrence  of  such  enactments 
in  Deuteronomy,  and  there  first,  is  in 
thorough  harmony  with  the  time  and 
circumstances  set  forth  in  the  book  it- 
self as  belonging  to  its  composition. 

In  like  manner  the  alleged  historical 
inconsistencies  between  this  book  and 
the  earlier  narrative  are  apparent  only 
and  not  real  (see  e.g.  on  i.  9 — 15,  i.  22, 23, 
ix.  I,  &c.);  and  the  total  omission  of  large 
portions  of  the  Sinaitic  legislation  is 
easily  intelligible  when  we  bear  in  mind 
the  purpose  which  the  orator  in  Deute- 
ronomy had  in  view.  It  is  particularly 
to  be  noted  that  the  laws  passed  over  in 
this  book  are  more  especially  those  per- 
taining to  the  offices  of  the  priests  and 
Levites.  And  these  are  precisely  the 
topics  which  it  would  be  needless  for 
one  addressing  the  general  assembly  of 
the  people  to  expound  or  insist  upon. 

It  is  indeed  possible  that  some  or  per- 
haps all  of  the  archteological  and  topo- 
graphical remarks  which  are  interwoven 
in  several  places  (see  e.g.  ii.  10 — 12, 
and  20 — 23,  hi.  9)  are  insertions  made 
by  a later  reviser,  perhaps  a much  later 
reviser,  after  the  book  was  complete  : 
see  the  notes  on  those  passages.  But 
on  the  other  hand  it  is  quite  in  the  man- 
ner of  very  ancient  writers  to  interrupt 
the  thread  of  their  narrative  by  paren- 
theses of  this  character,  and  to  introduce 
them  as  abruptly  as  Moses  does.  The 
pages  of  Herodotus  furnish  many  illus- 
trations of  this  (see  the  remarks  in  Raw- 


linson’s  ‘Herod.’  i.  29,  125,  and  notes). 
It  must  be  remembered  that  foot-notes 
are  an  invention  of  modern  times.  An 
ancient  historian  embodied  incidental  re- 
marks, references,  and  illustrations  in 
his  text ; nor  would  one  who  at  a subse- 
quent period  undertook  to  re-edit  an 
ancient  work  regard  himself  as  taking 
any  unwarrantable  liberty  if  he  added 
here  and  there  any  incidental  notice  or 
short  explanation  in  a parenthetic  form 
which  might  be  useful  to  his  own  con- 
temporaries. And  it  seems  hardly  likely 
that  Moses  would  himself  digress  into 
such  topics  in  the  course  of  an  address 
to  the  people,  though  there  would  be  no 
improbability  in  believing  that  he  did 
so  when  writing  a history.  Hence  it  is 
on  the  whole  not  unlikely  that  the  pas- 
sages in  question  were,  as  Prideaux  long 
ago  maintained,  see  ‘ Connexion,’  (Part  i. 
Book  V.  §§  3 and  4),  glosses  added  by 
Ezra,  who  would  certainly  regard  him- 
self as  fully  authorized  thus  to  interpo- 
late. But  the  question  as  to  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  book  is  not  affected 
by  any  conclusion  which  may  be  formed 
about  such  isolated  passages. 

On  the  whole  then  the  assertions  of 
some  modern  critics  as  to  the  spurious- 
ness of  Deuteronomy,  though  very  posi- 
tive, appear  when  sifted  to  rest  upon 
most  insufficient  arguments.  The  alleged 
anachronisms,  discrepancies,  and  diffi- 
culties admit  for  the  most  part  of  easy 
and  complete  explanation ; and  no  se- 
rious attempt  has  ever  been  made  by 
these  critics  to  meet  the  overwhelming 
presumption  drawn  from  the  unanimous 
and ‘Unwavering  testimony  of  the  ancient 
Jewish  church  and  nation  that  Moses  is 
the  author  of  this  book.  The  whole  of 
this  part  of  the  argument,  though  enough 
of  itself  to  outweigh  many  difficulties 
even,  were  they  insoluble,  is  almost  al- 
ways passed  over  by  the  critics  sub 
silentio. 

It  must  be  added  too  that  Deuteronomy 
has  in  a singular  manner  the  attestation 
of  the  Apostles  and  of. our  Lord.  St  Paul 
in  Romans  x.  and  xv.  argues  from  it  at 
some  length,  and  expressly  quotes  it  as 
written  by  Moses ; St  Peter  and  St  Stephen 
(Acts  iii.  22,  vii.  37)  refer  to  the  pro- 
mise of  “a  Prophet  like  unto”  Moses, 
and  regard  it  as  given,  as  it  professes  to 

3 E 2 


8oo  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY. 


be,  by  Moses  himself ; our  Lord,  wielding 
“the  sword  of  the  Spirit  which  is  the 
word  of  God”  against  the  open  assaults 
of  Satan,  thrice  resorts  to  Deuteronomy 
for  the  texts  with  which  He  repels  the 
tempter,  St  Matt.  iv.  4 — 10.  It  is  in 
vain  to  urge  in  reply  that  the  inspiration 
of  the  Apostles,  and  even  the  indwelling 
of  the  Spirit  “without  measure”  in  the 
Saviour,  would  not  necessarily  preserve 
them  from  mistakes  on  such  subjects  as 
the  authorship  of  ancient  writings,  or  to 
fortify  such  assertions  by  remarking  that 
our  Lord  as  the  Son  of  Man  was  Him- 
self ignorant  of  some  things.  Even 
were  we  warranted  in  inferring  from  St 
Luke  ii.  52,  St  Mark  xiii.  32,  that  some 
things  were  not  known  to  the  Lord  as 
the  Son  of  Man,  because  His  human  facul- 
ties must  have  been  finite,  yet  the  answer 


overlooks  the  important  distinction  be- 
tween ignorance  and  error.  To  be  con- 
scious that  much  truth  lies  beyond  the 
range  of  the  intelligence  is  compatible 
with  the  perfection  of  the  creature,  which 
of  course  must  be  finite  perfection  (cf. 
Butler,  ‘Anal.’  Part  i.  ch.  v.,  Vol.  i.  pp. 
95  sqq.  Oxford  Ed.  of  Butler’s  Works) : 
but  to  be  deceived  by  the  fraud  of  others 
and  to  fall  into  error,  is  not  so.  To  as- 
sert then  that  He  who  is  “the  Truth” 
believed  Deuteronomy  to  be  the  work  of 
Moses  and  quoted  it  expressly  as  such, 
though  it  was  in  fact  a forgery  introduced 
into  the  world  seven  or  eight  centuries 
after  the  exodus,  is  in  effect,  even  though 
not  in  intention,  to  impeach  the  per- 
fection and  sinlessness  of  His  nature, 
and  seems  thus  to  gainsay  the  first  prin- 
ciples of  Christianity. 


THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES,  . 


CALLED 

DEUTERONOMY. 


CHAPTER  1. 

I Moses*  speech  m the  end  of  the  fortieth  year^ 
briefly  rehearsing  the  story  6 of  Cod' s pj'onise, 
13  of  giving  them  officers,  19  of  sending  the 
spies  to  search  the  laitd,  34  of  God's  anger  for 
their  incredulity,  4 1 and  disobedience. 


These  be  the  words  which  Mo- 
ses spake  unto  all  Israel  on  this 
side  Jordan  in  the  wilderness,  in  the 
plain  over  against  " the  Red  sea.,  be-  zufk. 
tween  Paran,  and  Tophel,  and  Laban, 
and  Hazeroth,  and  Dizahab. 


Chap.  I.  1,  2. — ^These  are  prefixed  as 

a connecting  link  between  the  contents  of  the 
preceding  books  and  that  of  Deut.  now  to 
follow. 

1.  These  be  the  ^ords~\  The  clause  is 
retrospective,  as  the  geographical  data  which 
follow  indicate,  and  serves  to  connect  Deut. 
with  the  preceding  book.  The  Hebrew 
pronoun  {elleh,  these'),  when  used  without  the 
copulative  and,  generally  refers  exclusively  to 
what  follows  (see  on  Gen.  ii.  4)*  But  here 
it  serves,  as  in  Lev.  xxvi.  46,  and  perhaps 
Deut.  xxix.  I,  where  see  note,  to  point  a clause 
conclusive  of  the  preceding  and  introductory 
to  the  succeeding  context.  The  sense  of  the 
passage  might  be  given  thus:  “The  discourses 
of  Moses  to  the  people  up  to  the  eleventh  month 
of  the  fortieth  year”  (cf.  3)  “have  now 
been  recorded.”  The  general  term  “words” 
is  used  in  order  to  include  the  various  kinds 
of  communications  made  by  Moses  to  the 
people,  laws,  speeches,  commands,  &c.  The 
proper  names  which  follow  seem  to  belong  to 
places  where  “words”  of  remarkable  import- 
ance were  spoken.  They  are  by  the  Jewish 
commentators  referred  to  the  spots  which 
witnessed  the  more  special  sins  of  the  people, 
and  the  mention  of  them  here  is  construed  as 
a pregnant  rebuke.  The  Book  of  Deut.  is 
known  amongst  the  Jews  as  “the  book  of 
reproofs;”  cf.  Introd.  § I. 

on  this  side  fordan\  Render  rather  be- 
yond Jordan,  as  the  same  Hebrew  phrase 
is  translated  iii.  20  and  25 : and  as  the  LXX. 
and  the  versions  generally  have  it.  A.  V.  has 
“on  this  side  Jordan”  also  in  Num.  xxii.  i 
(where  see  note);  Deut.  i.  5,  iii.  8,  &c.:  but 
one  rendering  ought  to  be  followed  through- 
out. The  phrase  (b'eber  hay-yarden)  means 
literally  “at  the  side  or  passage  of  Jordan.” 
It  was  a standing  designation  for  the  district 
east  of  Jordan,  and  in  times  when  Greek  be- 


came commonly  spoken  in  the  country  was 
exactly  represented  by  the  proper  name  Peraea. 
It  was  used  quite  irrespectively  of  the  actual 
position  of  the  speaker  or  writer  (just  as  “ sea- 
wards” or  “from  the  sea”  was  used  for  “west,” 
cf.  Ex.  X.  19) ; had  probably  been  settled  by  the 
usage  of  the  Ganaanites  in  very  early  times ; and 
passed  from  them  to  the  patriarchs  and  the 
Jews  generally.  Yet  alongside  of  this  conven- 
tional sense  the  natural  one  is  still  found ; and 
the  phrase  is  used  of  both  sides  of  the  river : 
in  Gen.  1.  10,  ii;  Josh.  ix.  i,  &c.,  of  Cisjor- 
danic  territory : in  Num.  xxii.  i,  xxxii.  32,  of 
Transjordanic;  and  even  in  the  same  chapter 
is  used  first  of  one  and  then  of  the  other:  see 
Deut.  iii.  8,  20,  25.  The  immediate  context 
will  usually  determine  the  sense  of  the  phrase, 
which  is  thus  in  itself  ambiguous ; but  often 
some  qualifying  addition  is  made  to  determine 
it  (cf.  e.g.  iv.  41;  Josh.  xxii.  7).  In  Num. 
xxxii.  19,  the  Transjordanic  tribes  use  a phrase 
nearly  identical  with  the  one  before  us  first  of 
their  own  territory  and  then  of  that  of  their 
brethren ; but  add  terms  to  explain  their  mean- 
ing. It  is  evident,  from  a mere  inspection  of 
the  passages  in  which  the  phrase  is  used,  that 
no  inferences  at  all  can  be  drawn  from  it  as 
to  whether  the  writer  of  Deut.  dwelt  on  the 
one  side  of  Jordan  or  the  other. 

in  the  <sjoilderness,  in  the  plain~\  These  terms 
assign  broadly  the  localities  referred  to  in  the 
preceding  books.  The  former  term  (midbdr) 
denotes  the  desert  of  Arabia  generally;  the 
latter  (ardbdb)  the  sterile  tract  which  stretches 
along  the  lower  Jordan  to  the-Dead  Sea,  and 
is  continued  thence  to  the  Gulf  of  Akaba. 
In  this  'v.  and  ii.  8 (“the  way  of  the  plain”) 
it  is  the  southern  portion  of  this  depressed 
tract  which  is  meant. 

o’ver  against  the  Red  Sea~\  Render:  over 
against  Suph.  Here  the  A.  V.  (cf.  on 
Num.  xxi.  14)  supplies  “Sea.”  But  though 


DEUTERONOMY.  I.  [v.  2-5. 


2 {TJ?ere  are  eleven  days’  journey 
from  Horeb  by  the  way  of  mount 
Seir  unto  Kadesh-barnea.) 

3 And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  for- 
tieth year,  in  the  eleventh  month,  on 
the  first  day  of  the  month,  that  Moses 
spake  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  ac- 
cording unto  all  that  the  Lord  had 


given  him  in  commandment  unto 
them; 

4 ^ After  he  had  slain  Sihon  the  “ 
king  of  the  Amorites,  which  dwelt 
in  Heshbon,  and  Og  the  king  of 
Bashan,  which  dwelt  at  Astaroth  in 
Edrei : 

5 On  this  side  Jordan,  in  the  land 


the  Red  Sea  (Hebr.  yarn  supld)  is  often  called 
simply  “the  Sea,”  yet  “Suph”  without  “Sea” 
must  be  a proper  name,  especially  as  the  full  ex- 
pression “yam  suph”  occurs  'v.  40.  “Suph” 
is  most  probably  the  pass  es  Sufah  near  Ain- 
el-Weibeh  described  by  Robinson  (‘  Bib.  Re- 
searches,’ II.  1 81  sqq. : see  also  on  Num.  xiii. 
26;  § 5 of  Note  at  end  of  chapter),  or  some 
place  in  the  neighbourhood.  Thus,  the  Maa- 
leh-acrabbim  of  Josh.  xv.  3 is  the  shortest  (cf. 
on  Num.  xxxiv.  4),  and  anciently  was  the 
most  frequented  path  from  the  Arabah,  the 
plain  mentioned  in  the  last  note,  through 
the  mountains  to  Hebron.  It  commands  an 
extensive  view,  and  the  district  beneath  it, 
which  may  have  been  signalized  by  some  deeds 
or  words  of  Moses,  is  probably  meant  by  the 
expression  “over  against  Suph.” 

bet'ween  Par  an  and  Tophel'\  Of  these 
places  Tophel  is  by  general  consent  identified 
as  the  Tufileh  of  Robinson  (‘Bib.  Res.’  ii. 
570),  the  Tafyle  of  Burckhardt  (p.  402  sqq.). 
Saadia  writes  “Tufal.”  It  is  still  a consider- 
able place, — some  little  distance  S.  E.  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  “ Numerous  springs  and  rivulets 
(ninety-nine,  according  to  the  Arabs,)  the 
waters  of  which  unite  below,  render  the 
vicinity  of  the  town  very  agreeable.  It  is 
surrounded  by  large  plantations  of  fruit- 
trees  : apples,  apricots,  figs,  pomegranates, 
and  olive-  and  beech-trees  of  a large  species  are 
cultivated  in  great  numbers”  (Burckhardt, 
1.  c.).  It  is  naturally,  therefore,  selected  as 
a landmark.  Paran  being  assigned  here  as 
the  western  limit  of  a district  is  probably  the 
Mount  Paran  of  xxxiii.  2;  or  a city  of  the 
same  name  mentioned  by  Euseb.,  Jer.  and 
several  modern  geographers,  near  the  moun- 
tain. The  name  is  familiar  in  the  phrase 
“wilderness  of  Paran;”  cf.  Gen.  xiv.  6,  xxi. 
21 ; Num.  x.  12  and  note. 

and  Lahati]  With  this  and  the  two  fol- 
lowing names  we  must  understand  the  pre- 
position “ in and  regard  them  as  adding  three 
more  to  those  already  mentioned  as  memorable. 
Laban  is  generally  identified  with  Libnah 
(Num.  xxxiii.  20,  see  Note):  the  latter  being 
the  same  word  in  the  fern,  forni. 

HazerotlS]  i.e.  “inclosures”  (cf. .on  ii.  23), 
probably  not  identical  with  the  place  of  the 


same  name  mentioned  Num.  xi.  35;  where 
see  note. 

Dizahab~\  i.e.  region  of  gold;  LXX.  Kara- 
Xpyo-ea.  The  name  suggests  the  idea  of  gold- 
mines; and  Jerome  (‘De  Situ  et  Nom.  Loc. 
Heb.’  s.v.  Gata  ta  chrysea)  says  “suntmontes 
auri  fertiles  in  deserto.”  Cf.  Ewald,  ‘History 
of  Israel,’  p.  466  (translated  by  Martineau), 
and  foot-note.  Nothing  can  be  ascertained  of 
the  place  except  that  it  was  one  of  the  earlier 
stations  after  the  people  left  Sinai.  Knobel 
identifies  it  with  Kibroth-hattaavah.  It  can 
hardly  be  the  modern  Dahab,  which  is  out  of 
the  way  on  the  Gulf  of  Akaba. 

2 . There  are  eleven  days''  journey . . . unto  Ka- 
desh']  Kadesh  (see  on  Num.  xiii.  26)  is  named 
as  the  southern  point  of  the  Promised  Land. 
In  this  <1;.,  as  in  the  first,  the  mind  of  the 
reader  seems  directed  to  the  past  history. 
It  was  but  eleven  days’  journey  from  the 
Mountain  of  the  Covenant  to  the  Promised 
Land;  yet  in  the  fortieth  year  the  chosen 
people  were  still  in  the  wilderness. 

Hoi'eb']  On  this  name  and  its  relation  to 
Sinai,  see  on  Ex.  iii.  i. 

3 — 5.  The  time  and  place  at  which  the 
following  exhortations  were  addressed  to 
the  people,  are  now  defined ; cf.  iv.  44 — 49. 
In  2;.  5 too  the  nature  of  Moses’  address 
is  indicated.  He  “began,”  or  better  perhaps 
“undertook,”  to  “declare  this  law:”  i.e. 
explain  and  elucidate  it.  Such  is  the  force 
of  the  Hebrew  verb  (beer').,  a word  implying 
the  pre-existence  of  the  matter  on  which  the 
process  is  employed,  and  so  the  substantial 
identity  of  the  Deuteronomic  legislation  with 
that  of  the  previous  books. 

4.  AstarotlS]  On  this  place  cf.  Gen.  xiv. 
5,  and  note. 

in  Edrei]  These  words  should,  to  render 
the  sense  clear,  come  next  after  “ slain.”  The 
battle  in  which  Sihon  and  Og  were  defeated 
took  place  at  Edrei. 

5.  in  the  land  of  Moab]  Cf.  xxix.  i.  More 
accurately  in  Num.  xxxiii.  48,  “in  the  plains 
of  Moab  by  Jordan  near  Jericho.”  This 
district  had  formerly  been  occupied  by  the 
Moabites,  and  retained  its  name  from  them : 
but  had  been  conquered  by  the  Amorites. 
Cf.  Num.  xxi.  26. 


tHeb. 
all  his 
neigh- 
bours. 


tHeb. 

give9t. 


V.  6-II.]  DEUTERONOMY.  I.  803 


of  Moab,  began  Moses  to  declare  this 
law,  saying, 

6 The  Lord  our  God  spake  unto 
us  in  Horeb,  saying.  Ye  have  dwelt 
long  enough  in  this  mount : 

C) 

7 Turn  you,  and  take  your  jour- 
ney, and  go  to  the  mount  of  the 
Amorites,  and  unto  ^all  the  places 
nigh  thereunto,  in  the  plain,  in  the 
hills,  and  in  the  vale,  and  in  the 
south,  and  by  the  sea  side,  to  the  land 
of  the  Canaanites,  and  unto  Lebanon, 
unto  the  great  river,  the  river  Eu- 
phrates. 

8 Behold,  I have  ^set  the  land  be- 


fore you : go  in  and  possess  the  land 
which  the  Lord  sware  unto  your  fa- 
thers, ‘^Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  *^Gen.  15. 
to  give  unto  them  and  to  their  seed  & '17. 7,  s. 
after  them. 

9 ^ And  I spake  unto  you  at  that 
time,  saying,  I am  not  able  to  bear 
you  myself  alone : 

10  The  Lord  your  God  hath  mul- 
tiplied you,  and,  behold,  ye  are  this  day 
as  the  stars  of  heaven  for  multitude. 

11  (The  Lord  God  of  your  fa- 
thers make  you  a thousand  times  so 
many  more  as  ye  are.,  and  bless  you, 
as  he  hath  promised  you ! ) 


declare]  Render  explain : and  see  onno-v. 
3 — 5 above.  LXX.  : Vulg.  ex- 

planare, 

6.  The  first  and  introductory  address  of 
Moses  to  the  people  is  here  commenced.  It 
extends  to  iv.  40,  and  is  divided  from  the 
second  discourse  by  the  ‘vno.  iv.  41  — 49, 
which  are  obviously  of  a different  character 
from  those  which  precede  and  follow  them. 
Addressing  the  people  on  the  very  threshold 
of  the  Promised  Land,  Moses  summiarily  re- 
calls to  them  the  manifold  proofs  they  had 
experienced  of  the  care  and  the  faithfulness 
of  God  towards  them,  and  the  manifold  in- 
stances of  their  own  perverseness  and  rebel- 
lion. These  their  sins  had  shut  them  out 
during  a whole  generation  from  the  inherit- 
ance covenanted  to  be  given  to  their  fathers. 
The  warning  is  thus  most  effectively  pointed, 
— that  they  should  not  by  new  transgressions 
debar  themselves  from  those  blessings  which 
even  now  lay  before  their  eyes;  and  the  way 
is  appropriately  prepared  for  that  recapitu- 
lation and  re-inforcement  of  the  laAv  of  the 
covenant,  which  it  is  the  main  purpose  of 
Deuteronomy  to  convey. 

7.  to  the  mount  of  the  Amorites]  i.  e.  to 
the  mountain  district  occupied  by  the  Amor- 
ites, reaching  into  the  Negeb,  and  part  of  the 
territory  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Judah.  The 
Amorites,  as  the  leading  people  of  Canaan, 
here  stand  for  the  nations  of  that  country  ge- 
nerally (see  nj.  44);  and  “ the  mountain  of  the 
Amorites  and  the  places  nigh  thereunto,”  (or 
more  literally,  “all  its  neighbours”),  denote 
the  whole  district,  which  is  more  particularly 
specified  in  the  concluding  part  of  the  verse. 

9 — 15.  This  appointment  of  the  “cap- 
tains” (cf.  Ex.  xviii.  21  sqq.)  must  not  be 
confounded  with  that  of  the  Elders  in  Numb, 
xi. i6sqq.  The  former  would  number  78,600; 
the  latter  were  seventy  only.  The  time  and 


place,  and  indeed  the  transactions  themselves, 
were  quite  different.  The  only  common 
point  between  the  two  lies  in  the  complaint 
of  Moses,  -v.  12,  which  bears  some  verbal 
resemblance  to  Numb.  xi.  14  and  17.  But, 
as  in  both  cases,  the  grievance  Moses  had 
was  of  the  same  kind,  there  is  no  reason 
why  he  should  not  express  it  in  the  like 
terms.  It  is,  in  fact,  a characteristic  of  the 
speech  of  early  times,  and  one  exemplified  in 
every  ancient  record,  to  employ  the  same  or 
similar  combinations  of  words  for  like  occa- 
sions, instead  of  inventing  new  combinations 
for  each.  Such  similarities  afford  no  proof 
whatever  of  the  writers  having  other  like 
passages  in  view.  Very  ancient  languages 
had  not  that  variety  and  flexibility  of  expres- 
sion which  belong  to  the  modern  languages 
of  \V  estern  Europe. 

It  has  been  observed,  that  in  Exodus  the 
appointment  of  the  captains  is  described  as 
made  before  the  giving  of  the  Law  at  Sinai; 
here  it  seems  to  be  placed  immediately  be- 
fore the  people  departed  from  Horeb,  i.e.  a 
year  later.  But  it  is  obvious  that  Moses  is 
only  touching  on  certain  parts  of  the  whole 
history,  and  with  a special  purpose.  God  had 
given  them  a promise,  and  willed  them  to 
enter  on  the  enjoyment  of  it.  Moses  too 
had  done  his  part,  and  had  provided  for  the 
good  government  and  organization  of  their 
greatly  increased  multitudes.  All  was  ready 
for  the  full  accomplishment  of  the  promises 
before  the  camp  broke  up  from  Horeb.  The 
order  of  statement  is  here  rather  suggested 
by  the  purposes  of  the  speaker  than  by  the 
facts.  But  it  is  nevertheless  quite  correct  in 
the  main  point,  wh'ich  is  that  this  important 
arrangement  for  the  good  government  of  the 
people  took  place  before  they  quitted  Horeb 
to  march  direct  to  the  Promised  Land.  This 
fact  sets  more  clearly  before  us  the  perverse- 
ness and  ingratitude  of  the  people,  to  which 
the  orator  next  passes;  and  shows,  what  he 


DEUTERONOMY.  I. 


[V.  12 24. 


S04 


tHeb. 

Give. 


t Heb. 
gave. 


12  How  can  I myself  alone  bear 
your  cumbrance,  and  your  burden, 
and  your  strife  ? 

13  ^Take  you  wise  men,  and  un- 
derstanding, and  known  among  your 
tribes,  and  I will  make  them  rulers 
over  you. 

14  And  ye  answered  me,  and  said. 
The  thing  which  thou  hast  spoken  is 
good  for  us  to  do. 

15  So  I took  the  chief  of  your 
tribes,  wise  men,  and  known,  and 
^ made  them  heads  over  you,  captains 
over  thousands,  and  captains  over 
hundreds,  and  captains  over  fifties, 
and  captains  over  tens,  and  officers 
among  your  tribes. 

16  And  I charged  your  judges  at 
that  time,  saying,  Hear  the  causes 
betv/een  your  brethren,  and  ‘^judge 
righteously  between  every  man  and 
his  brother,  and  the  stranger  that  is 
with  him. 

17  "^Ye  shall  not  Yespect  persons 
in  judgment;  hut  ye  shall  hear  the 

l^Sam.  16.  small  as  well  as  the  great ; ye  shall 
not  be  afraid  of  the  face  of  man ; for 
the  judgment  is  God’s:  and  the  cause 
that  is  too  hard  for  you,  bring  it  unto 
me,  and  I will  hear  it. 


cjobn  7. 
24. 


^ Lev.  19. 
15- 

chap.  16. 

19 


Prov.  24. 
23. 

t Heb. 
acknow- 
ledge 
faces. 


18  And  I commanded  you  at  that 
time  all  the  things  which  ye  should 
do. 


19  ^ And  when  we  departed  from 
Horeb,  we  went  through  all  that 
great  and  terrible  wilderness,  which 
ye  saw  by  the  way  of  the  mountain 
of  the  Amorites,  as  the  Lord  our 
God  commanded  us ; and  we  came  to 
Kadesh-barnea. 

20  And  I said  unto  you,  Ye  are 
come  unto  the  mountain  of  the  Amor- 
ites, which  the  Lord  our  God  doth 
give  unto  us. 

21  Behold,  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  set  the  land  before  thee:  go  up 
and  possess  zV,  as  the  Lord  God  of 
thy  fathers  hath  said  unto  thee;  fear 
not,  neither  be  discouraged. 

22  And  ye  came  near  unto  me 
every  one  of  you,  and  said,  We  will 
send  men  before  us,  and  they  shall 
search  us  out  the  land,  and  bring  us 
word  again  by  what  way  we  must  go 
•up,  and  into  what  cities  we  shall 
come. 

23  And  the  saying  pleased  me 
well:  and  took  twelve  men  of  you, 
one  of  a tribe : 

24  AndAhey  turned  and  went  up 


e Numb. 
13-  .3- 

yNumb. 
13.  24. 


was  anxious  to  impress,  that  the  fault  of  the 
40  years’  delay  rested  only  with  themselves. 

Similar  reasons  explain  the  omission  of 
Jethro’s  counsel,  which  led  to  the  nomination 
of  the  captains.  It  was  beside  the  present 
purpose  to  enter  into  such  particulars. 

19.  that  great  and  terrible  <wilderness\  Cf. 
viii.  15.  This  language  is  by  no  means  applica- 
ble to  the  whole  peninsula  of  Sinai,  even  in  its 
present  deteriorated  state:  see  on  Num.  xx.  i. 
It  is  however  quite  such  as  men  would  em- 
ploy after  having  passed  with  toil  and  suffer- 
ing through  the  worst  part  of  it,  the  southern 
half  of  the  Arabah:  see  on  Num.  xxi.  4;  and 
more  especially  when  they  had  but  recently 
rested  from  their  marches  in  the  plain  of 
Shittim,  the  largest  and  richest  oasis  in  the 
whole  district:  see  on  Num.  xxii.  i,  and  cf. 
Tristram,  ‘Land  of  Israel,'  pp.  528,  529. 

22,  23.  Cf.  Numb.  xiii.  i,*2.  There  is  no 
real  discrepancy  between  these  passages.  The 
plan  of  sending  the  spies  originated  with  the 
people;  and,  as  in  itself  a reasonable  one,  it 
approved  itself  to  Moses;  was  submitted  to 
God,  and  sanctioned  by  Him;  and  carried 


out  under  special  Divine  direction.  The  ora- 
tor’s purpose  in  this  chapter  is  to  bring  before 
the  people  emphatically  their  own  responsi- 
bilities and  behaviour.  It  is  therefore  impor- 
tant to  remind  them,  that  the  sending  of  the 
spies,  which  led  immediately  to  their  mur- 
muring and  rebellion,  was  their  own  sugges- 
tion. 

It  is  frivolous  to  object  that  the  genera- 
tion .which  had  sinned  thus  was  dead;  and 
that  Moses  was  addressing  men  who  had  had 
no  concern  in  the  events  to  which  he  is  refer- 
ring. That  this  fact  was  present  to  the 
speaker's  mind  is  clear  from  nj-v.  34,  35 ; 
nay,  it  was  the  very  aim  he  had  in  view,  to 
warn  the  present  generation  not  to  follow  their 
fathers  in  their  perversity,  and  so'  defraud 
themselves  of  the  promised  blessing,  as  their 
fathers  had  done.  It  is  but  natural  that  Moses, 
who  had  been  the  leader  of  the  congregation 
all  along,  should,  when  addressing  it  collec- 
tively, treat  it  as  the  same  which  he  had 
brought  forth  from  Egypt,  and  had  now,  for 
the  second  time,  conducted  to  the  threshold 
of  the  Promised  Land. 

The  following  nc-v.  to  the  end  of  the 


V.  25—38-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  I. 


805 


t Heb. 
melted. 


S Numb. 
13.  28. 


into  the  mountain,  and  came  unto 
the  valley  of  Eshcol,  and  searched  it 
out. 

25  And  they  took  of  the  fruit  of 
the  land  in  their  hands,  and  brought 
it  down  unto  us,  and  brought  us  word 
again,  and  said.  It  is  a good  land 
which  the  Lord  our  God  doth  give 
us. 

26  Notwithstanding  ye  would  not 
go  up,  but  rebelled  against  the  com- 
mandment of  the  Lord  your  God : 

27  And  ye  murmured  in  your 
tents,  and  said.  Because  the  Lord 
hated  us,  he  hath  brought  us  forth 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  to  deliver 
us  into  the  hand  of  the  Amorites,  to 
destroy  us. 

28  Whither  shall  we  go  up?  our 
brethren  have  Miscouraged  our  heart, 
saying.  The  people  is  greater  and 
taller  than  we;  the  cities  are  great 
and  walled  up  to  heaven;  and  more- 
over we  have  seen  the  sons  of  the 
^ Anakims  there. 

29  Then  I said  unto  you.  Dread 
not,  neither  be  afraid  of  them. 

^30  The  Lord  your  God  which 
goeth  before  you,  he  shall  fight  for 
you,  according  to  all  that  he  did  for 
you  in  Egypt  before  your  eyes ; 


31  And  in  the  wilderness,  where 
thou  hast  seen  how  that  the  Lord 
thy  God  bare  thee,  as  a man  doth 
bear  his  son,  in  all  the  way  that  ye 
went,  until  ye  came  into  this  place. 

32  Yet  in  this  thing  ye  did  not  be- 
lieve the  Lord  your  God, 

33  ^Who  went  in  the  way  before  '^'Exod. 
you,  to  search  you  out  a place  to 
pitch  your  tents  /;?,  in  fire  by  night, 

to  shew  you  by  what  way  ye  should 
go,  and  in  a cloud  by  day. 

34  And  the  Lord  heard  the  voice 
of  your  words,  and  was  v/roth,  and 
sware,  saying, 

35  ^'Surely  there  shall  not  one  of 'Numb, 
these  men  of  this  evil  generation  see 

that  good  land,  which  I sware  to  give 
unto  your  fathers, 

36  Save  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephun- 
neh ; he  shall  see  it,  and  to  him  will 
I give  the  land  that  he  hath  trodden 
upon,  and  to  his  children,  because  he 
hath  ^wholly  followed  the  Lord. 

37  Also  the  Lord  was  angry  v/ithTgo 

me  for  your  sakes,  saying,  '^Thou  also  2'^umb. 
shalt  not  go  in  thither.  & 27^14. 

38  But  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun, 
which  standeth  before  thee,  he  shall  & 4- 21. 
go  in  thither:  encourage  him:  for  he 
shall  cause  Israel  to  inherit  it. 


tHeb. 

ftiljilled 


chapter  give  a condensed  statement,  the  fuller 
account  being  in  Numb.  xiii.  and  xiv.,  of  the 
occurrences  which  led  to  the  banishment  of 
the  people  for  40  years  into  the  wilderness. 
The  facts  are  treated  with  freedom,  as  by 
one  familiar  with  them,  addressing  those  no 
less  so,  yet  in  consistency  with  the  more  strictly 
historical  record  of  Numbers. 

37,  38.  The  sentence  on  Moses  was  not 
passed  on  occasion  of  the  rebellion  of  the 
people  at  Kadesh,  but  at  Meribah,  some  thirty- 
seven  years  later.  This,  as  having  happened  not 
many  months  previously,  was  well  known  to 
those  whom  he  was  addressing.  The  general 
tenor  of  the  discourse  has  led  to  its  being 
parenthetically  mentioned  here.  The  faithful- 
ness of  God,  the  trespasses  of  the  people,  these 
are  the  key-notes  throughout.  In  stating  the 
sentence  of  God  on  the  rebellious  generation, 
the  preacher  naturally  names  the  only  ex- 
ceptions to  it.  The  name  of  Joshua  leads  on 
at  once  to  his  appointment  to  the  leadership 
of  the  people,  now  just  about  to  take  effect. 


And  so  Moses  naturally  alludes  to  the  cause 
why  he  himself  is  to  be  set  aside.  The  fact 
that,  in  the  midst  of  judgment,  a future  leader 
was  provided  to  put  them  in  possession  of  the 
promises,  illustrates  the  faithfulness  of  God; 
and  the  description  of  Moses’  sentence,  as  “for 
your  sakes,”  no  less  illustrates  the  perversity  of 
the  people,  to  which  alone  the  ultimate  blame 
of  all  these  calamities  rolls  back.  See  further  on 
iii.  26.  Ps.  cvi.  32,  33,  is  strikingly  parallel 
with  the  passage  before  us:  “They  angered 
God  also  at  the  waters  of  strife,  so  that  it 
went  ill  with  Moses  for  their  sakes:  because 
they  provoked  his  spirit,  so  that  he  spake  un- 
advisedly with  his  lips.”  Moses  also  was  culp- 
able in  the  matter,  and  his  fault  is  set  forth 
^unshrinkingly;  cf.  xxxii.  51.  There  is  then 
no  suppression  of  anything  out  of  reverence 
for  God’s  extraordinary  messenger,  nor  any 
real  inconsistency  between  this  passage  and 
Num.  XX.  10  sqq.,  much  less  any  proof  that 
we  have  here  another  independent  and  wholly 
different  narrative  of  the  transactions  at  Me- 
ribah. Moses  simply  dwells  on  the  side  of 


8o6 


DEUTERONOMY.  I.‘ 


[v.  39—46. 


39  Moreover  your  little  ones,  which 
ye  said  should  be  a prey,  and  your 
children,  which  in  that  day  had  no 
knowledge  between  good  and  evil, 
they  shall  go  in  thither,  and  unto 
them  will  1 give  it,  and  they  shall 
possess  it. 

40  But  as  for  you,  turn  you,  and 
take  your  journey  into  the  wilderness 
by  the  way  of  the  Red  sea. 

41  Then  ye  answered  and  said  un- 

Xumb.  to  me,  "'We  have  sinned  against  the 
' Lord,  we  will  go  up  and  hght,  ac- 

cording to  all  that  the  Lord  our  God 
commanded  us.  And  when  ye  had 
girded  on  every  man  his  weapons  of 
war,  ye  were  ready  to  go  up  into  the 

hill. 

42  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me. 


Say  unto  them.  Go  not  up,  neither 
fight ; for  I am  not  among  you ; lest 
ye  be  smitten  before  your  enemies. 

43  So  I spake  unto  you ; and  ye 
would  not  hear,  but  rebelled  against'  ^ 
the  commandment  of  the  Lord,  and 

^ went  presumptuously  up  into  the  hill, 

44  And  the  Amorites,  which  dwelt 

. ' ^ ^ tnojts,  atu 

in  that  mountain,  came  out  against  i»ent  nj> 
you,  and  chased  you,  as  bees  do,  and 
destroyed  you  in  Seir,  even  unto 
Hormah. 

45  And  ye  returned  and  wept  be- 
fore the  Lord  ; but  the  Lord  would 
not  hearken  to  your  voice,  nor  give 
ear  unto  you. 

46  So  ye  abode  in  Kadesh  many 
days,  according  unto  the  days  that  ye 
abode  there. 


the  facts  which  was  to  his  purpose ; he  aims 
at  pricking  the  conscience  of  the  people. 

41.  ye  <were  ready  to  go  up  into  the  hill~\ 
Rather,  perhaps,  “ye  made  light  of  going 
up ; ” i.  e.  ‘ ‘ ye  were  ready  to  attempt  it  as  a 
trifling  undertaking.”  On  the  Hebrew  verb 
here  used,  see  note  at  the  end  of  the  chap- 
ter. F.  43,  “ye  went  presumptuously,”  or 
better,  “ were  presumptuous  and  went,”  as 
margin,  shows  the  issue  of  this  spirit  in  action : 
Cf.  Numb.  xiv.  44,  where  however  the  Hebrew 
words  are  different. 

44.  the  Amorites\  In  Numb.  xiv.  45,  it  is 
“ the  Amalekites  and  the  Canaanites,”  who  are 
said  to  have  discomfited  them.  The  Amor- 


ites, as  the  most  powerful  nation  of  Canaan, 
lend  their  name  here,  as  in  other  passages,  to 
the  Canaanitish  tribes  generally.  Cf.  e.g.  'v^v. 
7 and  19  of  this  chapter.  The  more  lengthy 
and  precise  narrative  of  Numbers  gives  details 
here,  as  elsewhere,  which  are  disregarded  as 
unimportant  to  his  purpose  by  the  speaker  in 
Deut. 

as  bees  do']  The  same  comparison  will  be 
found,  Iliad  xvi.  259  sqq. 

in  Seir]  Cf.  Numb.  xiv.  45  and  note. 

46.  ye  abode  in  Kadesh  many  days]  On 
this  long  stay  cf.  Introd.  to  Numbers,  § 3,  and 
note  on  Num.  xx.  i. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  i.  41. 


The  Hebrew  word  rendered  in  A.  V.  “ye 
were  ready”. is  the  Hiphil  of  ITl.  It  is 
OTTO^  Xeyojjievou,  and  about  its  precise  sense 
there  has  always  been  much  difference  of 
opinion.  Gesenius  says  (‘  Lex.’  s.  v.)  “ in  hoc 
verbo  interpretando  in  alia  omnia  abibant 
veteres  interpretes.” 

Modern  commentators  have  for  the  most 
part  connected  the  Hebrew  word  with  the 
Arabic  “ lenis,  facilis  fuit,”  which  in 

the  fourth  conjugation  has  the  sense  “ de- 
spexit,  vilipendit.”  This  would  give  the 
rendering  suggested  in  the  note,  “ye  made 
light  of  going  up ; ” which  is  adopted  by 
Dathe,  Gesen.,  Knob.,  F first,  Keil,  vSchultz, 
&c.  It  cannot  however  be  regarded  as  more 
than  a probable  rendering.  None  of  the 
ancient  versions  or  comm,  adopt  it;  and  it 
is  remarkable  that  Saadia  translates  pn  by 

jj\j  , in  conj.  3,  kf.  “ prtevenit,”  “ festinavit;” 


whereas  a familiar  word,  solicited  by 

the  very  letters  of  the  Hebrew  verb,  would 
have  been  an  obvious  equivalent,  if  it  were  an 
equivalent  at  all. 

The  LXX.  renders  the  word  by  avvaOpot- 
O-Oeires : (crvvadpoLaSevTes  dpe^aivere  els  to 
opos).  This  sense,  and  possibly  that  of  the 
Vulg.,  “instruct!  armis,”  would  seem  to  have 
been  derived,  by  a very  forced  inference  cer- 
tainly, from  the  root  jin,  in  the  sense  of 
“ abundance,”  “ facilitates,” 

The  A.  V.  follows  Jarchi,  Abenezra,  Va- 
tablus,  &c.,  and  assumes  that  the  verb  pn 
is  cognate  with  jrt,  “ecce;”  and  signifies 
strictly  “ecce  nos,  parati  sumus  ascendere,” 
&c.  Cf.  the  German  “bejahen;”  the  Arabic 

. This  view  has  been  again  recently  put 
forward  by  Wogue;  but  seems  somewhat 
farfetched. 


V.  1—9.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  II. 


CHAPTER  II. 

I The  story  is  continued,  that  they  were  not  to 
meddle  with  the  Edomites,  9 nor  with  the 
Aloabites,  17  nor  with  the  Ammonites,  24  but 
Sihon  the  A moriie  was  subdued  by  them. 

Then  we  turned,  and  took  our 
journey  into  the  wilderness  by 
the  way  of  the  Red  sea,  as  the  Lord 
spake  unto  me : and  we  compassed 
mount  Seir  many  days. 

2 And  the  Lord  spake  unto  me, 
saying, 

3 Ye  have  compassed  this  moun- 
tain long  enough  : turn  you  north- 
ward. 

4 And  command  thou  the  people, 
saying.  Ye  are  to  pass  through  the 
coast  of  your  brethren  the  children 
of  Esau,  which  dwell  in  Seir ; and 
they  shall  be  afraid  of  you  : take  ye 
good  heed  unto  yourselves  therefore  : 

5 Meddle  not  with  them ; for  I will 


807 

not  give  you  of  their  land,  ^ no,  not  ^ 

SO  much  as  a foot  breadth  ; " because  trending 
I have  given  mount  Seir  unto  Esau  of  uL foot 
for  a possession. 

6 Ye  shall  buy  meat  of  them  for 
money,  that  ye  may  eat;  and  ye  shall 
also  buy  water  of  them  for  money, 
that  ye  may  drink. 

7 Eor  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
blessed  thee  in  all  the  works  of  thy 
hand : he  knoweth  thy  walking  through 
this  great  wilderness  : these  forty  years 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath  been  with 
thee ; thou  hast  lacked  nothing. 

8 And  when  we  passed  by  from 
our  brethren  the  children  of  Esau, 
which  dwelt  in  Seir,  through  the  way 
of  the  plain  from  Elath,  and  from 
Ezion-gaber,  we  turned  and  passed  by 
the  way  of  the  wilderness  of  Moab. 

9 And  the  Lord  said  unto  me,  hostility 
■■  Distress  not  the  Moabites,  neither ffab* 


Chap.  II.  1 — 3.  The  people  were  at 
Kadesh  in  the  second  year  of  the  Exodus 
(Num.  xiii.  26,  where  see  Note  at  the  end  of 
the  chapter),  and  are  again  spoken  of  as  being 
there  at  the  close  of  the  thirty-eight  years’ 
wandering,  and  in  the  fortieth  of  the  Exodus 
(Num.  XX.  i).  V.  1 seems  to  refer  in  general 
terms  to  the  long  years  of  wandering,  the 
details  of  which  were  not  to  Moses’  present 
purpose.  The  command  of  'w.  2 and  3 re- 
lates to  their  journey  from  Kadesh  to  Mount 
Elor  (Num.  xx.  22;  xxxiii.  37),  and  directs 
their  march  round  the  south  extremity  of 
Mount  Seir,  so  as  to  “compass  the  land  of 
Edom”  (Judges  xi.  18 ; Num.  xxi.  4),  and  so 
northwards  towards  the  Arnon,  i.e.  “by  the 
way  of  the  wilderness  of  Moab,”  a).  8.  This 
circuitous  path  was  followed  because  of  the 
refusal  of  the  Edomites  to  allow  the  people 
to  pass  through  their  territory. 

4.  From  Num.  xx.  18 — 20,  it  appears  that 
the  Edomites  made  formidable  preparations  to 
resist  the  passage  of  the  Israelites  through 
the  midst  of  their  land;  they  did  not,  however, 
and  probably  dared  not,  resist  the  passage  of 
the  host  along  their  eastern  frontier,  which  is, 
as  compared  with  that  towards  the  Arabah, 
open  and  defenceless. 

5.  I haaoe  given  mount  Seir  to  Esati]  Though 
the  descendants  of  Esau  were  conquered  by 
David  (2  Sam.  viii.  14),  and  “all  they  of 
Edom  became  David’s  servants,”  yet  they 
were  not  dispossessed  of  their  land,  and  in 
the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  they  regained  their 
independence  (2  Kings  viii.  20 — 22). 

6.  The  Edomites,  though  they  refused  to 


allow  passage  through  their  land,  did  not  de- 
cline to  sell  the  people  necessary  provisions 
(v.  29) ; and  indeed  would,  as  we  may  infer 
from  V.  4,  be  afraid  to  irritate  them  by 
doing  so. 

buy  nvater]  Literally  “ dig  water;”  i.e.  pur- 
chase permission  to  dig  for  water. 

8.  And  nvhen  voe  passed  by']  These  words 
imply  the  failure  of  the  attempt  made  to  pass 
directly  through  the  territory  of  Edom;  cf. 
Num.  XX.  20,  21. 

from  Elath,  and  from  Ezion-gaber]  For 
Ezion-geber,  see  Num.  xxxiii.  35.  Elath 
is  mentioned  again  in  connexion  with  it, 
I Kings  iy^.  26;  “Solomon  made  a navy  of 
ships  in  Ezion-geber,  which  is  beside  Eloth, 
on  the  shore  of  the  Red  Sea,  in  the  land  of 
Edom.”  From  this  it  would  appear  that 
Elath  was  the  better  known  place  of  the  two. 
Elath,  in  Greek  AlXdo  and  AtAai/77,  is  at  the 
northern  extremity  of  the  eastern  arm  of  the 
Red  Sea,  and  gives  to  that  arm  the  name  of 
the  Elanitic  Gulf.  The  town  has  now  a small 
castle  with  a garrison  under  the  viceroy  of 
Egypt ; and,  like  the  gulf,  bears  the  name  of 
Akaba.  Its  sole  importance  lies  at  present  in 
its  being  on  the  route  of  the  annual  caravan 
of  pilgrims  from  Cairo  to  Mecca.  The  word 
Elath  or  Eloth  means  “trees;”  and  is  still 
justified  by  the  grove  of  palm-trees  at  Akaba. 
(Cf.  Stanley,  ‘ Sinai  and  Palestine,’  p.  84.) 

9.  The  Moabites  and  the  Ammonites  (-t;. 
19)  being  descended  from  Lot,  the  nephew  of 
Abraham  (Gen.  xix.  30 — 38),  were,  like  the 
Edomites,  kinsmen  of  the  Israelites. 


8o8 


DEUTERONOMY.  II. 


[v.  lO — 21. 


contend  with  them  in  battle  : for  I 
will  not  give  thee  of  their  land  for 
a possession ; because  I have  given 
Ar  unto  the  children  of  Lot  for  a 
possession. 

10  The  Emims  dwelt  therein  in 
times  past,  a people  great,  and  many, 
and  tall,  as  the  Anakims  ; 

1 1 Which  also  were  accounted 
giants,  as  the  Anakims  ; but  the  Mo- 
abites call  them  Emims. 

/>Gen.  36.  12  ^The  Horims  also  dwelt  in 

Seir  beforetime;  but  the  children  of 
+ Heb.  Esau  ^ succeeded  them,  when  they 
had  destroyed  them  from  before  them, 
11  Or,  ^ind  dwelt  in . their  “ stead  ; as  Israel 

room.-^  did  unto  the  land  of  his  possession, 

which  the  Lord  gave  unto  them. 

13  Now  rise  up,  said  /,  and  get 
cNumb.  you  over  the  I' brook  Zered.  And 
11  Or,  ' we  went  over  the  brook  Zered. 
valley:  space  in  which  we 

came  from  Kadesh-barnea,  until  we 
were  come  over  the  brook  Zered, 
was  thirty  and  eight  years  ; until  all 
the  generation  of  the  men  of  war 


were  wasted  out  from  among  the  host, 
as  the  Lord  sware  unto  them. 

15  For  indeed  the  hand  of  the 
Lord  was  against  them,  to  destroy 
them  from  among  the  host,  until  they 
were  consumed. 

16  So  it  came  to  pass,  when  ^11 
the  men  of  war  were  consumed  and 
dead  from  among  the  people, 

17  That  the  Lord  spake  unto  me, 
saying, 

18  Thou  art  to  pass  over  through 
Ar,  the  coast  of  Moab,  this  day  : 

19  And  when  thou  comest  nigh 
over  against  the  children  of  Ammon, 
distress  them  not,  nor  meddle  with 
them : for  I will  not  give  thee  of 
the  land  of  the  children  of  Ammon 
any  possession  ; because  I have  given 
it  unto  the  children  of  Lot  for  a pos- 
session. 

20  (That  also  was  accounted  a 
land  of  giants  : giants  dwelt  therein 
in  old  time  ; and  the  Ammonites  call 
them  Zamzummims ; 

21  A people  great,  and  many,  and 


10 — 12.  For  the  Emims  and  the  Horims 
see  Gen.  xiv.  5 and  6:  for  the  Anakims, 
Niim.  xiii. 

The  archaeological  notices  in  these  verses, 
which  obviously  break  the  sense  of  the  con- 
text (see  next  note),  have  every  appearance 
of  being  a gloss.  See  the  Note  at  the  end  of 
the  chapter. 

13.  No^iv  rise  up^  said  I,  and  get  you  over 
the  brook  Zered.']  The  words,  “said  I,”  in- 
troduced by  our  translators  at  the  last  re- 
vision, and  not  found  in  the  Hebrew,  should 
be  dropped.  The  words  “ rise  up,  and  get 
you  over  the  brook  Zered”  connect  them- 
selves with  V.  9,  and  form  the  conclusion 
of  what  God  said  to  Moses.  The  interme- 
diate w,  must  be  regarded,  if  allowed  to 
stand  in  the  text,  as  parenthetic.  Moses 
resumes  the  narrative  in  his  own  words  in 
what  immediately  follows:  “And  we  went 
over  the  brook  Zered.” 

14.  Before  they  passed  the  Zered,  “the 
generation  of  the  men  of  war,”  which  came 
out  of  h'-gyPb  hatl  passed  away.  Thus  was 
fulfilled  the  sentence  of  Num.  xiv.  23,  that 
itone  of  these  men  should  see  the  land  which 
God  sware  unto  their  fathers.  From  the  high 
ground,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Zered,  if  we 
identify  it  with  the  Wady  Kerek  (see  Num. 
xxi.  12),  a distant  view  of  the  Promised  Land 
might  have  been  obtained;  and  according  to 


Seetzen,  even  Jerusalem  can  be  seen  in  clear 
weather. 

16 — 19.  From  the  brook  Zered  the  people 
passed  on  “by  the  way  of  the  wilderness  of 
Moab,”  i.e.  leaving  the  country  occupied  by 
Moab  on  their  left,  until  they  came  to  the 
Arnon,  which  formed  at  that  time  the  north- 
ern boundary  of  Moab,  and  separated  Moab 
from  the  Amorites  and  the  Ammonites.  At 
the  Arnon  they  would,  in  their  line  of  march, 
come  upon  the  territories  of  Sihon,  and  con- 
sequently “nigh  over  against”  {y.  19)  those 
of  the  Ammonites,  who  dwelt  to  the  East  of 
Sihon's  kingdom.  The  mention  of  the  Am- 
monites leads  to  the  insertion  (yv.  20 — 23)  of 
some  particulars  respecting  the  ancient  inha- 
bitants of  these  districts,  and  their  extermina- 
tion. 

20—23.  These  like  w.  10 — 12  (see 
note),  are  in  all  likelihood  an  addition  made 
by  a later  reviser.  See  the  Note  at  the  end 
of  the  chapter. 

20.  Zjamzummims]  A giant  race  usually 
identified,  from  the  similarity  of  name,  with 
the  Zuzims  of  Gen.  xiv.  5.  It  would  give 
probability  to  this  conjecture  if  we  could 
be  sure  that  the  ‘Ham’  of  that  verse  is  the 
name  of  the  chief  city  of  the  Zuzims  (see  note 
in  loc.);  since  ‘Ham’  might  then  be,  as 
Tuch,  Clark  (‘  Bible  Atlas,’  p.  8),  and  others 


V.  22—31.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  II. 


809 


t Heb. 
begin, 
possess. 


tall,  as  the  Anakims  j but  the  Lord 
destroyed  them  before  them ; and  they 
succeeded  them,  and  dwelt  in  their 
stead : 

22  As  he  did  to  the  children  of 
Esau,  which  dwelt  in  Seir,  when  he 
destroyed  the  Horims  from  before 
them  ; and  they  succeeded  them,  and 
dwelt  in  their  stead  even  unto  this 
day  : 

23  And  the  Avims  which  dwelt 
in  Hazerim,  even  unto  Azzah,  the 
Caphtorims,  which  came  forth  out  of 
Caphtor,  destroyed  them,  and  dwelt 
in  their  stead.) 

24  11  Rise  ye  up,  take  your  jour- 
ndy,  and  pass  over  the  river  Arnon  : 
behold,  I have  given  into  thine  hand 
Sihon  the  Amorite,  king  of  Heshbon, 
and  his  land : ^ begin  to  possess  zV, 
and  contend  with  him  in  battle. 

25  This  day  will  I begin  to  put 
the  dread  of  thee  and  the  fear  of  thee 
upon  the  nations  that  are  under  the 
whole  heaven,  who  shall  hear  report 
of  thee,  and  shall  tremble,  and  be  in 
anguish  because  of  thee. 


26  H And  I sent  messengers  out 
of  the  wilderness  of  Kedemoth  unto 
Sihon  king  of  Heshbon  with  words  of 
peace,  saying, 

27  ^Let  me  pass  through  thy  land:  ‘^Numb. 
I will  go  along  by  the  high  way,  I 

will  neither  turrt  unto  the  right  hand 
nor  to  the  left. 

28  Thou  shalt  sell  me  meat  for 
money,  that  I may  eat ; and  give 
me  water  for  money,  that  I may 
drink : 
my  feet 

29  (As  the  children  of  Esau  which 
dwell  in  Seir,  and  the  Moabites  which 
dwell  in  Ar,  did  unto  me;)  until  I 
shall  pass  over  Jordan  into  the  land 
which  the  Lord  our  God  giveth  us. 

30  But  Sihon  king  of  Heshbon 
would  not  let  us  pass  by  him : for  the 
Lord  thy  God  hardened  his  spirit, 
and  made  his  heart  obstinate,  that  he 
might  deliver  him  into  thy  hand,  as 
appeareth  this  day. 

31  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me. 
Behold,  I have  begun  to  give  Sihon 
and  his  land  before  thee  : begin  to 


only  I will  pass  through  on 


suppose,  the  root  of  the  name  given  to  the  chief 
city  of  the  Ammonites,  Rabbath- Ammon. 

23.  the  A^tms  <which  dvjelt  in  Haze~ 
rim,  even  unto  Azzah'\  Read  Gaza,  of  which 
Azzah  is  the  Hebrew  form.  “Hazerim”  is 
not  strictly  a proper  name,  but  means  “vil- 
lages,” or  “ enclosures,”  probably  such  as  are 
still  common  in  the  East.  A piece  of  ground 
is  surrounded  with  a rude  fence,  in  the  midst 
of  which  the  tents  may  be  pitched,  and  the 
cattle  tethered  at  night  in  safety  from  ma- 
rauders. The  'Avims  are  no  doubt  identical 
with  the  Avites  of  Joshua  xiii.  3,  and  possibly 
connected  with  the  Ava  of  1 Kings  xvii.  24. 
We  have  perhaps  another  trace  of  them  in 
Avim,  the  name  of  a Benjamite  town.  Josh, 
xviii.  23.  As  their  district  appears  to  have 
been  included  in  the  promise  (Josh,  xiii.)  it 
seems  probable  that  they  belonged  to  the  ori- 
ginal Canaanitish  population ; and  as  the  words 
“from  the  south,”  with  which  Josh.  xiii.  4 
begins,  belong  apparently  to  the  preceding 
verse,  it  would  appear  that  the  Avites  dwelt 
in  the  extreme  southern  district  of  the  land. 
Their  name  is  added  as  a sort  of  appendage 
in  this  passage  of  Joshua  to  those  of  the  five 
powerful  cities  which  formed  the  confederacy 
of  the  Philistines.  The  Avims  were  doubtless 
a scattered  remnant  of  a conquered  people 
living  in  their  “hazerim”  in  the  neighbour- 


hood of  Gerar.  The  word,  which  means 
“ruins,”  seems  itself  expressive  of  their  fallen 
estate. 

It  has  been  inferred,  from  the  mention  of 
the  Avites  in  Joshua  /.  r.,  that  their  conquest 
by  the  Caphtorims  cannot  have  taken  place 
till  the  days  of  the  Judges  at  the  earliest,  and 
that  the  passage  before  us  is  consequently  of 
later  date  than  Moses.  The  passage  has  in- 
deed the  appearance  of  a note  which  has  im- 
properly found  its  way  into  the  text : see  on  w. 
10 — 12.  But  it  is  unlikely  that  the  Caphto- 
rims, whenever  their  invasion  may  have  been, 
extirpated  the  Avites  utterly;  and  the  charac- 
ter of  the  notice  in  Joshua  xiii.  3,  4 suggests 
that  the  Avites  were  even  then  dependent  on 
the  Philistines  {i.e.  the  Caphtorims),  and  con- 
sequently that  the  conquest  had  taken  place 
long  before. 

LXX.  identifies  the  Avims  and  the  Hivites, 
rendering  both  Evaioi.  The  names  are  how- 
ever radically  different  in  Hebrew. 

the  Caphtorims]  See  note  on  Gen.  x.  14. 

26.  Kedemoth]  This  town  was  after- 
wards assigned  to  the  Reubenites  (Josh.  xiii. 
18):  it  was  (i  Chron.  vi.  79)  one  of  thecities 
out  of  that  tribe  given  to  the  Levites.  Its 
name  signifies  “easternmost  parts.” 

29.  Cf.  xxiii.  3,  4,  and  note. 


8io 


DEUTERONOMY.  II.  E- 32-37. 


possess,  that  thou  mayest  inherit  his 
land. 

^Numb.  22  ^Then  Sihon  came  out  against 
us,  he  and  all  his  people,  to  light  at 
Jahaz. 

33  And  the  Lord  our  God  de- 
livered him  before  us  ; and  we  smote 
him,  and  his  sons,  and  all  his  people. 

34  And  we  took  all  his  cities  at 
tHeb.  that  time,  and  utterly  destroyed  ^the 

men,  and  the  women,  and  the  little 
ones,  of  every  city,  we  left  none  to 
liiiic  ones,  remain  : 

35  Only  the  cattle  we  took  for  a 


prey  unto  ourselves,  and  the  spoil  of 
the  cities  which  we  took. 

36  From  Aroer,  which  is  by  the 
brink  of  the  river  of  Arnon,  and 
from  the  city  that  is  by  the  river, 
even  unto  Gilead,  there  was  ngt  one 
city  too  strong  for  us  : the  Lord  our 
God  delivered  all  unto  us  : 

37  Only  unto  the  land  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Ammon  thou  earnest  not,  nor 
unto  any  place  of  the  river  Jabbok, 
nor  unto  the  cities  in  the  mountains, 
nor  unto  whatsoever  the  Lord  our 
God  forbad  us. 


34.  utterly  destroyed  the  men.,  and  the 
<rjoomen,  and  the  little  ones,  ofe'very  city~\  Ren- 
der, laid  under  ban  every  inhabited 
city,  both  -women  and  children.  See 
Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

36.  Aroer,  <^johich  is  hy  the  brink  of  the  river 
of  Arnon~\  Aroer  stood  on  the  north  bank  of 
the  river,  and  was  assigned  (Josh.  xiii.  9,  16) 
to  the  tribe  of  Reuben,  of  which  it  formed  the 
most  southerly  city.  Burckhardt  in  1852 
found  the  ruins,  which  still  bear  the  name 
Ara'yr,  on  the  edge  of  a cliff  overlooking  the 
river.  ‘Travels,’  pp.  372 — 374.  Mesha  in 
the  26th  line  of  the  Moabite  stone  records 
that  “he  built  Aroer  and  made  the  road  over 
the  Arnon.”  No  doubt  the  city  was  restored 
and  probably  re-fortified  by  ^^esha  after  his 
successes  over  king  Ahaziah.  If  the  latter 
words  of  the  line  above  quoted  are  correctly 
interpreted  by  Nbldeke,  Ginsburg,  &c.,  as 
importing  that  Mesha  bridged  over  the  valley 
of  the  Anion  at  this  place,  the  work  was  a 


gigantic  one.  The  width  across  is  grefet  (it 
is  described  by  Burckhardt  as  “about  two 
hours”);  the  valley  is  deep,  and  the  descent  to 
it  abrupt.  In  Roman  times  it  was  spanned  by 
a viaduct  the  ruins  of  which  still  remain,  and 
which  was  probably  built  on  the  lines  of  the 
original  structure  of  Mesha.  It  must  not  be 
confounded  with  “Aroer,  which  is  before 
Rabbah”  (Josh.  xiii.  25).  This  latter  place 
was  “built,”  i.e.  rebuilt,  by  the  Gadites 
(Num.  xxxii.  34);  belonged  to  that  tribe; 
and  was  consequently  far  to  the  north  of  the 
Arnon.  A third  Aroer  in  the  tribe  of  Judah 
is  mentioned  i Sam.  xxx.  28. 

and  from  the  city  that  is  by  the  rlver~\ 
Literally,  “in  the  river.”  The  situation  is 
m.ore  distinctly  described  Joshua  xiii.  9,  16, 
as  “/«  the  midst  oi  the  river.”  The  words 
are  not  a further  description  of  Aroer,  which 
was  on  the  brink  of  the  valley,  not  in  the 
midst  of  it.  They  point  to  Ar  Moab,  named 
in  V.  18,  which  is  “the  dwelling  of  Ar”  of 
Num.  xxi.  15 ; where  see  note  and  reff. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  ir.  10 — 12,  20 — 23,  and  34.  . 


The  two  groups  of  ethnological  notices 
contained  in  these  passages  have  been  long 
ago  suspected  to  be  insertions  from  a later 
hand:  so  Kennicott,  Geddes,  Boothroyd;  and 
see  Rosenm.  in  loc.  The  reasons  for  this 
opinion  are  certainly  weighty. 

(i)  The  removal  of  both  from  the  narra- 
tive not  only  does  not  injure  it,  but  greatly 
add  to  its  directness  and  effectiveness.  It  is 
impossible  not  to  see  that  2;.  13  closely  be- 
longs to  V.  9,  and  when  the  two  are  read 
consecutively  it  is  difficult  to  escape  the  con- 
viction that  that  was  their  original  relation. 
The  A.  V.  indeed  unwarrantably  attributes 
the  order  given  in  v.  13  to  Moses  by  inter- 
polating the  words  “said  I.”  But  v.  13 
clearly  gives  the  close  of  the  Divine  behest 
begun  in  v.  9.  Similarly  the  w.  20 — 23  in- 


terrupt, not  quite  so  harshly  but  as  manifestly, 
a similar  direction  of  God  to  Moses  com- 
menced in  w.  17  sqq.,  and  of  which  w.  24, 
25  are  the  conclusion.  They  are  properly 
marked  in  A.  V.  as  parenthetic:  but  it  is 
certainly  little  after  the  manner  of  Moses  to 
break  in  upon  the  communications  of  God  to 
him  with  parentheses;  and  it  seems  somewhat 
unsuitable  to  regard  these  fragments  of  ancient 
history  as  portions  of  what  God  revealed. 

(2)  The  words  “as  Israel  did  unto  the 
land  of  his  possession,”  taken  in  their  natural 
sense,  refer  to  the  conquest  of  Canaan  as  a 
past  transaction.  The  explanations  offered, 
e.g.  that  the  passage  is  prophetical,  that  it 
refers  to  the  territories  of  Sihon  and  Og  only, 
&c.,  are  not  satisfactory. 

(3)  The  observation  that  the  w.  in  qiies- 


DEUTERONOMY.  III. 


8ii 


V.  1—4] 


tion  are  germane  to  the  purpose  of  the  narra- 
tive is  true,  but  does  not  of  itself  prove  that 
they  formed  originally  integral  portions  of  it. 
Fv.  10 — I a are  obviously  introduced  in  ex- 
planation of  the  statement  that  “ Ar  was 
given  to  the  children  of  Lot.”  God  destroyed 
from  before  the  children  of  Lot  mighty  na- 
tions, as  He  did  the  nations  of  Canaan  before 
the  Israelites,  Therefore  the  Israelites  were 
not  to  disturb  the  Moabites,  who  had  the 
same  title  to  Ar  as  Israel  to  Canaan.  Like 
reasons  are  adduced,  ‘vv.  ao — 23,  for  not 
molesting  the  Ammonites,  But  the  reasons 
are  antiquarian  details  which  could  hardly  be 
necessary  for  Moses  and  his  contemporaries, 
but  are  exactly  such  as  a later  and  learned 
historian  would  desire  to  put  on  record  by 
way  of  confirming  and  illustrating  the  general 
assertion  of  ‘v'v.  9 and  19,  that  God  had 
“given  their  land  to  the  children  of  Lot,” 

(4)  It  is  evident  however  that  the  two 
sets  of  if  introduced  long  after  the  days 
of  Moses,  were  not  intended  to  be  passed  off 
as  part  of  the  original  text.  No  attempt  was 
made  to  interweave  them  closely  into  the 
context,  or  to  accommodate  the  phraseology 
of  them  to  the  circumstances  of  the  fortieth 
year  after  the  exodus.  They  contain  exactly 
such  matter  as  a modern  editor  might  have 
given  in  explanatory  foot-notes:  but  which 
a Jewish  reviser,  if  duly  authorized,  would 
feel  warranted  in  writing  along  with  his  text. 
Substantially  then  we  may  regard  them  as 
glosses,  perhaps  contributed  by  Ezra, 

34,  The  A.V.  renders  here,  “utterly  de- 
stroyed the  men,  and  the  women,  and  the  little 
ones  of  every  city,”  The  interpretation  of  the 
passage  turns  upon  (i)  the  proper  sense  of 
the  word  QflD ; (2)  the  true  syntax.  In 
neither  particular  can  the  decision  arrived  at 
by  our  translators  be  now  maintained. 

For  (i)  DriD  is  obviously  connected  with 
n'lfO,  and  does  not  mean  adult  males  as  dis- 
tinct from  other  human  beings,  but  “mor- 
tals,” “ men,”  generally.  Indeed  in  the 


present  text  the  adult  males  seem  excluded  by 
the  nature  of  the  case,  for  they  had  perished 
in  battle,  'v.  33,  and  the  special  aim  of  the 
verse  is  to  record  how  fhe  Israelites  completed 
the  work  of  slaughter  by  afterwards  destroy- 
ing the  non-combatants.  The  word  occurs 
again  in  a strictly  parallel  passage,  iii,  6,  The 
A,  V.  has  rendered  the  word  correctly  in 
Job  xxiv,  12  (“Men  groan  from  out  of  the 
city”),  though  there  too  (as  here)  it  should 
be  taken  as  dependent  upon  “I'y,  and  the 
passage  rendered  ‘ ‘ from  the  city  of  men  (/.  e. 
the  inhabited  city)  they  raise  a cry,”  In 
Judg,  XX,  48  the  word  occurs  with  a different 
punctuation  in  a context  similar  in  tenor  to 
Dent,  ii,  34,  iii.  6,  and  describing  the  utter 
destruction  of  the  Benjamites,  But  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  the  pointing  of  DFID  there 
ought  to  be  the  same  as  it  is  here,  and  in- 
deed (cf.  Rosenm,,  Gesen.)  the  Peshito,  many 
ancient  editions,  and  some  MSS.  so  exhibit 
it.  The  LXX.  has  one  and  the  same  rendering 
for  the  word  in  the  three  passages:  i.e.  i^rjs. 
In  the  passage  before  us  the  LXX.  renders 
€^(o\odf)€vcraixev  Tracrav  ttoXiv  e^fjs  Ka\  ras 
yvvaiKas  Kal  ra  reKua,  and  reads  apparently 
Dhp  in  all  three  cases,  regarding  it  as  a 
substantive  =“  integritas  ” (connected  with 
DDJl,  see  Furst,  s.  v.  DFID).  The  occurrence 
of  the  word  four  times  in  construction  with 
"I'y  is  noteworthy.  The  phrase  seems  to  have 
been  a common  one,  and  the  sense,  “ city  of 
mortals,”  Le.'  “inhabited  city,”  is  apposite 
and  etymologically  satisfactory,  (So  after 
some  discussion  Gesen,  eventually  renders, 

. ‘Thes,’  s,  V,  DFlD:  and  Wogue,) 

But  (2)  the  A,  V,  in  Deut,  ii,  34,  iii,  6, 
has  disregarded  the  true  syntax.  The  three 
nouns  DADj  flLDn  are  certainly  not 

coordinate.  The  omission  of  the  article  with 
the  first  of  them,  and  its  insertion  before  the 
other  two,  shows  this,  as  does  also  the  ac- 
centuation, The  sense  therefore  clearly  is, 
“we  destroyed  every  inhabited  city,  both 
women  and  little  ones ; ” the  latter  clause 
being  added  by  way  of  fuller  explanation. 


CHAPTER  III. 

I T/ie  sto7y  of  the  conquest  of  Og  king  of  Bashan. 
II  The  bigness  of  his  bed.  12  The  distribu- 
tion of  those  lands  to  the  two  tribes  and  half 
23  Moses'  prayer  to  enter  into  the  land.  26 
lie  is  permitted  to  see  it. 

Then  we  turned,  and  went  up 
the  way  to  Bashan  : and  ^ Og 
chap.^g.*^’  the  king  of  Bashan  came  out  against 
7-  us,  he  and  all  his  people,  to  battle  at 

Edrei. 

2  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me. 
Fear  him  not : for  I will  deliver  him, 


and  all  his  people,  and  his  land,  into 
thy  hand ; and  thou  shaft  do  unto 
him  as  thou  didst  unto  ^ Sihon  king  * Numb, 
of  the  Amorites,  which  dwelt  at  Hesh- 
bon. 

3 So  the  Lord  our  God  delivered 

into  our  hands  Og  also,  the  king  of  ^ Numb. 
Bashan,  and  all  his  people  : and  we 
smote  him  until  none  was  left  to  him 
remainino;. 

4 And  we  took  all  his  cities  at 
that  time,  there  was  not  a city  which 
we  took  not  from  them,  threescore 


8i2 


DEUTERONOMY.  III. 


[v-  5—7- 


cities,  all  the  region  of  Argob,  the 
kingdom  of  Og  in  Bashan. 

5  All  these  cities  were  fenced  with 
high  walls,  gates,  and  bars ; beside 
unwalled  towns  a great  many. 


6 And  we  utterly  destroyed  them, 
as  we  did  unto  Sihon  king  of  Hesh- 
bon,  utterly  destroying  the  men,  wo- 
men, and  children,  of  every  city. 

7 But  all  the  cattle,  and  the  spoil 


Chap.  III.  4.  threescore  c-ities~\  Cf. 

12 — 15.  No  doubt  these  are  identical  with  the 
“ Bashan-havoth-jair,”  i.e.  cities  of  Jair  in 
Bashan,  of  ‘u.  14 : and  with  “the  towns  of  Jair” 
in  Bashan  of  the  same  number  in  Josh.  xiii.  30 ; 
I K.  iv.  13 ; and  i Chr.  xi.  23.  See  on  Num. 
xxxii.  41. 

all  the  region  of  Argolf  The  Hebrew  word 
here  rendered  “ region,”  means  literally  rope 
or  cable;  and  though  undoubtedly  used  else- 
where in  a general  topographical  sense  for 
portion  or  district  {e^g.  Josh.  xvii.  5),  has  a 
special  propriety  in  reference  to  Argob,  with 
which  it  is  connected  wherever  that  term  is 
used,  i.e.  in  this  ‘u.,  and  in  'w.  13  and  14, 
and  I K.  iv.  13.  The  name  Argob  means 
(according  to  Gesen.)  stone-heap.,  and  is  para- 
phrased by  the  Targums,  Trachonitis.,  or  “the 
rough  country ; ” both  titles,  like  the  modern 
Lejah.,  designating,  with  the  wonted  vigour 
of  Hebrew  topographical  terms,  the  more 
striking  features  of  the  district.  The  Argob 
is  described  as  an  island  of  black  basaltic 
rock,  oval  in  form,  measuring  sixty  miles  by 
twenty,  rising  abruptly  to  the  height  of  from 
twenty  to  thirty  feet  from  the  surrounding 
plains  of  Bashan.  Its  borders  are  compared 
to  a rugged  shore-line ; hence  its  description 
in  the  text  as  “ the  girdle  of  the  stony 
country,”  would  seem  peculiarly  appropriate. 

“The  physical  features  of  the  Lejali,”  says 
Porter  (‘Travels,’  ii.  pp.  241,  242),  “present 
the  most  singular  phenomena  I have  ever 
witnessed.  It  is  wholly  composed  of  black 
basalt  rock,  which  appears  to  have  in  past 
ages  issued  from  innumerable  pores  in  the 
earth  in  a liquid  state,  and  to  have  flowed  out 
on  every  side  until  the  plain  was  almost 
covered.  Before  cooling,  its  surface  was  agi- 
tated by  some  fearful  tempest  or  other  such 
agency;  and  it  was  afterwards  shattered  and 
rent  by  internal  convulsions  and  vibrations. 
'I'he  cup-like  cavities  from  which  the  liquid 
mass  was  projected  are  still  seen ; and  like- 
wise the  wavy  surface  a thick  liquid  generally 
assumes  which  cools  while  flowing.  There 
are  in  many  places  deep  fissures  and  yawning 
gulfs,  with  rugged  broken  edges,  while  in 
other  places  are  jagged  heaps  of  rock  that 
seem  not  to  have  been  sufficiently  heated  to 
flow,  but  were  forced  upward  by  a mighty 
agency,  and  rent  and  shattered  to  their  centre. 
The  rock  is  filled  with  little  pits  and  pro- 
tuberances like  air-bubbles:  it  is  as  hard  as 
flint,  and  emits  a sharp  metallic  sound  when 
struck.”  Yet  “this  forbidding  region  is 
thickly  studded  with  deserted  cities  and  vil- 


lages,” and  many  of  them,  from  theextraordi- 
dinary  solidity  of  their  structure,  are  still 
standing  almost  uninjured.  See  a paper  by 
Mr  C.  G.  Graham  “On  the  Ancient  Bashan 
and  the  cities  of  Og,”  in  ‘ Cambridge  Essays 
for  1858.’  The  rocky  labyrinth  of  the  Argob 
in  fact  offers  natural  fastnesses  which  are 
almost  impregnable,  and  which  compensated, 
by  the  security  they  offered,  for  the  many  in- 
conveniences of  the  site. 

5.  All  these  cities  auere  fenced  <with  high 
'Walls.,  gates.,  and  bars~\  Lit.  “double  gates  and 
a bar.”  The  stone  doors  of  Bashan,  whether 
as  ancient  as  the  days  of  Og  or  not,  have 
excited  the  amazement  of  every  traveller  who 
has  visited  the  country.  “ The  streets  are  per- 
fect,” says  Mr  Graham,  ‘ Cambridge  Essays 
for  1858,’  p.  160,  “the  walls  perfect,  and,  what 
seems  most  astonishing,  the  stone  doors  are 
still  hanging  on  their  hinges,  so  little  im- 
pression has  been  made  during  these  many 
centuries  on  the  hard  and  durable  stone  of 
which  they  were  built.”  The  doors  are  de- 
scribed by  Mr  Porter  (‘Travels,’  11.  22,  23), 
as  “formed  of  slabs  of  stone,  opening  , on 
pivots  which  are  projecting  parts  of  the  stone 
itself,  and  working  in  sockets  in  the  lintel  and 
threshold.”  He  mentions  one,  in  a house, 
“ so  large  that  camels  could  go  in  and  out 
with  ease.”  The  height  of  the  doors  in  general 
points  to  a race  of  great  stature.  Mr  Graham 
remarks  (/.  r.),  “ We  could  not  help  being 
impressed  with  the  belief  that  had  we  never 
known  anything  of  the  early  portion  of  Scrip- 
ture history  before  visiting  this  country,  we 
should  have  been  forced  to  the  conclusion 
that  its  original  inhabitants,  the  people  who 
had  constructed  these  cities,  were  not  only  a 
powerful  and  mighty  nation,  but  individuals  of 
greater  strength  than  ourselves.”  Mr  Graham 
remarks  “on  the  crowding  together  of  the 
towns”  as  “ one  of  the  first  peculiarities” 
which  he  remarked  in  visiting  the  district. 
A recent  traveller,  Mr  D.  W.  Freshfield 
(‘Travels  in  the  Central  Caucasus,’  &c. 
London,  1869),  has  indeed  called  in  question 
the  correctness  of  the  conclusions  arrived  at 
by  Mr  Porter  and  xMr  Graham  respecting  the 
age  and  origin  of  these  cities.  But  his  ex- 
amination of  them  seems  to  have  been  but 
hurried,  and  he  himself  admits  the  great 
antiejuity  of  some  of  the  buildings.  Many 
of  them,  especially  in  the  larger  towns,  which 
were  those  visited  by  Mr  Freshfield,  have  evi- 
dently been  altered  in  comparatively  modern 
times,  and  others  erected  beside  and  amongst 
them.  These  facts  sufficiently  explain  the 


V.  8 — II.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  III. 


813 


of  the  cities,  we  took  for  a prey  to 
ourselves. 

8 And  we  took  at  that  time  out 
of  the  hand  of  the  two  kings  of  the 
Amorites  the  land  that  was  on  this 
side  Jordan,  from  the  river  of  Arnon 
unto  mount  Hermon  ; 

9 {Which  Hermon  the  Sidonians 


call  Sirion ; and  the  Amorites  call 
it  Shenir;) 

10  All  the  cities  of  the  plain,  and 
all  Gilead,  and  all  Bashan,  unto  Sal- 
chah  and  Edrei,  cities  of  the  kingdom 
of  Og  in  Bashan. 

11  For  only  Og  king  of  Bashan 
remained  of  the  remnant  of  giants  ; 


occurrence  amongst  the  remains  of  Greek  in- 
scriptions and  Saracenic  ornaments,  as  has 
been  pointed  out  by  Mr  Porter  in  the  Preface 
to  his  second  edition  of  ‘ Five  Years  in 
Damascus’  (London,  1870);  in  which  (under 
date  March,  1870)  he  makes  some  strictures 
on  Mr  Freshfield’s  remarks. 

The  -w.  before  us  then,  far  from  reflecting, 
as  some  have  fancied,  the  tone  of  one  speaking 
as  of  events  in  a far  distant  past,  represent  the 
lively  impressions  made  by  the  spectacle  of  a 
memorable  victory  won  in  a very  remarkable 
territory.  Before  they  approached  Edrei  the 
Israelites  had  traversed  either  a lim.estone  dis- 
trict where  the  abodes  of  men  were  often 
artificial  caves,  or  a rich  pasture  land  such  as 
the  plains  destitute  of  rock  and  stones,  which 
stretch  to  the  foot  of  the  Argob.  All  at 
once  they  came  on  the  marvellous  barrier  of 
rocks  amidst  which  Edrei  and  the  other  of 
the  sixty  cities  were  perched;  built  of  black 
stone  as  hard  as  iron,  defended  by  the  Re- 
phaim,  and  ruled  over  by  the  giant-king  Og. 
Had  Og  remained  within  his  fortifications  it 
was  humanly  speaking  impossible  for  the 
Israelites  to  have  vanquished  him.  Such  was 
the  dread  he  Inspired,  that  God  {y.  2)  gave 
special  encouragement  to  Moses,  “Fear  him 
not.”  It  would  seem  (Joshua  xxiv.  12)  that 
the  hornet  was  sent  into  these  impregnable 
cities  by  God,  and  so  Og  and  his  people 
were  driven  forth  into  the  open  field  (2^  i), 
where  they  were  overthrown  by  Moses  and 
the  Israelites  in  a pitched  battle  opposite  Edrei. 
This  signal  victory  and  its  circumstances 
evidently  impressed  the  people  deeply  at  this 
time,  and  its  memory,  as  the  Psalms  attest, 
lingered  for  ages  after  in  the  national  mind. 

9.  Which  Hermon  the  Sidonians  call  Sirion ; 
and  the  Amorites  call  it  Shenir']  Hermon  is 
the  southern  and  culminating  point  of  the 
range  of  Lebanon.  “It  is  both  physically 
and  politically  a grand  central  point  in  the 
geography  of  Syria  and  Palestine.  From  it 
are  derived  all  the  most  noted  rivers — the 
Jordan,  whose  fountains  are  fed  by  its  eternal 
snows;  the  Abana  and  Pharpar,  ‘rivers  of 
Damascus;’  the  O routes,  which  swept  past  the 
walls  of  the  classic  and  Christian  Antioch; 
and  the  Leontes.  All  the  great  ancient  king- 
doms of  the  country  also  converged  at  Her- 
mon— Bashan,  Damascus,  Syria,  Israel.  It 
was  also  the  religious  centre  of  primseval 
VoL.  I. 


Syria.  Its  Baal  sanctuaries  not  only  existed 
but  gave  it  a name  before  the  Exodus.”  (Porter 
in  Kitto’s  ‘ Encycl.’  sub  voce  Hermon.)  Hence 
the  careful  specification  of  the  various  names 
by  which  the  mountain  was  known.  The 
Sidonian  name  of  it  might  easily  have  become 
known  to  Moses  through  the  constant  traffic 
which  had  gone  on  from  the  most  ancient 
times  between  Sidon  and  Egypt.  Syria  was 
repeatedly  traversed  in  all  directions  by  the 
Egyptian  armies  from  the  accession  of  the  1 8th 
dynasty  downiwards.  The  transcription  of 
Semitic  words  in  the  papyri  of  the  19th 
dynasty  is  remarkably  complete.  Dean  Stanley 
observes,  ‘Sinai  and  Palestine,’  pp.  403,  404,. 
“ The  several  names  in  the  text,  as  also  that 
of  Sion,  iv.  48,  and  not  less  the  miodern. 
appellations  of  it,  are  all  descriptive.  Rising 
with  its  grey  snow-capped  cone  to  a height  of 
about  9500  feet  it  is  visible  from  most  parts, 
of  the  promised  land,  and  even  from  the 
depths  of  the  Jordan  valley  and  the  shores  of 
the  Dead  Sea.  Hence  it  was  Sion  ‘ the  up- 
raised ; ’ or  ‘ Hermon  ’ ‘ the  lofty  peak ; ’ or 
‘ Shenir’  and  ‘ Sirion,’  the  glittering  ‘ breast- 
plate’ of  ice;  or  above  all,  ‘Lebanon’  the 
‘Mont  Blanc’  of  Palestine;  the  ‘White 
Mountain’  of  ancient  times;  the  mountain  of 
the  ‘Old  White-headed  Man’  (Jebel  es 
Sheykh),  or  ‘the  mountain  of  ice’  (Jebel  eth 
Tilj),  in  modern  times.” 

10.  Salchald]  Cf.  Josh.  xii.  5;  i Chr.  v. 
II,  where  it  is  named  as  belonging  to  the  tribe 
of  Gad.  The  modern  Salchah  of  Burck- 
hardt;  Sarchad  of  Robinson;  Sulkhad  of 
Porter,  who  visited  it  in  1853,  describes 
it,  ‘ Five  ^ears  in  Damascus,’  2nd  edit.  pp.  248 
sqq.,  lies  seven  hours’  journey  to  the  south- 
east of  Bostra  or  Bozrah  of  Moa.b.  As  the 
eastern  border  city  of  the  kingdom  of  Bashan 
it  was  no  doubt  strongly  fortified.  Mr  Graham 
describes  it  in  ‘ Cambridge  Essays  for  1858,’ 
p.  156:  “Above  the  town,  and  built  upon 
a hill,  one  of  the  last  otf-shoots  from  the 
mountains  of  Bashan,  is  a strong  castle,  which 
occupies  one  of  the  most  commanding  posi- 
tions imaginable.  It  is  just  on  the  very  edge 
of  the  Desert,  and  a foe  from  whichever 
direction  he  might  come  could  be  seen  almost 
a day’s  journey  off.” 

Edrei]  Cf.  on  Num.  xxi.  33. 

11.  of  the  remnant  of  giants]  OrP.ephaim: 
see  on  -Gen.  xiv.  5 and  xv.  20. 

3 F 


8i4 


DEUTERONOMY.  III. 


[v.  12—14. 


« Numb. 
32.  3.3- 
Josh.  13. 
d:c. 


behold,  his  bedstead  was  a bedstead 
of  iron  ; is  it  not  in  Rabbath  of  the 
children  of  Ammon  ? nine  cubits  was 
the  length  thereof,  and  four  cubits 
the  breadth  of  it,  after  the  cubit  of 
a man. 

12  And  this  land,  which  we  pos- 
sessed at  that  time,  from  Aroer,  which 
is  by  the  river  Arnon,  and  half  mount 
Gilead,  and  ^the  cities  thereof,  gave 
8,  I unto  the  Reubenites  and  to  the 
Gadites. 


13  And  the  rest  of  Gilead,  and 
all  Bashan,  being  the  kingdom  of  Og, 
gave  I unto  the  half  tribe  of  Ma- 
nasseh  ; all  the  region  of  Argob,  with 
all  Bashan,  which  was  called  the  land 
of  giants. 

14  Jair  the  son  of  Manasseh  took 
all  the  country  of  Argob  unto  the 
coasts  of  Geshuri  and  Maachathi; 
and  called  them  after  his  own 
name,  Bashan-^ havoth-jair,  unto  this ‘'Numb. 

1 32.  4^- 


a bedstead  of  iron]  The  “iron”  was  pro- 
bably the  black  basalt  (“  eisenstein  ”)  of  the 
country,  which  not  only  contains  a large  pro- 
portion, about  20  per  cent.,  of  iron,  but  was 
actually  called  iron,  and  is  still  so  regarded 
by  the  Arabians.  So  too  Pliny,  ‘ Nat.  Hist.’ 
xxxvi.  II : “Invenit  Egyptus  in  Ethiopia 
quern  vocant  basalten  ferrei  coloris  atque  du- 
ritios.  Unde  et  nomen  ei  dedit.”  Iron  was 
indeed  both  known  and  used,  principally  for 
tools  (see  e.g.  xix.  5 and  note),  at  the  date  in 
question  by  the  Semitic  people  of  Palestine 
and  the  adjoining  countries ; see  Wilkinson, 

‘ A.  E.’  II.  pp.  154  sqq.,  Rougemont,  ‘ L’ Age 
du  Bronze,’  p.  189  ; but  bronze  was  the 
ordinary  metal  of  which  weapons,  articles  of 
furniture,  &c.  were  made. 

The  word  translated  “bedstead”  (eres)  is 
derived  from  a root  signifying  “to  unite”  or 
“ bind  together,”  and  so  “ to  arch”  or  “cover 
with  a vault.”  Its  cognate  forms  in  Arabic 
and  Syriac  have  parallel  significations.  The 
word  may  then  certainly  mean  “bier,”  and 
perhaps  does  so  in  this  passage.  (So  Knob., 
Winer,  Von  Lengerke,  &c.)  Modern  tra- 
vellers have  discovered  in  the  territories  of 
Og  sarcophagi  as  well  as  many  other  articles 
made  of  tJie  black  basalt  of  the  country. 

is  it  not  in  Rabbath  of  the  children  of  Am- 
mon?] Probably  after  the  defeat  and  death  of 
Og  at  Edrei  the  remnant  of  his  army  fled 
into  the  territory  of  the  friendly  Ammonites, 
and  carried^  with  them  the  corpse  of  the  giant 
king.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  from 
nj.  3 (cf.  Num.  xxi.  35)  that  there  were  abso- 
lutely no  survivors  at  all  of  Og’s  people. 
Rabbah  was  not  captured  by  the  Israelites 
till  the  time  of  David,  2 Sam.  xii.  29 ; but  it 
is  not  likely  that  this  remarkable  relic  would 
remain  at  Rabbah  unknown  to  them.  There 
is  no  necessity  to  suppose,  with  Ewald,  that 
the  Ammonites  were  allies  of  Israel  against 
Og;  nor,  with  Schultz,  that  they  took  the 
opportunity  of  making  an  inroad  on  Og’s 
territory  on  the  flank  whilst  he  was  engaged 
with  Israel  in  front. 

after  the  cubit  of  a man.]  i.e.  after  the 


usual  and  ordinary  cubit.  Cf.  Is.  viii.  i, 
“ take  thee  a roll,  and  write  in  it  with  a man’s 
pen,”  Rev. xxi.  17,  “a  hundred  and  forty  and 
four  cubits,  according  to  the  measure  of  a 
man i.  e.  counted  as  men  are  wont  to 
count.  The  words  are  added  to  the  number 
of  cubits  in  order  to  exclude  the  idea  that  a 
smaller  cubit  than  usual  was  intended.  The 
bedstead  or  sarcophagus  would  thus  be  from 
thirteen  to  fourteen  feet  long;  but  was  of 
course  considerably  larger  than  the  body  of 
the  man  for  whom  it  was  designed. 

14.  of  Geshuri  and  Maachathi]  Render, 
of  the  Geshurite  and  Maachathite; 
and  see  Josh.  xii.  5 and  xiii.  ii. 

The  Geshurites  here  mentioned  are  not  to 
be  confounded  with  those  mentioned  in  Jo- 
shua xiii.  2,  who,  as  appears  from  that  place, 
and  more  clearly  from  i Sam.  xvii.  8,  were 
neighbours  of  the  Philistines.  The  Geshur- 
ites here  in  question  are  frequently  named  in 
connection  with  Bashan,  and  their  territory, 
if  not  included  within  Bashan,  evidently  ad- 
joined it.  Though  (i  Chron.  ii.  23)  Jair  the 
son  of  Manasseh  “took  Geshur,”  yet  (Josh, 
xiii.  13)  the  Geshurites  were  not  expelled,  but 
dwelt  among  the  Israelites.  Probably  they 
occupied  some  corner  of  the  impregnable 
district  of  Argob,  with  which  they  are  here 
connected.  Hence  we  read  (2  Sam.  xv.  8)  of 
“ Geshur  in  Aram”  or  “in  the  high  ground,” 
rendered  in  A.  V.  Syria.  The  Geshurites  main- 
tained themselves,  probably  as  a tributary 
principality,  even  in  the  times  of  the  kings. 
David  married  Maachah  “the  daughter  of 
Talmai  king  of  Geshur”  (2  Sam.  iii.  3),  and 
was  by  her  the  father  of  Absalom. 

Maachathi]  The  mention  of  this  people 
both  here  and  in  Joshua  xii.  and  xiii.  /.  c. 
with  the  Geshurites  points  to  a connection 
between  the  peoples ; and  this,  since  the  name 
Maachah  was  borne  by  the  daughter  of  Talmai 
king  of  Geshur,  may  have  been  more  than  a 
local  one.  Like  Geshur,  Maachah  is  con- 
nected with  Aram  (i  Chron.  xix.  6,  7);  and 
had  a king  in  later  times  who  allied  himself 
with  the  Ammonites  against  David.  The 


V.  15—22.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  III. 


815 


15  And  I gave  Gilead  unto  Ma- 
ch ir. 

16  And  unto  the  Reubenites  and 
unto  the  Gadites  I gave  from  Gilead 
even  unto  the  river  Arnon  half  the 
valley,  and  the  border  even  unto  the 
river  Jabbok,  zvhich  is  the  border  of 
the  children  of  Ammon  ; 

17  The  plain  also,  and  Jordan,  and 
the  coast  thereof^  from  Chinnereth 
even  unto  the  sea  of  the  plain,  even 

" c>r,  the  salt  sea,  “ under  Ashdoth-pis^ah 

mider  ike  ’ o 

springs  of  eastward. 

18  ^ And  I commanded  you  at 

lull.  time,,  saying.  The  Lord  your 

God  hath  given  you  this  land  to  pos- 
/Numb.  gggg  jj. . /yg  shall  pass  over  armed 

32.  20,  J ^ 

before  your  brethren  the  children  of 
t Heb  Israel,  all  that  are  ^ meet  for  the  war. 
^o-jjer.  ig  But  your  wivcs,  and  your  little 


ones,  and  your  cattle,  (/br  I know 
that  ye  have  much  cattle,)  shall  abide 
in  your  cities  which  1 have  given  you 

20  Until  the  Lord  have  given 
rest  unto  your  brethren,  as  well  as 
unto  you,  and  anti/  they  also  pos- 
sess the  land  which  the  Lord  your 
God  hath  given  them  beyond  Jordan  : 
and  then  shall  ye  ^ return  every  man  ^ Josh.  22. 
unto  his  possession,  which  I have  given 

you. 

21  And  commanded  Joshua 

at  that  time,  saying.  Thine  eyes  have  ' 
seen  all  that  the  Lord  your  God  hath 
done  unto  these  two  kings  : so  shall 
the  Lord  do  unto  all  the  kingdoms 
whither  thou  passest. 

22  Ye  shall  not  fear  them:  for 
the  Lord  your  God  he  shall  fight  for 
you. 


eiact  position  of  Maachah  like  that  of  Ge- 
sl'.ur  cannot  be  ascertained ; but  was  no 
doubt  amongst  the  fastnesses  which  lay  be- 
tween Bashan  and  the  kingdom  of  Damas- 
cus, and  on  the  skirts  of  mount  Hermon. 

unto  this  day\  This  expression,  frequent 
in  Genesis,  is  not  found  in  Exodus  and 
the  two  following  books.  It  may  be  a 
gloss  inserted  here  by  an  after  hand,  but 
it  does  not  as  used  in  the  Bible  necessarily 
imply  that  the  time  spoken  of  as  elapsed  is 
long.  It  amounts  to  no  more  than  our  “ un- 
til now.”  In  Josh.  xxii.  3 it  denotes  the  few 
m.onths  during  which  the  two  tribes  and  a 
half  had  assisted  their  brethren  in  the  con- 
quest of  the  land  westward  of  Jordan:  and 
in  Josh,  xxiii.  9,  refers  to  the  period  that  had 
passed  from  the  beginning  of  the  victories  of 
the  Israelites  to  the  close  of  Joshua’s  life.  It 
may  then  be  used  in  the  text  to  denote  the 
duration  to  the  time  then  present  of  what 
had  been  already  some  months  accomplished. 
Moses  dwells,  -vn].  13,  14,  on  the  complete- 
ness of  that  part  of  the  conquest  which  had 
been  achieved ; and  winds  up  his  accumulation 
of  particulars,  “all  Bashan,”  “all  Argob,” 
&c.,  with  the  statement  that  Jair  had  so 
thoroughly  made  himself  master  of  the  cities 
of  the  district  as  that  they  were  now  currently 
known  by  his  name. 

16.  from  Gilead  e'ven  unto  the  ri'ver  Arnon 
half  the  noalley ^ and  the  border  even  unto  the 
river  Jabbok]  TThe  words  “and  the  border,” 
i.e.  “and  its  border,”  belong,  as  in  Num. 
xxxiv.  6,  to  the  preceding  context.  The  sense 
is  that  the  Reubenites  and  Gadites  were  to 
possess  the  district  from  the  Jabbok  on  the 


north  to  the  Arnon  on  the  south,  including 
the  middle  part  of  the  valley  of  the  Arnon, 
and  the  territory  (“coast”  or  “border”) 
thereto  pertaining.  I'hus  these  tribes  who  had 
“much  cattle,”  v.  19,  were  provided  with 
free  access  to  the  Avater,  and  with  the  valuable 
though  narrow  strip  of  green  pasture  along 
the  side  of  the  brook.  The  gorge  of  Arnon, 
about  eighty  miles  in  length,  is  for  the  most 
part  about  two  m.iles  wide.  So  in  the  next 
V.  the  words  “and  the  coast,”  lit.  “the 
boundary,”  are  added  similarly  to  the  Jordan, 
and  mean  that  the  valley  and  bank  on  their 
own  side  of  the  stream  were  included  in  the 
portion  of  the  two  tribes. 

the  border  of  the  children  of  Ammon]  The 
Jabbok  in  its  earlier  course  divided  the  two 
tribes  from  the  Ammonites,  in  its  later  from 
Bashan. 

17.  under  Ashdoth-pisgah]  It  is  doubt- 
ful whether  these  words  form  a proper  name 
or  not.  The  Avord  {ashdoth)  is  translated 
“springs”  iv.  49,  and  Josh.  x.  40  and  xii.  8, 
though  in  Josh.  xii.  3 it  is  again  treated  as 
a proper  name.  It  is  derived  from  a root 
signifying  “to  pour  forth,”  and  signifies  “the 
pourings  forth”  of  the  torrents,  i.e.  the  ravines 
down  which  the  torrents  find  their  way  to 
the  loAv  grounds.  Thus  the  words  may  signify 
“ under  the  slopes  of  Pisgah  towards  the  east,” 
and  are  added  to  define  somewhat  more  ac- 
curately the  portion  of  the  -Arabah  allotted  to 
the  two  tribes. 

On  “Pisgah”  or  '■'■the  Pisgah,”  for  the 
word  is  always  used  with  the  article,  and  may 
(as  marg.)  be  rendered  “the  hill:”  see  Num. 
xxi.  20. 


3 F 2 


8i6 


DEUTERONOMY.  III.  IV. 


[v.  23—1. 


* Numb. 
20.  12. 
chap.  I. 
37- 


nor, 
the  hill. 


23  And  I besought  the  Lord  at 
that  time,  saying, 

24.  O Lord  God,  thou  hast  begun 
to  shew  thy  servant  thy  greatness, 
and  thy  mighty  hand  : for  what  God 
is  there  in  heaven  or  in  earth,  that  can 
do  according  to  thy  works,  and  ac- 
cording to  thy  might  ? 

25  1 pray  thee,  let  me  go  over, 
and  see  the  good  land  that  is  beyond 
Jordan,  that  goodly  mountain,  and 
Lebanon. 

26  But  the  Lord  ^’was  wroth  with 
me  for  your  sakes,  and  would  not 
hear  me : and  the  Lord  said  unto 
me.  Let  it  suffice  thee ; speak  no 
more  unto  me  of  this  matter. 

27  Get  thee  up  into  the  top  of 
" Pisgah,  and  lift  up  thine  eyes  west- 


ward, and  northward,  and  southward, 
and  eastward,  and  behold  it  v/ith  thine 
eyes  : for  thou  shalt  not  go  over  this 
Jordan. 

28  But  charge  Joshua,  and  encou- 
rage him,  and  strengthen  him  : for  he 
shall  go  over  before  this  people,  and 
he  shall  cause  them  to  inherit  the  land 
which  thou  shalt  see. 

29  So  we  abode  in  the  valley  over 
against  Beth-peor. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

\ An  exhortation  to  obedience.  41  Moses  ap- 
pointeth  the  three  cities  of  refuge  on  that  side 
Jordan. 

N'  OW  therefore  hearken,  O Is- 
rael, unto  the  statutes  and  un- 
to the  judgments,  which  I teach  you, 
for  to  do  themj  that  ye  may  live,  and 


25.  that  goodly  mountain']  i.e.  that  moun- 
tainous district.  The  flat  districts  of  the  East 
are  generally  scorched,  destitute  of  water, 
and  therefore  sterile:  the  hilly  ones,  on  the 
contrary,  are  of  more  ternpered  climate,  and 
fertilized  by  the  streams  from  the  high 
grounds.  It  was,  more  especially  perhaps  to 
the  mind  of  one  who  had  wandered  so  long 
in  the  desert,  part  of  the  attractions  of  the 
promised  land  that  it  was  a mountain  coun- 
try. Cf.  xi.  II,  “but  the  land  whither  ye 
go  to  possess  it  is  a land  of  hills  and  valleys, 
and  drinketh  water  of  the  rain  of  heaven.” 

The  whole  of  this  prayer  of  Moses  is  very 
characteristic.  The  longing  to  witness  further 
manifestations  of  God’s  goodness  and  glory, 
and  the  reluctance  to  leave  unfinished  an  un- 
dertaking which  he  had  been  permitted  to 
commence,  are  striking  traits  in  his  charac- 
ter: cf.  Ex.  xxxii.  3Z  sq.,  xxxiii.  12,  18  sq. ; 
Num.  xiv.  12  sq. 

26.  the  Lord  ^joas  ^vroth  njoith  me  for 
your  sakes]  Here,  as  in  i.  37  and  iv.  21,  the  sin 
of  the  people  is  stated  to  be  the  ground  on 
which  Moses’  prayer  is  denied.  In  Num.  xxvii. 
14  and  in  Deut.  xxxii.  51  the  transgression 
of  Moses  and  Aaron  themselves  is  assigned 
as  the  cause  of  their  punishment.  Tlie  rea- 
son why  one  side  of  the  transaction  is  put 
forward  in  this  place,  and  the  other  else- 
where, is  evident.  Here  Moses  is  addressing 
the  people,  and  mentions  the  punishment  of 
their  leatlers  as  a most  impressive  warning  to 
them.  And  that  the  first  and  principal  fault 
was  with  the  people  is  clear.  Cf.  Num.  xx. 

I — 13;  and  on  ch.  i.  37,  38.  In  ch.  xxxii.  and 
Num.  xxvii.,  God  is  addressing  Moses,  and 
visits  on  him,  as  is  fitting,  not  the  sin  of  the 
people  but  his  own. 


29.  So  a.ve  abode  in  the  ‘valley  over  against 
Beth-peor]  Beth-peor,  i.e.  the  house  of  Peor, 
no  doubt  derived  its  name  from  a temple  ojf 
the  Moabite  god  Peor  which  was  there  situ- 
ated. It  was  no  doubt  near  to  Mount  Peor 
(Num.  xxiii.  28),  and  also  to  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan.  A notice  in  Eusebius  places  it 
in  the  Wady  Heshban,  which  has  yet  to 
be  explored  by  modern  travellers.  In  this 
valley  the  people  must  have  been  encamped 
some  time.  Here  it  w^as,  apparently,  that  the 
transactions  recorded  in  Num.  xxviii — xxxiv. 
took  place ; here  too  the  several  discourses  of 
Moses,  preserved  to  us  in  this  book,  were 
delivered ; and  somewhere  in  it  (xxxiv.  6)  he 
was  buried. 

The  V.  before  us  marks  a break  in  the 
discourse,  as  does  the  similar  verse  at  the  end 
of  ch.  ii.  Moses  hitherto  had  made  mention 
of  the  great  acts  of  God  on  behalf  of  his 
people,  and  reminded  them  of  their  own  ill 
return  for  His  mercies.  The  next  chapter, 
though  still  belonging  to  the  introductory 
portion  of  the  book,  passes  on  to  different 
topics. 

Chap.  IV.  After  thus  briefly  revievring 
the  past,  Moses  proceeds  in  the  present  chap- 
ter to  matter  of  a directly  didactic  and 
hortatory  kind.  His  topics  arise  clearly  and 
forcibly  out  of  the  historical  incidents  he  had 
been  rehearsing.  God  had  done  great  things 
for  the  people  in  the  way  both  of  mercies  and 
chastisements.  Their  duty  thenceforward,  and 
their  interest  also,  were  plain — to  abide  firmly 
by  the  covenant  into  which  they  had  entered 
with  Him.  “Now  therefore  hearken,  O Israel, 
unto  the  statutes,  &c.”  v.  i sqq.  This  gene- 
ral entreaty  is  pointed  by  special  mention  and 
enforcement  of  the  fundamental  principles  of 


V.  2 12.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  IV. 


817 


go  in  and  possess  the  land  which 
the  Lord  God  of  your  fathers  giveth 
you. 

« chap.  12.  2 "^Ye  shali  not  add  unto  the 

Josh  I 7.  word  which  I command  you,  nei- 
Prov.  30.  ther  shall  ye  diminish  ought  from  it, 
Rev.  22.  that  ye  may  keep  the  commandments 
of  the  Lord  your  God  which  I com- 
mand you. 

3 Your  eyes  have  seen  what  the 

because  of  ^ Baal-peor  : for 
all  the  men  that  followed  Baal-peor, 
the  LoPvD  thy  God  hath  destroyed 
them  from  among  you. 

4 But  ye  that  did  cleave  unto  the 
Lord  your  God  are  alive  every  one 
of  you  this  day. 

5 Behold,  I have  taught  you  sta- 
tutes and  judgments,  even  as  the 
Lord  my  God  commanded  me,  that 
ye  should  do  so  in  the  land  whither 
ye  go  to  possess  it. 

6 Keep  therefore  and  do  them; 
for  this  is  your  wisdom  and  your 
understanding  in  the  sight  of  the 
nations,  which  shall  hear  ail  these 
statutes,  and  say.  Surely  this  great 
nation  is  a wise  and  understanding 
people. 

7 For  what  nation  is  there  so  great, 


who  hath  God  so  nigh  unto  them,  as 
the  Lord  our  God  is  in  all  things  that 
we  call  upon  him  for? 

8 And  what  nation  is  there  so  great, 
that  hath  statutes  and  judgments  so 
righteous  as  all  this  law,  which  I set 
before  you  this  day 

9 Only  take  heed  to  thyself,  and' 
keep  thy  soul  diligently,  lest  thou 
forget  the  things  which  thine  eyes 
have  seen,  and  lest  they  depart  from 
thy  heart  all  the  days  of  thy  life  : 
but  teach  them  thy  sons,  and  thy 
sons’  sons  ; 

10  Specially  the  day  that  thou 
stoodest  before  the  Lord  thy  God 
in  Horeb,  when  the  Lord  said  unto 
me.  Gather  me  the  people  together, 
and  I will  make  them  hear  my  words, 
that  they  may  learn  to  fear  me  all 
the  days  that  they  shall  live  upon  the 
earth,  and  that  they  may  teach  their 
children. 

1 1 And  ye  came  near  and  stood 
under  the  mountain  ; and  the  “^moun- 
tain  burned  v/ith  hre  unto  the  ^ midst  t Heb. 
of  heaven,  with  darkness,  clouds,  and 
thick  darkness. 

12  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
you  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire : ve 


the  whole  covenant  (gvnj.  9 — 40),  the  spiritual 
nature  of  the  Deity,  His  exclusive  right  to 
their  allegiance,  His  abhorrence  of  idolatry 
in  every  form,  His  choice  of  them  for  His 
elect  people.  These  same  teachings  are  much 
more  copiously  and  elaborately  insisted  on  in 
Moses’  third  and  last  address  ch.  xxvii — xxx. 
(Cf.  Introd.  § li.);  and  appear  in  this  one  in 
the  form  of  prelude  and  introduction  to  the 
fuller  treatment  which  awaits  them  hereafter. 
Yet  they  follow  so  naturally  on  the  history 
just  narrated,  that  the  orator  could  not,  so  to 
say,  pass  from  it,  even  for  a 'time,  without 
pausing  to  urge  them,  through  a few  weighty 
sentences,  in  their  more  obvious  bearings. 

10,  11.  Render,  at  the  time  that  thou 
stoodest,  &c.  (ii)  then  ye  came  near, 
&c.  The  word  “specially”  is  needlessly 
introduced  in  the  A.  V.,  and  the  Hebrew 
word  rendered  “the  day”  is  merely  an  ad- 
verbial accusative;  equivalent  to  “at  what 
time;”  and  introduces  a new  sentence  which  is 
continued  in  the  'l’t.'.  ii — 13.  Moses,  exhort- 
ing to  heedful  observance  of  the  law,  strives 
to  renew  the  impressions  of  that  tremendous 


scene  which  attended  its  promulgation  at 
Sinai. 

12  sqq.  The  following  ‘vv.  are  designed 
to  proscribe  idolatry  in  all  its  manifestations. 
The  corrupt  worship  of  the  ancient  Oriental 
nations  may  probably  be  traced  back  in  its 
ultimate  analysis  to  two  roots  or  principles, 
the  deification  of  ancestors  or  national  leaders, 
and  veneration  of  the  powers  of  nature.  The 
former  is  perhaps  to  be  recognized  in  the 
idolatry  of  Terah  (Josh.  xxiv.  2);  of  Laban 
(Gen.  xxxi.  19,  30,  32);  and  of  Jacob's  house- 
hold (Gen.  XXXV.  2).  From  this  ancestral 
corruption  of  the  true  religion,  Abraham, 
“ the  father  of  the  faithful,”  was  probably 
called  away.  To  guard  against  it,  as  is  com- 
monly supposed,  the  sepulchre  of  Moses  was 
kept  secret  from  the  people:  (ch.  xxxiv.  6; 
but  see  note  in  loc.').  Not  unconnected  with 
this  tendency  to  hero-worship  was  perhaps 
the  idolatry  practised  in  reference  to  Gideon’s 
ephod  (Judg.  viii.  27);  the  worship  of  the 
brazen  serpent  in  later  times  (2  Kings  xviii.  4); 
and  the  teraphim  of  Micah  (Judg.  xvii.  4,  5). 
The  other  kind  of  idolatry,  nature-worship. 


8i8 


DEUTERONOMY.  IV. 


[v.  13— 21. 


tHeb. 
saz’e  a 
voice. 


heard  the  voice  of  the  vv^ords,  but 
saw  no  similitude  j • ^ only  ye  heard  a 
voice. 

13  And  he  declared  unto  you  his 
covenant,  which  he  commanded  you 
to  perform,  even  ten  commandments ; 
and  he  wrote  them  upon  two  tables 
of  stone. 

14  ^ And  the  Lord  commanded 
me  at  that  time  to  teach  you  sta- 
tutes and  judgments,  that  ye  might 
do  them  in  the  land  whither  ye  go 
over  to  possess  it. 

15  Take  ye  therefore  good  heed 
unto  yourselves  ; for  ye  saw  no  man- 
ner of  similitude  on  the  day  that  the 
Lord  spake  unto  you  in  Horeb  out 
of  the  midst  of  the  fire  : 

16  Lest  ye  corrupt  yourselves.^  and 
make  you  a graven  image,  the  simi- 
litude of  any  figure,  the  likeness  of 
male  or  female, 

17  The  likeness  of  any  beast  that 


Is  on  the  earth,  the  likeness  of  any 
winged  fowl  that  fiieth  in  the  air, 

18  The  likeness  of  any  thing  that 
creepeth  on  the  ground,  the  likeness 
of  any  fish  that  is  in  the  waters  be- 
neath the  earth  : 

19  And  lest  thou  lift  up  thine  eyes 
unto  heaven,  and  when  thou  seest 
the  sun,  and  the  moon,  and  the  stars, 
even  all  the  host  of  heaven,  shouldest 
be  driven  to  worship  them,  and  serve 
them,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
" divided  unto  all  nations  under  the 
whole  heaven. 

20  But  the  Lord  hath  taken  you, 
and  brought  you  forth  out  of  the  iron 
furnace,  even  out  of  Egypt,  to  be  unto 
him  a people  of  inheritance,  as  ye  are 
this  day. 

21  Furthermore  the  Lord  was 
angry  with  me  for  your  sakes,  and 
sware  that  I should  not  go  over  Jor- 


ROr, 

imparted. 


dan,  and  that  I should  not 


go 


in 


was  widely  spread  through  the  East,  and 
forms  in  various  aspects  and  degrees  an  ele- 
ment in  the  religious  sentiment  of  Arabians, 
Phoenicians,  Persians,  Chaldees,  and  Egyp- 
tians. Hero-worship  exhibited  itself  in  the 
practice  of  setting  up  images  of  human  form 
as  household  gods  (Penates),  or  as  local 
and  civic  divinities:  a practice  forbidden  by 
'V.  16.  Nat  lire- worship  in  its  baser  shapes 
is  seen  in  the  Egyptian  idolatry  of  animals 
and  animal  figures,  condemned  in  17,  18: 
whilst  its  less  ignoble  flights,  the  worship  of 
the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  are  forbidden  in 
-u.  19.  The  latter  was  practised  by  the  an- 
cient Persians  (Herod,  i.  131),  and  by  other 
oriental  nations  who  rejected  anthropomorphic 
idolatry.  It  was  formally  introduced  and 
made  popular  in  Israel  only,  as  it  seems,  in 
the  times  of  the  later  kings;  but  it  cannot 
have  been  unknown  to  Moses  and  the  Jews 
of  his  times,  since  it  was  undoubtedly  prac- 
tised by  many  of  the  tribes  with  whom  they 
had  come  in  contact.  The  great  legislator 
then  may  be  regarded  as  taking  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us  a complete  and  comprehensive 
survey  of  the  various  forms  of  idolatrous 
and  corrupt  worship  practised  by  the  sur- 
rounding oriental  nations,  and  as  particu- 
larly and  successively  forbidding  them  every 
one.  'Phe  chosen  people  of  God  are  not  to 
regard  with  superstitious  reverence  one  of 
their  own  race,  male  or  female:  nor  to  fall 
into  the  low  nature-worship  of  which  they 
had  seen  so  much  in  Egypt,  and  to  which 


they  had  once  since,  in  the  sin  of  the  golden 
calf,  shown  a bias;  nor  yet  to  be  beguiled  by 
the  more  subtle  cosmic  religionism  of  some  of 
the  Syrian  tribes  with  which  on  their  march 
they  had  made  acquaintance.  These  did  not 
indeed  make  gods  for  themselves;  but  they 
“ worshipped  and  served  the  creature  more 
than  the  Creator,”  addressed  themselves  to 
inferior  objects,  not  to  Him  Himself,  and  so 
were  idolaters  still.  God  is  not  to  be  wor- 
shipped under  any  visible  image  and  form, 
whether  made  by  man  for  the  purpose,  or 
created  by  Himself  for  man’s  service.  God 
had  been  manifested  to  them  through  no  me- 
dia of  shape  and  figure : through  no  such 
media  was  He  therefore  to  be  sought. 

19.  <ivhich  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  di- 
vided unto  all  nations']  i.e.  “whose  light  Gpd 
has  distributed  to  the  nations  for  their  use 
and  benefit,  ;ind  which  therefore  being  crea- 
tures ministering  to  man's  convenience  must 
not  be  worshipped  as  man’s  lords.”  So  Targg., 
Jarchi,  Saad.,  Jerome,  Bp.  Wordsworth,  &c. 
Others  regard  this  passage  as  importing  that 
God  had  allotted  the  heavenly  bodies  to  the 
heathen  for  worship,  and  that  His  own  people 
therefore  must  not  worship  them.  This  sense , 
though  current  as  long  ago  as  the  time  of 
Justin  Martyr  (‘D.  cum  Tryph.’  § 55  and 
1 2 1,  and  Clemens  Alex.  ‘Strom.’  vi.  14),  and 
preferred  by  many  modern  critics  (Knobel, 
Keil),  is  by  no  means  apposite. 

21.  Cf.  iii.  26,  and  note. 


V.  2 2 3^'] 


DEUTERONOMY.  IV. 


chap.  9, 
3- 

Hebr.  12. 
29. 


819 


unto  that  good  land,  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  giveth  thee  for  an  inherit- 
ance : 

22  But  I must  die  in  this  land, 
I must  not  go  over  Jordan  : but  ye 
shall  go  over,  and  possess  that  good 
land. 

23  Take  heed  unto  yourselves, 
lest  ye  forget  the  covenant  of  the 
Lord  your  God,  which  he  made 
with  you,  and  make  you  a.  graven 
image,  or  the  likeness  of  any  things 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  for- 
bidden thee. 

24  For  the  ^Lord  thy  God  Is  a 
consuming  fire,  even  a jealous  God. 

25  ^ When  thou  shalt  beget  chil- 
dren, and  children’s  children,  and  ye 
shall  have  remained  long  in  the  land, 
and  shall  corrupt  yourselves^  and  make 
a graven  image,  or  the  likeness  of  any 
things  and  shall  do  evil  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord  thy  God,  to  provoke  him 
to  anger ; 

26  I call  heaven  and  earth  to  wit- 
ness against  you  this  day,  that  ye 
shall  soon  utterly  perish  from  off  the 
land  v/hereunto  ye  go  over  Jordan  to 
possess  it ; ye  shall  not  prolong  your 
days  upon  it,  but  shall  utterly  be  de- 
stroyed. 

27  And  the  Lord  shall  scatter  you 
among  the  nations,  and  ye  shall  be 
left  few  in  number  among  the  hea- 
then, whither  the  Lord  shall  lead  you. 

28  And  there  ye  shall  serve  gods, 
the  work  of  men’s  hands,  wood  and 
stone,  which  neither  see,  nor  hear, 
nor  eat,  nor  smell. 

29  But  if  from  thence  thou  shalt 
seek  the  Lord  thy  God,  thou  shalt 


find  him^  if'  thou  seek  him  with  all 
thy  heart  and  with  all  thy  soul. 

30  When  thou  art  in  tribulation, 
and  all  these  thinp-s  ^ are  come  upon 
thee,  even  in  the  latter  days,  if  thou  foimd 
turn  to  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  shalt 

be  obedient  unto  his  voice  ; 

31  (For  the  Lord  thy  God  is  a 
merciful  God  ;)  he  will  not  forsake 
thee,  neither  destroy  thee,  nor  forget 
the  covenant  of  thy  fathers  which  he 
sware  unto  them. 

32  For  ask  now  of  the  days  that 
are  past,  which  were  before  thee, 
since  the  day  that  God  created  man 
upon  the  earth,  and  ask  from  the  one 
side  of  heaven  unto  the  other,  whe- 
ther there  hath  been  any  such  thing 
as  this  great  thing  /j,  or  hath  been 
heard  like  it  ? 

33  Did  ever  people  hear  the  voice 
of  God  speaking  out  of  the  midst  of 
the  fire,  as  thou  hast  heard,  and  live  ? 

34  Or  hath  God  assayed  to  go  and 
take  him  a nation  from  the  midst  of 
another  nation,  by  temptations,  by 
signs,  and  by  wonders,  and  by  war, 
and  by  a mighty  hand,  and  by  a 
stretched  out  arm,  and  by  great  ter-  ^ 
rors,  according  to  all  that  the  Lord 
your  God  did  for  you  in  Egypt  before 
your  eyes  ? 

35  Unto  thee  it  was  shewed,  that 
thou  mightest  know  that  the  Lord  he 
is  God  ; there  is  none  else  beside  him. 

36  Out  of  heaven  he  made  thee 
to  hear  his  voice,  that  he  might  in- 
struct thee  : and  upon  earth  he  shew- 
ed thee  his  great  fire ; and  thou 
heardest  his  words  out  of  the  midst 
of  the  fire. 


25-28.  The  warnings  against  idolatry  are 
enforced  by  distinct  prediction  of*the  terrible 
punishments  which  would  ensue  on  commis- 
sion of  it.  Cf.  with  these  verses  Lev.  xxvi. 
33 — 40,  and  chap,  xxviii.  64  sqq. 

29 — 40.  Unwilling,  as  it  might  seem,  to 
close  his  discourse  with  words  of  terror, 
Moses  makes  a last  appeal  to  them  in  these 
'vu.  in  a different  strain.  He  calls  on  them  to 
cleave  steadfastly  to  God  because  God  had 
given  them  evidences  of  His  Deity  and  His 
power  such  as  had  been  vouchsafed  to  no 


others ; and  had  worked  and  would  still  work 
no  less  singular  deliverances  for  them,  having 
chosen  them  out  to  be  His  own  people. 

34.  by  temptations]  Cf.  vii.  18,  19,  and 
xxix.  a,  3.  From  a comparison  of  these  pas- 
sages it  appears  that  we  must  refer  the  word 
“temptations”  (as  does  Gesen.),  not  to  the 
tribulations  and  persecutions  undergone  by 
the  Israelites,  but  to  the  plagues  miraculously 
inflicted  on  the  Egyptians.  By  these  plagues 
the  might  of  God  and  the  obstinacy  of  Pha- 
raoh were  at  once  tested  and  manifested. 


820 


DEUTERONOMY.  IV. 


[v.  37—45- 


37  And  because  he  loved  thy  fa- 
thers,  therefore  he  chose  their  seed 
after  them,  and  brought  thee  out  in 
his  sight  with  his  mighty  power  out 
of  Egypt ; 

38  To  drive  out  nations  from  be- 
fore thee  greater  and  mightier  than 
thou  art^  to  bring  thee  in,  to  give 
thee  their  land  for  an  inheritance,  as 
it  is  this  day. 

39  Know  therefore  this  day,  and 
consider  it  in  thine  heart,  that  the 
Lord  he  is  God  in  heaven  above,  and 
upon  the  earth  beneath  : there  is  none 
else. 

40  Thou  shalt  keep  therefore  his 
statutes,  and  his  commandments, 
which  I command  thee  this  day,  that 
it  may  go  well  with  thee,  and  with 
thy  children  after  thee,  and  that  thou 


mayest  prolong  thy  days  upon  the 
earth,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giv- 
eth  thee,  for  ever. 

41  ^ Then  Moses  severed  three 
cities  on  this  side  Jordan  toward  the 
sunrising ; 

42  That  the  slayer  might  flee  thi- 
ther, which  should  kill  his  neighbour 
unawares,  and  hated  him  not  in  times 
past ; and  that  fleeing  unto  one  of 
these  cities  he  might  live  ; 

43  Nainely^  ^ Bezer  in  the  wilder- ^ Josh, 
ness,  in  the  plain  country,  of  the 
Reubenites  ; and  Ramoth  in  Gilead, 

of  the  Gadites ; and  Golan  in  Bashan, 
of  the  Manas^ites. 

44  And  this  is  the  law  which 
Moses  set  before  the  children  of  Is- 
rael : 

45  These  are  the  testimonies,  and 


37.  he  chose  their  seed  after  theni\  Lit. 
“ his  seed  after  himP  Though  Moses  begins 
the  n).  by  setting  forth  the  love  of  God  to 
the  “ fathers”  of  the  nation  as  the  foundation 
of  His  election  of  their  posterity  (cf.  ix.  5 
and  X.  15),  yet  he  proceeds  in  the  singular 
number  to  speak  of  “ his  seed  after  him.^"'  The 
assumption  of  corruption  in  the  text  is  quite 
♦ arbitrary.  Speaking  of  the  love  of  God  to 
their  fathers  in  general,  Moses  has  more  especi- 
ally in  mind  that  one  of  them  who  was  called 
“the  Friend  of  God”  (St  James  ii.  23);  and 
instinctively,  so  to  say,  constructs  the  sen- 
tence accordingly. 

brought  thee  out  in  his  sight]  Lit.  “by 
His  face.”  i.e.  by  the  might  of  His  personal 
presence:  cf.  Exod.  xxxiii.  14,  where  God 
promises  to  Moses  “My  presence  (lit.  ‘my 
face  ’)  shall  go  with  thee.” 

41 — 43.  Many  of  the  older  commentators 
{e.g.  Calmet,  Houbigant,  &c.),  unable  to  see 
any  propriety  or  relevancy  in  these  as  at 
present  placed,  have  regarded  them  as  an  in- 
terpolation. There  is  however  no  reason  to 
depart  from  the  view  suggested  alike  by  their 
contents  and  context.  The  nj'v.  preceding  are 
clearly  the  conclusion,  as  those  succeeding  are 
the  exordium,  of  a distinct  and  complete  dis- 
course. 'J'hese  'w.^  then,  are  inserted  between 
the  two  simply  for  the  reason  to  which  they 
themselves  call  attention  {‘•'‘Then  Moses  severed 
three  cities.”  &c.);  i.e.  the  fact  narrated  took 
place  historically  after  .Moses  spoke  the  one 
discourse  and  before  he  delivered  the  other. 
In  thus  severing  the  three  cities  of  refuge 
Moses  carried  out  a previous  command  of 
God,  Num.  XXXV.  14;  and  so  followed  up  his 


exhortations  to  obedience  by  setting  a punc- 
tual example  of  it,  as  far  as  opportunity  was 
given  him. 

43.  Be%er  in  the  ^uilderness.1  in  the  plain 
country]  On  the  “wilderness,”  see  chap.  i.  i. 
“In  the  plain  country,”  lit.  “in  the  land  of 
the  Mishor.’’"'  The  word  means  a level  tract 
of  land;  but  when  used,  as  here  and  in  iii.  10, 
Josh.  xiii.  9,  &c.  with  the  article,  seems  to  be 
a proper  name,  as  it  is  treated  by  the  LXX. 

It  denotes  the  smooth  downs  of  Moab,  which 
reach  from  the  Jordan  eastward  of  Jericho 
far  into  the  desert  of  Arabia,  and  which 
form  a striking  contrast  alike  to  the  rugged 
country  west  of  the  river,  and  to  the  higher 
and  remarkable  districts  belonging  to  Bashan 
northwards. 

Bezer  is,  with  little  certainty,  identified 
with  Bostra,  or  (i  Macc.  v.  36)  Bosor. 

Ramoth  in  Gilead]  Identical  with  Ramoth 
Mizpeh,  Josh.  xiii.  26;  where  see  note. 

Golan]  Described  by  Jerome  after  Euse- 
bius as  “villa  priegrandis ; ” it  subsequently 
gave  the  name  of  Gaulonitis  to  a district  of 
some  extent  east  of  the  sea  of  Galilee  and 
north  of  tl*  Hieromax ; but  the  exact  site  of 
the  city  is  uncertain. 

44 — 49.  These  'w.  would  be  more  pro- 
perly assigned  to  the  next  chapter.  They 
are  intended  to  serve,  not  as  a conclusion  to 
the  first  introductory  and  preparatory  dis- 
course which  has  been  recorded  (Rosen- 
mUller),  but  as  the  announcement  and  in- 
troduction of  the  one  now  to  be  commenced. 

F.  44  gives  a kind  of  general  title  to  the 
whole  of  the  weighty  address,  including  in 
fact  the  central  part  and  substance  of  the  ^ 


V.  46—3-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  IV.  V. 


821 


y Numb. 
21.  24. 
chap.  I. . 


Numb. 
21-  33- 
chap.  3.  : 


the  statutes,  and  the  judgments,  which 
Moses  spake  unto  the  children  of 
Israel,  after  they  came  forth  out  of 
Egypt, 

46  On  this  side  Jordan,  in  the 
valley  over  against  Beth-peor,  in  the 
land  of  Sihon  king  of  the  Amorites, 
who  dwelt  at  Heshbon,  whom  Moses 
and  the  children  of  Israel  smote, 
after  they  were  come  forth  out  of 
Egypt : 

47  And  they  possessed  his  land, 
and  the  land  ^ of  Og  king  of  Bashan, 
two  kings  of  the  Amorites,  v/hich 
7irr^  On  this  side  Jordan  toward  the 
sunrising  ; 

48  From  Aroer,  which  is  by  the  • 
bank  of  the  river  Arnon,  even  unto 
mount  Sion,  which  is  Hermon, 

49  And  all  the  plain  on  this  side 


Jordan  eastward,  even  unto  the  sea 

of  the  plain,  under  the  springs  of  chap.  3. 

Pisgah. 


CHAPTER  V. 


I T//e  covenant  in  Ifo7'eb.  6 The  tc7i  co77i- 
I7ia7id/7ie7its.  I'l  At  the  people's  7'equest  Moses 
receiveth  the  law  f7'077i  God. 


ND  Moses  called  all  Israel,  and 
said  unto  them.  Hear,  O Israel, 
the  statutes  and  judgments  which  I 
speak  in  your  ears  this  day,  that  ye 
may  learn  them,  and  Teep,  and  do 
them. 

2 ^The  Lord  our  God  made  a 
covenant  with  us  in  Horeb. 

3 The  Lord  made  not  this  cove- 
nant with  our  fathers,  but  with  us, 
even  us,  who  are  all  of  us  here  alive 
this  day. 


t Heb. 
keep  to  do 
them. 

^ Exod.  19. 

5. 


book,  which  now  follows  in  twenty-two 
chapters ; cf.  Introd.  § ii.  These  chapters 
may  be  divided  into  two  groups,  the  former 
consisting  of  ch.  v. — xi.,  the  latter  of  ch. 
xii. — xxvi.  inclusive.  The  former  division  com- 
mences with  a repetition  of  the  Ten  Words, 
which  appropriately  occupy  here,  not  less 
than  at  their  first  announcement  in  Exodus, 
the  forefront  of  the  whole  legislative  system 
as  its  leading  and  essential  principles.  Amongst 
these  Ten  W ords  the  first  two  might,  under 
the  circumstances,  be  justly  regarded  as  “first 
and  great  commandments;”  and  Moses  ac- 
cordingly makes  application  of  them  in  some 
detail  to  his  audience,  mingling  warnings  and 
exhortations,  through  six  chapters  (vi. — xi.). 
The  second  division  (xii. — xxvi.)  recounts  the 
principal  laws  and  regulations  which  the 
people  were  to  observe  in  the  land  of  their 
inheritance.  In  -v.  45  this  “ law  ” (tborah')  is 
summarily  described  as  consisting  of  “testi- 
monies, statutes,  and  judgments i.e.  com- 
mandments considered  first  as  manifestations 
or  attestations  {eydoth')  of  the  will  of  God ; 
next  as  duties  of  moral  obligation  {khuklni).^ 
and,  thirdly,  as  precepts  securing  the  mutual 
rights  of  men  (mis  bp  at  1771).  See  on  these  last 
two  words  Levit.  xviii.  4,  5.  This  statement 
of  the  contents  of  the  succeeding  portion  of 
the  book  is  accompanied  by  a notice  of  time 
and  place : “ after  they  came  forth  out  of 
Egypt,”  lit.,  and  more  accurately,  their 
coming  forth :”  i.  e.  whilst  they  were  yet  on 
their  march  from  the  house  of  bondage  to  the 
Promised  Land;  but  “in  the  land  of  Sihon,” 
*1;.  46  ; and  so  when  they  had  already  received 
the  first  fruits  of  those . promises,  the  full 
fruition  of  which  was  to  be  consequent  on 


their  fulfilmeflt  of  that  covenant  now'  again 
about  to  be  rehearsed  to  them  in  its  leading 
features. 

48.  Tnount  Sion.,  ojobicb  is  HerTnon']  See 
note  on  iii.  9.  The  name  Zion  (cf.  Ps.  xlviii. 
2)  connected  with  Jerusalem  is  quite  different- 
ly spelt  in  the  original  from  the  Sion  of  the  text. 

• 

Chap.  V.  Moses  now  proceeds  vrith  the 
Deuteronomy  or  Second  Law  itself:  i.e.  with 
that  recapitulation  of  the  Sinaitic  code  in  all 
its  more  important  features  which  was  sug- 
gested at  once  by  the  fact  that  the  generation 
to  which  it  was  originally  given  was  now 
dead ; by  the  change  which  was  about  to  be 
accomplished  in  the  circumstances  of  Israel 
through  their  actual  entrance  and  settlement 
in  the  land  of  promise;  and  by  the  approach- 
ing decease  of  the  great  lawgiver  who  had 
been  the  mediator  of  the  covenant,  and  whose 
authority  had  hitherto  been  available  for  its 
explanation  and  enforcement. 

1.  And  Moses  called  all  Israel,  a7id  saiT\ 
This  more  emphatic  introductory  formula  in- 
stead of  the  simpler  and  ordinary  “And  Mo- 
ses said,”  points  to  the  publicity  and  import- 
ance of  the  discourse  which  follows. 

3.  Tbe  Lord  made  not  this  coojenant  ^euitb 
our  fathers,  but  ^witb  us,  even  us,  vuho  are  all 
of  us  here  alive  tins  day\  The  “fathers” 
here  intended  are,  as  in  iv.  37,  the  patriarchs, 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  With  them 
God  did  indeed  make  a covenant,  but  not  the 
particular  covenant  now  in  question.  The 
responsibilities  of  this  later  covenant,  made  at 
Sinai  by  the  nation  as  a nation,  attached  in 
their  day  and  generation  to  those  whom  Moses 
was  addressing. 


822 


DEUTERONOMY.  V. 


[v.  4—14. 


4 The  Lord  talked  with  you  face 
to  face  in  the  mount  out  of  the  midst 
of  the  fire, 

5 (I  stood  between  the  Lord  and 
vou  at  that  time^  to  shew  you  the 
word  of  the  Lord  : for  ye  were  afraid 
by  reason  of  the  fire,  and  went  not  up 
into  the  mount;)  saying, 

^Exod.  20.  6 ^ am  the  Lord  thy  God, 

Le^.'^T  I.  which  brought  thee  out  of  the  land 
Rsai.  81.  qP  Egypt,  from  the  house  of  ^ bondage, 
t Heb.  n 'Lhou  shalt  have  none  other  gods 

servants , , /•  ° 

before  me= 

8 Thou  shalt  not  make  thee  any 
graven  image,  or  any  likeness  of  any 
thing  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or  that 
is  in  the  earth  beneath,  or  that  is  in  • 
the  v/aters  beneath  the  earth  : 

9 Thou  shalt  not  bow  down  thy- 
self unto  them,  nor  serve  them  : for 


I the  Lord  thy  God  am  a jealous 
God,  ^visiting  the  iniquity  of  the  fa-^Exod.  34. 
thers  upon  the  children  unto  the  third 
and  fourth  generation  of  them  that 
hate  me, 

10  "^And  shewing  mercy  unto  thou-  32- 
sands  of  them  that  love  me  and  keep 

my  commandments. 

11  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name 
of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain  : for  the 
Lord  will  not  hold  him  guiltless  that 
taketh  his  name  in  vain. 

12  Keep  the  sabbath  day  to  sanc- 
tify it,  as  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
commanded  thee. 

13  Six  days  thou  shalt  labour,  and 
do  all  thy  work  : 

14  But  the  seventh  day  is  the 

^ sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  God  : in  ^ Gen.  2. 
it  thou  shalt  not  do  any  work,  thou,  Heb.  4.4. 


4 & 5.  The  participle  “saying”  at  the 
end  of  n.\  5 depends  on  the  verb  “tallced” 
in  'v.  4.  The  intermediate  part  of  t.’.  5 is 
therefore  parenthetic,  as  marked  in  the  A.  V. 
It  appears  from  'v^j.  22 — 25  and  from  iv.  ii, 
12,  that  the  Ten  Words  were  uttered  “with 
a great  voice”  to  the  assembly  from  the 
awful  summit  of  ^he  Mount  itself ; whilst 
the  other  precepts  were  communicated  to  the 
people  through  the  agency  of  Moses.  It 
appears  from  Exod.  xix.  9,  17,  20,  24,  that 
whilst  the  people  remained  in  the  lower  parts 
of  the  mountain,  Moses  was  from  the  first 
called  apart  to  God  on  the  top  of  it.  No 
doubt  whilst  the  great  voice  sounded  forth 
the  “Ten  Words,”  he  still  remained  there, 
either  to  convey  more  certainly  and  exactly 
what  was  uttered  to  the  people  standing  far 
oft'  in  consternation,  or,  as  is  suggested  by 
Exod.  XX.  9,  to  authenticate  his  mission. 
Even  then,  as  regards  the  Decalogue,  the 
statement  of  -u.  5 has  its  application.  Moses 
“stood  between  the  Lord  and  them”  whilst 
it  was  delivered;  and  perhaps  it  was  (Exod. 
xix.  19)  addressed  directly  to  Moses,  though 
in  accents  audible  to  the  assembly  beneath. 
'Thus  was  the  Law,  including  even  the  “Ten 
AVords”  “in  the  hand  of  a mediator”  (Gal. 
iii.  19).  The  diversity  and  the  separation  of 
the  jxirties  to  the  Covenant,  indicated  all 
along  by  the  intervention  of  Moses,  became 
still  more  conspicuous  after  that  the  Lord,  at‘ 
the  recpiest  of  the  terrified  people  {y.  27), 
ceased  to  speak  so  that  they  could  hear  Him 
for  themselves. 

6 — 21.  Repetition  of  the  Ten  Command- 
ments. On  the  variations  between  the  Com- 
mandments as  given  here  and  in  Exod.  xx., 


also  on  the  different  modes  of  dividing  the 
Commandments,  and  distributing  them  be- 
tween the  Two  Tables,  and  other  questions 
connected  with  the  Decalogue,  see  Exod.  xx. 
and  notes  at  the  end  of  that  chapter. 

Moses  here  adopts  the  Ten  Words  as  a 
ground  from  which  he  may  proceed  to  re- 
prove, warn,  and  exhort;  and  repeats  them, 
as  is  natural,  where  literal  accuracy  is  not  to 
the  purpose,  with  a measure  of  freedom  and 
adaptation.  Our  Lord  (St  Mark  x.  19)  and 
St  Paul  (Eph.  vi.  2,  3)  deal  similarly  with  the 
same  subject;  as  indeed  preachers  in  all  ages 
have  done.  It  is  important,  however,  to  note, 
that  in  the  course  of  thus  freely  quoting  the 
law,  Moses  thrice  refers  his  hearers,  to  the 
statutes  of  God  themselves,  nju.  12,  15,  16,  “as 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath  commanded  thee;” 
i.e.  commanded  from  Sinai.  It  is  thus  appa- 
rent that  speaker  and  hearers  recognized  a 
statutory  and  authoritative  form  of  the  laws 
in  question,  which,  because  it  was  familiar  to 
both  parties,  needed  not  to  be  reproduced 
with  verbal  fidelity. 

12 — 15.  In  stating  the  purposes  of  the 
Sabbath  ordinance  Moses  introduces  a few 
words,  originally  applied  in  the  same  con- 
nexion, from  Exod.  xxiii.  12 : and  the  exhorta- 
tion to  observe  the  Sabbath  and  allow  their 
time  of  rest  to  servants  is  pointed  by  remind- 
ing the  people  that  they  too  were  formerly 
servants  themselves.  The  bondage  in  Egypt 
and  the  deliverance  from  it  are  not  assigned 
as  grounds  for  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath, 
which  is  of  far  older  date  (see  on  Gen.  ii.  3), 
but  rather  as  suggesting  motives  for  the  reli- 
gious observance  of  that  institution.  The 
exodus  was  an  entrance  into  rest  from  the 


V.  T5  — 24-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  Y. 


823 


nor  thy  son,  nor  thy  daughter,  nor 
thy  manservant,  nor  thy  maidservant, 
nor  thine  ox,  nor  thine  ass,  nor  any 
of  thy  cattle,  nor  thy  stranger  that 
is  within  thy  gates  ; that  thy  man- 
servant and  thy  maidservant  may  rest 
as  well  as  thou. 

15  And  remember  that  thou  wast 
a servant  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  and 
that  the  Lord  thy  God  brought  thee 
out  thence  through  a mighty  hand 
and  by  a stretched  out  arm  : therefore 
the  Lord  thy  God  commanded  thee 
to  keep  the  sabbath  day. 

16  ^ Honour  thy  father  and  thy 
mother,  as  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
commanded  thee  ; that  thy  days  may 
be  prolonged,  and  that  it  may  go  well 
with  thee,  in  the  land  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  giveth  thee. 

'"Matt.  5.  17  -^Thou  shalt  not  kill. 

? Luke  18.  -^Neither  shalt  thou  commit 

20-  adultery. 

/^Rom.  13.  ^'Neither  shalt  thou  steal. 


20  Neither  shalt  thou  bear  false 
witness  against  thy  neighbour. 

21  ^’Neither  shalt  thou  desire  thy'^o"^-7- 
neighbour’s  wife,  neither  shalt  thou 
covet  thy  neighbour’s  house,  his  field, 

or  his  manservant,  or  his  maidservant, 
his  ox,  or  his  ass,  or  any  thing  that  is 
•thy  neighbour’s. 

22  ^ These  v/ords  the  Lord 
spake  unto  all  your  assembly  in  the 
mount  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire, 
of  the  cloud,  and  of  the  thick  dark- 
ness, with  a great  voice  : and  he 
added  no  more.  And  he  wrote  them 
in  two  tables  of  stone,  and  delivered 
them  unto  me. 

23  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  ye 
heard  the  voice  out  of  the  midst  of 
the  darkness,  (for  the  mountain  did 
burn  with  fire,)  that  ye  came  near 
unto  me,  even  all  the  heads  of  your 
tribes,  and,  your  elders  ; 

24  And  ye  said.  Behold,  the  Lord 
our  God  hath  shewed  us  his  glory 


toils  of  the  house  of  bondage,  and  is  thought 
even  to  have  occurred  on  the  Sabbath-day. 
Hence  arose  special  and  national  obligations 
with  respect  to  the  Sabbath,  on  which  it  is 
exactly  within  the  .scope  of  Moses’  purpose 
in  Deuteronomy  to  insist. 

16.  The  blessing  of  general  well-being  is 
here  annexed  to  the  keeping  of  the  fifth  Com- 
mandment, as  well  as  that  of  long  life,  which 
alone  is  found  in  the  parallel  passage  of  Exodus. 
The  insertion,  however,  is  no  real  addition  to 
the  promise,  -but  only  an  amplification  of  its 
expression,  intended  to  serve  the  homiletic 
purposes  of  the  speaker.  Long  life  would 
present  itself  to  the  Jewish  mind  as  one  ele- 
ment of  well-being,  and  a very  important  one. 
Here  too  Moses  refers  his  hearers  back  to  the 
command  of  God  in  Exodus. 

21.  The  tenth  Commandment,  as  here 
given,  varies  in  three  particulars  from  that  in 
Exodus. 

(i)  In  Exod.  the  bouse  is  mentioned  first, 
the  •zuife  second:  in  Deut.  the  reverse. 

(a)  In  Deut.  a dilferent  word  is  used  in 
reference  to  wife,  (“thou  shalt  not  desire, '' 
thakmod,  “thy  neighbour’s  wife”);  and  in  re- 
ference to  the  other  objects,  (“  neither  shalt 
thou  covet,”  hitba-v-veh,  “thy  neighbour’s 
house,  &c.”) 

(3)  In  Deut.  the  “ field”  is  added  to  the 
list  of  objects  specifically  forbidden  to  be  de- 
sired. 


The  first  two  variations  are  explained  by 
the  general  character  of  the  passage  before  us. 
The  express  mention  of  the  “ field”  amongst 
the  forbidden  objects  seems  very  natural  in 
one  who  was  speaking  with  the  partition  of 
Canaan  amongst  his  hearers  directly  in  view. 
The  LXX.  has  brought  about  an  uniformity 
as  regards  the  second  variation  by  altering 
the  text  of  Exodus  after  that  of  Deuteronomy ; 
the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  by  altering  Deute- 
ronomy after  Exodus. 

22.  be  added  no  morei]  Lit.  “ He  did  not 
add : ” i.  e.  He  spoke  no  more  with  the  great 
voice  directly  to  the  people,  but  addressed  all 
other  communications  to  them  through  Mo- 
ses. The  expression  (Joydsapb:  cf.  Num.  xi. 
25)  points  to  the  occurrence  as  one  that  was 
not  repeated.  This  unique  and  sublim.e  phe- 
nomenon, followed  up  by  the  inscription  of 
the  Ten  Words  on  the  Two  Tables  by  the 
finger  of  God,  marks  not  only  the  holiness  of 
God’s  Law  in  general,  but  the  special  emi- 
nence and  permanent  obligation  of  the  Ten 
Words  themselves  as  compared  with  the  rest 
of  the  Mosaic  enactments.  The  giving  of  the 
Two  Tables  did  not  take  place  until  Moses 
had  been  on  the  Mount  forty  days  and  forty 
nights,  as  appears  from  the  fuller  account  of 
ix.  9 — 12. 

23 — 33.  These  contain  a much  fuller 
narrative  of  the  events  described  in  Exod. 
xx.  t8 — 21.  The  reply  of  God  to  the  request 


[v-  25—3. 


824  DEUTERONOMY.  V.  VI. 


/tExod.19.  2.nd  his  greatness,  and  '^’we  have 
heard  his  voice  out  of  the  midst  of 
the  fire  : we  have  seen  this  day  that 
God  doth  talk  with  man,  and  he 

^ chap.  4.  ^liveth. 

25  Now  therefore  why  should  we 
die  ? for  this  great  fire  will  consume 

: if  we  ^ hear  the  voice  of  the 
/u’nr.  Lord  our  God  any  more,  then  we 
shall  die. 

26  For  who  is  there  of  all  flesh, 
that  hath  heard  the  voice  of  the  living 
God  speaking  out  of  the  midst  of  the 
fire,  as  we  have^  and  lived  ? 

27  Go  thou  near,  and  hear  all  that 
the  Lord  our  God  shall  say  : and 
speak  thou  unto  us  all  that  the  Lord 

Exod.  our  God  shall  speak  unto  thee  *,  and 
we  will  hear  zV,  and  do  it. 

28  And  the  Lord  heard  the  voice 
of  your  words,  when  ye  spake  unto 
me;  and  the  Lord  said  unto  me,  I 
have  heard  the  voice  of  the  words 
of  this  people,  which  they  have  spoken 
unto  thee  : they  have  well  said  all 
that  they  have  spoken. 

29  O that  there  were  such  an 
heart  in  them,  that  they  would  fear 
me,  and  keep  all  my  commandments 
always,  that  it  might  be  well  with 
them,  and  with  their  children  for 
ever  ! 

30  Go  say  to  them.  Get  you  into 
your  tents  again. 

' 31  But  as  for  thee,  stand  thou  here 
by  me,  and  I v/ill  speak  unto  thee 


all  the  commandments,  and  the  sta- 
tutes, and  the  judgments,  which  thou 
shalt  teach  them,  that  they  may  do 
the7n  in  the  land  which  I give  them 
to  possess  it. 

32  Ye  shall  observe  to  do  there- 
fore as  the  Lord  your  God  hath 
commanded  you  : ye  shall  not  turn 
aside  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the  left. 

33  Ye  shall  walk  in  all  the  ways 
which  the  Lord  your  God  hath  com- 
manded you,  .that  ye  may  live,  and 
that  it  may  he  well  with  you,  and  that 
ye  may  prolong  your  days  in  the  land 
which  ye  shall  possess. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

I The  end  of  the  law  is  obedience.  ^ An  ex- 
hoj'tation  thei'eto. 

N’  OW  these  are  the  command- 
ments, the  statutes,  and  the 
judgments,  which  the  Lord  your 
God  commanded  to  teach  you,  that 
ye  might  do  them  in  the  land  whi- 
ther ye  ^ go  to  possess  it : 

2 That  thou  mightest  fear  the 
Lord  thy  God,  to  keep  all  his  sta- 
tutes 'and  his  commandments,  which 
I command  thee,  thou,  and  thy  son, 
and  thy  son’s  son,  all  the  days  of  thy 
life  ; and  that  thy  days  may  be  pro- 
longed. 

3 ^ Hear  therefore,  O Israel,  and 
observe  to  do  it;  that  it  may  be 
well  with  thee,  and  that  ye  may  in- 
crease mightily,  as  the  Lord  God 


t Heb. 
p:iss  over. 


of  the  people  {yw.  28 — 31)  is  omitted  alto- 
gether in  the  historical  summary  of  Exodus. 
Here  it  is  important  to  the  speaker's  purpose 
to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  it  was  on 
their  own  entreaty  that  he  had  taken  on  him 
to  be  the  channel  of  communication  between 
God  and  them.  God  approved  (-f.  28)  the 
request  of  the  people,  because  it  showed  a 
feeling  of  their  own  imworthiness  to  enter 
into  direct  communion  with  God.  The  ter- 
rors of  Sinai  had  done  their  work.  They  had 
awakened  tlie  consciousness  of  sin. 

Chap.  VI.  Moses  having  rehearsed  the 
Decalogue,  and  reminded  the  people  of  the 
awful  circum,stances  by  which  its  Divine  origin 
and  authority  were  accredited,  proceeds  next 
to  set  forth  more  particularly  and  to  enforce 
those  cardinal  and  essential  doctrines  of  it, 


the  nature  and  attributes  of  God,  and  the 
fitting  mode  of  honouring  and  worshipping 
Him.  Two  objects  are  indicated  (yw.  2,  3) 
as  sought  by  the  lawgiver  in  thus  expound- 
ing anew  these  im.portant  duties.  He  aims 
at  awakening  a holy  fear  of  God  in  the  heart 
of  his  people,  a fear  which  shall  manifest  it- 
self in  steadfast  fulfilment  of  the  CovenaM; 
and  he  seeks  no  less  the  temporal  prosperity 
of  Israel,  which  is  shown  as  a certain  result 
upon  such  fidelity.  Thus  the  glory  of  God 
and  the  welfare  of  man  are  seen  to  be  the 
grand  ends  he  has  in  view. 

1.  the- commandments']  Lit.  “command- 
ment,” for  the  noun  is  singular.  It  is  thus 
equivalent  to  the  “ thorah”  of  iv.  44,  and  is 
explained  in  the  context  as  consisting  of 
“statutes  and  judgments.” 


V.  4—9-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  VI. 


of  thy  fathers  hath  promised  thee,  in 
the  land  that  floweth  wdth  milk  and 
honey. 

4 Hear,  O Israel : The  Lord  our 
God  is  one  Lord  : 

fi^chap.  lo.  5 And  ^thou  shalt  love  the  Lord 
Matt.  22.  thy  God  with  all  thine  heart,  and 
Mark  i-’  witli  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy 
3^-  might. 

^7!  ^ 6 And  ^ these  words,  which  I com- 

^^chap.  II.  |3g  thine 

heart : 


825 

7 And  thou  shalt  Heach  them  dili- 
gently  unto  thy  children,  and  shalt  sharpen. 
talk  of  them  when  thou  sittest  in 
thine  house,  and  when  thou  walkest 

by  the  way,  and  when  thou  liest  down, 
and  when  thou  risest  up. 

8 And  thou  shalt  bind  them  for  a 
sign  upon  thine  hand,  and  they  shall 
be  as  frontlets  between  thine  eyes. 

9 And  thou  shalt  v/rite  them  upon 
the  posts  of  thy  house,  and  on  thy 
gates. 


3.  hi  the  land^  There  is  no  prep,  in  the 
Hebrew.  It  seems  better  to  regard  the  words 
“ the  land,  &c.”  simply  as  an  explanatory 
clause.  According  as  the  Lord  the  God 
of  thy  fathers  promised  thee  a land 
flowing  with  milk  and  honey. 

4.  Hear,  O Israel:  the  Lord  our  God  is  one 
Lord\  These  words  form  the  beginning  of 
what  is  termed  the  Shama  (“  Hear”)  in  the 
Jewish  Services,  and  belong  to  the  daily 
Morning  and  Evening  office.  They  may  in- 
deed be  termed  the  Creed  of  the  Jews.  Their 
expression  is  in  the  original  singularly  terse 
and  forcible.  “ Jehovah  our  Elohim,  Jeho- 
vah one.”  Their  very  brevity  opens  them  to 
different  constructions;  e.g.  “ the  Lord  is  our 
God,  the  Lord  alone:”  “the  Lord  our  God, 
namely,  the  Lord,  is  one:”  “the  Lord,  the 
Lord  only,  is  our  God.”  The  rendering  of 
A.  V.  is  on  all  grounds  the  best. 

This  weighty  text  contains  for  more  than 
a mere  declaration  of  the  unity  of  God  as 
against  polytheism;  or  of  the  sole  authority 
of  the  revelation  He  had  made  to  Israel  as 
against  other  pretended  manifestations  of  His 
will  and  attributes.  It  asserts  that  the  Lord 
God  of  Israel  is  absolutely  God,  and  none 
other.  He,  and  He  alone,  is  Jehovah  the 
absolute,  uncaused  God  ; He  who  had  by  His 
election  of  them  made  Himself  known  to 
Israel. 

The  last  letter  of  the  first  and  last  words  of 
this  verse  are  majusciila  in  the  original,  i.e. 
written  larger  than  the  ordinary  size:  being 
the  ninth  and  tenth  which  are  so  written  in 
the  Hebrew  of  the  Scriptures.  These  two 
majuscula  form  together  a word  signifying 
“ witness.”  It  is  uncertain  how  this  differ- 
ence in  writing  originated.  It  may  be  in- 
tentional, but  of  late  date.  It  is  construed 
by  the  Jewish  commentators  as  highly  signifi- 
cant. In  this  place  it  is  held  to  import  that 
the  utterance  of  this  verse  is  to  be  account- 
ed a witness  for  the  faith ; or  that  God  is  a 
witness  of  the  sincerity  and  earnestness  of 
him  who  utters  it. 

5.  As  there  is  but  one  God,  and  that  God 


Israel’s  God,  so  Israel  must  love  God  unre- 
servedly and  entirely.  The  specification  “with 
all  thine  heart,  and  wfith  all  thy  soul,  and  with 
all  thy  might,”  is  intended  to  include  every 
faculty  that  can  possibly  come  in  question. 
The  “ heart”  is  mentioned  as  the  seat  of  the 
understanding;  the  “soul”  as  the  centre  of 
will  and  personality;  the  “might”  as  repre- 
senting the  outgoings  and  energies  of  all  the 
vital  powers. 

The  command  of  the  text  cannot  be  sur- 
passed in  comprehensiveness  by  any  wffi.ich 
God  can  give  or  man  receive.  The  New 
'I'estarnent  itself  can  require  no  more  than 
this  total  self-surrender  of  man’s  being  to 
his  Maker.  It  is  then  a very  imperfect  con- 
ception of  the  scope  of  the  text,  and  not 
less  so  of  the  nature  of  the  service  required 
from  God’s  people  of  old,  to  limit  it  to  out- 
ward and  ceremonial  obedience  (as  Olsh.  on 
St  Matt.  xxii.  37).  The  Gospel  differs  from 
the  law  not  so  much  in  replacing  an  external 
and  carnal  service  of  God  by  an  inward  and 
spiritual  one,  as  in  supplying  new  motives 
and  peculiar  assistances  for  the  attainment  of 
that  Divine  love  which  was  from  the  first  and 
all  along  enjoined  as  “the  first  and  great 
commandment.” 

8 and  9.  Here  as  elsewhere  Moses  turns  to 
account  usages  widely  spread  in  his  times,  and 
still  common  in  the  East.  The  ancient  Egyp- 
tians commonly  wore  amulets  of  various 
kinds;  some,  “consisting  of  words  written 
on  folds  of  papyrus  tightly  rolled  up  and 
sown  in  linen,”  have  been  found  at  Thebes 
(Wilkinson,  ‘A.E.’  111.364);  and  the  modern 
Egyptians  still  continue  the  practice  (Lane, 
‘Mod.  Egypt,’  I.  338).  The  “pillows,” 
spoken  of  Ezek.  xiii.  18  as  “sown  to  arm- 
holes” were  probably  amulets  of  an  idola- 
trous character.  The  wearing  of  amulets 
engraved  with  a sacred  symbol  or  motto,  and 
the  inscribing  of  texts  of  the  Koran  on  build- 
ings, have  been  noticed  by  many  modern 
travellers.  By  adopting  and  regulating  this 
custom  Moses  provides  at  once  a check  on 
superstition  and  a means  of  keeping  the 


826 


DEUTERONOMY.  VI. 


[v.  lO 20. 


10  And  it  shall  be,  v/hen  the 
LoR-D  thy  God  shall  have  brought 
thee  into  the  land  which  he  sware 
unto  thy  fathers,  to  Abraham,  to 
Isaac,  and  to  Jacob,  to  give  thee  great 
and  goodly  cities,  which  thou  build- 
edst  not, 

11  And  houses  full  of  all  good 
things^  which  thou  filledst  not,  and 
wells  digged,  which  thou  diggedst  not, 
vineyards  and  olive  trees,  v/hich  thou 

fchap.  8.  plantedst  not ; ‘^when  thou  shalt  have 
9.  lo.  eaten  and  be  full ; 

12  The7i  beware  lest  thou  forget 
the  Lord,  which  brought  thee  forth 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  from  the 

tiieb.  house  of  Tondage. 
ov‘/ser-^’  13  Thou  shalt  ^fear  the  Lord  thy 
■^chlp.  10.  God,  and  serve  him,  and  shalt  swear 
name. 

14  Ye  shall  not  go  after  other  gods, 
of  the  gods  of  the  people  which  are 
round  about  you  ; 


15  (For  the  Lord  thy. God  is  a 
jealous  God  among  you)  lest  the 
anger  of  the  Lord  thy  God  be  kin- 
dled against  thee,  and  destroy  thee 
from  off  the  face  of  the  earth. 

16  ^ ^ Ye  shall  not  tempt  the  ^ Matt.  4. 
Lord  your  God,  7 as  ye  tempted  him/^xoCi.  n. 
in  Massah. 

17  Ye  shall  diligently  keep  the 
commandments  of  the  Lord  your 
God,  and  his  testimonies,  and  his 
statutes,  which  he  hath  commanded 
thee. 

18  And  thou  shalt  do  that  which 
is  right  and  good  in  the  sight  of  the 
Lord  ; that  it  may  be  well  with  thee, 
and  that  thou  mayest  go  in  and  pos- 
sess the  good  land  which  the  Lord 
sware  unto  thy  fathers, 

19  To  cast  out  ail  thine  enemies 
from  before  thee,  as  the  Lord  hath 
spoken. 

20  Jnd  when  thy  son  asketh  thee 


divine  law  in  memory.  On  the  “ frontlets” 
{totaphotli)^  the  “phylacteries”  of  the  New 
Test.  (St  Matt,  xxiii.  5),  see  on  Exod.  xiii. 
16.  On  I’.  9 and  xi.  20  is  based  the  Jewish 
usage  of  the  Mez.uzah.  This  word  denotes 
properly  a door-post,  as  it  is  rendered  here 
and  Ex.  xii.  7,  22,  23,  xxi.  6,  &c.  Amongst 
the  Jews  however  it  is  the  name  given  to  the 
square  piece  of  parchment,  inscribed  with 
E)eut.  vi.  4 — 9 and  xi.  13 — 21,  which  is  rolled 
up  in  a small  cylinder  of  wood  or  metal,  and 
affixed  to  the  right-hand  post  of  every  door 
in  a Jewish  house.  The  pious  Jew  touches 
the  Mezuzah  on  each  occasion  of  passing,  or 
kisses  his  finger,  and  says  in  Hebrew  Ps.  cxxi. 
8,  “ The  Lord  shall  preserve  thy  going  out,” 
&c.  See  Ginsburg  in  Alexander’s  Edit,  of 
Kitto's  Encyc.  article  Mezu%ah. 

10 — 25.  Having  stated  thus  emphatically 
their  primary  duty  towards  God,  Moses  goes 
on  to  add  warnings  and  cautions.  The  per- 
tinence and  the  necessity  of  these  are  derived 
from  the  existing  circumstances  of  the  case. 
The  Israelites  were  on  the  point  of  quitting 
a nomad  life,  in  which  they  had  lived  in  a 
great  degree  aloof  from  other  nations,  for  a 
fixed  and  settled  abode  in  the  midst  of  them; 
were  exchanging  a condition  of  comparative 
poverty,  in  which  they  possessed  nothing  ex- 
cept what  they  carried,  for  “ great  and  goodly 
cities,  houses  full  of  all  good  things,”  &c. 
I'here  was  then  before  them  a double  danger; 
that  namely  of  a God-forgetting  worldliness, 
and  that  of  a false  tolerance  of  the  idolatries 


practised  by  those  about  to  become  their 
neighbours.  The  former  error  Moses  strives 
to  guard  against  in  the  njv.  before  us;  the 
latter  in  vii.  i — ii. 

13.  and  serve  him^  and  shalt  svjear  by 
his  namely  The  LXX.  here  has  “ Him 
only  shall  thou  serve,  and  to  Him  shalt  thou 
cleave,  and  by  His  Name  shalt  thou  swear.” 
The  addition  of  fx6va,  clearly  implied  in  the 
Hebrew,  was  probably  mxade  simply  in  order 
to  bring  out  the  sense  more  forcibly.  In  this 
particular  the  LXX.  is  follovv'ed  by  St  Matt, 
iv.  10.  The  clause  “to  Him  shalt  thou 
cleave”  is  borrowed  from  the  parallel  passage 
X.  20,  which  the  LXX.  gives  word  for  word 
the  same  as  the  verse  before  us. 

The  command  “to  swear  by  His  Narne” 
is  not  inconsistent  with  the  Lord’s  injunction 
St  Matt.  V.  34,  “Swear  not  at  all.”  Moses 
refers  to  legal  swearing,  our  Lord  to  swear- 
ing in  common  conversation.  It  is  not  the 
purpose  of  Moses  to  encourage  the  practice 
of  taking  oaths,  but  to  forbid  that  when 
taken  they  should  be  taken  in  any  other 
name  than  that  of  Israel’s  God.  The  oath 
involves  an  invocation  of  Deity,  and  so  a 
solemn  recognition  of  Him  whose  name  is 
made  use  of  in  it.  Hence  it  comes  peculiarly 
wdthin  the  scope  of  the  commandment  Moses 
is  enforcing. 

20—25.  These  vv.  describe  more  par- 
ticularly the  command  already  given,  v.  7, 
“ thou  shalt  teach  these  words,  &c.” 


V.  21  — 6.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  VI.  VII. 


' Heb.  ^ in  time  to  come,  saying,  What  mean 
tomorrow.  testimoiiies,  and  the  statutes,  and 
the  judgments,  which  the  Lord  our 
God  hath  commanded  you  ? 

21  Then  thou  shalt  say  unto  thy 
son.  We  were  Pharaoh’s  bondmen 
in  Egypt ; and  the  Lord  brought  us 
out  of  Egypt  with  a mighty  hand  : 

22  And  the  Lord  shewed  signs 
and  wonders,  great  and  Uore,  upon 

• Egypt,  upon  Pharaoh,  and  upon  all 
his  household,  before  our  eyes  : 

23  And  he  brought  us  out  from 
thence,  that  he  might  bring  us  in,  to 
give  us  the  land  which  he  sware  unto 
our  fathers. 

24  And  the  Lord  commanded  us 
to  do  all  these  statutes,  to  fear  the 
Lord  our  God,  for  our  good  always, 
that  he  might  preserve  us  alive,  as  zV 
is  at  this  day. 

25  And  it  shall  be  our  righteous- 
ness, if  we  observe  to  do  all  these 
commandments  before  the  Lord  our 
God,  as  he  hath  commanded  us. 

CHAPTER  VIE 

I All  commiinio7i  with  the  nations  is  forbidden., 
4 for  fear  of  idolatry,  6 for  the  holiness  of  the 
people,  9 for  the  nature  of  God  in  his  tneiry 
and  justice,  1 7 for  the  assuredness  of  victoiy 
%uhich  God  will  give  over  them. 


HEN  the  ^Lord  thy  God " 31- 

shall  bring  thee  into  the  land  ‘ 
whither  thou  gocst  to  possess  it,  and 
hath  cast  out  many  nations  before 
thee,  the  Hittites,  and  the  Girgashites, 
and  the  Amorites,  and  the  Canaan- 
ites,  and  the  Perizzites,  and  the  Hiv- 
ites,  and  the  Jebusites,  seven  nations 
greater  and  mightier  than  thou  ; 

2 And  when  the  Lord  thy  God 

shall  deliver  them  before  thee  ; thou 
shalt  smite  them,  and  utterly  destroy 
them;  ‘^thou  shalt  make  no  cove- ^ 23. 

nant  with  them,  nor  shew  mercy  ^^4. 12. 
unto  them  ; 

3 Neither  shalt  thou  make  mar- 
riages with  them  ; thy  daughter  thou 
shalt  not  give  unto  his  son,  nor  his 
daughter  shalt  thou  take  unto  thy  son. 

4 For  they  will  turn  away  thy  Son 
from  following  me,  that  they  may 
serve  other  gods  : so  will  the  anger  of 
the  Lord  be  kindled  against  you,  and 
destroy  thee  suddenly. 

5 But  thus  shall  ye  deal  with 

them  ; ye  shall  destroy  their  altars, 
and  break  down  their  ^ images,  and 
cut  down  their  groves,  and  burn  their  or, 
graven  images  with  hre.  ^chap.  14. 

6 “^For  thou  art  an  holy  people  & 26. 19. 


25.  it  shall  be  our  righteousness~\  Lit. 
“righteousness  shall  be  to  us;”  i.e.  God  will 
esteem  us  righteous  and  deal  with  us  accord- 
ingly. The  LXX.  renders  “there  shall  be 
mercy  (IXerjiioavurj)  to  us:”  and  similarly  the 
Vulgate,  “God  shall  be  merciful  to  us:”  as 
if  to  guard  against  the  tenet  of  “justification 
by  works.”  The  word  translated  “righte- 
ousness” is  the  same  as  in  the  famous  passage 
Gen.  XV.  6;  rendered  in  the  New  Testament 
by  diKaioavurj ; but  often  in  the  LXX.  as 
here  by  i\er]iioG-vvr}.  It  is  often  found  in  a 
context  where  it  probably  means  liberality, 
beneficence,  &c.  (see  Gesenius’  Thesaurus,  s.  v.) ; 
but  there  is  no  need  in  this  no.  to  depart  from 
the  ordinary  and  proper  signification.  Moses 
from  the  very  beginning  has  made  the  whole 
“righteousness  of  the  law”  to  depend  so  en- 
tirely on  a right  state  of  the  heart,  in  one 
word,  on  faith,  that  there  can  be  no  real  in- 
consistency between  the  no.  before  us  taken 
thus  strictly  and  properly,  and  the  principle 
of  “justification  by  faith  only.” 

Chap.  VII.  i — ii.  See  on  vi.  10.  Moses 
proceeds  to  forewaim  Israel  against  a false 


toleration  of  idolatry.  Commerce  with  the 
idolatrous  nations  amongst  which  they  were 
about  to  live  might  easily  render  them  danger- 
ously familiar  with  superstitions  and  abomi- 
nations, against  which  it  was  a primary  pur- 
pose of  the  whole  legislation  to  raise  up  a 
witness  and  a protest.  Hence  the  stringency 
of  the  command  given  -vo).  a — 5,  and  repeated 
0)00.  23 — 26,  to  excommunicate  the  idolatrous 
nations  and  all  belonging  to  them,  and  to 
exterminate  their  degraded  worship  with  all 
its  appliances.  The  renewal  of  the  promises 
in  0)0).  1 2 sqq.  is  but  set  forth  as  supplying  a 
motive  for  the  more  zealous  and  effectual 
execution  of  these  duties;  and  thus  the  de- 
struction of  idolatry  and  idolaters  within 
the  sacred  precincts  of  the  chosen  people  ap- 
pears as  the  leading  topic  of  this  part  of 
Moses’  discourse.  The  words  and  phrases 
employed  will  be  found  parallel  to  various 
passages  of  the  preceding  books  given  in  the 
margin. 

5.  cut  doovn  their  gr Gooes']  Render  their 
idols  of  wood:  the  reference  is  to  the 
wooden  trunk  used  as  a representation  of 
Ashtaroth;  see  on  2;.  13  and  xvi.  21. 


828 


DEUTERONOMY.  VII. 


rfExod.  19.  ynto  the  Lord  thy  God  : "^the  Lord 
I Pet.  2. 9.  thy  God  hath  chosen  thee  to  be  a 
special  people  unto  himself,  above  all 
people  that  are  upon  the  face  of  the 
earth. 

7 The  Lord  did  not  set  his  love 
upon  you,  nor  choose  you,  because 
ye  were  more  in  number  than  any 
people  ; for  ye  were  the  fewest  of  all 
people  : 

8 But  because  the  Lord  loved 
you,  and  because  he  would  keep  the 
oath  which  he  had  sworn  unto  your 
fathers,  hath  the  Lord  brought  you 
out  with  a mighty  hand,  and  re- 
deemed you  out  of  the  house  of  bond- 
men,  from  the  hand  of  Pharaoh  king 
of  Egypt. 

9 Know  therefore  that  the  Lord 
thy  God,  he  is  God,  the  faithful 
God,  w'hich  keepeth  covenant  and 
mercy  with  them  that  love  him  and 
keep  his  commandments  to  a thou- 
sand generations ; 

10  And  repayeth  them  that  hate 
him  to  their  fiice,  to  destroy  them  : 
he  will  not  be  slack  to  him  that 


['"•  7—15- 

hateth  him,  he  will  repay  him  to  his 
face. 

1 1 Thou  shalt  therefore  keep  the 
commandments,  and  the  statutes,  and 
the  judgments,  which  I command 
thee  this  day,  to  do  them. 

12  ^ Wherefore  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  AT  ye  hearken  to  these  judg-^Heb. 
ments,  and  keep,  and  do  them,  that 

the  Lord  thy  God  shall  keep  unto 
thee  the  covenant  and  the  mercy 
which  he  sware  unto  thy  fathers  : 

1 3 And  he  will  love  thee,  and  bless 
thee,  and  multiply  thee : he  will  also 
bless  the  fruit  of  thy  womb,  and  the 
fruit  of  thy  land,  thy  corn,  and  thy 
wine,  and  thine  oil,  the  increase  of 
thy  kine,  and  the  flocks  of  thy  sheep, 
in  the  land  which  he  sware  unto  thy 
fathers  to  give  thee. 

14  Thou  shalt  be  blessed  above  all 
people  : ^ there  shall  not  be  male  or 
female  barren  among  you,  or  among 
your  cattle. 

15  And  the  Lord  will  take  away 

from  thee  all  sickness,  and  will  putyExod.  9. 
none  of  the  evil  diseases  of  Egypt,  4L5. 26 


7.  the  fe^ecest  of  all  people Moses  is 
here  referring  to  the  ground  or  motive  from 
which  the  election  of  Israel  was  originally 
made.  Though  it  might  have  seemed  suit- 
able that  the  God  of  the  universe  should 
choose  to  Himself  the  mightiest  nation  of  any, 
yet  God  had  not  so  acted.  He  chose  to  Him- 
self Israel,  when  as  yet  but  a single  family, 
or  rather  a single  person,  Abraham;  though 
there  were  already  numerous  nations  and 
powerful  kingdoms  in  the  earth.  It  is  then 
no  inconsistency  in  Moses  to  describe  Israel 
as  rivalling  the  stars  of  heaven  for  multitude 
(i.  10,  X.  22);  since  such  increase  had  taken 
]dace  because  of  the  very  blessing  of  God 
liere  spoken  of. 

9,  10.  repayeth  them  that  hate  him  to  their 
face^  i.e.  punishes  hlis  enemies  in  their  own 
proper  persons,  much  as  in  Ex.  xxxiii.  14. 
'Ehe  phrase  “to  their  faces'’  has  been  variously 
understood;  “openly,  manifestly”  (Grotius, 
Michaelis);  “instantly,”  “statim”  (Vulgate, 
I'ater,  &c.).  Dathe  connects  it  closely  with 
the  following  “to  destroy  them,”  and  renders 
“c|ui  vero  rependatsui  osoribus  preesentissima 
pernicie:”  the  word  “faces”  being  taken  as 
ecjuivalent  to  a reciprocal  pronoun,  “to  their 
own  very  selves.”  Better  perhaps  Rosenm. 
“ whilst  still  alive.” 


13.  flocks  of  thy  sheep~\  (^Ashterdth  tsone- 
cha).  Render  rather  the  ewes  of  thy 
sheep.  So  Gesen.  femella;  gregem  propa- 
gantes.  The  phrase  is  found  again  xxviii.  4, 
18,  51 ; but  is  peculiar  to  Deut.  The  former 
of  the  Hebrew  words  composing  it  is  the 
plural  form  of  Ashtoreth  the  well-known 
name  of  the  “ godde.ss  of  the  Sidonians” 
(i  K.  xi.  5).  This  goddess,  called  by  the 
classical  writers  Astarte,  and  identified  with 
Venus,  represented  the  fruitfulness  of  nature; 
cf.  xvi.  21  and  note.  The  name  Ashtaroth 
is  found  on  early  Egyptian  monuments:  see 
Brugsch,  ‘Recueil,’  i.  pi.  3. 

15.  e’vil  diseases  of  Egypt  ^ <which  thou  kno-jo- 
estl]  There  seems  to  be  here  not  so  much  a 
reference  to  the  plagues  inflicted  miraculously 
by  God  on  Egypt  (cf.  Ex.  xv.  26),  as  to  the 
terrible  diseases  with  which  above  other 
countries  Egypt  was  infested.  Pliny  (Nat. 
Hist.  XXVI.  i)  calls  it  “ the  mother  of  worst 
diseases,”  "Wagner  (‘  Naturgesch.  des  Men- 
schen,’  11.  270,  quoted  by  Schultz,  on  this  place), 
“a  focus  of  contagious  sicknesses.”  Cf.  xxviii. 
27,  35.  It  is  not  without  significance  that 
Egypt,  which  represents  in  Scripture  the  world 
as  contrasted  with  the  Church,  should  thus 
above  other  lands  lie  under  the  power  of  dis- 
ease and  death. 


V.  t6 2.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  VII.  VIII. 


which  thou  knowest,  upon  thee  ; but 
will  lay  them  upon  all  them  that  hate 
thee. 

1 6 And  thou  shalt  consume  all  the 
people  which  the  Lord  thy  God  shall 
deliver  thee  ; thine  eye  shall  have  no 
pity  upon  them  : neither  shalt  thou 
serve  their  gods  ; for  that  will  be  a 

^Exod.23.  g snare  unto  thee. 

17  If  thou  shalt  say  in  thine  heart, 
These  nations  a^^e  more  than  I ; how 
can  I dispossess  them  ? 

18  Thou  shalt  not  be  afraid  of 
them  : but  shalt  well  remember  what 
the  Lord  thy  God  did  unto  Pharaoh, 
and  unto  all  Egypt ; 

19  The  great  temptations  which 
thine  eyes  saw,  and  the  signs,  and 
the  wonders,  and  the  mighty  hand, 
and  the  stretched  out  arm,  whereby 
the  Lord  thy  God  brought  thee  out : 
so  shall  the  Lord  thy  God  do  unto 
all  the  people  of  whom  thou  art  a.Aaid. 

*Exod. 23.  20  '^'Moreover  the  Lord  thy  God 

Josh.  24.  will  send  the  hornet  among  them,  un- 
til  they  that  are  left,  and  hide  them- 
selves from  thee,  be  destroyed. 

21  Thou  shalt  not  be  affrighted  at 
them  : for  the  Lord  thy  God  is  a- 
mong  you,  a mighty  God  and  terrible. 

22  And  the  Lord  thy  God  will 

^ those  nations  before  thee  by 

^ j little  : thou  mayest  not  con- 

sume them  at  once,  lest  the  beasts  of 
the  held  increase  upon  thee. 

23  But  the  Lord  thy  God  shall 


829 


deliver  them  Tnto  thee,  and  shall  de- 

• 1 1 • before  thy 

stroy  them  with  a mighty  destruction, 
until  they  be  destroyed. 

24  And  he  shall  deliver  their  kings 
into  thine  hand,  and  thou  shalt  de- 
stroy their  name  from  under  heaven  : 
there  shall  no  man  be  able  to  stand 
before  thee,  until  thou  have  destroyed 
them. 

25  The  graven  images  of  their 
gods  shall  ye  burn  with  fire:  thou  * 

shalt  not  desire  the  silver  or  goldJk^7^-7- 
that  is  on  them,  nor  take  tt  unto  2’Mac.  12. 
thee,  lest  thou  be  snared  therein  : for 
it  is  an  abomination  to  the  Lord 
thy  God. 

26  Neither  shalt  thou  brino-  an 

O 

abomination  into  thine  house,  lest 
thou  be  a cursed  thing  like  it  : but 
thou  shalt  utterly  detest  it,  and  thou 
shalt  utterly  abhor  it;  ^for  it  is  a ^ chap.  13 
cursed  thing. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

A 71  exJiOliatioii  to  obedience  in  regiD'd  of  God\<7 
dealing  zoith  tJie7n. 

ALL  the  commandments  which  I 
±\_  command  thee  this  day  shall  ye 
observe  to  do,  that  ye  may  live,  and 
multiply,  and  go  in  and  possess  the 
land  which  the  Lord  sv/are  unto  your 
fathers. 

2 And  thou  shalt  remember  all  the 
way  which  the  Lord  thy  God  led 
thee  these  forty  years  in  the  wilder- 


17- 


ness,  to  humble  thee. 


thee,  to  know  what  was 


a?id  to  prove 
in  thine 


22.  Cf.  Ex.  xxxiii.  29,  30. 

25.  thou  shalt  not  desire  the  silaoer  or 
gold  that  is  on  theni]  The  silver  and  gold  with 
which  the  statues  of  the  gods  were  overlaid. 
St  Paul  is  probably  alluding  to  this  command 
Rom.  ii.  22,  (“Thou  that  abhorrest  idols,  dost 
thou  commit  sacrilege?”),  and  his  accusation 
of  the  Jew  thus  shows  that  the  prohibition 
of  the  text  was  a very  necessary  one. 

lest  thou  be  snarecT]  As  by  the  rich  ephod 
1*^  made  by  Gideon:  cf.  Judg.  viii.  27. 

, Chap.  VIII.  To  the  cautions  of  the  last 

chapter,  directed  against  the  risk  of  a lapse 
into  idolatry  through  association  with  it,  an- 
other no  less  pertinent  and  necessary  caution 
is  now  to  be  added.  The  long  wandering  in 
VoL.  I. 


the  wilderness  had  been  designed,  amongst 
other  purposes,  to  teach  God’s  people  humi- 
lity and  a self-distrusting  reliance  on  Him  for 
the  supply  of  their  necessities.  For  this  end 
had  Israel  long  been  kept  where  the  ordinary 
means  of  providing  for  their  bodily  life  and 
safety  were  insufficient,  and  where  their  own 
exertions  could  have  availed  but  little  (yv. 
3 — 6,  15,  16):  and  had  been  preserved  by  the 
special  providence  of  God.  But  this  extra- 
ordinary dispensation  was  now  to  end.  They 
were  about  to  take  possession  of  a fertile  land 
where  their  daily  wants  would  be  satisfied 
from  the  bounty  of  nature  in  the  usual  way 
(yu.  7 — 10).  But  as  the  former  discipline 
was  needed,  -so  now  when  it  was  about  to  be 
removed,  a warning  against  forgetting  its 
teachings  is  seasonable.  God  as  really  pro- 

3 G 


830 


« Matt.  4. 
Luke  4.  4 

^ Neh.  9. 

21. 


DEUTERONOMY.  VIII. 


heart,  whether  thou  wouldest  keep 
his  commandments,  or  no. 

3 And  he  humbled  thee,  and  suf- 
fered thee  to  hunger,  and  fed  thee 
with  manna,  which  thou  knewest 
not,  neither  did  thy  fathers  know ; 
that  he  might  make  thee  know  that 
man  doth  " not  live  by  bread  only, 
but  by  every  ivor<^  that  proceedeth 
out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  doth 
man  live. 

4.  ^Thy  raiment  waxed  not  old 


[v-  3—7- 

upon  thee,  neither  did  thy  foot  swell, 
these  forty  years. 

5 Thou  shalt  also  consider  in  thine 
heart,  that,  as  a man  chasteneth  his 
son,  SC)  the  Lord  thy  God  chasteneth 
thee. 

6 Therefore  thou  shalt  keep  the 
commandments  of  the  Lord  thy  God, 
to  v/alk  in  his  ways,  and  to  fear  him. 

7 For  the  Lord  thy  God  bring- 
eth  thee  into  a good  land,  a land 
of  brooks  of  water,  of  fountains  and 


vided  for  them  the  wealth  and  abundance  of 
Canaan  as  He  had  done  the  manna  of  the 
desert  (w.  17,  18). 

3.  but  by  eujery  <^dJord  that  proceedeth  out  of 
the  mouth  of  the  Lord\  Lit.  “every  outgoing 
of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord.”  Cf.  xxix.  5,6. 
The  term  “ word”  is  inserted  by  A.  V.  after 
the  LXX.,  which  is  followed  by  St  Matt,  and 
St  Luke.  On  the  means  of  subsistence  avail- 
able to  the  people  during  the  wandering,  see  on 
Num.  XX.  I.  “ Bread”  in  this  verse  stands  for 
the  ordinary  means  of  earthly  sustenance  in 
general.  Those  means  in  the  case  of  Israel 
were  withheld,  and  new  ones  by  God’s  al- 
mighty word  and  will  substituted.  Thus  was 
the  lesson  taught,  that  it  is  not  nature  which 
nourishes  man,  but  God  the  Creator  by  and 
through  nature;  and  generally  that  God  is  not 
tied  to  the  particular  channels  through  which 
He  is  ordinarily  pleased  to  work. 

4.  Thy  raimejit  coaxed  not  old  upon  thee^ 
neither  did  thy  foot  s^vell^  these  forty  years  Cf. 
xxix.  5,  “Your  clothes  are  not  waxen  old 
upon  you,  and  thy  shoe  is  not  waxen  old  upon 
thy  foot.”  These  words  in  a passage  like  the 
present,  where  the  speaker  is  not  so  much  nar- 
rating historically  as  alluding  for  hortatory 
purposes  to  God's  care  of  them  in  the  desert, 
may  signify  no  more  than  that  “ God  so  am- 
ply provided  for  them  all  the  necessaries  of 
life,  that  they  were  never  obliged  to  wear  tat- 
tered garments,  nor  were  their  feet  injured 
for  lack  of  shoes  or  sandals.” 

(Jf  course  they  had  clothes,  it  would  seem 
in  abundance  (cf.  Exod.  xii.  34,  35),  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  forty  years ; and  equally  of 
course  some  sources  of  supply  during  them. 
They  had  abundance  cf  sheep  and  oxen,  and 
so  must  have  had  much  material  for  clothing 
always  at  command  ; and  no  doubt  also  car- 
ried on  a traffic  in  these,  as  in  other  commo- 
dities, with  the  Moabites  and  the  nomadic 
tribes  of  the  desert.  Such  ordinary  supplies 
must  not  be  shut  out  of  consideration,  as 
regards  the  raiment  of  the  chosCn  people,  as 
they  cannot  in  the  similar  question  regarding 
their  victual:  cf.  on  Num.  xx.  i.  It  may 


have  been  that  these  natural  sources  were  on 
occasions  supplemented  by  extraordinary  pro- 
vidences of  God,  as  was  undoubtedly  the 
case  with  their  food.  So  substantially  Cal- 
met,  Kurtz,  Keil,  Wogue,  &c.  The  Jew- 
ish commentators,  in  bondage  as  elsewhere 
to  the  letter,  construe  the  u).  as  meaning  that 
the  raiment  of  the  Israelites  did  not  wear  out 
in  their  wanderings,  and  as  implying  even 
that  the  clothes  of  the  children  grew  with 
their  growth.  So  too  Justin  Mar.  ‘Dial, 
cum  Tryph.’  § 13 1 sub  fin.  The  lesson  of 
•V.  3,  which  it  is  the  object  of  Moses  to  im- 
press, comes  but  sufficiently  without  such 
suppositions. 

s^eir\  On  this  word  see  Note  at  end  of 
chapter. 

7 — 9.  On  the  ancient  fertility  of  Canaan 
see  on  Ex.  iii.  8.  In  these  •vu.  is  implied 
a contrast,  which  in  the  parallel  passage  xi. 
10,  II,  is  expressed,  between  Palestine  and 
Egypt.  The  latter  depends  entirely  on  its 
single  river;  without  the  Nile,  and  the  ut- 
most use  of  the  waters  of  the  Nile,  Egypt 
would  bo  a desert.  But  Palestine  is  well  dis- 
tinguished not  merely  as  “a  land  of  wheat 
and  barley,  and  vines  and  fig-trees  and  pome- 
granates, of  oil-olive  and  honey,”  but  em- 
phatically as  “a  good  land,  a land  of  brooks 
of  water,  of  fountains  and  depths  that  spring 
out  of  plains  and  mountains;”  “not  as 
the  land  of  Egypt,  where  thou  sowedst  thy 
seed,  and  wateredst  it  vdth  thy  foot,  as  a 
garden  of  herbs,”  but  a land  of  “ mountains 
and  plains  which  drinketh  water  of  the  rain 
of  heaven.”  This  mountainous  character, 
this  abundance  of  water  both  from  natural 
springs  and  from  the  clouds  of  heaven,  in 
contradistinction  to  the  one  uniform  supply 
of  the  great  river,  this  abundance  of  “milk” 
from  its  “cattle  on  a thousand  hills,”  of 
“honey”  from  its  forests  and  its  thymy 
shrubs,  was  absolutely  peculiar  to  Palestine 
amongst  the  civilized  nations  of  the  East. — 
Eeeble  as  its  brooks  might  be,  though,  doubt- 
less, they  were  then  far  more  frequently  and 
fully  filled  than  now,  yet  still  it  was  the 


V.  8—15.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  VIII. 


831 


depths  that  spring  out  of  valleys  and 
hills  ; 

8 A land  of  wheat,  and  barley,  and 
vines,  and  fig  trees,  and  pomegranates ; 
a land  ^ of  oil  olive,  and  honey ; 
reeofoii.  g A land  wherciti  thou  shalt  eat 
bread  without  scarceness,  thou  shalt 
not  lack  2Lny, thing  in  it;  a land  whose 
stones  are  iron,  and  out  of  whose  hills 
thou  mayest  dig  brass. 

chap.  6.  10  ^When  thou  hast  eaten  and 

art  full,  then  thou  shalt  bless  the 
Lord  thy  God  for  the  good  land 
which  he  hath  given  thee. 

II  Beware  that  thou  forget  not 
the  Lord  thy  God,  in  not  keeping 
his  commandments,  and  his  judg- 


ments, and  his  statutes,  v^hich  I com- 
mand thee  this  day ; 

12  Lest  when  thou  hast  eaten  jind 
art  full,  and  hast  built  goodly  houses, 
and  dwelt  therein ; 

13  And  when  thy  herds  and  thy 
flocks  multiply,  and  thy  silver  and 
thy  gold  is  multiplied,  and  all  that 
thou  hast  is  multiplied  ; 

14  Then  thine  heart  be  lifted  up, 
and  thou  forget  the  Lord  thy  God, 
which  brought  thee  forth  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,  from  the  house  of 
bondage ; 

15  Who  led  thee  through  that 
great  and  terrible  wilderness,  wherein 
were  fiery  serpents,  and  scorpions. 


only  country  where  an  Eastern  could  have 
written  as  does  the  Psalmist : “ He  sendeth 
the  springs  into  the  valleys,  which  run  among 
the  mountains,”  Those  springs  too,  however 
short-lived,  are  remarkable  for  their  copious- 
ness and  beauty. 

The  physical  characteristics  and  advantages 
of  a country  like  Palestine  must  have  been 
quite  strange  to  Israel  at  the  time  Moses  was 
speaking  : cf.  note  on  iii.  25.  It  is  signifi- 
cant that  Deut.  should  abound  more  than 
the  earlier  books  in  praises  of  the  fertility  and 
excellence  of  the  promised  land.  “ Such  a 
topic  at  an  earlier  period  would  have  in- 
creased the  murmurings  and  impatience  of 
the  people  at  being  detained  in  the  wilderness : 
whereas  now  it  encouraged  them  to  encoun- 
ter with  more  cheerfulness  the  opposition 
they  must  must  meet  with  from  the  inhabit- 
ants of  Canaan.”  (Dean  Graves  on  the  Pen- 
tateuch, pp.  45?  46.) 

8.  vines i]  The  abundance  of  wine  in 
Syria  and  Palestine  is  dwelt  upon  in  the 
Egyptian  records  of  the  campaigns  of  Thot- 
mosis  III.  In  Egypt  itself  but  little  wine  is 
produced.  The  country  has  not  the  slopes 
suitable  for  vineyards,  and  the  overflow  of 
the  Nile  occurs  about  the  season  when  grapes 
would  ripen.  The  Mareotic  wine  would  seem 
however  to  have  been  prized  (Hor.  ‘ Od.’  I. 
XXXVII.  14),  and  came  to  perfection  in 
Egypt  apparently  for  one  principal  reason 
which  forbad  the  successful  cultivation  of 
grapes  in  general,  viz.  the  fatness  of  the  soil. 

“Sunt  Thasias  vites,  sunt  et  Mareotides  albee 

Pinguibus  hoe  terris  habiles,  levioribus  illae.” 

Virg.  ‘ Georg.’  ii.  92,  93. 

The  production  of  wine  has  in  later  times 
gradually  ceased  in  Palestine,  cf.  Ritter, 
“ Pal.”  IV.  185  (Clark’s  Transl.),  except  in 


some  parts  of  the  south  where  there  is  a con- 
siderable Jewish  and  Christian  population, 
e.g.  near  Bethlehem  : cf.  Stanley,  “ S.  and  E.” 
p.  164,  and  Hebron,  Robinson  “Bibl.  Res.” 
It.  80,  81. 

9.  a land  nvbose  stones  are  iron^  and  ont 
of  vuhose  hills  thou  mayest  dig  hrass~\  For 
brass  read  copper:  cf.  on  Gen.  iv.  22.  AVe 
have  a highly  poetical  description  of  mining 
operations  Job  xxviii.  i — ii.  Mining  docs 
not  seem  to  have  been  extensively  carried  on 
by  the  Jews,  though  it  certainly  was  so  by 
the  Canaanitish  peoples  displaced  by  them; 
see  Rougemont,  ‘ L’Age  du  Bronze,’  pp.  188 
sqq.  Traces  of  iron  and  copper  works  have 
been  discovered  by  modern  travellers  on  Leba- 
non (Volney,  ‘Travels,’  il.  438);  and  many 
parts  of  the  country,  e.g.  the  district  of  Argob 
(see  notes  on  iii.  4),  contain  iron-stone  in 
abundance.  The  brass,  iron,  &c.  used  for 
Solomon’s  temple  were  probably  either  the 
spoils  of  war  (2  Sam.  viii.  8,  &c.),  or  im- 
ported. 

].5.  PVho  led  thee  through  that  great  and 
terrible  <wilderness.,  wherein  were  fiery  serpents^ 
and  scorpions.,  and  drought.,  vohere  there  was 
no  voater'\  The  insertions  made  by  our 
translations  seem  to  carry  the  construction 
needlessly  away  from  that  of  the  original. 
The  words  rendered  “ fiery  serpents  ” and 
“ scorpions,”  singular  nouns  in  the  Hebrew, 
stand  grammatically  in  apposition  with  “wil- 
derness.” The  word  rendered  drought  (tsim- 
mdon')  means  “a  dry  place  or  land;”  and 
should  be  closely  connected  with  the  clause 
following.  That  clause  literally  rendered 
would  run,  “a  dry  land  to  which  there  were 
no  waters.”  The  passuge  might  be  more  ac- 
curately rendered  thus:  “who  brought  thee 
through  that  great  and  terrible  wilderness,  the 

3G  2 


DEUTERONOMY.  VIII.  IX.  [v.  16-2. 


832 


and  drought,  where  there  was  no 
Numb,  water ; ^who  brought  thee  forth  water 
“■  out.  of  the  rock  of  flint ; 

16  Who  fed  thee  in  the  wilderness 
^Exod.  16.  with  ^ manna,  which  thy  fathers  knew 

not,  that  he  might  humble  thee,  and 
that  he  might  prove  thee,  to  do  thee 
good  at  thy  latter  end  ; 

17  And  thou  say  in  thine  heart. 
My  power  and  the  might  of  mine 
hand  hath  gotten  me  this  wealth. 

18  But  thou  shalt  remember  the 
Lord  thy  God ; for  it  is  he  that 
giveth  thee  *power  to  get  wealth,  that 


he  may  establish  his  covenant  which 
he  sware  unto  thy  fathers,  as.  zV  is 
this  day. 

19  And  it  shall  be,  if  thou  do  at 
all  forget  the  Lord  thy  God,  and 
walk  after  other  gods,  and  serve  them, 
and  worship  them,  I testify  against 
you  this  day  that  ye  .shall  surely 
perish. 

20  As  the  nations  which  the  Lord 
destroyeth  before  your  face,  so  shall 
ye  perish  ; because  ye  would  not  be 
obedient  unto  the  voice  of  the  Lord 
your  God. 


fiery  serpent,  and  the  scorpion,  and  the  dry 
land  where  are  no  waters.”  On  the  fiery 
serpents  see  on  Num.  xxi.  6. 

16.  to  ilo  thee  good  at  thy  latter  end'\  This 
is  presented  as  the  result  of  God’s  dealings. 
The  people  had  been  suffered  to  hunger  (yv.  3) 
and  fed  with  manna  in  order  that  God  might 
prove  them.  But  this  trial  was  not  laid  on 
them  arbitrarily,  but  as  a moral  discipline 
qualifying  for  the  blessings  which  God  de- 
signed ultimately  to  bestow.  The  “hum- 
bling” and  “proving”  are  exhibited  as  God’s 
immediate  purpose; — the  “doing  good”  to 


Israel  as  the  eventual  issue.  The  expression 
“at  thy  latter  end”  conveys  somewhat  more 
than  “ at  length,”  “ in  future.”  The  set- 
tlement of  Israel  in  Canaan  was  the  end  and 
climax  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  to  which 
the  sojourn  in  Egypt,  the  wandering  in  the 
desert,  and  the  arrangements  of  the  law, 
all  led  up.  “ Thy  latter  end  ” is  then  the 
later,  and  for  the  purpose  in  hand,  final 
epoch  in  the  national  life  to  which  all  that 
had  gone  before  was  preparatory  and  in- 
troductory. The  wilderness  was  to  the  Jew- 
ish Church  analogous  to  the  Cross,  Canaan 
to  the  Crown. 


NOTE  on  V.  4. 


The  Hebrew  word  rcndered  “swell”  in 
A.  V.  only  occurs  again  in  Neh.  ix.  21,  where 
it  is  quoted  from  the  present  passage.  This 
rendering  proposed  by  Jarchi,  is  followed  by 
Gesen.,  Fiirst,  Keil  and  the  majority  of  au- 
thorities. The  Hebrew  verb  seems  certainly 
connected  with  the  noun  p3k2,  dough ; and 
used  Ex.  xii.  34,  39,  and  elsewhere;  and 
probably  through  the  idea  of  the  swelling 


which  accompanies  fermentation.  The  LXX. 
renders  the  word  before  as  eTvXddrjaav.,  i.e. 
“ became  callous,”  in  this  place ; though  in  the 
parallel  passage  of  Neh.  it  has  bi^ppav-qaav. 
Vulg.  “ pes  tuus  non  est  subtritus.”  Onk 
Saad.  and  other  Versions  render  “unshod,” 
“ naked:”  all  these  senses  except  the  first  ap- 
pear to  be  conjectures  as  to  the  sense  of  the 
word  drawn  from  the  context. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

Moses  dissiiadeth  them  from  the  opinion  of  their 
own  righteousness,  by  rehearsing  their  several 
rebellions. 

EAR,  O Israel : Thou  art  to 
pass  over  Jordan  this  day,  to 


go  in  to  possess  nations  greater  and 
mightier  than  thyself,  cities  great  and 
fenced  up  to  heaven, 

2 A people  great  and  tall,  the  chil- 
dren of  the  Anakims,  whom  thou 
knowest,  and  of  whom  thou  hast  heard 


Ch.\p.  IX.  1 29.  Moses  has  been  warn- 

ing his  hearers  against  that  form  of  pride 
which  claims  victory  as  the  fruit  of  human 
might  only.  He  now  goes  on  naturally  to 
caution  them  against  another  and  subtler 
aspect  of  the  same  sin,  that  namely  which 


sees  in  success  only  the  reward  of  one’s  own 
righteousness.  The  real  causes  are  therefore 
set  forth  of  God's  dealings  as  to  the  Promised 
Land,  (i)  the  wickedness  of  the  Canaanitish 
nations,  and  (2)  free  grace  towards  Israel. 
The  lesson  is  exactly  that  of  Eph.  ii.  8,  “By 


V.  3—8.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  IX. 


* Nur.'.l 
13.  28. 


b chap. 
24. 

Hcb.  i; 
29. 


say^  Who  can  stand  before  the  chil- 
dren of  Anak  ! 

3 Understand  therefore  this  day, 
that  the  Lord  thy  God  is  he  which 
goeth  over  before  thee  \ as  2.  ^ co/i- 

'•  SLiming  fire  he  shall  destroy  them, 
and  he  shall  bring  them  down  before 
thy  face  : so  shalt  thou  drive  them 
out,  and  destroy  them  quickly,  as  the 
Lord  hath  said  unto  thee. 

4 Speak  not  thou  in  thine  heart, 
after  that  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
cast  them  out  from  before  thee,  say- 
ing, For  my  righteousness  the  Lord 
hath  brought  me  in  to  possess  this 
land  : but  fpr  the  wickedness  of  these 
nations  the  Lord  doth  drive  them  out 
from  before  thee. 

5 Not  for  thy  righteousness,  or  for 
the  uprightness  of  thine  heart,  dost 


thou  go  to  possess  their  land : but 
for  the  wickedness  of  these  nations 
the  Lord  thy  God  doth  drive  them 
out  from  before  thee,  and  that  he 
may  perform  the  word  which  the 
Lord  sware  unto  thy  fathers,  Abra- 
ham, Isaac,  and  Jacob. 

6 Understand  therefore,  that  the 
Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee  not  this 
good  land  to  possess  it  for  thy  right- 
eousness ; for  thou  art  a stiffnecked 
people. 

7 Remember,  and  forget  not, 
how  thou  provokedst  the  Lord  thy 
God  to  wrath  in  the  wilderness ; from 
the  day  that  thou  didst  depart  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt,  until  ye  came  unto 
this  place,  ye  have  been  rebellious 
against  the  Lord 

8 Also  in  Horeb  ye  provoked  the 


grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith;  and  that 
not  of  yourselves ; it  is  the  gift  of  God : not 
of  works,  lest  any  man  should  boast.” 

Moses  points  his  admonition  by  reminding 
them  of  their  repeated  rebellions  in  past  times, 
7,  8;  22,  23,  &c.;  and  dwells  especially 
on  their  apostasy  at  Horeb  (yvaj.  8 — ^21).  This 
was  so  flagrant  that  it  was  only  his  own 
earnest  intercessions  which  averted  the  de- 
struction of  the  people,  and  won  at  length 
from  God  a renewal  of  the  forfeited  pledges 
of  the  Covenant  25 — 29;  x.  i — ii). 

In  referring  to  these  circumstances  Moses 
here,  as  elsewhere,  has  regard  not  so  much  to 
the  order  of  time  as  to  that  of  subject.  (Cf. 
note  on  i.  9 — 15.)  He  inserts  e.g.  mention 
of  the  provocations  at  Taberah,  Massah,  Ki- 
broth-hattaavah  and  Kadesh-barnea  (gw.  22, 
23),  in  the  very  midst  of  the  narrative  respect- 
ing the  idolatry  at  Horeb  and  his  own  con- 
duct in  reference  thereto.  The  like  reasons, 
convenience  and  fitness  to  his  argument,  suffi- 
ciently explain  the  variations  observable  when 
the  statements  of  this  chapter  are  minutely 
compared  with  those  of  Exod.  xxxii. — xxxiv. 
There  is  no  real  discrepancy,  much  less  con- 
tradiction. Sometimes  the  more  particular 
history  of  Exodus  is  condensed;  as  in  ‘w.  26 
— 29,  where  the  substance  of  Moses’  inter- 
cessions on  two  occasions  (Ex.^xxxii.  ii — 13, 
xxxiv.  9)  is  summed  up  in  one  statement:  at 
other  times  circumstances  not  in  Exodus  are 
set  forth  here,  because  they  are  such  as  en- 
hance the  impressiveness  of  the  admonitions 
Moses  was  uttering;  e.g.  the  fact  is  put  for- 
ward that  Moses  fasted  for  t^ao  periods  of 
forty  days  (gw.  9 and  i-S),  one  such  fast  only 
being  expressly  named  in  Exodus;  as  is  also 


his  special  intercession  for  Aaron  (2;.  20).  In 
these  variations  we  have  nothing  more  or 
other  than  such  treatment  of  facts  as  is  usual 
and  warrantable  enough  between  parties  per- 
sonally acquainted  with  the  matters  in  ques- 
tion ; a treatment  which  implies  and  assumes 
a knowledge  of  the  facts  in  both  speaker  and 
hearer,  and  which  therefore,  there  being  no 
fear  of  misleading,  can  dispense  with  minute 
specifications  of  time,  place,  and  circumstance. 

3.  Understand  therefore'\  Render  And 
thou  Shalt  know.  The  verb  is  not  to  be 
taken  as  an  imperative,  but  as  simply  con- 
tinuing the  announcement  of  i,  “Thou 
art  to  pass  over  Jordan  &c. ; and  thou  shalt 
know  &c.” 

so  shalt  thou  drive  them  out.,  and  destroy 
them  quickly']  This  is  not  inconsistent  with 
vii.  22,  “thou  mayest  not  consume  them 
at  once,”  though  the  word  here  rendered 
“quickly”  is  the  same  as  that  there  trans- 
lated “at  once.”  In  the  former  passage  the 
Israelites  are  warned  not  to  expect  that  God 
would  bring  about  an  instant  annihilation  of 
the  Canaanites : the  word  there  employed 
(“ consume,”  has  clearly  this  force,  and 

the  reason  why  no  such  annihilation  was  to 
take  place  is  .assigned  there,  “lest  the  beasts  of 
the  field  increase  upon  thee.”  Here  Moses 
urges  the  people  to  trust  in  God’s  covenanted 
aid;  since  He  would  then  make  no  delay  in 
so  destroying  the  nations  attacked  by  them 
as  to  put  them  into  enjoyment  of  the  pro- 
mises, and  in  doing  so  as  fast  as  was  for  the 
well-being  of  Israel  itself. 

8.  Also  in  Horeb  ye  provoked  the  Lord] 
Rather  ‘■'■even  in  Horeb:”  the  conjunction  here 


834 


DEUTERONOMY.  .IX. 


[v.  9 — 21. 


Lord  to  wrath,  so  that  the  Lord 
was  angry  with  you  to  have  destroyed 
you. 

9 When  I was  gone  up  into  the 
mount  to  receive  the  tables  of  stone, 
the  tables  of  the  covenant  which 
«Exod.  24.  the  Lord  made  with  you,  then 
&34. 28.  abode  in  the  mount  forty  days  and 
forty  nights,  I neither  did  eat  bread 
nor  drink  water : 

^E.xod.31.  10  '^And  the  Lord  delivered  unto 

me  two  tables  of  stone  written  with 
the  finger  of  God  ; and  on  them  was 
written  according  to  ail  the  words, 
which  the  Lord  spake  with  you  in 
the  mount  out  of  the  midst  of  the 
lire  in  the  day  of  the  assembly. 

1 1 And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end 
of  forty  days  and  forty  nights,  that 
the  Lord  gave  me  the  two  tables 
of  stone,  even  the  tables  of  the  cove- 
nant. 

12  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me, 
'Exod.  32.  ^ Arise,  get  thee  down  quickly  from 

hence ; for  thy  people  which  thou 
hast  brought  forth  out  of  Egypt  have 
corrupted  themselves;  they  are  quickly 
turned  aside  out  of  the  way  which  I 
commanded  them  ; they  have  made 
them  a molten  image. 

13  Furthermore  the  Lord  spake 
unto  me,  saying,  I have  seen  this 
people,  and,  behold,  it  is  a stiffiiecked 
people : 

14  Let  me  alone,  that  I may  de- 
stroy them,  and  blot  out  their  name 
from  under  heaven  : and  I will  make 


of  thee  a nation  mightier  and  greater 
than  they. 

15  So  I turned  and  came  down 
from  the  mount,  and  the.  mount 
burned  with  fire  : and  the  two  tables 
of  the  covenant  were  in  my  two 
hands. 

16  And  I looked,  and,  behold,  ye 
had  sinned  against  the  Lord  your 
God,  and  had  made  you  a molten 
calf : ye  had  turned  aside  quickly  out 
of  the  way  which  the  Lord  had  com- 
manded you. 

17  And  I took  the  two  tables,  and 
cast  them  out  of  my  two  hands,  and 
brake  them  before  your  eyes. 

18  And  I fell  down*  before  the 
Lord,  as  at  the  first,  forty  days  and 
forty  nights : I did  neither  eat  bread, 
nor  drink  water,  because  of  all  your 
sins  which  ye  sinned,  in  doing  wick- 
edly in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  to  pro- 
voke him  to  anger. 

19  For  I was  afraid  of  the  anger 
and  hot  displeasure,  wherewith  the 
Lord  was  wroth  against  you  to  de- 
stroy you.  But  the  Lord  hearkened 
unto  m.e  at  that  time  also. 

20  And  the  Lord  was  very  angry, 
with  Aaron  to  have  destroyed  him : 
and  I prayed  for  Aaron  also  the  same 
time. 

21  And  I took  your  sin,  the  calf 
which  ye  had  made,  and  burnt  it 
with  fire,  and  stamped  it,  and  ground 
it  very  small,  even  until  it  was  as 
small  as  dust:  and  I cast  the  dust 


(as  often)  introduces  a special  example  of  a 
general  statement.  The  time  and  circum- 
stances made  the  apostasy  at  Horeb  particu- 
larly inexcusable. 

18.  7 fell  donxm  before  the  Lord^  as  at  the 

first']  iMoses  interceded  for  the  people  before 
he  came  down  from  the  mountain  the  first 
time:  Kx.  xxxii.  ii — 13.  This  intercession  is 
only  briefly  alluded  to  in  this  t,’.  Afterwards 
he  spent  another  forty  days  on  the  mountain 
in  fasting  and  prayer  to  obtain  a complete  res- 
titution of  the  covenant:  Ex.  xxxiv.  28.  It 
is  this  second  forty  days,  and  the  intercession 
of  Moses  made  therein  (cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  9),  that 
is  more  particularly  brought  forward  here  and 
in  w.  25 — 29.  Tliere  is  no  inconsistency 


between  the  two  accounts. 

20.  And  the  Lord  <was  'very  angry  msith 
Aaron  to  have  destroyed  him]  Israel  could 
not  boast  even  that  its  heads  and  representa- 
tives continued  faithful.  Aaron  had  been 
already  designated  for  the  high-priestly  func- 
tions; but  he  fell  away  with  the  rest  of  the 
people.  It  was  due  then  solely  to  the  grace 
of  God  and  the  intercession  of  Moses  that 
Aaron  himself  and  his  promised  priesthood 
with  him  were  not  cut  off;  just  as  at  a later 
time,  when  Aaron  had  actually  to  die  for  a 
new  sin  Israel  owed  it  still  to  the  same 
causes  that  Eleazar  was  substituted  and  the 
high  priesthood  perpetuated  (x.  6,  Num.  xx. 
25  sqq.  and  note). 


V.  2 2- 4-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  IX.  X. 


835 


thereof  into  the  brook  that  descended 
out  of  the  mount. 

/Numb.  22  And  at-^Taberah,  and  at  ^Mas- 
”Exod.’i7.  sah,  and  at  Kibroth-hattaavah,  ye 
J/Numb.  provoked  the  Lord  to  wrath. 

34-  23  Likewise  when  the  Lord  sent 

you  from  Kadesh-barnea,  saying,  Go 
up  and  possess  the  land  which  I have 
given  you  ; then  ye  rebelled  against 
the  commandment  of  the  Lord  your 
God,  and  ye  believed  him  not,  nor 
hearkened  to  his  voice. 

24  Ye  have  been  rebellious  against 
the  Lord  from  the  day  that  I knew 
you. 

25  Thus  I fell  down  before  the 
Lord  forty  days  and  forty  nights, 
as  I fell  down  at  the  first;  because 
the  Lord  had  said  he  would  destroy 
you. 

26  I prayed  therefore  unto  the 
Lord,  and  said,  O Lord  God,  destroy 
not  thy  people  and  thine  inheritance, 
which  thou  hast  redeemed  through 
thy  greatness,  which  thou  hast  brought 
forth  out  of  Egypt  with  a mighty 
hand. 

27  Remember  thy  servants,  Abra- 
ham, Isaac,  and  Jacob ; look  not 
unto  the  stubbornness  of  this  peo- 
ple, nor  to  their  wickedness,  nor  to 
their  sin  : 


28  Lest  the  land  whence  thou 
broughtest  us  out  say,  ^Because  the^Numb. 
Lord  was  not  able  to  bring  them 

into  the  land  which  he  promised 
them,  and  because  he  hated  them, 
he  hath  brought  them  out  to  slay 
them  in  the  wilderness. 

29  Yet  they  are  thy  people  and 
thine  inheritance,  which  thou  brought- 
est  out  by  thy  mighty  power  and  by 
thy  stretched  out  arm. 

CHAPTER  X. 

I God's  mercy  in  restoring  the  two  tables,  6 in 
contimiing  the  priesthood,  8 in  separating  the 
tribe  of  Levi,  10  in  hearkening  unto  Moses' 
suit  for  the  people.  12  An  exhortation  unto 
obedience. 

AT  that  time  the  Lord  said  unto 

me,  "Hew  thee  two  tables  of«Exod.34. 
stone  like  unto  the  first,  and  come 
up  unto  me  into  the  mount,  and 
make  thee  an  ark  of  wood. 

2 And  I will  write  on  the  tables 
the  words  that  were  in  the  first  tables 
which  thou  brakest,  and  thou  shalt 
put  them  in  the  ark. 

3 And  I made  an  ark  of  shittim 
wood,  and  hewed  two  tables  of  stone 
like  unto  the  first,  and  went  up  into 
the  mount,  having  the  two  tables  in 
mine  hand. 

4 And  he  wrote  on  the  tables,  ac- 


2 2 . Taber  ah . . . Kihroth-hattaauah~\  T he 
“burning”  which  gave  to  the  place  the  name 
of  Taberah,  occurred  on  the  outer  edge  of 
the  camp;  Num.  xi.  i,  see  note.  It  happened 
however  whilst  the  people  were  encamped  at 
the  station  afterwards  termed  Kibroth-hatta- 
avah, from  another  judgment  inflicted  there 
for  another  rebellion.  Taberah  was  then  the 
name  of  a spot  in  or  near  the  station  of  Ki- 
broth-hattaavah, and  accordingly  is  not  named 
in  the  list  of  encampments  given  Num.  xxxiii. 
16.  The  separate  mention  of  the  two  is  how- 
ever here  appropriate;  for  each  place  and  each 
name  was  a memorial  of  an  act  of  rebellion. 
The  instances  in  this  and  the  next  no.  are  not 
given  in  order  of  occurrence.  The  speaker 
for  his  own  purposes  advances  from  the 
slighter  to  the  more  heinous  proofs  of  guilt. 
The  transpositions  by  which  som.e  editors 
have  attempted  to  reduce  these  statements 
into  conformity  with  chronology  are,  when 
the  nature  of  the  language  before  us  is  con- 
sidered, alike  needless  and  unauthorized. 


Chap.  X.  1 — 11.  These  nono.  are  closely 
connected  with  the  preceding  chapter,  and 
state  very  briefly  the  results  of  that  inter- 
cession of  Moses  recorded  ix,  25 — 29.  They 
present  not  only  the  grant  of  the  second 
tables  of  the  Covenant  (nono.  i — 5)  but  the  in- 
stitution and  regulation  of  the  priestly  (gv.  6) 
and  Levitical  (nono.  8,9)  services,  and  even  the 
permission  to  march  onward  and  take  pos- 
session of  the  promised  land  (no.  ii),  as  all 
consequent  upon  Moses’  intervention.  Thus 
effectively  does  Moses  close  his  admonition 
against  spiritual  pride  by  reminding  the  people 
how  all  their  blessings  and  privileges,  forfeited 
by  apostasy  as  soon  as  bestowed,  were  only 
now  their  own  by  a new  and  most  unmerited 
act  of  grace  on  the  part  of  God,  won  from 
Him  by  the  self-sacrificing  mediation  of 
Moses  himself  (no.  10). 

1 — 5.  come  up  unto  me  into  the  mount,  and 
make  thee  an  ark  of  nvood,  &c.]  The  order  for 
making  the  ark  and  tabernacle  was  evidently 


836 


DEUTERONOMY.  X. 


[v,  5—10.  . 


cording  to  the  first  writing,  the  ten 

+ Heb.  ^commandments,  which  the  Lord 

'words.  , ' , - 

spake  unto  you  in  the  mount  out  or 
the  midst  of  the  fire  in  the  day  of 
the  assem.bly : and  the  Lord  gave 
them  unto  me. 

5 And  I turned  myself  and  came 
down  from  the  mount,  and  put  the 
tables  in  the  ark  which  I had  made  ; 
and  there  they  be,  as  the  Lord  com- 
manded me. 

6 ^ And  the  children  of  Israel 
took  their  journey  from  Beeroth  of 

*Niimb.  the  children  of  Jaakan  to  ^Mosera: 

^Nunib.  ^ there  Aaron  died,  and  there  he  was 
■ buried  ; and  Eleazar  his  son  minis- 
tered in  the  priest’s  office  in  his 
stead. 


7 From  thence  they  journeyed 
unto  Gudgodah  \ and  from  Gudgo- 
dah  to  Jotbath,  a land  of  rivers  of 
waters. 

8 ^ At  that  time  the  Lord  sepa- 
rated the  tribe  of  Levi,  to  bear  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord, 
to  stand  before  the  Lord  to  minister 
unto  him,  and  to  bless  in  his  name, 
unto  this  day. 

9 ‘^Wherefore  Levi  hath  no  part  ^g^umb. 
nor  inheritance  , with  his  brethren; 

the  Lord  is  his  inheritance,  accord- 
ing as  the  Lord  thy  God  promised 
him. 

10  And  I stayed  in  the  mount, 
according  to  the  first  time,  ^orty 
days  and  forty  nights  ; and  the  Lord 


given  before  the  apostasy  of  the  people  (Ex.  xxv. 
sqq.) ; and  the  tables  were  not  put  in  the  ark 
until  the  completion  and  dedication  of  the  ta- 
bernacle (Exod.  xL).  Buthere  aselsewhere  (cf. 
on  ix.  i)  Moses  connects  transactions  closely 
related  to  each  other  and  to  his  purpose  with- 
out regard  to  the  order  of  occurrence. 

6.  Beeroth  of  the  children  of  Jaakan']  This 
placeis  identical  with  the  Bene-jaakan  of  Num 
xxxiii.  31,  where  see  note. 

Mosera]  The  Moseroth  of  Num.  xxxiii.  31, 
where  see  note. 

there  Aaron  died]  i.e.  whilst  the  people 
were  encamped  at  Mosera  or  Moseroth.  In 
xxxii.  50  as  well  as  in  Num.  xx.  25  sqq. 
Mount  Hor  is  assigned  as  the  place  of  Aaron’s 
death.  It  is  plain  then  that  Moscrah  was  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Mount  Hor;  and  this 
is  confirmed  by  other  notices  of  the  locality. 
See  note  on  Numbers  l.c.  Aaron  did  not 
die  in  the  camp,  neither,  from  the  nature  of 
the  case,  could  the  camp  be  pitched  actually 
on  Mount  Hor.  It  was  of  course  located  on 
the  slopes  or  at  the  foot  of  the  mount ; more 
precisely  at  Moserah.  Thence  Moses,  Aaron, 
and  Eleazar  “went  up  into  Mount  Hor  in 
the  sight  of  the  congregation,”  and  “Aaron 
died  there  in  the  top  of  the  mount”  (Num. 
XX.  27 — 28). 

Eleazar  his  son  ministered  in... his  stead] 
The  appointment  of  Eleazar  to  minister  in 
place  of  Aaron,  as  in  w.  i — 3 the  restitution 
of  the  Decalogue,  and  in  'v'v.  8,  9 the  esta- 
blishment of  the  ministry  of  the  Levites,  is 
referred  to  in  ])roof  of  the  completeness  and 
fullness  of  the  reconciliation  effected  between 
God  and  the  people  by  Moses.  Though 
Aaron  was  sentenced  to  die  in  the  wilderness 
for  his  sin  at  Meribah,  yet  God  provided  for 


the  ’perpetuation  of  the  high-priesthood,  so 
that  the  people  should  not  suffer.  Cf.  ix.  20 
and  note. 

7.  Jothath.,  a land  of  rivers  of  vjaters] 
Parenthetical  mention  ismiadeof  the  two  jour- 
neys which  next  followed  Aaron’s  death;  and 
with  the  same  theme  apparently  in  view.  God 
showed  that  His  care  and  love  of  His  people 
were  not  diminished  because  of  the  sin  and 
consequent  death  of  the  first  solemnly  ap- 
pointed and  official  mediator,  Aaron.  God 
led  them  from  the  spot  where  they  had  wit- 
nessed Aaron’s  departure  to  a land  of  rest  and 
reireshment.  It  is  possible  however  that  these 
two  vv.  may  be,  as  may  some  other  notices 
of  a like  character,  a gloss:  cf.  note  on  ii. 
10 — 12,  and  20 — 23.  The  words  “at  that 
time”  in  8 certainly  connect  themselves  with 
V.  5 and  not  with  v.  7.  Jotbath  is  the  Jot- 
bathah  of  Num.  xxxiii.  33,  where  see  note. 

8.  At  that  time]  i.e.  that  of  the  encamp- 
ment at  Sinai,  as  the  words  also  import  in  v.  i. 
Throughout  the  passage  the  time  of  the  im- 
portant events  at  Sinai  is  kept  in  view,  and  is 
reverted  to  as  each  incident  is  brought  for- 
ward by  Moses,  alluded  to  sufficiently  for  his 
purpose,  and  dismissed. 

As  the  priests  were  of  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
their  special  duties,  as  well  as  those  belonging 
to  the  other  Levites,  may  generally  be  assigned 
to  that  tribe  in  contradistinction  to  the  other 
eleven.  It  was  properly  the  priest’s  office  to 
bless  (Num.  vi.  22  sqq.),  and  to  minister  before 
the  Lord  (ch.  xviii.  5),  whilst  the  non-priestly 
family  of  Kohath  (Num.  iv.  15)  had  the  duty 
of  bearing  the  ark.  But  Moses  is  evidently 
here  speaking,  of  the  election  by  God  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi  at  large,  priests  and  others  also, 
for  His  own  service.  On  the  passages  in 


V.  II — 16.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  X. 


837 


hearkened  unto  me  at  that  time 
also,  a7id  the  Lord  would  not  de- 
stroy thee. 

1 1 And  the  Lord  said  unto  me, 
tHeb.  Arise,  ^ take  thy  journey  before  the 

inland  pos- 
sess the  land,  which  1 sware  unto 
their  fathers  to  give  unto  them. 

12  ^ And  now,  Israel,  what  doth 
the  Lord  thy  God  require  of  thee, 
but  to  fear  the  Lord  thy  God,  to 
walk  in  all  his  ways,  and  to  love  him, 
and  to  serve  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thy  heart  and  with  all  thy 
soul, 


13  To  keep  the  commandments  of 
the  Lord,  and  his  statutes,  which 
I command  thee  this  day  for  thy 
good 

14  Behold,  the  heaven  and  the 
heaven  of  heavens  is  the  Lord’s  thy 
God,  ^ the  earth  also^  with  all  that 
therein  is. 

15  Only  the  Lord  had  a delight 
in  thy  fathers  to  love  them,  and  he 
chose  their  seed  after  them,  even  you 
above  all  people,  as  it  is  this  day. 

16  Circumcise  therefore  the  fore- 
skin of  your  heart,  and  be  no  more 
stiffnecked. 


Deut.  relating  to  the  priests  and  Levites,  see 
Introd.  § V.  and  Note  at  end  of  chap,  xviii. 

12  sqq.  After  these  emphatic  warnings 
against  self-righteousness  the  principal  topic 
is  resumed  from  ch.  vi.,  and  this  division  of 
the  discourse  is  drawn  to  a conclusion  in  the 
next  two  chapters  by  a series  of  direct  and 
positive  exhortations  to  a careful  fulfilment  of 
the  duties  prescribed  in  the  first  two  of  the 
Ten  W^ords.  Pride  having  been  shown  to 
be  utterly  out  of  place  in  those  who  had  so 
often  provoked  God,  and  who  owed  their  all 
to  God’s  forgiveness  and  Moses’  intreaties,  it 
remains  for  Israel  to  make  such  return  as  is 
possible  for  God’s  undeserved  mercies,  by 
loving  and  fearing  Him  and  diligently  keeping 
his  commandments.  Both  for  love  and  fear 
of  Him  abundant  cause  is  drawn  from  His 
past  dealings  wfith  Israel : from  His  condescen- 
sion to  their  fathers  {ynj.  14,  15),  and  to  them- 
selves in  their  distress  {yv.  18,  19);  and  from 
His  great  acts  for  them  and  against  their  ene- 
mies {y.  22 : xi.  I sqq.).  Finally  Moses  reminds 
them  of  the  consequences  which  await  their 
conduct ; prosperity  and  success  if  they  be 
faithful,  misfortune  and  sorrow  if  otherwise 
(xi.  13 — 25).  The  alternative  is  solemnly 
and  distinctly  set  before  them,  and  the  choice 
committed  to  themselves  (xi.  26  sqq.). 

12.  And  no^w,  Israel  &c.]  i.e.  “Since  all 
that  thou  hast  is  thus  shown  to  be  of  mere 
grace,  without  desert  of  thine  own.” 

nxjhat  doth  the  Lord  thy  God  require.^  &c.] 
A noteworthy  demand.  God  has  in  the  Mo- 
saic law  positively  commanded  many  things. 
These  however  relate  to  external  observances, 
v/hich  if  need  be  can  be  enforced.  But  love 
and  veneration  cannot  be  enforced,  even  by 
God  himself.  They  must  be  spontaneous. 
Hence,  even  under  the  law  of  ordinances 
where  so  much  was  peremptorily  laid  down, 
and  omnipotence  was  ready  to  compel  obe- 
dience, those  sentiments,  which  are  the  spirit 


and  life  of  the  whole,  have  to  be,  as  they  here 
are,  invited  and  solicited. 

14.  heaven  of  heavens']  Cf.  i K.  viii.  27; 
Ps.  cxlviii,  4.  The  phrase  is  an  exhaustive  one 
like  sscula  sasculorum,  al^ves  tSu  aloiuov ; 
and  imports  all  which  can  be  included  under 
the  name  of  heaven.  Cf.  St  Paul’s  record 
that  he  had  been  “caught  up  to  the  third 
heaven,”  2 Cor.  xii.  2.  The  declaration  that 
“heaven  and  the  heaven  of  heavens  is  the 
Lord’s”  warns  Israel  that  this  authority  is 
not  local  and  circumscribed ; that  He  was 
not  in  any  way  bound  to  make  election  of 
Israel,  but  did  so  (v.  15)  of  His  own  free 
grace. 

16.  Circumcise  therefore  the  foreskin  of 
your  hearty  and  be  no  more  stiffneckedd]  On 
circumcision  see  Gen.  xvii,.  Note  at  end 
of  chapter.  This  v.  points  to  the  spiritual 
import  of  circumcision.  Circumcision  must 
not  be  regarded  as  a rite  adopted  principally 
for  sanitary  reasons,  and  incorporated  into 
the  ritual  of  Moses  by  way  of  securing  its 
regular  observance.  Nor  is  it  enough  to  re- 
gard circumcision  as  representing  merely  the 
purity  of  heart  and  life  required  of  those  who 
would  dedicate  themselves  to  God.  Circum.- 
cisicn  was  rather  designed  to  set  forth  the 
truth  which  lies  at  the  very  basis  of  revealed 
religion,  and  which  requires  to  be  recognized 
as  a preliminary  to  the  saving  reception  of 
revealed  truth,  that  man  is  by  nature  “very 
far  gone  from  original  righteousness,  ” and  in 
a state  of  enmity  to  God.  The  peremptory 
requirement  of  circumcision  as  the  sacrament 
of  admission  to  the  privileges  of  the  chosen 
people  denoted  that  this  opposition  must  be 
taken  away  ere  man  could  enter  into  covenant 
with  God ; and  the  peculiar  nature  of  the 
rite  itself  indicated  the  origin  and  cause  of 
that  opposition,  and  marked  that  element  of 
our  nature  w'hich  is  the  most  guilty  and  fallen. 
It  was  through  the  flesh  that  man  first  sinned; 


DEUTERONOMY.  X.  XL 


[v.  17—2, 


838 

17  For  the  Lord  your  God  is 
God  of  gods,  and  Lord  of  lords,  a 
great  God,  a mighty,  and  a terrible, 
/2Chron.  which  -^regardeth  not  persons,  nor 
jJb^34. 19.  taketh  reward  : 

Acts  10.  jg  pjg  execute  the  judgment 

Rom.  2.  qP  the  fatherless  and  widow,  and  lov- 
Gai.  2. 6.  eth  the  stranger,  in  giving  him  food 
Cot’3^'25-  raiment. 

i^Pet.  I.  Love  ye  therefore  the  stranger: 

for  ye  were  strangers  in  the  land  of 
Egypt. 

chap.  6.  20  ^Thou  shalt  fear  the  Lord  thy 

Matt.  4.  God  ; him  shalt  thou  serve,  and  to 
Luke  4. 8.  him  shalt  thou  cleave,  and  swear  by 
chap.  13.  his  name. 

' 21  He  is  thy  praise,  and  he  is  thy 

God,  that  hath  done  for  thee  these 
great  and  terrible  things,  which  thine 
eyes  have  seen. 


22  Thy  fathers  went  dov/n  into 
Egypt  ^ with  threescore  and  ten  per-*Gen.  46. 
sons ; and  now  the  Lord  thy  God  eLl  i.  5. 
hath  made  thee  ^ as  the  stars  of  hea-  ^ ^5- 

ven  for  multitude. 

CHAPTER  XL 

I A7i  exhortation  to  obedience,  1 by  their  ozvn 
experience  of  God's  great  works,  8 by  promise 
of  God's  great  blessings,  1 6 and  by  threaten- 
ings.  i8  A careful  study  is  required  in 
God's  words.  26  The  blessing  and  curse  is 
set  before  them. 

Therefore  thou  shait  love 

the  Lord  thy  God,  and  keep 
his  charge,  and  his  statutes,  and  his 
judgments,  and  his  commandm-ents, 
alway. 

2 And  know  ye  this  day : for  1 
speak  not  with  your  children  which 
have  not  known,  and  which  have  not 
seen  the  chastisement  of  the  Lord 


as  it  is  also  in  the  flesh,  its  functions,  lusts, 
&c.,  that  man’s  rebellion  against  God  chiefly 
manifests  itself  still.  It  was  fitting  therefore 
that  the  symbol  which  should  denote  the 
removal  of  this  estrangement  from  God 
should  be  wrought  in  the  body.  Moses  then 
fitly  follows  up  the  command  “to  circumcise 
the  heart”  with  the  warning  “to  be  no  more 
stiffnecked.”  His  meaning  is  that  they  should 
lay  aside  that  obduracy  and  perverseness 
towards  God  for  which  he  had  been  reproving 
them,  which  had  led  them  into  so  many 
transgressions  of  the  covenant  and  revolts  from 
God,  and  which  was  especially  the  very  con- 
trary of  that  love  and  fear  of  God  required  by 
the  first  two  of  the  Ten  Commandments.  Si- 
milarly, XXX.  6,  circumcision  of  the  heart  is 
spoken  of  as  a necessary  condition  of  loving 
God;  and  on  the  other  hand  the  epithet  “un- 
circumcised” is  applied  to  the  heart,  lips,  &c. 
Lev.  xxvi.  41 ; Jer.  iv.  4 ; Ezek.  xliv.  9 ; Acts  vii. 
jT,  &c.,  to  denote  the  native  incapacity  of  the 
members  of  the  body  for  God’s  service.  The 
language  associated  with  circumcision  in  the 
Bible  distinguishes  the  use  made  of  this  rite  in 
the  Jewish  religion  from  that  found  amongst 
certain  heathen  nations.  Circumcision  was 
practised  by  those  nations,  and  as  a religious 
rite;  but  not  by  any,  the  Egyptians  probably 
excepted,  at  all  in  the  Jewish  sense  and  mean- 
ing. 1 1 is  found  e.g.  amongst  the  Phoenicians ; 
but  as  one  of  a class  of  usages,  human  sacrifices 
being  another  example,  which  were  designed 
to  aj>pease  a deity  representing  the  powers 
of  death  and  destruction,  and  supposed  there- 
fore to  delight  in  human  privation  and  suffer- 
ing. 

The  grounds  on  which  Circumcision  was 


imposed  as  essential  by  the  Law  are  the  same 
as  those  on  which  Baptism  is  required  in  the 
Gospel.  The  latter  in  the  New  Testament  is 
strictly  analogous  to  the  former  under  the 
Old;  cf.  Col.  ii.  ii,  12. 

17,  18.  For  the  Lord  your  God  is  God  of 
gods^  and  Lord  of  lords,  &c.]  The  demand  for 
a surrender  on  the  part  of  Israel  of  that  re- 
fractoriness towards  God  to  which  they  were 
prone,  is  followed  up  by  an  admonition  re- 
specting His  majesty  and  omnipotence.  As 
He  sums  up  in  Himself  all  power  and  might, 
He  will  not  {y.  17)  accept  sacrifices  or  gifts 
(cf.  Ps.  li.  16)  to  win  His  favour,  nor  will  He 
tolerate  resistance,  either  against  Himself  or 
(y.  18)  against  those  whom  He  takes  into  His 
protection. 

18.  The  uncircumcised  heart  is  ever  proud, 
hard,  selfish.  The  call  to  put  it  away  is 
naturally  coupled  therefore  with  an  admoni- 
tion that  though  “ God  be  high,  yet  hath  He 
respect  unto  the  lowly,”  and  with  an  injunc- 
tion to  “ love  the  stranger,  as  God  had  loved 
them  when  strangers  in  Egypt.”  Thus  would 
it  be  shown  that  they  had  circumcised  their 
hearts  indeed  (cf.  i St  John  iii.  10,  17,  and 
iv.  20). 

Chap.  XL  1.  keep  his  charge']  Cf.  Levit. 
viii.  35- 

2.  And  know  ye  this  day:  for  1 speak  not 
with  your  children  which  hanoe  not  known,  and 
which  have  not  seen  the  chastisement  of  the 
Lord  your  God,  his  greatness,  &c.]  Render: 
And  own  ye  this  day  (for  I have  not  to 
do  with  your  children  which  have  not 
known  and  which  have  not  seen)  the 


V.  3—10.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XL 


your  God,  his  greatness,  his  mighty 
hand,  and  his  stretched  out  arm, 

3 And  his  miracles,  and  his  acts*, 
which  he  did  in  the  midst  of  Egypt 
unto  Pharaoh  the  king  of  Egypt,  and 
unto  all  his  land  ; 

4 And  what  he  did  unto  the  army 
of  Egypt,  unto  their  horses,  and  to 
their  chariots ; how  he  made  the 
water  of  the  Red  sea  to  overflow 
them  as  they  pursued  after  you,  and 
how  the  Lord  hath  destroyed  them 
unto  this  day  ; 

5 And  what  he  did  unto  you  in 
the  wilderness,  until  ye  came  into 
this  place  ; 

« Numb.  6 And  what  he  did  unto  Da- 
& than  and  Abiram,  the  sons  of  Eliab, 

Ps.  io6. 17.  Qjp  Reuben  : how  the  earth 

opened  her  mouth,  and  swallowed 
them  up,  and  their  households,  and 


their  tents,  and  ail  the  substance  n Or, 
that  ^ was  in  their  possession,  in  t\\Q 
midst  of  all  Israel : 

7 But  your  eyes  have  seen  all  the 
great  acts  of  the  Lord  which  he  did.  was  at 

8 Therefore  shall  ye  keep  all  the 
commandments  which  I command  you 
this  day,  that  ye  may  be  strong,  and 
go  in  and  possess  the  land,  whither  ye 
go  to  possess  it ; 

9 And  that  ye  may  prolong  your 
days  in  the  land,  which  the  Lord 
sware  unto  your  fathers  to  give  unto 
them  and  to  their  seed,  a land  that 
floweth  with  milk  and  honey. 

10  ^ For  the  land,  whither  thou 
goest  in  to  possess  it,  is  not  as  the 
land  of  Egypt,  from  whence  ye  came 
out,  v/here  thou  sowedst  thy  seed, 
and  wateredst  it  with  thy  foot,  as  a 
garden  of  herbs  : 


chastisement  of  the  Lord,  his  great- 
ness, &c.  The  word  “chastisement”  is 
evidently  the  accusative  governed  by  the  verb 
at  the  beginning  of  the  7.;.,  rendered  “know” 
in  A.  V.  The  colon  placed  after  “day  ” should 
therefore  be  removed,  and  the  words  between 
the  verb  and  its  accusative  placed  in  paren- 
thesis as  above.  The  ellipse  in  the  parenthetic 
words,  supplied  in  the  A.  V.  by  the  insertion 
of  “I  speak,”  is  better  filled  up  as  above,  un- 
derstanding a common  Hebrew  phrase  {had- 
ddbbdr  hahoo)  : so  Schultz,  Keil,  and  Del.,  Bp. 
Wordsworth,  &c.  With  the  words  “which 
have  not  known  and  which  have  not  seen,” 
it  is  easy  from  the  context  to  supply  a clause 
equivalent  to  “what  ye  have  known  and 
seen.” 

The  “chastisement”  consisted  in  the  many 
mighty  acts,  both  of  punishment  and  mercy, 
through  which  God  had  guided  them  from 
Egypt  to  the  borders  of  the  Promised  Land. 
This  loving  discipline  Moses  calls  on  them  to 
recognize  and  lay  to  heart:  and  in  this  and 
the  following  four  he  specifies  some  lead- 
ing instances  of  its  exercise. 

6.  And  <ivbat  be  did  unto  Dathan  and  Abi- 
ram., the  sons  of  Eliab.,  the  sons  of  Reuben~\  It 
has  been  noted  that  Korah  and  the  Levites 
who  took  part  with  him  are  not  mentioned 
here,  though  in  Num.  xvi.  “ Korah  and  his 
company”  took  a leading  part  in  the  rebellion. 
It  may  be  added  that  the  nam.e  of  “On,  the 
son  of  Peleth”  (cf.  Num.  xvi.  i)  is  omitted 
also.  But  in  a mere  allusion  such  as  that 
before  us,  and  made  too  in  the  presence  of 
eyewitnesses  of  the  facts,  it  was  superfluous 
to  give  all  the  names  of  the  leaders  in  “the 


gainsaying,”  The  omission  of  Korah  andtl  e 
Levites  seems  intelligible  enough  when  we 
remember  that  Moses  was  addressing  and 
admonishing,  not  the  Levites,  but  the  con- 
gregation at  large.  The  rebellion  of  Korah 
evidently  included  an  attack  on  both  the 
ecclesiastical  and  civil  arrangements  of  Moses; 
see  note  on  Num.  xvi.  The  former  were 
assailed  by  Korah  and  certain  of  the  Levites, 
the  latter  by  Dathan,  Abiram,  and  On,  with 
250  other  “princes  of  the  assembly”  (Num. 
xvi.  a).  This  latter  was  the  only  portion  of 
the  sedition  which  it  was  relevant  to  Moses’ 
present  purpose  to  name;  and  he  therefore 
naturally  omits  the  former. 

all  the  substance  that  ^vas  in  their  possessioii] 
Render,  every  living  thing  which  fol- 
lowed them.  Literally,  “every  living  thing 
at  their  feet.”  The  expression  does  not  mean 
their  goods,  which  would  be  included  in  their 
“households  and  tents,”  but  their  followers, 
described  Num.  xvi.  32  as  “all  the  men  that 
appertained  to  Korah.” 

10.  Another  motive  for  fidelity  is  added, 
viz.  the  entire  dependence  of  the  Promised 
Land  upon  God  for  its  fertility.  It  was  “a 
land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey  ; ” yet  this 
its  richness  was  not,  as  was  that  of  Egypt,  the 
reward  of  human  skill  and  labour,  but  was, 
on  the  contrary,  the  gift  of  God  simply  and 
entirely;  the  effect  of  “the  former  and  the 
latter  rains”  sent  by  Him.  The  spiritual 
significance  of  these  and  many  other  such 
peculiarities  of  the  Promised  Land  must  not 
be  overlooked. 

Egypt  and  Canaan  are  distinguished  in  this 
and  the  following  verses,  by  certain  of  their 


840 


DEUTERONOMY.  XL 


[v.  II — 19. 


+ Heb. 
secketh. 


.II  But  the  land,  whither  ye  go 
to  possess  it,  is  a land  of  hills  and 
valleys,  and  drinketh  water  of  the 
rain  of  heaven  : 

12  A land  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  ^ careth  for : the  eyes  of  the 
Lord  thy  God  are  always  upon  it, 
from  the  beginning  of  the  year  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  year. 

13  ^ And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if 
ye  shall  hearken  diligently  unto  my 
commandments  which  I command  you 
this  day,  to  love  the  Lord  your  God, 
and  to  serve  him  with  all  your  heart 
and  with  all  your  soul, 

14  That  I will  give  yon  the  rain 
of  your  land  in  his  due  season,  the 
first  rain  and  the  latter  rain,  that  thou 
mayest  gather  in  thy  corn,  and  thy 
wine,  and  thine  oil. 


most  remarkable  physical  traits.  Canaan  as 
a mountainous  country  (cf.  on  iii.  25)  was 
well  watered,  but  by  the  rains  of  heaven,  on 
wJiich  it  absolutely  depended  for  its  crops. 
Without  the  autumn  rain  to  quicken  the 
newly  sown  seed,  and  the  spring  rain  to  give 
the  grain  bulk  and  substance,  the  harvest  of 
Palestine  would  totally  fail.  Nor,  from  the 
configuration  of  the  country,  could  artificial 
irrigation  do  anything  to  remedy  this  de- 
pendence. Hence  it  was  a land  on  which,  so 
long  as  God's  people  were  faithful  and  con- 
sequently prosperous,  “the  eyes  of  God” 
would  always  be:  i.e.  He  would  supply  at 
each  successive  season  (cf  14,  15)  the 
needful  conditions  of  productiveness.  But 
Egypt,  fit  emblem  here  as  elsewhere  of  the 
world  of  nature  in  distinction  from  the  world 
of  grace,  though  of  course  deriving  its  all 
ultimately  from  the  Giver  of  all  good  things, 
yet  directly  and  immediately  owed  its  riches 
and  plenty  to  human  ingenuity  and  capital. 
It  enjoyed  no  rain  worth  speaking  of,  but 
drew  its  water  supply  from  the  annual  over- 
fiowing  of  the  Nile.  This  only  lasts  about  a 
hundred  days;  but  is  rendered  available  for 
agricultural  purposes  throughout  the  year  by 
an  elaborate  and  costly  system  of  tanks,  canals, 
forcing  machines,  &c.  To  these  mechanical 
appliances  allusion  is  made  in  this  verse: 
“Egypt  where  thou  sowedst  thy  seed,  and 
wateredst  it  with  thy  foot.”  The  inhabitants 
of  Egypt  j)robably  watered  “with  the  foot” 
in  two  ways,  vi/.  by  means  of  tread-wheels 
working  sets  of  pumps,  and  by  means  of  arti- 
ficial channels  connected  with  reservoirs,  and 
opened,  turned,  or  closed  by  the  feet.  Both 
methods  are  still  in  use  in  Egypt  and  other 
similar  districts  of  country.  On  the  former 


1 5 And  I will  ^ send  grass  in  thy  t Heb. 
fields  for  thy  cattle,  that  thou  mayeSf^^^^' 
eat  and  be  full. 

16  Take  heed  to  yourselves,  that 
your  heart  be  not  deceived,  and  ye 
turn  aside,  and  serve  other  gods,  and 
worship  them  ; 

17  And  then  the  Lord’s  wrath  be 
kindled  against  you,  and  he  shut  up 
the  heaven,  that  there  be  no  rain, 
and  that  the  land  yield  not  her  fruit ; 
and  lest  ye  perish  quickly  from  off 
the  good  land  which  the  Lord  giveth 
you. 

18  ^ Therefore  shall  ye  lay  up 
these  my  words  in  your  heart  and 
in  your  soul,  and  '^bind  them  for  a ^ chap.  6. 
sign  upon  your  hand,  that  they  may 

be  as  frontlets  between  your  eyes.  chap.  4. 

19  And  ye  shall  teach  them  your  & 'e.  7. 


see  Hengstenberg,  ‘Auth.’  i.  435.  Of  the 
latter  Bp.  Daniel  Wilson  {e.gl)  speaks,  writ- 
ing from  Mayaveram  on  a visitation  tour ; he 
journeyed  (1835)  through  “rice-fields,  wav- 
ing with  their  green  mass  of  blade-grass, 
every  field  soaked  and  floated.  Literally  they 
‘sow  amidst  many  waters,’  ‘cast  their  bread 
(corn)  upon  them,’  ‘water  them  with  their 
foot,’  which  removes  the  petty  embankmeut 
when  tliey  let  in  the  stream ; whilst  ‘ the  send- 
ing out  thither  the  feet  of  the  ox  and  the  ass  ’ 
is  perpetually  seen.”  Bp.  Wilson’s  ‘Journal, 
Letters,’  p.  35.  Cf.  Virgil,  ‘Georgic,’  i.  106 
sqq. : 

satis  fluvium  inducit  rivosque  sequentes, 

Et  quum  exustus  ager  morientibus  aestuat 

herbis, 

Ecce  supercilio  clivosi  tramitis  undam 
Elicit ; ilia  cadens  raucum  per  Isevia  murmur 
Saxa  ciet,  &c. 

14.  the  first  rain  and  the  latter  raiti]  The 
Hebrew  nouns  are  here  rendered  in  sense 
rather  than  in  letter.  The  fonner,  derived 
from  a verb  signifying  to  cast  forth  or  to 
sprinkle^  is  the  proper  term  for  the  autumn 
rain,  falling  about  the  time  of  sowing,  and 
which  may  be  named  “the  former,”  as  occur- 
ing  in  the  early  part  of  the  Hebrew  civil  year, 
viz.  in  October  and  November.  The  other 
word  (pnalkosh')^  derived  from  a verb  signify- 
ing “to  be  late,”  or  “to  gather  in  the  late 
fruits,”  is  applied  to  the  spring  rain,  which 
falls  in  March  and  April,  because  it  fits  the 
earth  for  the  ingathering  of  harvest.  Be- 
tween these  two  wet  periods,  and  except  them, 
there  was  little  or  no  rain  in  Canaan.  Rain 
in  harvest  time  (cf.  i Sam.  xii.  17,  18)  was  so 
rare  as  to  be  regarded  as  portentous. 


V.  20 3*^-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XL 


841 


children,  speaking  of  them  when  thou 
sittest  in  thine  house,  and  when  thou 
walkest  by  the  way,  when  thou  liest 
dov/n,  and  when  thou  risest  up. 

20  And  thou  shalt  write  them  up- 
on the  door  posts  of  thine  house,  and 
upon  thy  gates  : 

21  That  your  days  may  be  mul- 
tiplied, and  the  days  of  your  children, 
in  the  land  which  the  Lord  sware 
unto  your  fathers  to  give  them,  as  the 
days  of  heaven  upon  the  earth. 

22  ^ For  if  ye  shall  diligently  keep 
all  these  commandments  which  I com- 
mand you,  to  do  them,  to  love  the 
Lord  your  God,  to  walk  in  all  his 
ways,  and  to  cleave  unto  him  ; 

23  Then  will  the  Lord  drive  out 
all  these  nations  from  before  you,  and 
ye  shall  possess  greater  nations  and 
mightier  than  yourselves. 

‘^josh.  I.  24  ^’Every  place  whereon  the  soles 
of  your  feet  shall  tread  shall  be  yours  : 
from  the  wilderness  and  Lebanon, 
from  the  river,  the  river  Euphrates, 
even  unto  the  uttermost  sea  shall 
your  coast  be. 

25  There  shall  no  man  be  able  to 


stand  before  you  : for  the  Lord  your 
God  shall  lay  the  fear  of  you  and 
the  dread  of  you  upon  all  the  land 
that  ye  shall  tread  upon,  as  he  hath 
said  unto  you. 

26  ^1  Behold,  I set  before  you  this 
day  a blessing  and  a curse  ; 

27  blessing,  if  ye  obey  the  com-  ^chap.  28. 
mandments  of  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  I command  you  this  day : 

28  And  a -^curse,  if  ye  will  not  ■/'chap.  28. 
obey  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 

your  God,  but  turn  aside  out  of  the 
way  which  I command  you  this  day, 
to  go  after  other  gods,  which  ye  have 
not  known. 

29  And  it  shall  come  to  .pass,  when 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath  brought  thee 
in  unto  the  land  whither  thou  goest 

to  possess  it,  that  thou  shalt  put  ^ the  ^chap.  27. 
blessing  upon  mount  Gerizim,  and  josh.  8. 33. 
the  curse  upon  mount  Ebal, 

30  Are  they  not  on  the  other  side 
Jordan,  by  the  way  where  the  sun 
goeth  down,  in  the  land  of  the  Ca- 
naanites,  which  dwell  in  the  cham- 
paign over  against  Gilgal,  beside  the 
plains  of  Moreh  ? 


21.  as  the  days  of  hea<ven  upon  the  earth~\ 
These  words  are  grammatically  connected 
with  the  verb  “multiplied”  in  the  beginning 
of  the  aK  The  sense  is;  “Keep  the  cove- 
nant faithfully,  and  so  your  own  and  your 
children’s  days  be  multiplied  as  long  as  the 
heaven  covers  the  earth.”  The  promise  of 
Canaan  to  Israel  then  was  d.  perpetual  promise, 
but  also  a conditional  one. 

24.  Every  place  qju  hereon  the  soles  of  your 
feet  shall  tread  shall  be  yours']  This  promise  is 
restricted  by  the  words  following  to  certain 
limits:  viz.  the  desert  of  Arabia  on  the  south; 
Lebanon  on  the  north;  the  Mediterranean  on 
the  west ; the  Euphrates  on  the  east  (cf.  Gen. 
XV.  18;  Josh.  i.  3,  4).  Before  the  word  Le- 
banon must  apparently  be  understood  the 
preposition  “from.” 

29.  thou  shalt  put  the  blessing  upon  mount 
Gerisedm]  Lit.  thou  shsXt  give^  i.e,  give  utter- 
ance to  it. 

The  word  Gerizim  is  probably  derived 
from  a root  (^gdraz)^  to  shear  or  cut  off.  It 
can  however  hardly  (as  Rosenm.  and  others) 
have  been  bestowed  on  the  mountain  because 
it  grew  large  crops,  and  so  found  much  em- 
ployment for  the  sickle.  Mount  Gerizim 
was  and  is  as  barren  as  Ebal  (see  Robinson, 


II.  276  sqq.):  and  was  probably  selected  as 
the  hill  of  benediction  because  it  was  the 
southernmost  of  the  two,  the  south  being 
the  region,  according  to  Hebrew  ideas,  of 
light,  and  so  of  life  and  blessing.  On  the 
ceremony  of  the  solemn  benediction  and  com- 
mination,  see  xxvii.  14  sqq. 

30.  Are  they  not  on  the  other  side  Jordan^ 
by  the  ^vay  vohere  the  sun  goeth  dovun^  in  the 
land  of  the  Canaanites^  vuhich  dvjell  in  the 
champaign  over  against  Gilgal^  beside  the  plains 
of  Moreh  ?]  The  situation  of  the  mountains 
is  here  described  more  accurately.  The  words 
“by  the  way  where  the  sun  goeth  down,” 
should  run,  bijyond.  the  road  of  the  west ; 
i.e.  on  the  further  side  of  the  main  track 
which  ran'  from  Syria  and  Damascus  to 
Jerusalem  and  Egypt  through  the  centre  of 
Palestine.  This  is  called  “the  way  of  the 
west”  in  contrast  to  the  other  main  route 
from  Damascus  to  the  south  which  passed 
through  the  district  east  of  Jordan.  The  por- 
tion of  this  western  road  which  lies  between 
Jerusalem  and  Nablous  is  described  in  Ritter, 

‘ Palestine,’  iv.  293  sqq.  (Clark’s  Transl.). 
Robinson  on  his  way  from  Acre  to  Jerusa- 
lem passed  over  the  same  portion,  and  de- 
scribes the  road  as  skirting  Ebal  and  Gerizim. 


842 


DEUTERONOMY.  XL  XII. 


[v.  31— I, 


chap.  5. 
32 


31  For  ye  shall  pass  over  Jordan 
to  go  in  to  possess  the  land  which  the 
Lord  your  God  giveth  you,  and  ye 
shall  possess  it,  and  dwell  therein. 

32  And  ye  shall  observe  do  all 
the  statutes  and  judgments  which  I 
set  before  you  this  day. 

CHAPTER  XII. 

I ]\Iommients  of  idolatiy  are  to  be  destroyed. 
5 The  place  of  God^s  sci-vice  is  to  be  kept. 


15,  23  Blood  is  forbidden.  17,  '-o,  26  Holy 
things  must  be  eaten  in  the  holy  place.  19 
The  Levite  is  not  to  be  forsaken.  29  Idolatry 
is  not  to  be  inquired  after. 

These  are  the  statutes  and  judg- 
ments, which  ye  shall  observe 
to  do  in  the  land,  which  the  Lord 
God  of  thy  fathers  giveth  thee  to  pos- 
sess it,  all  the  days  that  ye  live  uport 
the  earth. 


Traces  of  the  ancient  road,  which  is  still  a 
much  frequented  track,  were  noticed  in  many 
places  by  Robinson  ; see  “ Bibl.  Res.”  ill.  127 
sqq.  The  further  specifications  of  the  verse 
apply  only  indirectly  to  Ebal  and  Gerizim. 

Gilgal”  and  “ the  plains  (rather,  the  oaks, 
cf.  on  Gen.  xii.  6)  of  Moreh,”  are  added  to 
define  more  particularly  the  section  of  Ca- 
naanites  intended.  The  fact  that  the  whole 
district  in  question  is  clearly  placed  by  these 
local  notes  beyond  the  main  central  road  of 
Palestine,  ought  to  have  precluded  the  charges 
of  anachronism  brought  forward  on  the  as- 
sumption that  the  Gilgal  here  named  is  Gilgal 
by  Jericho,  which  only  received  its  name  in 
the  time  of  Joshua  (Josh.  v.  9). 

The  purpose  of  ^Ioses  is  to  mark  the  situa- 
tion of  two  mountains  which  were  to  be  the 
scene  of  a very  remarkable  function  of  his 
ritual.  He  describes  them  first  as  beyond 
Jordan,  on  the  banks  of  which  Israel  then 
was*;  next,  as  beyond  the  well-known  high 
road  through  the  country;  next,  as  in  the 
land  occupied  by  certain  Canaanites  “over 
against  Gilgal,  and  beside  the  oaks  of  Moreh.” 
I'hese  latter  were  apparently  familiar  to  the 
people  from  the  history  of  Abraham  (cf. 
Gen.  xii.  6),  and  were  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Sichem : obviously  therefore  the  Gilgal  by 
Jericho  is  out  of  the  question  in  the  case  be- 
fore us.  Whether  Deuteronomy  was  or  was 
not  written  after  the  time  of  Joshua,  the 
writer  of  this  verse  did  not  and  could  not  in- 
tend to  refer  to  a place  on  the  edge  of  the 
Jordan,  such  as  the  Gilgal  of. Joshua  v.  9,  but 
to  one  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Moreh  and 
Sichem,  some  thirty-five  miles  distant  at  least. 

l^earing  these  things  in  mind  it  seems  im- 
possible to  doubt  that  the  Gilgal  of  this 
verse  is  to  be  found  in  the  Jiljulieh  of  Robin- 
.son  (‘Bibl.  Researches,’  iii.  pp.  138,  139),  a 
large  village  about  twelve  miles  south  of  Geri- 
zim. J iljulieh  is  on  the  brow  of  a lofty  range  of 
hills,  and  would  be  very  appropriately  assign- 
ed as  a landmark.  It  is  called  “ Gilgoul”  by 
Ritter,  ‘ Pah’  iv.  268  (Clark’s  Transh).  It 
may  also  have  been  the  Gilgal  from  which 
IClijah  and  Idisha  “went  down”  to  Bethel 
(2  K.  ii.  I,  2);  and  which  is  repeatedly  named 
in  the  history  of  those  prophets.  The  Gilgal 
mentioned  Josh.  xii.  23  as  a capital  of  certain 


nations,  seems  to  have  been  a third  place  bear- 
ing this  descriptive  and  so  not  uncommon 
name.  See  note  there. 

Chap.  XII.  Having  thus  rehearsed  the 
Decalogue  and  enforced  its  leading  principles, 
Moses  now  passes  on  to  apply  those  prin- 
ciples to  the  ecclesiastical,  civil,  and  social 
life  of  the  people.  Fourteen  chapters  are  thus 
occupied.  In  proceeding  through  them  many 
particulars  will  be  noticed  which  are  peculiar 
to  the  law  as  given  in  Deut. ; and  even  in 
laws  repeated  from  the  earlier  books  various 
new  circumstances  and  details  are  introduced. 
This  is  but  natural.  The  Sinaitic  legislation 
was  nearly  forty  years  old,  and  had  been 
given  under  conditions  of  time  place,  and 
circumstance  now  distant  from,  the  present 
ones.  The  promised  land  was  in  sight,  the  law- 
giver hjmself  was  about  to  be  withdrawn,  and 
his  institutions  were  at  length  about  to  be  put 
into  full  effect.  Moses  in  ripeness  of  wisdom 
and  experience  now  completes  his  office  by 
enlarging,  explaining,  modifying,  and  supple- 
menting, under  Divine  guidance  and  sanction, 
the  code  which  under  the  like  authority  he  had 
in  earlier  days  promulgated.  Yet  the  Sinaitic 
system,  so  far  from  being  set  aside  or  in  any 
way  abrogated,  is  on  the  contrary  throughout 
presupposed  and  assumed.  Its  existence  and 
authority  are  taken  as  the  starting-point  of 
what  is  here  prescribed,  and  an  accurate 
acquaintance  with  it  on  the  part  of  the  people 
is  taken  for  granted.  It  is  too  much  to  say 
that  the  details  of  chaps,  xii. — xxvi.  can  be 
at  all  satisfactorily  grouped  in  order  round 
the  precepts  of  the  Decalogue ; but  the  allu- 
sions to  it  are  so  frequent  that  we  can  readily 
see  how  here,  as  in  other  parts,  the  book  of 
Deuteronomy  is  a kind  of  commentary  upon 
the  Decalogue,  and  an  application  of  it.  Yet 
the  particulars  into  which  Moses  enters,  with 
the  daily  life  and  w'alk  of  his  own  people  in 
their  future  Iiome  before  his  mind,  are  such 
that  the  prescriptions  in  these  chapters  are 
for  the  most  part  purely  national;  they  be- 
long to  the  ceremonial  and  civil  rather  than 
to  the  moral  elements  of  his  system. 

Moses  fitly  begins  with  regulations  pertain- 
ing to  the  worship  of  the  Israelites  during 
their  settled  life  in  Canaan. 


« chap.  7 
5- 

tOr, 

inherit. 


b Jud-. 

t Heb. 

I reak 
down. 


V.  2-5.]  DEUTERONOMY.  ^II.  843 


2 Ye  shall  utterly  destroy  all  the 
places,  wherein  the  nations  which  ye 
shall  ''possess  served  their  gods,  upon 
the  high  mountains,  and  upon  the  hills, 
and  under  every  green  tree  : 

3 And  '^ye  shall  ^overthrow  their 
altars,  and  break  their  pillars,  and 
burn  their  groves  with  fire  ; and  ye 
shall  hew  down  the  graven  images  of 


their  gods,  and  destroy  the  names  of 
them  out  of  that  place. 

4 Ye  shall  not  do  so  unto  the  Lord 
your  God. 

5 But  unto  the  place  which  the 
Lord  your  God  shall  “^choose  out  of  Kin.  s. 
all  your  tribes  to  put  his  name  there,  zChron.  7. 

unto  his  habitation  shall  ye  seek, 
and  thither  thou  shalt  come  : 


1 — 7.  On  the  command  to  destroy  the 
places  and  monuments  of  idolatrous  worship, 
see  on  vii.  5. 

3.  thetr  gron)es~\  Render  tlieir  idols  of 
■wood  : and  see  on  xvi.  21. 

4.  Te  shall  not  do  so  unto  the  Lord  your 
God~\  i.e.  “The  idolaters  set  up  their  altars 
and  images  on  any  high  hill,  and  under  every 
green  tree  at  their  pleasure,  but  shall  not  do 
so;  the  Lord  Himiself  shall  determine  the 
spot  for  your  worship,  and  there  only  shall 
ye  seek  Him,”  The  religion  of  the  Canaanites 
was  human;  its  modes  of  worship  were  of 
man’s  devising.  It  fixed  its  holy  places  on 
the  hills  in  the  vain  thought  of  being  nearer 
heaven,  or  in  deep  groves  where  the  silence  and 
gloom  might  overawe  the  worshipper.  But 
such  superstitious  appliances  were  not  worthy 
of  the  true  religion.  God  had  in  it  revealed 
Himself  to  men,  and  manifested  amongst 
them  His  immediate  presence  and  power.  It 
followed  of  course  that  the  machinery  of 
idolatry  must  thenceforward  be  swept  away  ; 
and  that  God  thus  come  down  amongst  men, 
would  Himself  assign  the  sanctuary  and  the 
ritual  of  His  own  service. 

5.  But  unto  the  place  <iuhich  the  Lord  your 
God  shall  choose  out  of  all  your  tribes  to  put 
his  name  there.,  eneen  unto  his  habitation  shall 
ye  seek.,  and  thither  thou  shalt  come~\  The 
A.  V.  here  follows  the  syntax  and  punctua- 
tion of  the  ordinary  Hebrew  text.  Others 
regard  the  word  rendered  “unto  his  habita- 
tion” as  a verb  infinitive,  and  connect  it  with 
the  preceding;  “to  put  his  name  there,  that 
he  might  dwell  there:”  Vulg.  “ ut  ponat  no- 
men SLium  ibi  et  habitet  in  eo ;”  cf.  2;.  1 1 . “To 
put  his  name  there ;”  i.  e.  to  manifest  to  men 
His  Divine  Presence.  The  Targumists  rightly 
refer  to  the  Shechinah.  The  expression  “ put 
His  Name,”  comprehends  however  all  the 
various  modes  in  which  God  vouchsafed  to 
reveal  Himself  and  His  attributes  to  men.  God 
is  present  everywhere  by  His  power ; but  is 
present  “per  prassentiam  gratice”  only  where 
He  has  covenanted  to  be  so ; as  He  is  “ per 
preesentiam  glorice  ” to  the  Angels  and  Saints 
in  Heaven. 

The  purpose  of  the  command  of  the  text 
is  to  secure  the  unity,  and  through  unity  the 
purity  of  the  worship  of  God.  That  there 


should  be  one  national  centre  for  the  religion 
of  the  people  was  obviously  essential  to  the 
great  ends  of  the  whole  dispensation.  Had 
fanciful  varieties  of  worship  such  as  Poly- 
theism delighted  in  been  tolerated,  the  Israelites 
would  soon  have  lapsed  into  idolatry,  and  the 
deposit  of  the  true  faith  and  knowledge  of 
God  would  have  been,  humanly  speaking, 
hopelessly  lost.  There  are  not  wanting  in 
their  history  examples  which  demonstrate  their 
proneness  to  this  corruption  as  soon  as  the 
precepts  of  the  text  were  relaxed  or  neglected : 
e.g.  that  of  Gideon,  Judg.  viii. ; of  Micah, 
Judg.  xviii. ; of  Jeroboam,  i K.  xiii.  Hence 
the  emphasis  and  reiteration  with  which  in 
this  chapter,  and  elsewhere  in  Dent.,  “will- 
worship  ” is  forbidden,  and  the  outward  reli- 
gious life  of  the  people  gathered  strictly  round 
the  authorized  sanctuary. 

The  prescription  before  us  is  not  altogether 
new.  Its  principle  is  clearly  laid  down  Ex. 
XX.  24,  simultaneously  with  the  very  first  pro- 
mulgation of  the  Law  at  Sinai.  Its  practice 
was  secured  during  the  journeyings  through 
the  wilderness  by  the  enactment  Levit.  xvii. 
I — 7,  which  forbad  the  offering  of  sacrifices 
elsewhere  than  “at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation.”  But  the  detection  and 
suppression  of  unlawful  worship  was  com- 
paratively easy  whilst  the  whole  nation  was 
organized  in  one  camp.  Now  that  the  two 
tribes  and  a half  were  established  beyond 
Jordan,  and  the  rest  were  soon  to  be  scattered 
in  their  settled  homes  over  the  whole  face  of 
the  promised  land,  the  opportunities  and  the 
temptations  for  setting  up  idol  shrines,  and 
for  devising  private  rites,  would  be  much 
greater.  As  a natural  and  necessary  con- 
sequence, the  command  before  us  is  repeated 
with  more  point  and  stringency,  and  is 
guarded  on  every  side  from  infringement. 

The  words  “the  place  which  the  Lord 
shall  choose  to  put  his  name  there  ” suggest 
Jerusalem  and  Solomon’s  Temple  to  our 
minds.  But  though  spoken  as  they  were  by 
a Prophet,  and  interpreted  as  they  are  by  the 
Psalms  {e.g.  Ps.  Ixxviii.  67 — 69),  they  have 
a proper  application  to  the  Temple,  yet 
they  must  not  be  referred  exclusively  to  it. 
Jarchi  names  Shiloh  as  the  spot  indicated; 
and  Jeremiah  (vii.  12),  speaking  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord,  calls  Shiloh  “my  place,  where  I 


844 


V.  6,  7-] 


Dli^UTERONOMY.  XII. 


6 And  thither  ye  shall  bring  your 
burnt  offerings,  and  your  sacrifices, 
and  your  tithes,  and  heave  offerings 
of  your  hand,  and  your  vows,  and 
your  freewill  offerings,  and  the  first- 
lings of  your  herds  and  of  your  flocks  : 


7 And  there  ye  shall  eat  before 
the  Lord  your  God,  and  ye  shall 
rejoice  in  all  that  ye  put  your  hand 
unto,  ye  and  your  households,  where- 
in the  Lord  thy  God  hath  blessed 
thee. 


set  my  name  at  the  first.”  The  text  in  truth 
does  not  import  that  God  would  always  from 
the  first  choose  one  and  the  same  locality  “to 
put  His  Name  there,”  but  that  there  would 
always  be  a locality  so  chosen  by  Him  ; and 
that ’thither  the  people  must  bring  their  sacri- 
fices, and  not  offer  them  at  their  pleasure  or 
convenience  elsewhere. 

Neither  does  the  text  forbid  the  offering  of 
sacrifices  to  God  at  other  places  than  the  one 
chosen  by  Him  “to  put  His  Name  there”  on 
proper  occasions  and  by  proper  authority. 
Moses  himself,  ch.  xxvii.  5,  6,  enjoins  the 
erection  of  a stone  altar  on  Mount  Ebal  for 
burnt  offei'ings  to  be  offered  on  the  day  of 
commination  : and  we  read  of  sacrifices  offer- 
ed at  various  places  by  Judges,  Prophets, 
Kings,  and  others,  and  accepted  by  God. 
Gideon,  e.g.  offered  a burnt  offering  at 
Jehovah  Shalom  in  Ophrah  (Judg.  vi.  24 
sqc].);  Manoah  did  the  like  at  the  suggestion 
of  the  angel  who  appeared  to  him,  no  doubt 
near  his  own  home  (Judg.  xiii.  16  sqq.); 
Solomon  in  Gibeon,  where  “the  Lord  appeared 
to  him”  (i  Kings  iii.  4,  5);  Elijah  on  Mount 
Carmel,  and  that  after  the  erection  of  the 
temple  (i  Kings  xviii.  31  sqq.),  (See.  Yet 
these  v'ere  no  transgressions  of  the  command 
of  the  text,  much  less  can  we  infer  from  them 
that  the  worshippers  knew  nothing  of  such 
a command.  Clearly  the  several  places  in 
question  were  Jor  the  particular  purpose  and 
occasion  as  really  “chosen  by  God  to  put  His 
Name  there,”  as  were  Shiloh  or  Jerusalem 
for  ordinary  purposes  and  occasions.  In 
short,  the  text  prohibits  sacrifices  at  any  other 
locality  than  that  which  God  should  appoint 
for  the  purpose.  It  is  no  contravention  of  it 
that  He  should  not  only  choose  a site  for  the 
national  sanctuary,  and  for  the  regular  worship 
of  His  people,  but  should  also  specially  direct 
on  extraordinary  emergencies  sacrifices  to  be 
brought  to  Him  elsewhere. 

6.  thither  shall  ye  hrhig  your  burnt  offer- 
ings^ and  your  sacrijices']  The  various  kinds  of 
sacrificial  gifts  are  here  specified,  in  order  to 
enforce  the  order  that  each  and  every  one  of 
them  is  to  be  offered  at  the  Sanctuary,  and 
nowhere  else.  Some  have  objected  that  this 
command  cannot  possibly  have  been  ever 
carried  out,  at  all  events  until  in  later  days 
the  territory  which  owned  obedience  to  it 
was  narrowed  to  the  little  kingdom  of  Judah. 
No  doubt  the  necessity  for  making  some  kinds 
of  ofierings  (e.g.  the  trespass-offerings)  must 


under  the  statutes  of  Levit.  v.  and  vi.  have 
arisen  very  frequently.  Can  it  have  been  im- 
perative on  every  one  who  contracted  cere- 
monial uncleanness  to  rid  himself  of  it  on  (#xh 
occasion  by  journeying,  perhaps  from  distant 
Dan,  or  the  further  side  of  Jordan,  to  Shiloh 
or  Jerusalem  to  offer  the  prescribed  sacrifices? 
Let  it  be  noted  that  the  dimensions  of  the 
difficulty  have  been  sometimes  over-estimated. 
Even  Dan,  the  furthest  point  of  the  land,  was 
less  than  100  miles  from  Jerusalem.  This 
fact  shows  that  the  rule  requiring  all  the 
males  to  go  up  to  the  Capital  at  the  three 
great  feasts  was  by  no  means  impracticable 
because  of  distance,  even  when  the  twelve 
tribes  were  united  in  one  kingdom,  especially 
as  these  feasts  all  occurred  in  the  summer 
months,  when  travelling  is  easy.  But  in  these 
and  in  other  precepts  Moses  doubtless  takes 
much  for  granted.  He  is  here,  as  elsewhere, 
regulating  and  defining  more  precisely  institu- 
tions which  had  long  been  in  existence,  as  to 
m.any  details  of  which  custom,  as  in  our  own 
law  both  of  Church  and  State,  superseded  the 
necessity  of  specific  enactment.  No  doubt 
the  people  well  understood  what  Maimonides 
expressly  tells  us  in  reference  to  the  matter, 
namely,  that  where  immediate  paym.ent  could 
not  be  made,  the  debt  to  God  was  to  be 
reserved  until  the  next  great  feast,  and  then 
duly  discharged.  Nor  need  we  doubt  that 
the  commutation  of  the  tithes  allowed,  xiv. 
24,  25,  was  extended,  as  indeed  would  follow 
from  the  nature  of  the  case  and  from  the 
parallel  directions  about  the  redemption  of 
things  not  presented  to  God  in  kind  {e.g. 
Num.  xviii.  15),  to  any  or  all  of  the  offerings 
here  enumerated,  as  occasion  might  require. 
The  thing  specially  to  be  observed  was  that 
no  kind  of  sacrifice  was  to  be  offered  except 
at  the  sacred  spot  fixed  by  God  for  its  ac- 
ceptance. The  reserving  of  an  offering  until 
it  could  be  made  at  this  spot  was  in  some 
cases  necessary  if  this  command  was  to  be 
kept : and  where  necessary  was  no  doubt 
lawful. 

7.  ^nd  there  ye  shall  eat.,  (&c.]  To  the  in- 
junction that  the  sacrifices  and  other  offerings 
to  God  were  to  be  made  only  at  the  Sanctuary 
is  here  added  another,  that  the  feasts  which 
accompanied  certain  offerings  were  to  be  also 
held  in  the  same  place.  This  command  is 
here  given  for  the  first  time  in  a peremptory 
form,  ^^'hilst  the  people  formed  but  one 
camp  the  sacrificial  meal  would  naturally  take 


V.  8—15.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XII. 


845 


8 Ye  shall  not  do  after  all  the 
things  that  we  do  here  this  day,  every 
man  whatsoever  is  right  in  his  own 
eyes. 

9 For  ye  are  not  as  yet  come  to 
the  rest  and  to  the  inheritance,  which 
the  Lord  your  God  giveth  you. 

10  But  when  ye  go  over  Jordan, 
and  dwell  in  the  land  which  the  Lord 
your  God  giveth  you  to  inherit,  and 
when  he  giveth  you  rest  from  all  your 
enemies  round  about,  so  that  ye  dwell 
in  safety ; 

1 1 Then  there  shall  be  a place 
which  the  Lord  your  God  shall 
choose  to  cause  his  name  to  dwell 
there  ; thither  shall  ye  bring  all  that 
I command  you ; your  burnt  offerings, 
and  your  sacrifices,  your  tithes,  and 
the  heave  offering  of  your  hand,  and 


place  at  the  spot  where  the  victim  was  slain 
and  offered,  as  was  the  custom  amongst  all 
other  nations.  But  when  the  people  lived  in 
dwellings  far  asunder  from  one  another  and 
from  the  Sanctuary,  there  was  need  to  enjoin 
precisely  the  same  thing  as  to  the  sacrificial 
meals  which  was  ruled  as  to  the  sacrifices 
themselves. 

It  is  not  here  specified  which  of  the  eight 
kinds  of  offerings  enumerated  furnished  the 
wherewithal  for  a feast  to  the  offerers,  and 
which  not.  This,  as  so  much  in  various  parts 
of  the  book,  is  presumed  to  be  known.  The 
burnt-offerings  e.g.  were  wholly  consumed  on 
the  altar ; and  the  sin-offerings  too  were  in 
certain  cases  wholly  burnt,  though  not  on 
the  altar  only  (Lev.  iv.  21).  These  sacri- 
fices therefore  left  nothing  for  the  worshippers 
to  partake  of.  Comparing  'vv.  17,  18,  we 
learn  that  the  presentation  of  the  tithes  and 
the  firstlings  was  also  associated  with  a feast. 
This  however  is  not  instituted  by  Moses 
here,  nor  indeed  anywhere  else.  It  makes 
its  appearance  incidentally  as  a custom.  All 
that  is  said  of  it  is  that  it  shall  take  place, 
like  other  such  feasts,  at  the  Sanctuary.  The 
firstlings  (Num.  xviii.  15  — 18)  are  assigned  to 
the  priests,  the  tithes  to  the  Levites  (Num. 
xviii.  21  sqc].).  On  the  participation  of  the 
people  in  the  feasts  made  upon  the  firstlings 
and  tithes,  see  xv.  19 — 23  sqq.,  and  on  Lev. 
8 sqq.  Moses  points  out  that  heretofore 
they  had  not  observed  the  prescribed  order  in 
their  worship,  because  during  their  migratory 
life  in  the  wilderness  it  had  been  impossible  to 
do  so.  During  their  wanderings  there  were 
doubtless  times  when  the  tabernacle  was  not 
set  up  for  days  together,  and  when  the  daily 
sacrifice  (Num.  xxviii.  i),  together  with  many 
VoL.  I. 


all  ^ your  choice  vows  which  ye  vow  t Hei). 

1 r ^ th<;  choice 

unto  the  Lord  ; of  your 

12  And  ye  shall  rejoice  before  the 
Lord  your  God,  ye,  and  your  sons, 
and  your  daughters,  and  your  men- 
servants,  and  your  maidservants,  and 
the  Levite  that  is  within  your  gates ; 
forasmuch  as  "^he  hath  no  part  nor chap.  10. 
inheritance  with  you. 

13  Take  heed  to  thyself  that  thou 
offer  not  thy  burnt  offerings  in  every 
place  that  thou  seest  : 

14  But  in  the  place  which  the 
Lord  shall  choose  in  one  of  thy  tribes, 
there  thou  shalt  offer  thy  burnt  offer- 
ings, and  there  thou  shalt  do  all  that 
I command  thee. 

15  Notwithstanding  thou-mayest 
kill  and  eat  flesh  in  all  thy  gates, 
whatsoever  thy  soul  lusteth  after,  ac- 


other  ordinances,  were  necessarily  omiLted. 
It  is  not  too  much  to  say,  in  face  of  the  fact 
(Josh.  V.  5 sqq.)  that  circumcision  itself  had 
been  for  many  years  neglected,  that  the  whole 
system  was  imperfectly  acted  upon  up  to  the 
death  of  Moses,  and  important  parts  of  it  left 
altogether  in  abeyance.  This  consideration 
must  be  carefully  borne  in  mind  throughout 
Deut.  It  illustrates  the  necessity  for  a repeti- 
tion of  very  much  of  the  Sinaitic  legislation, 
and  suggests  the  reason  why  some  parts  are 
so  urgently  reiterated  and  impressed,  whilst 
others  are  left  unnoticed.  The  speaker  has 
in  view  throughout  the  state  of  religion  and 
its  observances  amongst  his  hearers.  He 
warns  them  in  the  ‘vtj.  before  us  that  as 
they  were  now  about  to  quit  their  unsettled 
mode  of  life,  God’s  purpose  of  choosing  for 
Himself  a place  to  set  His  Name  there  would 
be  executed,  and  the  whole  of  the  sacred 
ritual  would  consequently  become  obligatory. 
The  rest  and  safety  of  Canaan  is  significantly 
laid  down,  w.  10,  ii,  as  the  indispensable 
condition  and  basis  for  an  entire  fulfilment  of 
the  law : the  perfection  of  righteousness  coin- 
ciding thus  with  the  cessation  of  wanderings, 
dangers,  and  toils. 

12.  hath  no  part  tior  inheritance  '^vlth you] 
Cf.  V.  19  and  xiv.  27,  xvi.  ii,  14.  On  the  al- 
lusions in  Deut.  to  the  condition  of  the  Levites 
see  Introduction,  § v. 

15.  In  Levit.  xvii.  3 — 6,  the  people  had 
been  forbidden  under  any  circumstances  to 
slay  any  animal  except  “at  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation.”  This  pro- 
hibition was  designed  (2;.  7)  to  cut  off  all  pre- 
texts and  opportunities  for  those  private  and 
idolatrous  rites  to  which  the  people  \vere 

.3^ 


846 


chap.  15. 
23- 


/"chap.  14, 
27- 

Ecclus.  7. 

31- 

t Heb. 
all  thy 
days. 

S Gen.  28. 
14- 

chap.  ig.  8, 


DEUTERONOMY.  XII.  [v.  16-29. 


cording  to  the  blessing  of  the  Lord 
thy  God  which  he  hath  given  thee  : 
the  unclean  and  the  clean  may  eat 
thereof,  as  of  the  roebuck,  and  as  of 
the  hart. 

16  ^ Only  ye  shall  not  eat  the 
blood ; ye  shall  pour  it  upon  the  earth 
as  water. 

1 7 Thou  mayest  not  eat  within 
thy  gates  the  tithe  of  thy  corn,  or  of 
thy  wine,  or  of  thy  oil,  or  the  first- 
lings of  thy  herds  or  of  thy  flock,  nor 
any  of  thy  vows  which  thou  vowest, 
nor  thy  freewill  offerings,  or  heave 
offering  of  thine  hand  : 

18  But  thou  must  eat  them  before 
the  Lord  thy  God  in  the  place  which 
the  Lord  thy  God  shall  choose,  thou, 
and  thy  son,  and  thy  daughter,  and 
thy  manservant,  and  thy  maidservant, 
and  the  Levite  that  is  within  thy 
gates  : and  thou  shalt  rejoice  before 
the  Lord  thy  God  in  all  that  thou 
puttest  thine  hands  unto. 

19  -/^Take  heed  to  thyself  that  thou 
forsake  not  the  Levite  ^as  long  as 
thou  livest  upon  the  earth. 

20  ^ When  the  Lord  thy  God 
shall  enlarge  thy  border,  ^as  he  hath 
promised  thee,  and  thou  shalt  say,  I 
will  eat  flesh,  because  thy  soul  long- 
eth  to  eat  flesh ; thou  mayest  eat 
flesh,  whatsoever  thy  soul  lusteth 
after. 

21  If  the  place  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  hath  chosen  to  put  his  name 
there  be  too  far  from  thee,  then  thou 
shalt  kill  of  thy  herd  and  of  thy  flock, 
which  the  Lord  hath,  given  thee,  as 
I have  commanded  thee,  and  thou 


be  strong. 


shalt  eat  in  thy  gates  whatsoever  thy 
soul  lusteth  after. 

22  Even  as  the  roebuck  and  the 
hart  is  eaten,  so  thou  shalt  eat  them : 
the  unclean  and  the  clean  shall  eat  of 
them  alike. 

23  Only  Te  sure  that  thou  eat  not 
the  blood : for  the  blood  is  the  life ; 
and  thou  mayest  not  eat  the  life  with 
the  flesh. 

24  Thou  shalt  not  eat  itj  thou 
shalt  pour  it  upon  the  earth  as  water. 

25  Thou  shalt  not  eat  it;  that  it 
may  go  well  with  thee,  and  with  thy 
children  after  thee,  when  thou  shalt 
do  that  which  is  right  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord. 

26  Only  thy  holy  things  which 
thou  hast,  and  thy  vows,  thou  shalt 
take,  and  go  unto  the  place  which  the 
Lord  shall  choose: 

27  And  thou  shalt  offer  thy  burnt 
offerings,  the  flesh  and  the  blood, 
upon  the  altar  of  the  Lord  thy  God : 
and  the  blood  of  thy  sacrifices  shall  be 
poured  out  upon  the  altar  of  the 
Lord  thy  God,  and  thou  shalt  eat 
the  flesh. 

28  Observe  and  hear  all  these 
words  which  I command  thee,  that  it 
may  go  well  with  thee,  and  with  thy 
children  after  thee  for  ever,  when 
thou  doest  that  which  is  good  and 
right  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  thy 
God. 

29  ^1  When  the  Lord  thy  God 

shall  cut  off  the  nations  from  before 
thee,  whither  thou  goest  to  possess  ^ 
them,  and  thou  Nucceedest  them,  and  inheritest, 
dwellest  in  their  land;  ^L'/thetTi!' 


prone,  as  well  as  to  gather  their  sacrificial 
worship  round  one  centre.  In  the  chapter 
before  us  the  latter  essential  object  is  insisted 
on  even  more  emphatically.  A reason  for 
this  increased  emphasis  may  be  seen  in  the 
fact  that  the  prohibition  against  slaying  animals 
for  food  elsewhere  than  at  the  Sanctuary  had 
necessarily  now  to  be  relaxed.  It  could  not 
be  maintainetl  when  the  people  were  dispensed 
in  their  homes  from  Dan  to  Beersheba.  Whilst 
then  a stringent  injunction  is  laid  down  that 
the  old  rule  must  be  adhered  to  as  regards 
anitnals  slain  in  sacrifice,  yet  permission  is 
given  to  slaughter  at  home  what  was  necessary 


for  the  table.  Such  meat  not  having  been  de- 
dicated to  God  could  be  partaken  of  by 
“ clean  and  unclean,”  and  at  home.  The  cere- 
monial distinctions  did  not  apply  in  such  cases, 
any  more  than  to  “the  roebuck”  (or  gazelle) 
“ and  hart,”  animals  allowed  for  food  but  not 
for  sacrifice. 

21.  If  the  place... be  too  far  from  tbee\  Rather, 
Because^  or  si  nee  the  place  will  be  too  far 
from  thee.”  The  allowance  given  in  'w.  15, 
1 6 is  repeated,  and  the  reason  of  it  assigned. 

27.  the  blood... shall  be  poured  out  upon  the 
altar']  Cf.  on  Lev.  i.  5. 


v.30-2.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XII.  XIII. 


30  Take  heed  to  thyself  that  thou 

tHeb.  be  not  snared  Ty  following  them, 
afterthem.  destroyed  from  be- 

fore thee;  and  that  thou  inquire  not 
after  their  gods,  saying.  How  did 
these  nations  serve  their  gods?  even 
so  will  I do  likewise. 

31  Thou  shalt  not  do  so  unto  the 
tHeb.  Lord  thy  God;  for  every  Ubomina- 
]^ml/The.  tion  to  the  Lord,  which  he  hateth, 

have  they  done  unto  their  gods ; for 
even  their  sons  and  their  daughters  they 
have  burnt  in  the  hre  to  their  gods. 

32  What  thing  soever  I command 


847 

you,  observe  to  do  it:  ^'thou  shalt  not  chap.  4. 
add  thereto,  nor  diminish  from  it.  josh.  i. 

Prov.  30. 

CHAPTER  XIII.  6 

^ 22* 

I Enticers  to  idolatry^  6 how  near  soever  unto  i8. 
thee^  9 arc  to  be  stoned  to  death.  12  Idola- 
trous cities  are  not  to  be  spared. 

IF*  there  arise  among  you  a pro- 
phet, or  a dreamer  of  dreams,  and 
giveth  thee  a sign  or  a wonder, 

2 And  the  sign  or  the  wonder 
come  to  pass,  whereof  he  spake  unto 
thee,  saying.  Let  us  go  after  other 
gods,  which  thou  hast  not  known, 
and  let  us  serve  them ; 


30.  Take  heed  to  thyself  that  thou  be  not 
snared  by  fol having  them.,  after  that  they  be 
destroyed  from  before  thee~\  This  caution  is 
based  upon  the  notion  generally  entertained  in 
the  ancient  heathen  world,  that  each  country 
had  its  own  tutelary  deities  whom  it  would  be 
perilous  to  neglect  (^eo't  eVix«ptoi) ; cf.  i K. 
XX.  23;  2 K.  xvii.  26.  Hence  even  in  con- 
quered districts  the  worship  of  the  local  deities 
was  wont  to  be  scrupulously  maintained.  But 
Israel  was  to  shun  such  superstitions. 

Chap.  XIII.  The  admonition  of  the 
closing  verse  of  the  last  chapter,  to  observe 
the  whole  of  God’s  commands  without  addi- 
tion or  subtraction,  introduces  a new  series 
cf  warnings  intended  to  serve  as  a further 
safeguard  against  violation  of  these  duties. 
The  true  modes  and  forms  of  worship  have 
been  laid  down ; the  next  step  is  to  legislate 
against  the  authors  and  abettors  of  false  ones. 
Such  tempters  are  not  to  be  spared,  even 
though  (yvas.  i — 5)  their  teaching  be  con- 
firmed by  miracles:  or  (yvn).^ — 12)  they  be 
nearly  allied  by  kindred  or  friendship : or 
(‘I’T’.  12 — 19)  be  supported  in  their  apostasy 
by  a whole  city. 

1.  a prophet.,  or  a dreamer  of  dreams']  Cf. 
Num.  xii.  6.  The  “ prophet”  received  his  re- 
velations by  vision  or  direct  oral  communi- 
cation ; “ the  dreamer  of  dreams”  through  the 
medium  of  a dream.  Balaam  “fell  into  a 
trance,  yet  had  his  eyes  open,”  Num.  xxiv.  16  : 
St  Paul  was  “caught  up  to  the  third  heaven, 
and  heard  unspeakable  words,”  2 Cor.  xii.  2 
sqq.  Nathan  received  the  word  of  the  Lord 
in  the  night  (2  Sam.  vii.  4).  All  these  in 
various  ways  had  the  will  of  God  made 
known  to  them  as  “ prophets.”  Such  revela- 
tions are  different  in  kind  from  the  less 
direct  ones  made  by  dreams  ; as  e.g.  to  King 
Solomon,  i Kings  iii.  5 ; to  Joseph,  St  Matt, 
ii.  13.  On  the  occurrence  of  the  word  “ pro- 
phet” (ndbhT)  in  the  Pentateuch,  erroneously 
regarded  by  some  as  a mark  of  late  origin,  see 
Introd.  to  Numbers,  § 4. 


2.  And  the  sign  or  the  'ivonder  come  to 
pass]  The  people  are  warned  not  to  listen 
to  the  seducer  even  should  he  show  signs 
and  wonders  to  authenticate  his  doctrine. 
The  Lord  had  said  “Thou  shalt  have  none 
other  Gods  but  Me.”  A prophet  is  here  sup- 
posed who  invites  the  people  “to  go  after 
other  Gods.”  To  such  a one  no  credit  is 
under  any  circumstances  to  be  given.  The 
standing  rule  of  faith  and  practice  had  been 
laid  down  once  for  all.  That  the  people  were 
to  hold  fast.  The  prophet  who  propounded 
another  rule  could  only  be  an  impostor. 

We  need  not  then  suppose  that  Moses  is 
putting  an  impossible  case  by  way  of  enforcing 
his  words,  as  St  Paul  does  Gal.  i.  6 ; nor  yet 
that  the  prophet  in  question  is  one  who 
was  originally  a true  prophet,  and  obtained 
authority  by  his  miracles  as  such,  but  was 
afterwards  drawn  away  into  apostasy. 

In  ch.  xviii.  18  sqq.  Israel  is  led  to  expect 
that  God  will  hereafter  send  prophets  to  speak 
in  His  name : and  the  accomplishment  of 
their  predictions  is  laid  down  as  a proof  (yva). 
21,  22)  of  their  authority.  But  the  context 
renders  it  clear  that  the  case  supposed  is  not 
the  one  before  us  in  this  chapter.  Here  a 
prophet  is  spoken  of  who  teaches  in  plain 
contradiction  to  the  received  and  accredited 
standards  of  truth  by  advocating  a distinct 
apostasy : there  the  prophet  is  assumed  to 
recognize  those  standards,  and  to  be  primd 
facie  within  the  limits  of  the  religious  system 
authorized  by  God  as  to  doctrine  and  mission. 

The  Jews  applied  0)00. 2 — 5 to  Christ  and  His 
followers,  as  though  their  teaching  aimed  at 
bringing  about  a revolt  from  the  law  of  Moses. 
But  the  Gospel  is  not  only  no  contradic- 
tion or  abolition  of  the  law,  but  is  its  comple- 
ment and  fulfilment,  and  was  always  presented 
in  that  light  by  Christ  and  His  Apostles. 
The  Jews  ought  then,  instead  of  endeavouring 
to  stone  Christ  and  His  disciples  as  men  who 
sought  to  draw  them  away  to  apostasy  (cf.  St 
John  viii.  58,  59),  rather  to  have  given  heed 
to  the  comm.and  of  ch.  xviii.,  and  “hearkened 

3H  2 


DEUTERONOMY.  XIII. 


U 3—13. 


348 


« chap.  10. 
20. 


T Heb. 
sJ>oke?i 
revolt 
against 
the  Lord. 


3 Thou  shalt  not  hearken  unto  the 
words  of  that  prophet,  or  that  dream- 
er of  dreams : for  the  LoPvD  your  God 
proveth  you,  to  know  whether  ye  love 
the  Lord  your  God  with  all  your 
heart  and  with  all  your  soul. 

4 Ye  shall  walk  after  the  Lord 
your  God,  and  fear  him,  and  keep  his 
commandments,  and  obey  his  voice, 
and  ye  shall  serve  him,  and  "cleave 
unto  him. 

5 And  that  prophet,  or  that  dream- 
er of  dreams,  shall  be  put  to  death; 
because  he  hach  Epoken  to  turn  you 
away  from  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  redeemed  you  out  of  the 
house  of  bondage,  to  thrust  thee  out 
of  the  way  which  the  Lord  thy  God 
commanded  thee  to  walk  in.  So  shalt 
thou  put  the  evil  away  from  the  midst 
of  thee. 

6 ^ If  thy  brother,  the  son  of  thy 
mother,  or  thy  son,  or  thy  daughter, 
or  the  wife  of  thy  bosom,  or  thy 
friend,  which  is  as  thine  own  soul, 
entice  thee  secretly,  saying.  Let  us  go 
and  serve  ether  gods,  which  thou  hast 
not  known,  thou,  nor  thy  fathers ; 


7 Namely^  of  the  gods  of  the  peo- 
ple which  are  round  about  you,  nigh 
unto  thee,  or  far  off  from  thee,  from 
the  one  end  of  the  earth  even  unto  the 
other  end  of  the  earth ; 

8 Thou  shalt  not  consent  unto 
him,  nor  hearken  unto  him;  neither 
shall  thine  eye  pity  him,  neither  shalt 
thou  spare,  neither  shalt  thou  conceal 
him : 

9 But  ^thou  shalt  surely  kill  him;**^^^^- 
thine  hand  shall  be  first  upon  him  to 

put  him  to  death,  and  afterwards  the 
hand  of  all  the  people. 

10  And  thou  shalt  stone  him  with 

stones,  that  he  die;  because  he  hath 
sought  to  thrust  thee  away  from  the 
Lord  thy  God,  which  brought  thee 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  from  the  ^ ^ ^ 
house  of  ^ bondage.  bondmeit. 

11  And  ‘^all  Israel  shall  hear,  and 
fear,  and  shall  do  no  more  any  such 
wickedness  as  this  is  among  you. 

12  ^ If  thou  shalt  hear  say  in  one 
of  thy  cities,  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  hath  given  thee  to  dwell  there, 
saying, 

12  Certain  men,  "the  children  of"^'"’,, 

p nmighty 

Delia!,  are  gone  out  rrom  among  you,  me?!. 


to  the  words  spoken”  in  the  name  of  the  God 
of  Israel,  because  they  were  supported  by  the 
accomplishment  of  those  signs  and  wonders 
which  the  preachers  took  in  hand. 

3.  the  Lord  your  God pron^eth yoii\  Cf.  viii. 
2 ; Gen.  xxii.  i. 

5.  that  prophet.,  or  that  dreamer  of  dreams., 
shall  be  put  to  deatlS]  Cf.  ‘V’v.  9,  10.  The  con- 
text and  parallel  passages  (cf.  ch.  xvii..7; 
Lev.  XX.  2)  indicate  that  there  was  to  be 
a regular  judicial  procedure,  and  that  the 
manner  of  the  execution  was  to  be  by  stoning. 
In  this  the  community  was  to  take  its  part  in 
order  to  show  its  horror  at  the  crime,  and  to 
clear  itself  of  complicity  therein. 

The  text  has  been  commonly  brought 
forward  by  Roman  Catholic  commentators 
to  justify  the  capital  punishment  of  heretics 
in  the  Church  : and  by  others  {e.g.  Calvin  in 
loc.)  as  proving  that  such  punishment  must 
be  indicted  l)y  the  magistrate.  But  such  ap- 
plication of  it  overlooks  not  only  the  differ- 
ent “manner  of  spirit”  of  which  the  Gospel 
is  (St  Imke  ix.  55);  but  also  the  fact  that 
such  obligation  attached  to  the  Jewish  magis- 
trate simply  and  solely  because  he  had  to 
administer  the  law  of  a theocracy.  God  was 


pleased  to  place  Himself  for  the  time  in  a rela- 
tion to  Israel  analogous  to  that  of  an  earthly 
sovereign  to  an  earthly  people.  Consequently 
His  worship  and  the  laws  of  that  polity, 
whilst  not  ceasing  to  be  duties  of  religion, 
were  also  matters  of  civil  law.  To  bring 
in  the  worship  of  another  God  was  therefore 
not  merely  to  lead  away  God's  people  into 
error,  it  was  to  seduce  them  from  their 
loyalty  to  their  rightful  prince  and  ruler.  It 
was  in  a word  high  treason,  and  to  be  pun- 
ished accordingly.  So  too  the  concealment 
of  attempts  to  bring  in  apostasy  was  “ mis- 
prision of  treason.”  But  with  the  cessation  of 
the  theocracy  heresy  ceased  to  be  ipso  facto 
punishable  as  a crime  against  the  state. 

6.  Michaelis  observes  that  the  omissions 
in  this  enumeration  seem  to  imply  that  no 
one  was  bound  to  impeach  father,  mother,  or 
husband. 

12,  13.  If  thou  shalt  hear  say  in  one  of  thy 
cities.,  eivhich  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  given  thee 
to  d-well  there.,  saying..  Certain  ynen.,  the  children 
of  Belial.,  are  gone  out  from  among  you\,  i.e. 
“ when  one  city  hears  concerning  another;”  or 
more  strictly  “when  ye  in  one  city  hear,  &c.” 
In  this  duty,  essential  as  it  was  to  the  very  exist- 


849 


V.  14-2-]  DEUTERONOMY.  XIII.  XIV. 


and  have  withdrawn  the  inhabitants 
of  their  city,  saying,  Let  us  go  and 
serve  other  gods,  which  ye  have  not 
known ; 

14  Then  shalt  thou  inquire,  and 
make  search,  and  ask  diligently;  and, 
behold,  if  it  be  truth,  and  the  thing 
certain,  that  such  abomination  is 
wrought  among  you ; 

15  Thou  shalt  surely  smite  the  in- 
habitants of  that  city  with  the  edge  of 
the  sword,  destroying  it  utterly,  -and 
all  that  is  therein,  and  the  cattle 
thereof,  with  the  edge  of  the  sword. 

16  And  thou  shalt  gather  all  the 
spoil  of  it  into  the  midst  of  the  street 
thereof,  and  shalt  burn  with  hre  the 


city,  and  all  the  spoil  thereof  every 
whit,  for  the  Lord  thy  God:  and  it 
shall  be  an  heap  for  ever;  it  shall  not 
be  built  again. 

1 7 And  there  shall  cleave  nought 
of  the  II cursed  thing  to  thine  hand: 
that  the  Lord  may  turn  from  the 
fierceness  of  his  anger,  and  shew  thee 
mercy,  and  have  compassion  upon 
thee,  and  multiply  thee,  as  he  hath 
sworn  unto  thy  fathers ; 

18  When  thou  shalt  hearken  to 
the  voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  to 
keep  all  his  commandments  which  I 
command  thee  this  day,  to  do  that 
which  is  right  in  the  eyes  of  the  Lord 
thy  God. 


ence  of  the  Mosaic  cominonwealth,  city  was 
to  keep  jealous  watch  over  city,  as  man  over 
man.  The  clause  “ which  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  given  thee  to  dwell  in”  significantly  re- 
minds them  that  the  real  ownership  of  their 
dwellings  rested  in  the  Lord  (cf.  Lev.xxv.  23), 
and  that  they,  the  mere  tenants,  must  not 
allow  His  property  to  become  a centre  of 
rebellion  against  His  just  authority. 

13.  children  of  Belial]  In  xv.  9 the 
word  Belial  is  rendered  in  our  translation  by 
the  adj.  “wicked;”  as  it  is  also  in  Nahum 
i.  II.  In  Ps.  xviii.  4,  “floods  of  ungodly 
men,”  is  literally  “floods  of  Beliid.”  In’ the 
thirteen  other  places  in  which  the  word  oc- 
curs, all  being  in  the  historical  books,  it  is 


treated  consi.stently  in  the  A.  V.  as  a proper 
name.  The  LXX.  and  most  ancient  versions 
render  it  by  avofxos,  irapavo^os,  and  their 
cognates.  St  Paul,  2 Cor.  vi.  15,  uses  the 
■\vord  Belial  (Greek  BeXtap)  as  equivalent 
to  Satan.  Beliar  is  no  doubt  equivalent  to 
Belial ; and  probably  this  use  of  the  word  as 
a proper  name  originated  with  the  Apostle. 
The  word  means  ^vortblessness^  quod  nullius 
fnigis  est^  nequitia.  The  expression  “sons  of 
worthlessness”  is  simular  to  many  others  in  He- 
brew: e.g.  “sons  of  strength,”  “years,”  &c. 

16.  enjery  qvbit^  for  the  Lord  thy  God], 
Render:  “a.s  a whole  offering  to  the 
Lord  thy  God:”  see  the  Note  at  end  of  the 
chapter. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xiii.  16. 


E‘very  <whit]  The  Hebrew  word  here  is 
derived  from  a verb  “to  make 

circular,”  or  “complete.”  The  word  is  pro- 
perly an  adj.  signifying  “ perfect”  or  “ entire;  ” 
and  may  no  doubt  be  used  adverbially  as  it  is 
in  Is.  ii.  18.  The  A.V.  in  thus  taking  it. has 
the  support  of  the  Versions  generally;  but  the 
words  following  “for  the  Lord  thy  God”  do 
not  fit  aptly  to  this  sense,  and  indeed  should 
rather  run  “ unto  the  Lord  thy  God.”  This 
addition,  which  evidently  must  be  closely  con- 
nected with  certainly  suggests  the  other 


sense  of  the  word,  found  also  in  xxxiii.  10, 
“whole  offering,” ’oXofcaiirco/Aa.  The  word 
is  applied  to  offerings  whether  of  corn  or 
the  flesh  of  animals  provided  they  were  wholly 
burnt;  cf.  Lev.  vi.  22,  23 ; Deut.  xxxiii.  10.  As 
a synonym  for  the  more  common  Plby,  it  is 
sometimes  used  in  apposition  to  or  further  ex- 
planation of  nby,  e.g.  I S.  vii.  9;  Ps.  li.  19. 
The  rendering  suggested  in  the  foot-note  is 
that  of  the  Mishna,  and  other  Jewish  autho- 
rities* cf.  Gesen.,  Furst,  Keil,  Knobel,  &c. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

1 God's  child7'e7t  are  not  to  disdgure  themselves 
in  inonrning.  3 What  may.,  a7id  luhat  may 
not  he  eate7i,  4 of  beasts,  9 of  fishes,  ii  of 
fowls.  21  That  which  dieth  of  itself  i7iay  7iot 
he  eate7i.  22  Tithes  of  divme  se7'znce.  23 
Tithes  a7id  fi7'stli7igs  of  7'ejoici7ig  before  the 
Lo7'd.  28  The  third  year's  tithe  of  al//is  a7id 
charity. 


Ye  are  the  children  of  the  Lord 

your  God:  "ye  shall  not  cut Lev.  19. 
yourselves,  nor  make  any  baldness 
between  your  eyes  for  the  dead. 

2 “^For  thou  art  an  holy  people  un-  ^chap.  7. 
to  the  Lord  thy  God,  and.  the  Lord  & 26. 18. 
hath  chosen  thee  to  be  a peculiar  peo- 


850 


DEUTERONOMY.  XIV. 


[v.  3—6. 


^ Lev.  I 
2,  &c. 


pie  unto  himself,  above  all  the  na- 
tions that  are  upon  the  earth. 

3 ^ Thou  shalt  not  eat  any  abo- 
minable thing. 

4 “^These  are  the  beasts  which  ye 
shall  eat:  the  ox,  the  sheep,  and  the  goat, 


5 The  hart,  and  the  roebuck,  and 
the  fallow  deer,  and  the  wild  goat, 
and  the  “ pygarg,  and  the  wild  ox, 
and  the  chamois. 

6 And  every  beast  that  parteth  the 
hoof,  and  cleaveth  the  cleft  into  two 


Chap.  XIV.  Not  only  was  open  idolatry 
to  be  sternly  suppressed  (ch.  xiii.),  but  the 
whole  life  and  walk  of  the  people  were  to  be 
regulated  with  continual  regard  to  that 
character  which  God  designed  to  impress 
upon  them.  The  words  “ye  are  the  children 
of  the  Lord  your  God”  which  introduce 
this  chapter,  suggest  the  principle  which 
underlies  its  precepts.  It  was  unbeseeming 
their  dignity  and  privileges  to  disfigure  them- 
selves in  mourning  {yu.  i,  2),  as  the  heathen 
which  have  no  hope;  or  to  defile  themselves  by 
eating  “any  abominable  thing”  (y‘v.  3 — 22)  ; 
on  the  contrary  they  were  to  honour  God 
and  act  worthily  of  their  special  relation- 
ship to  Him  by  holy  meals  at  the  sanctuary  ; 
meals  associated  with  charity  to  the  needy 
(-r-T-.  23—29). 

1,  2.  tnake  any  baldness  between  your  eyes^ 
i.  e.  by  shaving  the  forepart  of  the  head  and 
the  eyebrows.  The  practices  here  named 
were  common  amongst  the  heathen,  and  seem 
to  be  forbidden,  not  only  because  such  wild 
excesses  of  grief  would  be  inconsistent  in 
those  who  as  children  of  a heavenly  Father 
had  prospects  beyond  this  world,  but  also  be- 
cause these  usages  themselves  arose  out  of 
idolatrous  notions.  The  mourners  inflicted 
wounds  and  privations  on  themselves,  as  the 
priests  of  Baal  (i  K.  xviii.  28)  cut  them- 
selves with  knives,  by  way  of  propitiating 
deities  to  whom  human  suffering  and  woe 
were  regarded  as  acceptable. 

The  Roman  law  of  the  Ten  Tables  had 
restrictions  (borrowed  from  Solon ; see  Cicero, 
‘De  Leg.’  ii.  25)  very  similar  to  those  of  the 
text  and  its  parallel  passages. 

3 — 21.  Moses  follows  up  the  general  in- 
junction against  eating  “any  abominable 
thing  ” by  specifying  particularly  what  crea- 
tures may  and  what  may  not  be  used  as  food. 
The  restrictions  laid  down  are  substantially 
repeated  from  tlie  parallel  passages  of  Levit. 
(where  see  notes),  but  not  without  notewor- 
thy variation.  Three  classes  of  creatures  are 
here  referred  to,  quadrupeds  (yv'v.  4 — 9),  fishes 
('i-'t'.  9 and  10),  and  fowls  {‘vv.  ii — 21);  a 
fourth  class,  reptiles,  is  omitted,  though  care- 
fully dealt  with  in  Levit.  xi.  29, 30,  where  eight 
species  of  it  are  forbidden  : on  the  other  hand, 
the  locust  and  certain  other  insects  are  enume- 
rated as  clean  Levit.  xi.  22,  but  are  not  named 
in  this  chapter.  Both  omissions  are  probably 
to  be  explained  by  the  time  and  circumstances 
of  the  speaker.  The  reptiles  of  the  promised 


land,  into  which  the  people  were  about  to 
enter,  were  not  such  as  they  would  be  likely 
to  think  of  eating  ; whilst  the  locust  and  the 
other  insects,  allowed  as  food  in  the  earlier 
book,  and  probably  of  occasional  importance 
as  such  in  the  wilderness,  could  be  but  of 
small  account  to  those  who  had  their  fields 
and  vineyards  in  Canaan.  The  example  of 
John  the  Baptist  (St  Matt.  iii.  4)  shows  us 
of  itself  that  the  omission  of  locusts  from  the 
list  of  clean  animals  in  this  place  was  not 
supposed  to  exclude  them.  So  too  in  2;.  19 
“every  creeping  thing  that  flieth”  is  simply 
forbidden;  and  the  qualification  of  Levit. 
xi.  20,  that  such  of  this  class  as  “have  legs 
above  their  feet  to  leap  ” may  nevertheless  be 
eaten,  is  omitted.  On  the  border  of  the  pro- 
mised land,  and  in  a repetition  of  laws  which 
he  desired  particularly  to  impress,  this  per- 
mission is  passed  over  as  of  no  moment. 
Here  too  the  kinds  of  clean  quadrupeds  are 
specified  by  name  as  well  as  in  general  cha- 
racteristics, obviously  because  the  diet  of  the 
people  would  for  the  future  mainly  be  drawn 
from  this  class.  In  Levit.  xi.  3 sqq.,  whilst 
they  had  yet  many  years  of  life  in  the  desert 
before  them,  it  was  enough  to  lay  down  the 
law  as  re^rds  quadrupeds  in  general  terms. 

4.  the  ox,  the  sheep,  and  the  goat\  These 
are  probably  named  first  as  being  the  animals 
used  for  sacrifice.  In  the  next  2;.  follow 
the  wild  animals  which  might  lawfully  be 
eaten,  though  not  sacrificed. 

5.  The  hart']  i.e.  the  ordinary  kind  of 
deer;  other  and  less  common  species  come 
after. 

fallow  deer]  Rather  perhaps  antelope.  The 
word  is  derived  from  a root  signifying  “to 
be  red.” 

the  pygarg]  Hebr.  dishon,  a species  of 
antelope  or  gazelle. 

civild  ox]  Hebr.  tho,  translated  Is.  li.  20 
“ wild  bull ; ” to  be  carefully  distinguished 
from  the  reem:  cf.  Num.  xxiii.  22  and  note. 
The  “tho”  is  also  a kind  of  antelope.  The 
etymology  of  the  name  points  to  its  swiftness 
in  running.  The  LXX.  render  oryx.  Both 
the  pygarg  and  the  oryx  are  named  Herod. 
IV.  192. 

chamois]  Hebr.  zamer-  LXX.  the  came- 
lopard, i.e.  the  giraffe.  The  giraffe  how- 
ever is  not  a native  of  Palestine.  It  is  there- 
fore more  likely  to  be  another  species  of 
antelope.  Its  name  is  derived  from  a root 
signifying  “ to  leap.” 


V.  7 22.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XIV. 


851 


cla\vs,  and  cheweth  the  cud  among 
the  beasts,  that  ye  shall  eat. 

7 Nevertheless  these  ye  shall  not 
eat  of  them  that  chew  the  cud,  or 

' of  them  that  divide  the  cloven  hoof ; 

as  the  camel,  and  the  hare,  and  the 
coney:  for  they  chew  the  cud,  but 
divide  not  the  hoof;  therefore  they 
are  unclean  unto  you. 

8 And  the  swine,  because  it  di- 
videth  the  hoof,  yet  cheweth  not  the 
cud,  it  IS  unclean  unto  you : ye  shall' 
not  eat  of  their  flesh,  nor  touch  their 
dead  carcase. 

‘^Lev,  II.  9 ^ ^These  ye  shall  eat  of  all  that 
(ire  in  the  waters : all  that  have  fins 
and  scales  shall  ye  eat : 

10  And  whatsoever  hath  not  fins 
and  scales  ye  may  not  eat ; it  is  un- 
clean unto  you. 

1 1 ^ Of  all  clean  birds  ye  shall  eat.  , 

12  But  these  are  they  of  which  ye 
shall  not  eat : the  eagle,  and  the  ossi- 
frage,  and  the  ospray, 

13  And  the  glede,  and  the  kite, 
and  the  vulture  after  his  kind. 


14  And  every  raven  after  his  kind, 

15  And  the  owl,  and  the  night 
hawk,  and  the  cuckow,  and  the  hawk 
after  his  kind, 

16  The  little  owl,  and  the  great 
owl,  and  the  swan, 

17  And  the  pelican,  and  the  gier 
eagle,  and  the  cormorant, 

18  And  the  stork,  and  the  heron 
after  her  kind,  and  the  lapwing,  and 

the  ^ bat.  ^ Lev.  n. 

19  And  every  creeping  thing  that 
flieth  is  unclean  unto  you  : they  shall 
not  be  eaten. 

20  But  of  all  clean  fowls  ye  may  eat. 

21  ^ Ye  shall  not  eat  of  any  thing 
that  dieth  of  itself : thou  shalt  give 
it  unto  the  stranger  that  is  in  thy 
gates,  that  he  may  eat  it ; or  thou 
mayest  sell  it  unto  an  alien  : for  thou 
art  an  holy  people  unto  the  Lord  thy 

God.  -^^Thou  shalt  not  seethe  a kid-^Exod.  23. 
in  his  mother’s  milk.  & 34. 26. 

22  Thou  shalt  truly  tithe  all  the 
increase  of  thy  seed,  that  the  field 
bringeth  forth  year  by  year. 


7.  the  hare'\  See  on  Levit.  xi.  6. 

12.  The  birds  here  named  are  the  same 
as  those  in  Lev.  xi.  13  sqq.  (where  see  note), 
except  that  in  13  “the  glede”  faah)  is 
added.  The  “vulture”  {dayyah')  of  1;.  13 
is  no  doubt  the  same  as  the  (dadh')  of  Lev. 
xi.  14. 

21.  Te  shall  not  eat  of  anything  that  dieth 
of  itself:  thou  shalt  give  it  to  the  stranger^ 
&;c.]  The  prohibition  is  repeated  from  Levit. 
xxii.  8 : the  directions  as  to  the  disposal  of  the 
carcase  are  peculiar  to  Deut.  Their  motive  is 
clear.  To  have  forbidden  the  people  either  to 
eat  themselves  that  which  had  died,  or  to  allow 
any  others  to  do  so,  would  have  involved  loss 
of  property,  and  consequent  temptation  to  an 
infraction  of  the  command.  The  permissions 
now  for  the  first  time  granted  would  have 
been  useless  in  the  wilderness.  During  the 
forty  years’  wandering  there  could  be  but  little 
opportunity  of  selling  such  carcases  ; whilst 
non-Israelites  living  in  the  camp  would  in 
such  a matter  be  bound  by  the  same  rules  as 
the  Israelites  (Levit.  xvii.  15,  and  xxiv.  22). 
“The  stranger  that  is  in  thy  gates”  will 
be  the  uncircumciscd  proselyte,  or  in  the 
language  of  later  Judaism  “the  proselyte  of 
the  gate.”  Such  a one  would  stand  midway 
between  the  “proselyte  of  righteousness,” 
who  was  circumcised  and  a “ debtor  to  do 
the  whole  law,”  and  “ the  alien,”  who  had  no 


concern  whatever  in  the  national  religion. 
It  would  seem,  on  comparing  this  v.  with 
Levit.  xvii.  15,  that  greater  stringency  is  here 
given  to  the  requirement  of  abstinence  from 
that  which  had  died  of  itself.  In  the  earlier 
book  the  eating  of  such  flesh  involved  merely 
uncleanness  until  the  evening ; here  it  is  abso- 
lutely interdicted.  Probably  on  this,  as  on 
so  many  other  points,  allowance  was  made  for 
the  circumstances  of  the  people.  Flesh  meat 
was  no  doubt  often  scarce  in  the  desert.  It 
would  therefore  have  been  a hardship  to  for- 
bid entirely  the  use  of  that  which  had  not 
been  killed.  Now  however  when  the  plenty 
of  the  promised  land  was  before  them,  the 
modified  toleration  of  this  unholy  food  is 
withdrawn. 

22.  Thou  shalt  truly  tithe  all  the  increase 
of  thy  seed'\  These  words  recall  in  general 
terms  the  command  of  the  earlier  legislation 
respecting  tithes  (cf.  Lev.  xxvii.  30,  Num.  xviii. 
27)  but  refer  more  particularly  to  the  second  or 
festival  tithe,  which  was  an  exclusively  vegetable 
one:  see  Introd.  §5.  So  Keil,  Schultz,  Lange, 
&c.,  and  the  Jewish  authorities  generally. 
One  computation  of  the  increase  of  the  field 
would  of  course  seiwe  for  both  the  Levitical 
tithe  of  Lev,  xxvii.,  so  far  as  it  consisted  of 
that  increase,  and  for  the  other  titl:e  to  be 
applied  to  the  feasts  at  the  sanctuary,  or  in 
each  third  year  at  home,  as  directed  in  this 


852  DEUTERONOMY.  XIV.  XV.  [v.  23-1. 


23  And  thou  shalt  eat  before  the 
Lord  thy  God,  in  the  place  which 
he  shall  choose  to  place  his  name 
there,  the  tithe  of  thy  corn,  of  thy 
wine,  and  of  thine  oil,  and  the  first- 
lings of  thy  herds  and  of  thy  flocks  ; 
that  thou  mayest  learn  to  fear  the 
Lord  thy  God  always. 

24  And  if  the  way  be  too  long  for 
thee,  so  that  thou  art  not  able  to 
carry  it ; or  if  the  place  be  too  far 
from  thee,  which  the  Lord  thy  God 
shall  choose  to  set  his  name  there, 
when  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  blessed 
thee  : 

25  Then  shalt  thou  turn  it  into 
money,  and  bind  up  the  money  in 
thine  hand,  and  shalt  go  unto  the 
place  which  the  Lord  thy  God  shall 
choose  : 

26  And  thou  shalt  bestow  that 
money  for  whatsoever  thy  soul  lusteth 
after,  for  oxen,  or  for  sheep,  or  for 
wine,  or  for  strong  drink,  or  for  what- 

tHeb.  soever  thy  soul  Mesireth  : and  thou 
shalt  eat  there  before  the  Lord  thy 


God,  and  thou  shalt  rejoice,  thou, 
and  thine  household, 

27  And  ^ the  Levite  that  is  within “• 
thy  gates ; thou  shalt  not  forsake  him ; 

for  he  hath  no  part  nor  inheritance 
with  thee. 

28  ^ At  the  end  of  three  years 
thou  shalt  bring  forth  all  the  tithe  of 
thine  increase  the  sam.e  year,  and  shalt 
lay  it  up  within  thy  gates  : 

29  And  the  Levite,  (because  he 
hath  no  part  nor  inheritance  with 
thee,)  and  the  stranger,  and  the  fa- 
therless, and  the  widow,  which  are 
within  thy  gates,  shall  come,  and 
shall  eat  and  be  satisfied ; that  the 
Lord  thy  God  may  bless  thee  in  all  the 
work  of  thine  hand  which  thou  doest. 

CHAPTER  XV. 

I The  seveiith  yea}-  a year  of  release  for  the poor. 

7 It  vuist  he  no  let  of  lending  or  giving.  1 2 
An  IIcbrri.v  servant^  16  except  he  luill  not 
depart.,  must  in  the  seventh  year  go  forth  free 
and  luell  furnished.  19  All  firstling  males 
of  the  cattle  are  to  be  sanctified  tinto  the  Lord. 

A T the  end  of  " every  seven  years  Lev.  25. 
r\^  thou  shalt  make  a release. 


passage : cf.  on  w.  28,  29.  One  tenth  would 
belong  to  the  Levites,  the  second  tenth  would 
remain  at  the  disposal  of  the  landowner  for 
the  purposes  so  earnestly  commended  to  him 
in  Deut.  xii.  6,  7,  17 — 20  (see  notes),  and  in 
this  passage.  These  purposes  are  minutely 
classitied  and  regulated  in  the  Mishna.  Thus 
altogether  one-fifth  part  of  the  annual  produce 
would  be  claimed  for  religious  hospitable  and 
charitable  employments ; and  this,  considering 
the  various  charges  met  out  of  it,  would  not  be 
an  unreasonably  burdensome  impost.  See  on 
Gen.  xli.  34,  xlvii.  26,  and  Winer,  ‘ Realwort,’ 
(Article,  Lebent).^  and  Saalschiitz,  ‘ Mos. 
Recht,’  I.  354  sq(}.,  who  however  regard  the 
festival  tithe  as  levied  upon  the  nine  portions 
that  remained  after  the  Levitical  tithe  had 
been  subtracted,  and  not  as  a full  tenth  of  all 
the  produce.  The  tithes  are  only  named  here 
in  passing,  as  are  also  the  firstlings,  in  order 
to  introduce  certain  directions  respecting  the 
sacred  meals  Y’hich  were  celebrated  out  of 
them.  'I'lie  firstlings  come  on  for  more  special 
treatment  in  xv.  19  sqq. 

28,  29.  Cf.  on  xxvi.  12.  It  is  only 
necessary  to  observe  here  that  the  tithe  thus 
directed  in  the  third  year  to  be  dispensed  in 
charity  at  home,  though  called  by  the  Jewish 
authorities  “the  third  tithe,”  was  not  paid  in 
addition  to  that  in  other  years  bestowed  on 
the  saci'ed  meals,  but  was  substituted  for  it. 


This  is  plainly  implied  in  the  text.  The  three 
years  Avould  count  from  the  Sabbatical  year, 
and  Moses  accordingly  goes  on  to  legislate  in 
reference  to  that  important  year  in  the  begin- 
ning of  the  next  chapter.  In  the  Sabbatical 
year  there  would  of  course  be  neither  pay- 
ment of  tithe  nor  celebration  of  the  feasts  at 
the  Sanctuary.  In  the  third  and  sixth  years 
of  the  septennial  cycle  the  feasts  would  be 
superseded  by  the  private  hospitality  enjoined 
in  the  verses  before,  us. 

28.  all  the  tithe^  LXX.  7tav  to  (Tri^cKa- 
top:  Vulg.  “aliam  decimam,”  i.e.  the  second 
tithe : see  above. 

Chap.  XV.  The  regulations  for  the  relief 
of  the  necessitous  by  means  of  the  triennial 
tithe  are  followed  up  in  this  chapter  by 
others  of  a similar  tendency.  Fv.  1 — ii  pre- 
scribe a Year  of  Release  ; w.  12 — 18  the 
mamimission  of  Hebrew  slaves;  w.  19 — 23 
the  appropriation  of  the  firstlings  of  cattle, 
which  had  already  (xii.  6;  xiv.  23)  been 
designated  as  offerings  to  be  made  by  the 
people  for  sacred  and  charitable  purposes. 

1 — 11.  The  Year  of  Release  is  no  doubt 
identical  with  the  Sabbatical  Year  of  the 
earlier  legislation;  on  which  see  Exod.  xxiii. 
10  scjq.,  and  I.evit.  xxv.  2 sqq.;  the  word 
“release”  of  this  passage  being  indeed  funda- 
mentally the  same  word  as  is  used  in  refer- 


V.  2— 7.J 


DEUTERONOMY.  XV. 


2 And  this  is  the  manner  of  the 
fHcb.  release:  Every  ^creditor  that  lend- 
^tiuhnd^  eth  ought  unto  his  neighbour  shall 

release  it;  he  shall  not  exact  it  of 
his  neighbour,  or  of  his  brotl-^er  ; be- 
cause it  is  called  the  Lord’s  release. 

3 Of  a foreigner  thou  mayest  ex- 
act it  again  : but  that  which  is  thine 
with  thy  brother  thine  hand  shall 
release  ; 

II  Or,  ^ II  Save  when  there  shall  be  no 

iLt  %7re  poor  amoiig  you  ; for  the  Lord  shall 
greatly  bless  thee  in  the  land  which 
the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee  for  an 
inheritance  to  possess  it : 


5 Only  if  thou  carefully  hearken 
unto  the  voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God, 
to  observe  to  do  all  these  command- 
ments which  I command  thee  this 
day. 

6 For  the  Lord  thy  God  blesseth 
thee,  as  he  promised  thee  : and  ^ thou 
shalt  lend  unto  many  nations,  but 
thou  shalt  not  borrow ; and  thou  shalt 
reign  over  many  nations,  but  they 
shall  not  reign  over  thee. 

7 ^ If  there  be  among  you  a poor 
man  of  one  of  thy  brethren  within 
any  of  thy  gates  in  thy  land  which 
the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee,  thou 


lives  near,  but  an  Israelite  as  opposed  to  a 
foreigner. 

because  it  is  called  the  Lord's  release']  Ren- 
der because  proclamation  has  been 
made  of  the  Lord’s  release.  The  verb 
is  impersonal,  and  implies  (cf.  xxxi.  lo)  that 
“the  solemnity  of  the  year  of  release”  has 
been  publicly  announced. 

3.  0/  a foreigner  thou  mayest  exact  it] 
The  foreigner  would  not  be  bound  by  the 
restriction  of  the  Sabbatical  year,  and  there- 
fore would  have  no  claim  to  its  special  remis- 
sions and  privileges.  He  could  earn  his  usual 
income  in  the  seventh  as  in  other  years,  and 
therefore  is  not  exonerated  from  liability  to 
discharge  a debt  any  more  in  the  one  than  the 
others. 

4.  Sa've  nvhen  there  shall  be  no  poor  among 
you;  for  the  Lord  shall  greatly  bless  thee] 
Rather  perhaps  “ no  poor  with  thee,”  i.  e. 
concerned  in  the  transaction.  See  Note  at  end 
of  chapter.  There  is  no  inconsistency  between 
this  and  v.  1 1,  in  which  it  is  affirmed  that  “ the 
poor  shall  never  cease  out  of  the  land.”  The 
meaning  seems  simply  to  be  “Thou  must 
release  the  debt  for  the  year,  except  when 
there  be  no  poor  person  concerned,  a con- 
tingency which  may  happen,  for  the  Lord 
shall  greatly  bless  thee.”  Thus  it  was  lawful 
to  call  in  a loan  (one  contracted  e.g.  for  such 
purposes  as  the  purchase  of  land,  carrying 
on  commerce  &c.)  when  the  borrower  could 
refund  it  without  impoverishment.  The 
reasonableness  of  the  limitation  of  the  release 
is  obvious.  If  no  lender  could  recover  his 
money  during  the  year  of  release  the  un- 
scrupulous debtor  might  have  enriched  him- 
self at  the  expense  of  his,  perhaps  less  wealthy, 
neighbour.  The  general  object  of  these  prL 
cepts,  as  also  of  the  year  of  Jubilee  and  the 
laws  respecting  inheritance,  is  to  prevent  the 
total  ruin  of  a needy  man,  and  his  dis- 
appearance from  the  families  of  Israel  by  the 
sale  of  his  patrimony. 


ence  to  the  land  Exod.  xxiii.  ii.  The  com- 
mand of  the  older  legislation  is  here  amplified. 
Not  only  is  the  land  to  have  its  “release”  or 
“ rest  ” for  the  year,  but  the  debt  also.  The 
obvious  reference  of  this  passage  to  that  of 
Exod.  seems  to  render  it  most  probable  (as 
Rosenm.,  Biihr,  ‘ Symb.’  ii.  570;  Saalschutz, 
Keil,  Knobel,  Schultz,  &c.,  maintain),  in 
spite  of  a consensus  of  Jewish  authorities  to 
the  contrary,  that  the  release  in  question 
must  have  been  for  the  year,  not  total  and 
final.  As  the  land  was  during  this  year  to 
keep  sabbath,  so  the  debt  was  to  stand  over ; 
but  neither  of  the  one  nor  the  other  would 
the  usufruct  be  lost  in  perpetuity  to  the 
owner.  It  seems  further  clear  that  the  release 
had  reference  only  to  loans  (see  especially  'v.  2) ; 
and  to  loans  lent  because  of  poverty  (cf.  2)2;. 
4,  7).  Apparently  therefore  that  a debt  con- 
tracted e.g.  by  purchase  of  goods,  would  not 
come  under  this  law.  It  would  seem,  however, 
notwithstanding  these  qualifications,  and  the 
fact  that  the  release  did  not  extend  at  all  to 
foreigners,  that  the  law  was  found  too  strin- 
gent for  the  avarice  of  the  people;  for  it  was 
one  of  those  which  the  Rabbis  “ made  of 
none  effect  by  their  traditions.”  A gloss 
attributed  to  Hillel  permitted  the  judges  to 
authorize  a creditor  to  enforce  his  claim  even 
during  the  year  of  release.  (See  Smith’s 
‘ Diet,  of  the  Bible,’  iii.  1074.)  This  fact, 
as  well  as  the  references  in  the  later  books  to 
the  year  of  release  and  the  laws  associated 
with  it,  shows  that  the  ordinances  of  Moses 
now  before  us  were  sufficiently  well  under- 
stood, though  too  much  disregarded  in  the 
later  days  of  thejewish  commonwealth.  (Cf. 
Is.  Ixi.  I,  2;  Jer.  xxxiv.  8 — 17.) 

2.  mamier  of  the  release]  Cf.  the  similar 
phrase  xix.  4 ; i K.  ix.  15. 

he  shall  not  exact  it  of  his  neighbour.^  or 
of  his  brother]  Lit.  “he  shall  not  urge  or 
press  his  neighbour  and  his  brother.”  The 
latter  words  are  added  to  explain  who  is 
meant  by  the  neighbour:  i.e.  not  one  who 


8S4 


DEUTERONOMY.  XV. 


[v.  8— 1 8. 


shalt  not  harden  thine  heart,  nor  shut 
thine  hand  from  thy  poor  brother  : 
fMatt.  5.  8 ‘^But  thou  shalt  open  thine  hand 

Luke  6. 34.  wide  unto  him,  and  shalt  surely  lend 
him  sufficient  for  his  need,  in  that 
which  he  wanteth. 

9 Beware  that  there  be  not  a 
t Heb.  ^ thought  in  thy  ^ v/icked  heart,  say- 
Tiik.  irig?  The  seventh  year,  the  year  of 
Belial.  release,  is  at  hand  ; and  thine  eye  be 

evil  against  thy  poor  brother,  and  thou 
givest  him  nought ; and  he  cry  unto 
the  Lord  against  thee,  and  it  be  sin 
unto  thee. 

10  Thou  shalt  surely  give  him,  and 
thine  heart  shall  not  be  grieved  when 
thou  givest  unto  him  : because  that 
for  this  thing  the  Lord  thy  God 
shall  bless  thee  in  all  thy  works,  and 
in  all  that  thou  puttest  thine  hand  unto. 

11  For  the  poor  shall  never  cease 
out  of  the  land : therefore  I command 
thee,  saying.  Thou  shalt  open  thine 
hand  wide  unto  thy  brother,  to  thy 
poor,  and  to  thy  needy,  in  thy  land. 

«'Exod.2i.  12  ^ if  thy  brother,  an  Fle- 

brew  man,  or  an  Hebrew  woman,  be 
sold  unto  thee,  and  serve  thee  six 
years  ; then  in  the  seventh  year  thou 
shalt  let  him  go  free  from  thee. 


13  And  when  thou  sendest  him  out 
free  from  thee,  thou  shalt  not  let  him 
go  away  empty  : 

14  Thou  shalt  furnish  him  libe- 
rally out  of  thy  flock,  and  out  of  thy 
floor,  *and  out  of  thy  winepress  : of 
that  wherewith  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  blessed  thee  thou  shalt  give  unto 
him. 

15  And  thou  shalt  remember  that 
thou  wast  a bondman  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  the  Lord  thy  God  re- 
deemed thee ; therefore  I command 
thee  this  thing  to  day. 

16  And  it  shall  be,  if  he  say  unto 
thee,  I will  not  go  away  from  thee  ; 
because  he  loveth  thee  and  thine  house, 
because  he  is  well  with  thee  ; 

17^  Then  thou  shalt  take  an  aul,  ^ 
and  thrust  it  through  his  ear  unto  the 
door,  and  he  shall  be  thy  servant  for 
ever.  And  also  unto  thy  maidservant 
thou  shalt  do  likewise. 

18  It  shall  not  seem  hard  unto 
thee,  when  thou  sendest  him  av/ay 
free  from  thee ; for  he  hath  been 
worth  a double  hired  servant  to  thee.^ 
in  serving  thee  six  years : and  the 
Lord  thy  God  shall  bless  thee  in  all 
that  thou  doest. 


9.  Be-zvare  that  there  be  not  a thought  in 
thy  zvicked  heart]  Render,  tliattherebenot 
a wicked  word  in  thy  heart.  The  word 
beliah  worthlessness,  (cf.  xiii.  13,  and  note)  is 
used  emphatically  in  place  of  an  adjective, 
and  is  in  apposition  grammatically  to  “word,” 
not,  as  suggested  by  A.  V,,  to  “ heart,”  The 
original  is  very  forcible,  “ that  there  be  not 
in  thy  heart  a word  which  is  worthless, 
ness.” 

14.  Thou  shalt  furnish  him  liberally]  The 
verb  in  the  Hebrew  is  remarkable.  It  means 
“thou  shalt  lay  on  his  neck,”  “adorn  his 
neck  with  thy  gifts.”  The  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
express  the  end  and  purpose  of  the  command ; 
((jibbwv  e(j)o^ia(reis,  “ dabis  viaticum.” 

12 — 18.  Regulations  of  a similarly  bene- 
ficent tenor  with  those  respecting  debtors  are 
now  laid  down  respecting  Hebrew  servants, 
'f'he  commands  here  are  repeated  from  Exod. 
xxi.  2 — 6,  with  amplifications  characteristic 
of  Dent.  In  the  earlier  code  mention  is 
made  only  of  the  manservant,  here  of  the 
maidscrvL  iR  also  (t;.  12)  : there  the  command 
is  simply  to  manumit  after  six  years  of  ser- 
vice; now  it  is  further  required  Qvv.  13,  sqcp) 


that  liberal  provision  should  be  made  for 
launching  the  freedman  on  an  independent 
course  of  life.  The  release  of  the  servant  is 
connected  with  the  Sabbatical  principle  though 
not  with  the  Sabbatical  year.  That  release 
was  to  take  place  after  six  years  of  bondage 
in  all  cases.  The  injunction  is  introduced 
here  only  because  it  is,  like  that  of  the  Sab- 
batical year,  one  of  those  designed  for  the 
benefit  of  the  poor.  It  is  noteworthy  also 
that  the  prospect  of  a gift  of  this  sort,  the 
amount  of  which  was  left  at  the  master’s 
discretion,  would  be  likely  to  encourage 
diligence  and  faithfulness  during  the  years  of 
servitude. 

17.  thou  shalt  take  an  aul]  Thus  bored  ears 
were  made  a badge  of  slavery,  and  so  became 
ignominious.  This  would  discourage  the 
wearing  of  ear-rings,  which  are  often  in  the 
East  regarded  as  amulets. 

18.  he  hath  been  zvorth  a double  hired  ser~ 
'vant  to  thee^  in  ser-ving  thee  six  years]  Render, 
rather  perhaps,  “double  the  hire  of  a hireling 
has  he  earned  thee  by  serving  thee  six  years : ” 
i.e.  such  a servant  has  earned  twice  as  much  as 
a common  hired  labourer  would  have  done  in 


V.  19— 23-J 


DEUTERONOMY.  XV. 


855 


^Exod.34.  19  -^All  the  firstling  males  that 

come  of  thy  herd  and  of  thy  flock 
thou  shalt  sanctify  unto  the  Lord 
thy  God : thou  shalt  do  no  work  with 
the  firstling  of  thy  bullock,  nor  shear 
the  firstling  of  thy  sheep. 

20  Thou  shalt  eat  it  before  the 
r Lev.  22.  Lord  thy  God  year  by  year  in  the 
'hap  17  pEce  which  the  Lord  shall  choose, 
t;  j thou  and  thy  household, 
xcus.  j5.  ^ And  if  there  be  any  blemish 


therein,  as  if  it  he  lame,  or  blind, 
or  have  any  ill  blemish,  thou  shalt 
not  sacrifice  it  -unto  the  Lord  thy 
God. 

22  Thou  shalt  eat  it  within  thy 
gates  : the  unclean  and  the  clean  per- 
son shall  eat  it  alike,  as  the  roebuck, 
and  as  the  hart. 

23  Only  thou  shalt  not  eat  the 
blood  thereof ; thou  shalt  pour  it  upon 
the  ground  as  water. 


the  same  time.  So  substantially  Saad.,  Rashi, 
Rosenm.,  Wogue,  &c.  The  clause  is  how- 
ever somewhat  obscure  and  difficult.  Literal- 
ly it  runs,  “ double  the  hire  of  a hireling  hath 
he  served  thee  during  six  years.”  Schultz, 
Knob.,  Keil,  &c.,  understand  this  to  mean 
“he  has  done  so  much  that  if  you  had  had 
to  keep  a day  labourer  in  place  of  him,  the 
cost  to  you  would  have  been  twice  as  great.” 

19 — 23.  The  command  to  dedicate  the 
firstborn  to  God,  as  a memorial  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  firstborn  of  the  Egyptians,  is  one 
of  the  very  earliest  regulations  of  the  Mosaic 
ritual  (Ex.  xiii.  ii  sqq.).  The  directions  of 
the  preceding  legislation  (see  Num.  xviii.  15 
sqq.)  are  here  assumed,  with  the  injunction 
added,  that  the  animals  thus  set  apart  to  God 
(“u,  19)  were  not  to  be  used  by  their  owners 
for  their  earthly  purposes.  It  is  further 
allowed  that  firstborn  animals  which  had  a 
blemish  should  be  regarded  as  exceptions,  and 
instead  of  being  given  to  God  might  be  used 
as  food  ("vv.  21,  22).  The  application  of  the 
firstborn  of  cattle  is  here  directed  as  in  xii.  6, 
17  and  xiv.  23:  they  are  to  be  consumed  in 
the  sacred  feasts  at  the  Sanctuary. 

It  has  been  pointed  out  that  the  flesh  of  the 
firstlings  is  given  (Num.  xviii.  18)  to  the 
priest,  whilst  in  the  passage  before  us,  as  in 
xii.  6,  17,  and  xiv.  23,  the  same  flesh  is  as- 
signed as  the  wherewithal  for  the  sacred  feasts 
which  the  offerer  and  his  household  were  to 
celebrate  at  the  Sanctuary.  The  inconsistency 
is  apparent  only.  Num.  xviii.  18,  in  assigning 
the  priest’s  portion,  prescribes  as  regards  the 
firstborn,  “the  flesh  of  them  shall  be  thine,  as 
the  wave  breast  and  the  right  shoulder  are 
thine i.  e.  shall  be  thine  on  the  like  terms 
and  conditions  as  the  wave  breast  and  right 
shoulder  are  so.  This  can  scarcely  mean,  as 
some  (Kalisch,  Hengstenberg)  have  thought, 
that  only  those  portions  of  the  firstlings  were 
to  go  to  the  priests,  the  rest  remaining  the 
property  of  the  offerer  for  a sacrificial  meal ; 


it  rather  directs  that  the  flesh  of  the  firstlings 
was  to  be  disposed  of  by  the  priests  in  the 
same  manner  as  the  wave  breast  and  heave 
shoulder.  The  appropriation  of  these,  the 
priests’  portions,  is  seen  from  Levit.  vii.  15,  16. 
They  were  to  be  employed  in  a sacrificial 
feast  which  had  to  be  held  on  the  day  of  the 
making  of  the  offering,  or  on  the  next  day, 
and  of  course  at  the  Sanctuary.  In  the  case 
of  the  firstlings  the  priests  would  have  the 
whole  of  the  victim  to  consume  thus  at  once, 
and  at  certain  seasons  no  doubt  many  victims 
at  once.  Under  these  circumstances  the 
priest  would  naturally  invite  the  offerers  to 
partake  in  the  feast  for  which  such  abundant 
provision  was  made ; and  indeed  would  feel  it 
a duty  to  do  so.  The  presentation  of  the 
firstlings  is  spoken  of  Ex,  xiii.  15  as  a sacrifice; 
and  a sacrificial  meal  on  the  flesh  of  the 
victim,  in  which  the  offerer  and  those  as- 
sociated with  him  partook,  was  an  established 
part  of  the  system  and  ritual  of  sacrifice.  In 
the  case  of  the  firstborn,  where  all  the  flesh 
was  the  perquisite  of  the  priests,  the  offerer 
could  only  have  his  share  in  such  meal  on  the 
invitation  of  the  priests ; an  invitation  which 
we  may  be  sure  would  never  be  withheld,  and 
which  is  regarded  in  the  text  accordingly  as  a 
matter  of  course  if  not  of  right.  We  must 
remember  that  the  expectation  of  sharing  in 
the  feast  on  the  firstlings  would  tend  to  en- 
courage their  being  regularly  brought  in  by 
the  people  ; and  that  under  no  circumstances 
would  the  priests  be  allowed  to  sell  any  por- 
tion of  them.  Any  flesh  of  such  offerings 
remaining  till  the  third  day  had  to  be  burnt 
(Lev.  vii.  17).  It  is  to  be  noted  too  that 
Moses  in  the  text  is  addressing  the  whole 
people — priests,  Levites,  and  laity.  The  gene- 
ral direction  then  that  the  firstlings  should  be 
brought  to  the  Sanctuary  and  there  consumed 
in  a sacred  meal  seems  on  the  whole  sufficient- 
ly accordant  with  the  earlier  legislation  on  the 
same  offerings.  Cf.  Keil  on  Deut.  xii.  6 and 
7,  from  whom  this  note  is  principally  taken. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xv.  4. 

San^e  <when  there  shall  he  no  poor~\  The  Gerhard,  several  Commentators  quoted  in 
sense  suggested  in  the  foot-note  is  adopted  by  Poole’s  Synopsis,  Rosenm.  (“  nisi  fortasse 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVL 


V.  I,  2. 


856 


pauperes  non  sint  ”),  Maurer,  Michaelis, 
Dathe,  &c. ; and  seems  on  the  whole  the  pre- 
ferable one.  The  particles  '3  DDl-?  are  thus 
taken  much  in  the  same  sense  as  in  Amos  ix. 
8,  “except  that,”  “saving  that.”  The  “save 
when”  of  the  A.  V.  brings  out  the  force  of 
the  clause  more  clearly  than  “save  that;”  but 
the  meaning  is  substantially  the  same.  Knobel 
insists  that  the  clause  gives  an  absolute  pro- 
mise that  there  should  be  no  poverty  in  Israel. 
But  no  writer  would  set  forth  such  a promise 
and  then  six  verses  afterwards  flatly  contra- 
dict himself;  cf.  -u.  ii.  Others  regard  the 
words  as  giving  a conditional  promise,  which 
was  not  accomplished  because ’of  Israel’s  dis- 


CHAPTER XVL 

I The  feast  of  the  passo^ser,  9 of  laeeks,  13  of' 
tabernacles.  16  Every  male  must  offer,  as  he 
is  able,  at  these  tlwce  feasts.  18  Of  judges  and 
justice.  21  Groves  and  images  are  for- 
bidden. 

« Exod.  12.  /“RESERVE  the  ^ month  of  Abib, 
2,  &c.  and  keep  the  passover  unto  the 


obedience.  But  the  statement  in  -v.  that 
“ the  poor  should  never  cease  out  of  the 
land,”  is  not  announced  as  a penalty  for  sin. 
The  rendering  of  margin  is  supported  by 
the  Syr.,  Bp.  Wordsworth  and  others.  But 
no  passage  has  been  alleged  in  which  '3 
has  this  telic  force ; on  the  contrary  these  par- 
ticles, as  the  root  of  determines,  always 
have  a limiting  force;^  cf.  Num.  xiii.  28 ; Judg. 
iv.  9.  Several  modern  Comm.  (Keil,  Schultz, 
Lange,  &c.)  take  the  clause  as  an  imperative, 
“ only  let  there  not  be  &c. so  taken  however 
its  connexion  with  what  follows  is  awkward 
and  obscure. 


Lord  thy  God  : for  ^in  the  month  of 
Abib  the  Lord  thy  God  brought  thee 
forth  out  of  Egypt  by  night. 

2 Thou  shalt  therefore  sacrifice  the 
passover  unto  the  Lord  thy  God,  of 
the  flock  and  the  herd,  in  the  ^ place  ^ chap, 
which  the  Lord  shall  choose  to  place 
his  name  there. 


Chap.  XVI,  Moses  continues  in  this 
chapter  the  review  of  the  religious  ordinances 
to  be  observed  by  the  people  in  Canaan. 
Prominent  amongst  these  were  the  three  great 
festivals,  of  Passover,  Pentecost,  and  Taber- 
nacles. The  regulations  respecting  them  given 
in  the  earlier  books  (Ex.  xii.,  Lev.  xxiii,, 
Num.  xxviii.  and  xxix.)  are  assumed,  and  the 
feasts  themselves  touched  upon  only  so  far  as 
present  circumstances  required.  The  treat- 
ment throughout  presupposes  the  hearers  to 
be  well  informed  as  to  the  ordinances  in 
question,  and  only  needing  to  have  their  at- 
tention drawn  to  certain  particulars  as  to 
which  reiteration  might  seem  advisable,  or 
changes  called  for.  The  cardinal  point  on 
which  the  whole  of  the  prescriptions  here 
before  us  turn  is  evidently  the  same  as  has 
been  so  often  insisted  on  in  the  previous 
chapters,  viz.  the  concentration  of  the  religious 
services  of  the  people  round  one  common 
Sanctuary.  The  prohibition  against  observing 
these  great  feasts,  the  three  annual  epochs  in 
the  sacred  year  of  the  Jew,  at  home  and  in 
private,  is  reiterated  in  a variety  of  words  no 
less  than  six  times  in  the  first  sixteen  verses  of 
this  chapter  (2,  6,  7,  ii,  15,  16).  Hence  it 
is  easy  to  see  why  nothing  is  here  said  of  the 
other  holy  days.  No  doubt  the  Great  Day  of 
Atonement  (Lev.  xxiii.  26  scjq.),  and  the  Feast 
of  d'rumj)ets  (Lev.  xxiii.  23  sqq,),  are  as  posi- 
tively enjoined  by  Moses  as  are  the  three 
Festivals  mentioned  in  the  present  chapter : 
but  it  was  no  jiart  of  the  observances  of  either 
of  those  days  that  all  the  males  should  “ap- 
pear before  the  Lord,”  I'hose  days  might  be 


regularly  observed  by  the  faithful  without  the 
necessity  of  their  going  to  the  central  Sanc- 
tuary for  the  purpose  ; and  so  could  furnish 
no  occasion  for  enforcing  that  peculiar  and 
leading  topic  of  Deuteronomy,  the  observance 
of  a national  and  visible  unity  in  faith  and 
worship. 

1—8.  The  Feast  of  Passover  (Ex.  xii. 
I — 27;  Num.  ix.  I— 14;  Lev.  xxiii.  1—8). 
A re-enforcement  of  this  ordinance  Avas  the 
more  necessary  because  its  observance  had 
clearly  been  intermitted  for  thirty-nine  years 
(see  on  Josh,  v,  10).  One  passover  only  had 
been  kept  in  the  wilderness,  that  recorded  in 
Num.  ix..  where  see  notes.  Various  Jewish 
authorities  obspved  that  the  passover  was  not 
designed  to  be'  kept  regularly  until  after  the 
settlement  in  Canaan  (see  Exod.  xii.  25,  xiii. 
5).  The  same  remark  may  be  made  of  the 
Feast  of  Pentecost  (see  Lev.  xxiii.  10). 

2.  sacrifice  the  passo--uer~\  i.  e.  offer  the 
sacrifices  proper  to  the  feast  of  the  passover, 
which  lasted  seven  days.  The  word  passover 
here  is  used  in  a general  sense  for  the  passover 
offerings,  as  in  St  John  xviii.  28,  “that  they 
might  eat  the  passover,”  i.e.  the  passover  offer- 
ings. The  passover  itself  in  the  strictest  sense 
was  a lamb  or  a kid  (Exod.  xii.  5)  ; but  the 
slaying  of  this  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the 
month  at  even  was  but  the  inauguration  of  a 
large  number  of  sacrifices  appointed  for  the 
days  following  (Num.  xxviii.  1 7 — 24 ; 2 Chron. 
XXXV.  7).  'Phese  sacrifices,  strictly  the  pass- 
over  oflerings  (Jjappesachim),  were  often  by 
the  Jews  spoken  of,  together  with  the  paschal 


V. 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVI. 


857 


Exod.  12.  3 "^Thou  shalt  eat  no  leavened 

'■  bread  with  it ; seven  days  shalt  thou 
eat  unleavened  bread  therewith,  even 
the  bread  of  affliction  ; for  thou  earnest 
forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  in 
haste : that  thou  mayest  remember 
the  day  when  thou  earnest  forth  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt  all  the  days  of 
thy  life. 

Exod.  34.  4 ^ And  there  shall  be  no  leavened 

’■  bread  seen  with  thee  in  all  thy  coast 
seven  days ; neither  shall  there  any, 
thing  of  the  flesh,  which  thou  sacri- 
ficedst  the  first  day  at  even,  remain 
all  nio-ht  until  the  mornino;. 

Dr,  kill.  5 Thou  mayest  not  ” sacrifice  the 
passover  within  any  of  thy  gates,  which 
the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee  ; 

6  But  at  the  place  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  shall  choose  to  place  his 


name  in,  there  thou  shalt  sacrifice  the 
passover  at  even,  at  the  going  down 
of  the  sun,  at  the  season  that  thou 
earnest  forth  out  of  Egypt. 

7 And  thou  shalt  roast  and  eat  it 
in  the  place  which  the  Lord  thy  God 
shall  choose  : and  thou  shalt  turn  in 
the  morning,  and  go  unto  thy  tents. 

8 Six  days  thou  shalt  eat  unlea- 
vened bread : and  on  the  seventh 
day  shall  be  a Tolemn  assembly  totHeb. 
the  L0R.D  thy  God  : thou  shalt  do  no 
work  therein. 

9 ^ -^Seven  weeks  shalt  thou  num--^Lev.  23. 
ber  unto  thee  : begin  to  number  the 
seven  weeks  from  such  time  as  thou 
beginnest  to  put  the  sickle  to  the  corn. 

10  And  thou  shalt  keep  the  feast 
of  weeks  unto  the  Lord  thy  God 

with  " a tribute  of  a freewill  offering  sufficiency. 


lamb  that  inaugurated  them,  as  simply  the 
Pascha  or  Passover.  It  is  clear  that  the  word 
passover  is  thus  used  in  the  passage  before  us 
from  Avhat  follows  immediately  in  the  next 
•z;.,  “thou  shalt  eat  no  leavened  bread 
with  it : seven  days  shalt  thou  eat  unleavened 
bread  therewith i.  e.  with  the  passover. 
Now  the  passover  in  the  narrowest  sense, 
i.  e.  the  lamb  or  kid,  had  to  be  consumed  on 
the  first  evening,  'v.  4.  That  therefore  with 
which  they  were  to  eat  unleavened  bread 
seven  days  is  the  passover  in  the  wider  sense, 
the  paschal  offerings  which  continued  to  be 
offered  throughout  the  week.  Hence  the 
direction  to  “sacrifice  the  passover  of  the 
flock  and  the  herd,”  i.e.  of  small  cattle  and 
oxen,  is  no  variation  of  the  ordinance  of 
Exod.  xii.  5.  The  rite  of  the  paschal  lamb  is 
presupposed  throughout,  and  the  command  of 
the  present  passage  is  to  bring  the  other 
paschal  offerings  “ of  the  flock  and  of  the 
herd”  to  the  place  which  the  Lord  should 
choose.  In  the  latter  part  of  4 and  the 
following  ‘z;*!'.  Moses  passes,  as  the  context 
again  shows,  into  the  narrower  sense  of  the 
word  passover. 

7.  thou  shalt  roast\  Lit.  Thou  shalt 
cook  it.  The  word  (bashal)  means  gene- 
rally to  prepare  food  by  cooking.  Ordinarily 
it  is  applied  to  boiling:  but  it  may  be  used, 
as  here  and  in  2 Chron.  xxxv.  13,  of  roasting 
also.  The  previous  rules  about  the  passover 
being  assumed,  no  Jew  would  think  of 
cooking  it  in  any  other  way  than  by  fire. 

thou  shalt  turn  in  the  rnornmg,^  and  go  unto 
thy  tents']  i.  e.  after  the  Paschal  Supper  in  the 
courts  or  neighbourhood  of  the  Sanctuary 
was  over,  they  might  disperse  to  their  several 


lodgings.  These  would  of  course  be  within  a 
short  distance  of  the  Sanctuary,  because  the 
other  paschal  offerings  were  yet  to  be  offered 
day  by  day  for  seven  days,  and  the  people 
would  remain  to  share  them ; and  especially 
to  take  part  in  the  holy  convocation  on  the 
first  and  seventh  of  the  days.  The  expression 
“unto  thy  tents,”  means  simply  “to  thy 
dwellings,”  as  in  i K.  viii.  66.  -The  use 
of  “tents”  as  a synonym  for  “dwellings” 
(cf.  Is.  xvi.  5)  is  a trace  of  the  original 
nomadic  life  of  the  people. 

9 — 13.  Feast  of  Weeks;  and -z-'-z;.  13 — 17, 
Feast  of  Tabernacles.  As  regards  these  holy 
seasons  nothing  is  here  added  to  the  rules 
given  in  Levit.  and  Num.  except  the  clauses 
so  often  recurring  in  Deut.  and  so  character- 
istic of  it,  which  restrict  the  public  celebration 
of  the  festivals  to  the  Sanctuary,  and  enjoin 
that  the  enjoyments  of  them*  should  be  ex- 
tended to  the  Levites,  widows,  orphans,  &c. 
It  is  obviously  for  the  sake  of  urging  these 
tvro  last-mentioned  points  that  any  allusion 
is  here  made  at  all  to  the  two  feasts. 

9.  begin  to  number  the  nveeks  from  such 
time  as  thou  beginnest  to  put  the  sickle  to  the 
corn]  Lit.  “upon  the  beginning  of  the  sickle 
to  the  corn ; ” i.  e.  from  the  beginning  of  corn 
harvest.  This  could  not  be  (Lev.  xxiii. 
14,  15)  until  the  presentation  of  the  first- 
fruits  of  the  new  harvest  before  God  on  “the 
morrow  after  the  sabbath”  in  the  Passover 
week,  i.e.  the  sixteenth  of  Nisan;  and  accord- 
ingly the  fifty  days  were  counted  from  this 
“beginning  of  the  sickle  to  the  corn,”  or  law- 
ful commencement  of  harvest,  on  the  second 
of  the  seven  days  of  unleavened  bread. 


858 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVI. 


[V.  II 22. 


of  thine  hand,  which  thou  shalt  give 
unto  the  Lord  thy  God^  according  as 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath  blessed  thee  : 

1 1 And  thou  shalt  rejoice  before 
the  Lord  thy  God,  thou,  and  thy 
son,  and  thy  daughter,  and  thy  man- 
servant, and  thy  maidservant,  and  the 
Levite  that  is  within  thy  gates,  and 
the  stranger,  and  the  fatherless,  and 
the  widow,  that  are  among  you,  in 
the  place  which  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  chosen  to  place  his  name  there. 

12  And  thou  shalt  remember  that 
thou  wast  a bondman  in  Egypt : and 
thou  shalt  observe  and  do  these  sta- 
tutes. 

13  ^ Thou  shalt  observe  the  feast 
of  tabernacles  seven  days,  after  that 

t Heb.  thou  hast  gathered  in  thy  ^ corn  and 

Jhorand  j 

tuy  wine-  . 

frcss.  And  thou  shalt  rejoice  in  thy 

feast,  thou,  and  thy  son,  and  thy 
daughter,  and  thy  manservant,  and 
thy  maidservant,  and  the  Levite,  the 
stranger,  and  the  fatherless,  and  the 
v/idow,  that  are  within  thy  gates. 

15  Seven  days  shalt  thou  keep  a 
solemn  feast  unto  the  Lord  thy  God 
in  the  place  which  the  Lor.d  shall 
choose  : because  the  Lord  thy  God 
shall  bless  thee  in  all  thine  increase, 
and  in  all  the  works  of  thine  hands, 
therefore  thou  shalt  surely  rejoice. 


16  ^ ^ Three  times  in  a year  shall 
all  thy  males  appear  before  the  Lord 
thy  God  in  the  place  which  he  shall 
choose  j in  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread,  and  in  the  feast  of  weeks,  and 
in  the  feast  of  tabernacles : and  ^ they 
shall  not  appear  before  the  Lord 
empty  : 

1 7 Every  man  shall  give  ^ as  he  is 
able,  according  to  the  blessing  of  the 
Lord  thy  God  which  he  hath  given 
thee. 

18  ^ Judges  and  officers  shalt  thou 
make  thee  in  all  thy  gates,  which  the 
Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee,  through- 
out thy  tribes  : and  they  shall  judge 
the  people  with  just  judgment. 

19  Thou  shalt  not  wrest  judg- 
ment ; thou  shalt  not  respect  persons, 
* neither  take  a gift  : for  a gift  doth 
blind  the  eyes  of  the  wise,  and  pervert 
the  words  of  the  righteous. 

20  ^ That  which  is  altogether  just 
shalt  thou  follow,  that  thou  mayest 
live,  and  inherit  the  land  which  the 
L0R.D  thy  God  giveth  thee. 

21  ^ Thou  shalt  not  plant  thee  a 
grove  of  any  trees  near  unto  the  altar 
of  the  Lord  thy  God,  v/hich  thou 
shalt  make  thee. 

22  Neither  shalt  thou  set  thee  up 
any  " image 
God  hateth. 


Exod.  23, 
14. 

& 34-  23- 


^ Ecclus. 
35-  4- 


t Heb.  _ 
accoi'ding 
to  the  giyt 
of  his 
hand. 


’ Exod.  23, 


OOr, 
■matters. 
t Heb. 
Justice, 
justice. 


h Lev.  26. 


which  the  Lord  thy  11  or, 

statue,  or, 
jillar. 


18 — 22.  These  'v'v.  are  closely  con- 
nected in  subject  with  the  following  chapter; 
and  form  with  that  and  the  four  next 
chapters  a proper  lesson  in  the  Synagogue 
service-book.  They  introduce  certain  direc- 
tions for  the  administration  of  justice  and  the 
carrying  on  of  the  civil  government  of  the 
people  in  Canaan.  See  on  Judg.  iii.  7.  During 
the  lifetime  of  Moses,  he  himself,  specially  in- 
spired and  guided  by  God,  was  sufficient,  with 
the  aid  of  the  subordinate  judges  appointed  at 
a very  early  period  of  the  people’s  indepen- 
dence (cf.  Ex.  xviii.  13  sqq.),  for  the  duties  in 
ciuestion ; and  the  more  so  because  the  nation 
had  thus  far  lived  in  encampment  together, 
and  so  within  a small  compass.  But  now  when 
Moses  was  to  be  withdrawn,  and  the  people 
would  soon  be  scattered  up  and  down  the 
land  of  Canaan,  regular  and  permanent  pro- 
vision must  be  made  for  civil  and  social  order 
and  good  government.  To  such  provision 
Moses  now  addresses  himself;  and  with  a 


statesmanlike  foresight,  not  only  arranges  for 
immediate  exigencies,  but  leaves  room  within 
his  plan  for  ideas  and  wants  which  as  yet  lay 
in  the  far  distant  future. 

21.  7hou  shalt  not  plant  thee  a groove  of 
any  trees'^  Render,  Tliou  shalt  not  plant 
for  thee  any  tree  as  an  idol:  literally 
“as  an  Asherah,”  i.e.  an  image  of  Astarte  or 
Ashtaroth,  the  Phoenician  goddess:  cf.  on 
vii.  13.  The  word  is  rendered  “groves”  by 
A.  V.  also  in  vii.  5,  xii.  3 ; Ex.  xxxiv.  13  ; 
Judg.  vi.  25.  This  rendering  is  adopted  after 
LXX.,  Saad.,  and  many  ancient  authorities, 
but  cannot  be  maintained,  for  the  word  is 
connected  with  various  verbs  {e-S'  “ make,” 
I K.  xiv.  15;  “to  set  up”  or  “erect,”  2 K. 
xvii.  10;  % Chron.  xxxiii.  19;  “to  build,” 
I K xiv.  23)  which  are  quite  inapplicable  to 
a grove.  The  wooden  idol  in  question  was 
the  stem  of  a tree,  stripped  of  its  boughs, 
set  upright  in  the  ground,  and  rudely  carved 
with  emblems. 


V.  1—9.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVII. 


859 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

I The  things  sacrificed  mnst  be  sound.  2 Idola- 
ters must  be  slain.  8 Hard  controversies  are 
to  be  dete7’mined  by  the  priests  and  judges,  r 2 
The  contetniier  of  that  determination  must  die. 
14  The  election,  16  and  duty  of  a king. 

Thou  shalt  not  sacrifice  unto  the 
Lord  thy  God  any  bullock,  or 
Ox, goat,  "sheep,  wherein  is  blemish,  or  any 
evilfavouredness  : for  that  is  an  abo- 
mination unto  the  Lord  thy  God. 

2  *[I  If  there  be  found  among  you, 
within  any  of  thy  gates  which  the 
Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee,  man  or 
woman,  that  hath  wrought  wicked- 
ness in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  thy 
God,  in  transgressing  his  covenant, 

3  And  hath  gone  and  served  other 
gods,  and  worshipped  them,  either  the 
sun,  or  moon,  or  any  of  the  host  of 
heaven,  which  1 have  not  commanded ; 

4  And  it  be  told  thee,  and  thou 
hast  heard  of  it.,  and  inquired  dili- 
gently, and,  behold,  it  he  true,  and 
the  thing  certain,  that  such  abomi- 
nation is  wrought  in  Israel : 


5 Then  shalt  thou  bring  forth  that 
man  or  that  woman,  which  have  com- 
mitted that  wicked  thing,  unto  thy 
gates,  even  that  man  or  that  woman, 
and  shalt  stone  them  with  stones,  till 
they  die. 

6 "At  the  mouth  of  two  witnesses,  " Numb, 
or  three  witnesses,  shall  he  that  IS  chap.  ig. 
worthy  of  death  be  put  to  death  ; but  is. 
at  the  mouth  of  one  witness  he  shall  \\  „ 

John  8.  17. 

not  be  put  to  death.  2 Cor.  13. 

7 The  hands  of  the  witnesses  shall  Heb.  10. 
be  first  upon  him  to  put  him  to  death, 

and  afterward  the  hands  of  all  the  peo- 
ple. So  thou  shalt  put  the  evil  away 
from  among  you. 

8 ^ If  there  arise  a matter  too 
hard  for  thee  in  j'udgment,  between  ? 
blood  and  blood,  between  plea  and 
plea,  and  between  stroke  and  stroke, 
being  matters  of  controversy  within 
thy  gates  : then  shalt  thou  arise,  and 
get  thee  up  into  the  place  which  the 
Lord  thy  God  shall  choose*; 

9 And  thou  shalt  come  unto  the 


Chap.  XVII.  1.  This  nj.  belongs  in 
subject  to  the  last  chapter.  It  prohibits  once 
more  (cf.  xv.  21)  that  form  of  insult  to  God 
which  consists  in  offering  to  Him  a blemished 
sacrifice. 

any  e’vil-faajouredness~\  Render  any  evil 
thing.  The  reference  is  to  the  faults  or 
maims  enumerated  Lev.  xxii.  22 — 24- 

2 — 7.  The  detection  and  punishment  of 
idolatry,  as  leading  duties  of  the  magistrate, 
are  again  enjoined  (cf.  xiii  sqq.)  with  special 
reference  to  the  legal  forms  to  be  adopted, 
'vv.  5 — 7.  The  sentence  is  to  be  carried  into 
effect  at  “the  gates”  (cf.  on  Gen.  xix.  i)  of 
the  town  in  which  the  crime  is  committed ; 
because,  as  “all  the  people”  were  to  take  a 
part,  an  open  space  would  be  requisite  for 
the  execution.  Note  the  typical  and  pro- 
phetical aspect  of  the  injunction;  cf.  Acts  vii. 
58  ; Hebr.  xiii.  12.  It  is  quite  in  keeping  with 
the  time  and  circumstances  of  Deut.  that  we 
should  find  here  the  expression  “ unto  the 
gates”  instead  of  the  “without  the  camp”  of 
the  earlier  books;  cf.  Lev.  xxiv.  14;  Num. 
XV.  35.  On  the  requirement  of  two  wit- 
nesses see  reff.  in  margin.  The  accuser  how- 
ever might  himself  be  one  of  the  two.  The 
obligation  laid  on  the  witnesses  (yv.  7)  on 
whose  testimony  sentence  of  death  should  be 
passed,  to  take  the  lead  in  the  execution  of 
it,  is  calculated  to  ensure  their  sincerity  and 
truthfulness,  and  to  deter  from  false  witness. 


8 — 13.  The  transition  is  obvious  from  the 
enactments  respecting  a leading  class  of  capital 
crimes  to  those  respecting  obscure  or  com- 
plicated cases.  These  ‘v^.  do  not,  strictly 
speaking,  provide  for  a court  of  appeal.  No 
provision  for  appeals  in  the  proper  sense  is 
found  in  the  laws  of  Moses.  The  cases  in 
question  are,  like  those  to  be  brought  before 
Moses  in  person  according  to  the  suggestion 
of  Jethro  (Ex.  xviii.  23 — 27),  such  as  the  in- 
ferior judges  did  not  feel  able  to  decide  satis- 
factorily, and  which  accordingly  they  remitted 
to  their  superiors. 

The  Supreme  Court  is  referred  to  in  very 
general  terms  as  sitting  at  the  Sanctuary,  n).  8, 
and  as  consisting  of  “the  priests  the  Levites, 
and  the  judge  that  shall  be  in  those  days,”  2;.  9. 
“The  judge”  would  no  doubt  usually  be  a lay- 
man, and  thus  the  court  would  contain  both 
an  ecclesiastical  and  a civil  element.  In  like 
manner  Moses  and  Aaron  (Num.  xv.  33), 
and  after  Aaron’s  death  Moses  and  Eleazar 
(Num.  xxvii.  2),  seem  to  have  acted  as  judges 
in  chief  whilst  the  people  were  still  in  the 
wilderness.  Jehoshaphat,  when  (2  Chron. 
xix.  4 — ii)  “he  brought  the  people  back 
unto  the  Lord  God  of  their  fathers,”  organized 
his  judicial  system  very  closely  upon  the  lines 
here  laid  down.  He  “ set  judges  in  the  land 
throughout  all  the  fenced  cities  of  Judah,” 
i.e.  local  courts,  as  is  enjoined  Deut.  xvi.  t8, 
and  appointed  the  chief  priest  and  “Zebadiah 


86o 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVII. 


[v.  lo — 1 6. 


t Heb. 
7!Ot  to 
hearkc7i. 


priests  the  Levites,  and  unto  the  judge 
that  shall  be  in  those  days,  and  in- 
quire \ and  they  shall  shew  thee  the 
sentence  of  judgment : 

10  And  thou  shalt  do  according  to 
the  sentence,  which  they  of  that  place 
which  the  Lord  shall  choose  shall 
shew  thee  ; and  thou  shalt  observe  to 
do  according  to  all  that  they  inform 
thee : 

1 1 According  to  the  sentence  of 
the  law  which  they  shall  teach  thee, 
and  according  to  the  judgment  which 
they  shall  tell  thee,  thou  shalt  do : 
thou  shalt  not  decline  from  the  sen- 
tence which  they  shall  shew  thee,  to 
the  right  hand,  nor  to  the  left. 

12  And  the  man  that  will  do  pre- 
sumptuously, ^ and  will  not  hearken 
unto  the  priest  that  standeth  to  mi- 
nister there  before  the  Lord  thy  God, 


or  unto  the  judge,  even  that  man  shall 
die  : and  thou  shalt  put  away  the  evil 
from  Israel. 

13  And  all  the  people  shall  hear, 
and  fear,  and  do  no  more  presump- 
tuously. 

14.  ^ When  thou  art  come  unto 
the  land  which  the  Lord  thy  God 
giveth  thee,  and  shalt  possess  it,  and 
shalt  dwell  therein,  and  shalt  say,  I 
will  set  a king  over  me,  like  as  all  the 
nations  that  are  about  me  ; 

15  Thou  shalt  in  any  wise  set  him 
king  over  thee,  whom  the  Lord  thy 
God  shall  choose  : one  from  among 
thy  brethren  shalt  thou  set  king  over 
thee  : thou  mayest  not  set  a stranger 
over  thee,  which  is  not  thy  brother. 

16  But  he  shall  not  multiply  horses 
to  himself,  nor  cause  the  people  to 
return  to  Egypt,  to  the  end  that  he 


the  son  of  Ishmael,  the  ruler  of  the  house  of 
J udah  ” to  be  a central  and  supreme  court  at 
Jerusalem,  On  the  judicial  institutions  of 
the  Jews  in  general,  see  Note  at  end  of 
chapter. 

9.  the  priests  the  Lensites'\  This  expres- 
sion, as  also  the  similar  one  “the  priests  the 
sons  of  Levi,”  is  equivalent  to  “the  Levitical 
priests,”  and  is  found  in  Dent,  and  Josh.  (cf. 
n).  18,  xviii.  I,  xxi.  5;  Josh.  iii.  3,  &c.),  in- 
stead of  “the  sons  of  Aaron”  of  Exodus 
and  the  two  following  books.  See  on  it, 
Introd.  § V. 

14—20.  The  provisions  for  a supreme 
court  of  justice  carry  the  writer  on  to  the 
consideration  of  a contingency  which  nearly 
concerns  this  part  of  his  polity,  that  of  his 
people  wishing  to  set  a king  over  them.  The 
king,  if  appointed,  would  of  course  gather 
round  himself  the  functions  of  judicature  and 
administration  which  are  treated  of  in  this 
part  of  the  book  ; and  his  election,  duties  and 
responsibilities  are  thus  naturally  and  appo- 
sitely spoken  of  here.  On  the  inferences  drawn 
from  these  verses  as  to  the  date  of  Dent,  see 
Note  at  end  of  chapter.  It  is  only  neces- 
sary to  observe  here  that  the  choice  of  a king 
is  not,  like  that  of  judges  and  officers,  xvi. 
18,  enjoined,  but  simply  permitted.  The  rea- 
son of  this  is  obvious.  Provision  for  the  due 
administration  of  justice  is  essential  : that 
justice  should  be  dispensed  through  monarch- 
ical forms  is  not  so;  and  is  accordingly  only 
recogiii/ed  as  an  arrangement  which  might 
pi'obably  result  on  the  settlement  and  conso- 
lidation of  the  people  in  Canaan. 


14.  No  encouragement  is  given  to  the 
desire,  natural  in  an  Oriental  people,  for 
monarchical  government ; but  neither  is  such 
desire  blamed,  as  appears  from  the  fact  that 
conditions  are  immediately  laid  down  upon 
which  it  may  be  satisfied. 

I <ivill  set  a king  o'ver  me~\  Cf.  i S.  viii. 
5,  19- 

15.  The  king,  like  the  judges  and  officers 
(cf.  xvi.  18),  is  to  be  chosen  by  the  people; 
but  their  choice  is  to  be  in  accordance  with 
the  will  of  God,  and  to  be  made  from 
amongst  “their  brethren.”  Cf.  i S.  ix.  15, 
X.  24,  xvi.  12;  I K.  xix.  16.  Neither  the 
manner  of  the  election,  nor  the  channel  through 
which  the  Divine  will  would  be  manifested, 
are  specified.  The  former  point,  in  this  as  in 
other  such  cases,  is  taken  as  sufficiently  pro- 
vided for  by  the  usual  customs  of  the  people ; 
the  latter  is  appropriately  left  indeterminate, 
God  would  make  His  choice  evident,  and 
this  was  all  that  needed  to  be  intimated.  In 
fact  a prophet  was  usually  commissioned,  as 
in  the  examples  above  cited;  though  in  the 
case  of  Solomon  the  decision  of  the  Lord  was 
directly  communicated  to  David  also.  Cf. 
I Chron.  xxii.  10. 

fhoii  mayest  not  set  a stranger  O'ver  thee~\ 
The  Jews  extended  this  prohibition  to  all 
offices  whatsoever;  cf.  Jer.  xxx.  21;  and  na- 
turally attached  the  greatest  importance  to  it: 
whence  the  significance  of  the  question  pro- 
posed to  our  Lord,  “Is  it  lawful  to  give 
tribute  to  Caesar?”  St  Matt.  xx.  17.  A Gen- 
tile head  for  the  Jewish  people,  which  it  was 
a main  aim  of  the  law  to  keep  pecufiar  and 
distinct  from  others,  was  an  anomaly. 


V.  17— 19-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVII. 


86 1 


should  multiply  horses  : forasmuch  as 
the  Lord  hath  said  unto  you,  Yc 
shall  henceforth  return  no  more  that 
way. 

17  Neither  shall  he  multiply  wives 
to  himself,  that  his  heart  turn  not 
away  : neither  shall  he  greatly  mul- 
tiply to  himself  silver  and  gold. 


18  And  it  shall  be,  when  he  sit- 
tcth  upon  the  throne  of  his  kingdom, 
that  he  shall  v/rite  him  a copy  of  this 
law  in  a book  out  of  that  which  is 
before  the  priests  the  Levites  : 

19  And  it  shall  be  v/ith  him,  and 
he  shall  read  therein  all  the  days  of 
his  life : that  he  may  learn  to  fear 


16.  ke  shall  not  multiply  korses  to  himself^ 
nor  cause  the  people  to  return  to  Egypt^  to  the 
end  that  he  should  multiply  horses'^  The  horse 
was  not  anciently  used  in  the  East  for  purposes 
of  agriculture  or  travelling,  but  ordinarily  for 
war  only.  He  appears  constantly  in  Scrip- 
ture as  the  symbol  and  embodiment  of  fleshly 
strength  and  the  might  of  the  creature ; cf. 
Ps.  XX.  7,  xxxiii.  16,  17,  cxlvii.  10;  Job 
xxxix.  19  sqq.,  and  is  sometimes  significantly 
spoken  of  simply  as  “ the  strong  one,”  cf.  Jer. 
viii.  16.  The  spirit  of  the  prohibition  there- 
fore is  that  the  king  of  Israel  must  not,  like 
other  earthly  potentates,  put  his  trust  in  costly 
and  formidable  preparations  for  war,  but  in 
God  who  “ saves  not  by  horses  nor  by  horse- 
men,” EIos.  i.  7. 

Canaan  being  a mountainous  country  was 
not  suited  for  the  breeding  and  training  of 
horses.  Egypt  was  the  principal  source 
whence  the  nations  of  western  Asia  drew 
their  supplies  of  this  animal : cf.  i K.  x. 
a8,  29;  and  horses  and  chariots  figure  con- 
stantly as  most  important  elements  in  the 
armies  of  the  Pharaohs;  cf.  Ex.  xiv.  5 sqq.; 
2 K.  vii.  6.  The  Assyrians  likewise  excelled 
in  this  arm  (cf.  2 K.  xviii.  23  ; Habak.  i.  8 ; 
Nah.  iii.  3),  and  it  was  the  natural  resource 
of  the  later  kings  of  Judah,  them.selves  weak 
in  cavalry,  to  seek  to  balance  the  superiority 
of  the  Assyrians  in  this  respect  by  alliances 
with  the  Egyptians.  This  policy  of  worldly 
wisdom  is  often  and  emphatically  condemned 
by  the  prophets;  cf.  Is.  xxx.  i,  xxxvi.  9; 
Ezek.  xvii.  15  ; and  in  the  very  spirit  of  the 
text.  Egypt  everywhere  in  Scripture  stands 
as  the  antithesis  to  the  theocratic  covenant 
and  kingdom  on  earth.  “To  cause  the  people 
to  return  to  Egypt”  would  be  to  reverse  that 
great  apd  beneficent  wonderwork  of  God 
which  inaugurated  the  Mosaic  covenant,  the 
deliverance  from  the  bondage  of  Egypt ; and 
to  bring  that  about  of  set  purpose  which  God 
threatens  (xxviii.  68)  as  the  sorest  punishment 
for  Israel’s  sin.  The  multiplication  of  horses 
could  not  take  place,  as  experience  in  Solo- 
mon’s reign  showed,  without  constant  traffic 
with  Egypt  and  consequent  intercourse  with 
the  Egyptians ; and  this  it  was  important  for 
the  purposes  of  the  Mosaic  law  to  prevent 
(cf.  Ex.  xiii.  17  ; Jer.  xlii.  14  sqq.;  Hos.  xi.  5). 

17.  Neither  shall  he  multiply  <wi‘ves  to 
himself]  Cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  16:. where,  however, 

VOL.  I. 


(as  in  Deut.  vii.  3,  4)  the  warning  is  rather 
against  intermarriage  with  idolatrous  nations 
which  might  by  their  example  seduce  the 
chosen  people  from  the  faith,  than  as  here, 
against  excessive  multiplication  of  wives.  The 
latter  sin  would  lead  to  sensuality,  and  so  to 
an  apostasy  no  less  fatal  in  effect  than  down- 
right idolatry.  This  rule,  like  the  others, 
abridges  to  the  ruler  of  Israel  liberties  usually 
enjoyed  without  stint  by  the  kings  of  the  East. 
It  does  not  forbid  polygamy,  but  inordinate 
polygamy.  The  Targum  of  Jonathan  inter- 
prets it  as  limiting  the  king  to  eighteen  wives. 
The  restriction,  however  lax  to  Christian  no- 
tions, was  in  the  days  of  Moses  unprecedented ; 
and  demanded  a higher  standard  in  the  king 
of  Israel  than  was  looked  for  amongst  his 
equals  in  other  nations. 

neither  shall  he  greatly  multiply  to  himself 
siNer  and  gold]  In  this  third,  as  in  the  other 
two  prohibitions,  excess  is  forbidden.  Vast 
accumulation  of  treasure  could  hardly  be 
effected  without  oppression ; nor  when  ef- 
fected fail  to  produce  pride  and  a “trust  in 
uncertain  riches,”  i Tim.  vi.  17. 

18.  he  shall  ^rite  him  a copy  of  this  la^] 
This  prescription  is  every  way  a remarkable 
one.  Philo  and  other  Jewish  commentate rs_ 
understand  it  as  binding  the  kijig  to  tran- 
scribe the  law  with  his  own  hand.  The  spirit 
of  the  rule  however  seemis  only  to  require 
that  the  king  should  have  a copy  written  for 
him  (so  Saad.,  Keil,  Knobel,  &c.).  It  is  in 
striking  consistency  with  the  dignity  which 
everywhere  throughout  the  Mosaic  legislation 
surrounds  the  chosen  people  of  God,  that 
even  if  they  will  be  “like  as  all  the  nations 
about,”  and  be  governed  by  a king,  care  should 
nevertheless  be  taken  that  he  shall  be  no  Ori- 
ental despot.  He  is  to  be  of  no  royal  caste, 
but  one  from  among  thy  brethren ; he  is  to 
bear  himself  as  a kind  of  “ primus  inter  pares,” 
his  heart  not  being  lifted  up  abon^e  bis  brethren^ 
'V.  20 ; he  is,  like  his  subjects,  to  be  bound 
by  the  fundamental  laws  and  institutions  of 
the  nation,  and  obliged,  as  they  were,  to 
do  his  duty  in  his  station  of  life  with  constant 
reference  thereto.  The  spirit  of  the  text  is 
that  of  St  Matt,  xxiii.  9.  It  is  noteworthy 
too  that  none  of  the  kings  of  Israel  appears 
in  character  cf  a legislator. 

a copy  of  this  la^]  The  A.  V.  reproduces 
exactly  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew,  and  the  ex- 

3 


862 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVII. 


the  Lord  his  God,  to  keep  all  the 
words  of  this  lav/  and  these  statutes, 
to  do  them  : 

20  That  his  heart  be  not  lifted  up 
above  his  brethren,  and  that  he  turn 


prcssion  is  generally  and  correctly  explained  as 
importing  the  whole  Pentateuch,  or  at  any 
rate  the  legal  portion  of  the  Pentateuch.  A 
knowledge  of  Exodus  and  the  two  following 
books  would  indeed  be  even  more  essential  to 
the  king  than  that  of  Deuteronomy,  which  is 
to  so  great  an  extent  a hortatory  comment  on 
them  and  supplement  to  them.  The  LXX. 


[v.  20. 

not  aside  from  the  commandment,  to 
the  right  hand,  or  to  the  left : to  the 
end  that  he  may  prolong  his  days  in 
his  kingdom,  he,  and  his  children,  in 
the  midst  of  Israel. 


renders  “ro  ^evrepovonLov  rouro”',  and  the 
Vulg.  “ Deuteronomium  legis  hujus.”  The 
Talmud  understands  /wo  copies,  making  7nijb- 
neh  equivalent  to  “duplum.” 

in  a book  out  of  that  'which  is  before  the 
priests  the  Lewtes^  Cf.  xxxi.  9 sqq.  and  24 
sqq.  and  notes. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xvii.  8 — 13,  and  14 — 17. 


We  have  no  means  of  determining  ques- 
tions of  detail  connected  with  the  judicial 
institutions  of  the  ancient  Jews.  The  words 
of  this  passage  and  of  xix.  17,  18  intimate  that 
the  chief  priest  and  the  judge  had  each  assessors 
or  assistants ; and  the  last-cited  one  seems  to 
assign  the  inquiry  into  fact  specially  to  the 
judges.  “The  priests  the  Levites”  would 
naturally  be  regarded  as  more  particularly 
entrusted  with  the  duty  of  interpreting  and 
expounding  the  law  of  God. 

Yet  distinctions  of  a legal  character,  such 
as  that  between  questions  of  law*  and  ques- 
tions of  fact,  would  not  be  drawn  with  nicety 
in  the  days  of  Moses.  Some  such  distinctions, 
e.g.  that  between  ecclesiastical,  civil,  and 
criminal  causes,  would  be  to  some  extent  in- 
applicable under  a theocracy. 

Three  sorts  of  functionaries  appear  in  the 
iPentateuch  as  taking  part  in  the  administra- 
tion of  justice:  (i)  “the  Elders;'”  (2)  “the 
Judges”  (□'.DS'J'*,  once  Ex.  xxi.  22  ; 

,5)  “the  Officers”  (DniO'd'). 

For  the  basis  of  the  whole  system  we  must 
go  back  to  the  patriarchal  institution  of  “the 
Elders.”  Cf  on  Num.  xi.  16.  In  this  as  in 
other  parts  of  his  legislation  Moses,  strictly 
speaking,  originates  little,  but  regulates  and 
develops  what  v/as  in  its  germs  already  pre- 
sent in  the  social  system  and  habits  of  his 
people.  “The  Elders”  of  Israel  are  men- 
tioned before  the  Exodus,  Ex.  iii.  18;  and 
appear  also  amongst  the  Egyptians,  Gen.  1.  7, 
as  they  do  indeed  amongst  Oriental  nations 
commonly,  from  the  dawn  of  history  to  the 
present  time.  They  are  in  the  Pentateuch 
identical  with  “the  heads  of  the  people”  and 
“chief  of  the  tribes,”  who  so  often  come  for- 
ward either  by  themselves  or  their  deputies, 
in  the  course  of  the  wandering,  as  represen- 
tatives of  the  nation  at  large. 

It  is  clear  tliat  on  the  lirst  emancipation  of 
the  people  from  F.gypt,  Moses  united  in  his 
own  person  the  judicial  as  well  as  the  other 
principal  theocratical  functions.  As  the  organi- 
zation of  the  nation  proceeded,  Moses  on  the 


counsel  of  Jethro  appointed  a large  number 
of  inferior  judges,  who  accordingly  are  dis- 
tinguished'from  “the  Elders,”  though  perhaps 
chosen  from  amongst  them  : (cf  Exod.  xviii. 
21  sqq.;  and  ch.  i..  13,  15,  16,  and  xxi.  2). 
The  college  of  Elders  however  seems  to  have 
retained  the  adjudication  of  certain  cases  (cf 
xxi.  19,  xxii.  15,  XXV.  8),  probably  cases  of 
a domestic  nature.  The  Elders  of  Jezreel 
(i  K.  xxi.)  play  a conspicuous  part  in  the 
judicial  murder  of  Naboth  ; but  we  can  hardly 
infer  from  such  a transaction,  especially  in 
Ahab’s  kingdom,  that  they  ordinarily  and 
regularly  exercised  powers  of  this  sort. 

“The  Officers”  too  (Shoterim)  are  found 
as  well  as  “the  Elders”  before  the  Exodus: 
Ex.  V.  10,  where  see  note.  Subsequently 
they  are  m.entioned  with  “ the  Elders”  (Num. 
xi.  16),  and  with  “the  Judges”  (ch.  xvi.  18); 
from  which  last  place  it  appears  that  they 
were  in  some  way  concerned  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  justice.  In  Josh.  viii.  33  and  xxiv. 
I “the  Elders,  Officers,  and  Judges”  are  enu- 
merated severally. 

The  Rabbinists  find  in  the  text  the  Greater 
and  Lesser  Sanhedrim.  No  doubt  the  Lesser 
Sanhedrim  corresponded  in  functions  with 
the  local  court  provided  in  xvi.  18,  as  did  the 
Greater  with  the  supreme  court  of  xvii.  8 
(cf  St  Matt.  V.  22);  but  the  Sanhedrim  in 
the  strict  and  proper  sense  was  only  in- 
stituted after  the  return  from  the  exile.  The 
Talmud,  differing  herein  from  Josephus, 
speaks  of  the  Lesser  Sanhedrim  as  containing 
twenty-three  members. 

It  would  seem  likely,  fi'om  the  wording  of 
xvi.  18  (cf  i.  13  and  Josh.  iv.  i),  that  the 
various  officers  concerned  in  the  administra- 
tion of  justice  were,  to  some  extent  at  least, 
chosen  by  popular  election.  Of  the  mode 
however  in  which  this  was  done  as  well  as  of 
many  other  particulars,  such  as  the  qualifica- 
tions required  in  those  to  be  elected,  we  have 
no  information.  The  directions  given  on  the 
whole  subject  in  chapters  xvi.  and  xvii.  are  of 
the  most  general^  kind.  The  language  is  in 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVII. 


863 


truth  more  that  of  one  alluding  to  customs 
and  institutions  already  existing  and  well 
known,  than  of  one  founding  new  ones  by 
legislation.  But  it  is  quite  arbitrary  to  assert 
(Riehm,  Kuenen)  that  the  writer  cannot  but 
have  had  before  him  the  judicial  reforms  of 
Jehoshaphat  (2  Chron.  xix.).  A far  more 
apposite  explanation  is  furnished  by  those 
(as  Keil)  who  remind  us  that  Moses  had 
before  him  no  disorganized  mob,  but  a na- 
tion already  in  possession  of  civil  and  religi- 
ous institutions ; institutions  indeed  such  as 
have  for  ages  sufficed  of  themselves  for  the 
purposes  of  many  an  Oriental  community.  It 
was  enough  therefore  for  Moses  to  lay  down 
broadly  the  general  principles  to  be  kept  in 
view  and  the  larger  outlines  to  be  followed  in 
working  these  out,  leaving  details  to  be  evolved 
as  circumstances  and  the  natural  development 
of  the  nation  might  suggest.  Here  as  else- 
where the  Mosaic  Code  is  designed  for  a free 
and  independent  people,  and  leaves  scope  for 
that  national  energy  which  will  not  fail  to 
provide  itself  with  organization  according  to 
emergencies.  The  New  Testament  treats  the 
Christian  Church  in  a strictly  analogous  man- 
ner on  the  like  classes  of  subjects,  such  as  dis- 
cipline, government,  &c.  Ends  are  set  forth ; 
means  left  largely  to  the  discretion  of  the 
rulers  of  the  Church  in  different  ages  and 
countries.  The  continuity  of  the  Church  has 
been  unbroken  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles 
to  the  present;  yet  there  are  many  debateable 
questions  as  to  what  were  ecclesiastical  usages 
and  arrangements  in  Apostolic  days.  How 
much  more  must  this  be  expected  as  to  the 
far  more  ancient  institutions  of  the  Jewish 
theocracy,  which  have  been  too  swept  away 
entirely  once  and  again  by  overwhelming 
national  calamity,  and  have  now  been  for 
eighteen  hundred  years  extinct ! 

’V'v.  14 — 17. 

This  passage  is  one  of  the  most  important 
amongst  those  brought  forward  by  certain 
critics  as  proofs  that  Deuteronomy  was  not 
written  until  the  time  of  the  later  kings.  I'he 
positions  assumed  by  these  critics  (e.g.  Vater, 
De  Wette,  Von  Bohlen,  Ewald,  Riehm, 
Colenso,  &c.,  and  even  Winer,  ‘Real  Wort- 
erb.’  s.  V.  Koenig')  may  be  thus  stated : 

(1)  It  is  inconceivable  that  Moses,  who 
died  more  than  three  centuries  before  regal 
government  was  introduced  in  the  person  of 
Saul,  can  have  made  mention  of  a king  as 
these  do ; especially  as  the  principles 
and  tenor  of  his  legislation  are  decidedly  not 
monarchical. 

(2)  In  the  narrative  of  the  appointment  of 
Saul,  I S.  viii — xii.,  there  is  no  reference 
whatever  to  these  provisions  of  Deuteronomy. 
Yet  had  these  been  then  extant  either  Samuel 
must  have  quoted  them  when  speaking  of 
“the  manner  of  the  king,”  chap.  viii.  and  xii., 


or  the  people  have  alleged  them  in  vindication 
or  excuse  of  their  desire  to  have  a king.  But, 
on  the  contrary,  Samuel  charges  it  on  the 
people  as  a great  wickedness  that  they  had 
asked  a king ; and  the  people  themselves  ad- 
mit their  guilt  in  the  matter,  i S.  xii.  17 — 19. 

(3)  The  prohibitions  against  accumulation 
of  horses,  wives,  and  treasure,  are  evidently 
suggested  by  the  history  of  Solomon;  cf. 
I k.  X.  26 — 29  and  xi.  i — 4. 

(4)  The  reference  to  the  traffic  in  horses 
with  Egypt  points  to  the  times  of  the  later 
kings  of  Judah;  cf.  Is.  ii.  7,  xxxvi.  9 ; Jer.  ii. 
18,  36,  xlii.  15 — 19,  &c. 

On  these  grounds  it  is  argued  that  the 
passage  was  certainly  penned  long  after  the 
date  of  Moses,  and  indeed  subsequently  to 
the  reign  of  Solomon,  and  most  probably  in 
the  age  of  Jeremiah. 

But  it  may  be  answered: 

(1)  Even  if  we  exclude  from  the  question 
Moses’  supernatural  gifts,  he  may  very  pro- 
bably have  contemplated  such  a contingency 
as  Israel  wishing  at  some  time  or  other  for  a 
king,  and  especially  have  thought  it  likely,  as 
the  text  presents  it,  when  the  people  had 
settled  themselves  in  the  promised  land.  When 
we  consider  that  the  experience  of  Moses, 
wide  as  it  no  doubt  was,  would  probably  fail 
to  afford  a single  instance  of  any  settled  com- 
munity governed  otherwise  than  by  a mon- 
arch, we  might  fairly  argue  that  it  is  more 
surprising  that  he  should  have  founded  any 
other  polity  and  expected  that  polity  to  en- 
dure, as  he  does,  than  to  find  him  entertaining 
the  supposition  that  Israel  might  wish  to  be 
governed  as  all  other  nations  were. 

If  the  institutions  of  Moses  are  non-monar- 
chical,  yet  neither  have  they  any  greater  affinity 
for  other  special  forms  of  civil  government. 
The  main  purposes  of  his  lav/  are  religious  and 
theocratical ; and  these  are  carefully  secured 
by  enactment.  But  they  could  be  attained 
as  well  under  kings  as  under  prophets  like 
Moses,  generals  like  Joshua,  or  judges  like 
Samuel;  and  accordingly  no  definite  polity 
was  by  Divine  authority  imposed  on  the 
Jews  in  perpetuity. 

Neither  is  the  passage  before  us  the  only 
one  of  the  Pentateuch  in  which  allusion  seems 
made  to  kings  of  Israel.  Cf.  Gen.  xvii.  16, 
xxxvi.  31,  xlix.  10;  Ex.  xxii.  28;  Num.  xxiv. 
17;  Dent,  xxviii.  36.  It  is  not  too  much  to 
say  that  the  presage  of  royalty  to  come  per- 
vades every  part  of  the  early  annals  of  the 
people. 

(2)  In  reply  to  the  second  position,  it  is 
to  be  remembered  that  a direct  and  formal 
quotation  of  an  earlier  book  Jn  a later  is  not 
at  all  in  the  manner  of  the  Old  Testament 
writers.  Yet  the  request  of  the  people  (i  S. 
viii.  5),  “Make  us  a king  to  judge  us  like  all 
the  nations,”  is  preferred  in  terms  very  like 
those  employed  Deut.  xvii.  14.  Is  the  resem- 
blance accidental?  It  is  hard  to  think  so 

31  2 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVII. 


864 

when  we  find  Samuel,  in  presenting  Saul  to 
the  people  as  “him  whom  the  Lord  hath 
chosen,”  i S.  x.  24,  employing  again  the 
words  cf  this  verse  of  Deut. ; and  in  his  ex- 
hortation, I S.  xii.  14,  reproducing  the  tone, 
phraseology,  and  rhetorical  accumulation  of 
clauses  which  are  characteristic  features  of 
Dent.  (cf.  Deut.  i.  26,  43,  ix.  7,  23,  &c.). 
It  is  therefore  too  much  to  gay  that  no  allu- 
sion to  the  passage  of  Deut.  before  us  can  be 
found  in  i S.  viii. — xii. 

(3)  Neither  is  it  correct  to  assume  that 
Samuel  condemned  the  demand  for  a king  as 
in  itself  a sin.  As  in  so  many  other  parts 
of  Scripture,  so  in  the  language  ascribed  to 
God  I S.  X.  18,  19,  and  to  Samuel  i S.  xii. 
17,  misconception  arises  from  insulating  parti- 
cular verses,  and  construing  them  irrespec- 
tively of  the  context.  When  we  duly  note 
that  God,  I S.  viii.  y,  enjoined  Samuel  “to 
hearken  to  the  voice  of  the  people  in  all  that  they 
say,”  it  is  not  possible  to  regard  the  demand 
in  question  as  one  which  the  sacred  w-riter 
thought  absolutely  wicked.  In  truth  it  is 
plain,  upon  a survey  of  the  whole  transaction, 
that  it  was  not  the  mere  desire  of  a king 
which  is  blamed,  but  the  time  and  circum- 
stances under  which  that  desire  was  mani- 
fested. It  might  e.£-.  have  been  innocent  to 
have  brought  forward  a scheme  for  a regal 
government  at  the  death  of  the  divinely  ap- 
pointed judge,  and  in  the  absence  of  any 
directions  from  God  respecting  a successor. 
But  the  people  desired  to  set  aside  Samuel, 
a man  who  had  the  special  approval  of  the 
Divine  head  of  the  theocracy,  and  upon  a pre- 
text “ Behold  thou  art  old,”  (i  S.  viii.  5),  which 
can  hardly  have  been  sincere,  seeing  that 
Samuel  lived  to  take  a leading  part  in  public 
affairs  for  some  thirty-five  years  afterwards; 
and  in  distrust  of  God’s  will  and  power  to  in- 
terpose for  their  succour  (i  S.  xii.  12)  against 
the  attack  of  Nahash,  king  sf  the  Ammonites. 
The  allegation  against  the  sons  of  Samuel 
(i  S.  viii.  3 sqq.)  was  valid  ground  for  re- 
monstrance, but  not  for  setting  aside  one 
whom  the  people  themselves  did  not  dare  to 
deny  to  have  been  as  uncorrupt  as  he  was 
able  and  diligent  in  his*  duties  (i  S.  xii. 

I — 5).  It  is  in  short  evident  that  the  demand 
for  a king  arose  partly  out  of  that  culpable 
jn'oneness  towards  imitation  of  heathen  na- 
tions which  so  often  led  the  people  into  error; 
j)artly  out  of  a peevish  impatience  at  certain 
abuses  of  a remediable  and  temporary  cha- 
racter; and  partly  out  of  a want  of  faith  in 
time  of  trial.  For  these  reasons  the  demand 
for  a king  was  sinful  at  the  time  it  was  made, 
and  became  doubly  so  when  persisted  in 
against  the  remonstrances  of  God’s  prophet 
(i  S.  viii.  10  scp).)  ; and  though  God  bade 
Samuel  to  “hearken  unto  the  voice  of  the 
people,’’  yet  (IIos.  xiii.  ii)  “ He  gave  them  a 
king  in  His  anger.”  d'here  is  therefore,  on 
the  whole,  no  real  repugnance  between  the 


narrative  in  i S.  viii. — xii.  and  the  passage  o' 
Deut.  before  us. 

(4)  The  similarity  between  our  passage  of 
Deut.  and  i K.  x.  26 — 29,  xi.  i — 5 cannot 
be  gainsayed.  The  only  open  (literary)  ques- 
tion is  whether  the  writer  of  Deut.  had  the 
passage  of  Kings  before  him,  or  the  writer  of 
Kings  that  of  Deut.  The  broad  reasons  on 
which  we  decide  for  the  latter  alternative  are 
set  out  in  the  Introduction.  Here  we  may 
note  that  it  is  clear  that  the  writer  of  i K. 
had  in  view  not  only  Deut.  xvii.  but  also 
Deut.  vii.  3,  4,  and  Ex.  xxxiv.  16. 

Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  the  inten- 
tion of  the  author  of  i K.  in  x.  26  sqq.  is  to 
trace  the  backsliding  of  Solomon  to  his  dis- 
regard amidst  his  prosperity  of  the  wholesome 
restraints  imposed  by  the  Divine  law.  This 
intention  comes  out  explicitly  in  xi.  2 ; but 
it  is  no  less  perceptible,  though  implied,  in 
the  preceding  context ; and  there  is  nothing 
in  that  context  which  the  writer  can  have 
had  in  view  except  our  passage  of  Deut. 

(5)  The  allegation  that  the  restrictions 
laid  on  the  supposed  king  by  Deut.  reflect  the 
ideas  of  a later  age,  is  simply  arbitrary.  The 
excesses  forbidden  to  the  king  of  Israel  were 
those  in  which  eastern  potentates  were  wont 
to  indulge;  nor,  supposing  Moses  to  have 
thought  of  a king  at  all,  is  anything  more  in 
keeping  with  the  general  spirit  of  his  legisla- 
lation  than  that  he  should  have  sought  to 
guard  against  some  of  the  more  obvious  and 
ordinary  abuses  of  Oriental  despotism. 

(6)  The  caution  against  “causing  the 
people  to  return  to  Egypt”  (Deut.  xvii.  16), 
is  thoroughly  consistent  with  the  character  and 
circumstances  of  Moses.  Again  and  again 
do  we  read  of  the  people  longing  for  the  land 
they  had  left  behind  (cf.  Ex.  xvi.  3 ; Num.  xi. 
5);  and  they  once  actually  proposed  to  “make 
a captain  and  return  to  Egypt”  (Num.  xiv.  4^, 
But  after  the  glorious  reigns  of  David,  Solo- 
mon, and  others,  the  building  of  the  Temple, 
and  the  long  annals  of  Israel  as  an  independent 
nation,  it  would  have  been  preposterous  to 
mention  such  a thing  as  replanting  the  Jews 
in  Egypt. 

(7)  Equally  absurd  would  it  have  been 
in  the  days  of  the  later  kings  to  forbid  the 
choice  of  an  alien  as  king.  No  one  would 
have  thought  of  such  an  appointm.ent  whilst 
the  seed  royal  was  prolific  in  several  branches. 

(8)  The  rules  laid  down  in  Deut.  xvii. 
respecting  the  kingdom  do  not  therefore  bear 
the  marks  of  a date  long  after  that  of  Moses, 
but  rather  the  contrary.  It  is  a striking  illus- 
tration of  the  peremptory  spirit  in  which 
arguments  on  this  subject  are  manufactured, 
that  we  find  Riehm  coupling  this  passage 
with  Deut.  xxviii.  68,  and  finding  in  the  two 
evidence  of  a treaty  by  which  Manasseh  fur- 
nished infantry  to  the  Egyptian  king  Psam- 
metichus  in  return  for  horses.  According  to 
Diodorus  (i.  66),  and  Herod,  (i.  152),  Psam- 


V.  I— -4-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVIII. 


“ Numb. 
1 8.  20. 
chap.  lo. 

^ I Cor.  c 
13- 


metichus  hired  soldiers  from  Arabia  and  Asia 
Minor;  but  there  is  not  a single  historical 
trace  of  the  supposed  treaty  in  any  writer 
sacred  or  secular;  and  no  mention  of  Judea 
at  all  in  the  historians  referred  to. 

(9)  AVe  may  add  that  it  is  quite  unin- 
telligible how  and  why  a later  writer,  desiring 
to  pass  under  the  name  of  Moses,  could  have 
penned  a passage  exhibiting  the  peculiarities 
of  the  one  under  consideration.  He  could 
not  have  designed  it  as  an  example  of  the  pro- 
phetical powers  of  the  great  lawgiver  of 
Israel,  for  it  is  so  vaguely  and  generally  con- 


865 

ceived  as  to  look  rather  like  a surmise  than  a 
prediction.  Nor  could  he. have  intended  to 
insert  by  it  a kind  of  sanction  of  royalty  in 
the  Mosaic  legislation;  for  it  contains  rather 
a toleration  of  that  mode  of  government  than 
an  approval  of  it.  Neither  would  he  have 
thought  of  subjecting  his  imaginary  king  to 
rules  which  must  have  sounded,  in  part  at 
least,  little  less  than  absurd  to  his  own  con- 
temporaries, and  which  are  in  themselves  such 
as  no  one  in  his  (supposed)  time  and  circum- 
stances can  naturally  be  thought  to  have 
invented. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

I The  Lord  is  the  priests'"  and  Levites""  inheri- 
tance. 3 The  priest's  due.  6 The  Lev’ite's 
portion.  9 The  abominations  of  the  nations 
are  to  be  avoided.  15  Christ  the  Prophet  is 
to  be  heard.  20  The  presumpticous  p7-ophet  is 
to  die. 

The  priests  the  Levites,  and  all 
the  tribe  of  Levi,  "shall  have  no 
part  nor  inheritance  with  Israel : they 
, ^ shall  eat  the  offerings  of  the  Lord 
made  by  fire,  and  his  inheritance. 


2 Therefore  shall  thev  have  no  in- 

J 

heritance  among  their  brethren  : the 
Lord  is  their  inheritance,  as  he  hath 
said  unto  them. 

3 ^ And  this  shall  be  the  priest’s 
due  from  the  people,  from  them  that 
offer  a sacrifice,  whether  it  be  ox  or 
sheep  ; and  they  shall  give  unto  the 
priest  the  shoulder,  and  the  two  cheeks, 
and  the  maw. 

4 The  firstfruit  also  of  thy  corn,  of 


Chap.  XVIII.  Whilst  speaking  of  the 
guides  and  rulers  of  the  people  the  legislator 
could  not  wholly  omit  the  priests,  the  Levites, 
and  the  prophets,  though  his  description  of 
the  ecclesiastical  life  of  the  nation  had  led 
him  already  to  treat  copiously  of  their  office 
and  duties.  Accordingly  he  now  summarily 
repeats,  with  some  supplementary  additions, 
from  his  former  enactments  what  were  to  be 
their  privileges  and  position  after  the  settle- 
ment in  Canaan;  beginning  with  the  priests 
{pv.  3 — 5),  and  Levites  {yno.  6 — 8),  the  or- 
dinary ministers  of  religion  and  expositors  of 
the  law  of  God ; and  proceeding,  in  contrast 
with  the  false-  pretences  of  the  heathen  seers 
9 — 14),  to  promise  that  the  true  God 
would  not  fail  in  extraordinary  emergencies 
to  afford  the  needful  instruction  as  to  His 
will  and  way.  Accordingly  the  prophets  are 
(yu.  15 — 22)  formally  accredited  as  instru- 
ments through  which  the  divine  Head  of  the 
Theocracy  would  from  time  to  time  exercise 
His  superintendence  and  control. 

1.  The  priests  the  Le'v'ites.^  and  all  the  tribe 
of  Leno'i]  The  word  and,  inserted  by  our 
translators,  weakens  the  force  of  the  ori- 
ginal. The  absence  of  conjunctions  in  the 
Hebrew,  and  its  climax  from  the  particular 
to  the  general,  are  emphatic  ; the  effect  might 
be  given  thus:  “there  shall  not  be  to  the 
priests,  the  Levites,  yea  the  whole  tribe  of 
Levi,  any  inheritance,  &c.”  This  is  thus 
forcibly  laid  down  by  way  of  basis  for  the 


enlargement  made  in  the  subsequent  verses  of 
the  emoluments  of  the  priests  and  Levites ; 
and  serves  to  suggest  the  need,  probably  al- 
ready ascertained,  of  some  addition  to  their 
allowance. 

and  his  inher'itance'\  i.e.  God's  inheritance, 
that  which  in  making  a grant  to  His  people 
of  the  Promised  Land  with  its  earthly  bless- 
ings He  had  reserved  for  Himself ; more 
particularly  the  sacrifices,  or  as  they  are  here 
termed  “ firings,”  and  the  holy  gifts,  such  as 
tithes  and  firstfruits  (so  Vulg.  “ oblatio- 
nes”).  These  were  God’s  portion  (Kkrjpos) 
of  the  substance  of  Israel ; and  as  the  Levites 
were  His  portion  of  the  persons  of  Israel,  it 
was  fitting  that  the  Levites  should  be  sus- 
tained from  these.  The  words  of  t'i'.  i and 
2 are  evidently  suggested  by  Num.  xviii.  20 
sqq. ; cf.  also  Dent.  x.  9;  Josh.  xiii.  14,  33  ; 
and  on  the  principle  here  laid  down,  i Cor. 
ix.  13,  14. 

3 — 5.  Separate  allusion  is  now  made  to 
the  two  parts ’of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  the  priests 
(-ux^.  3 — 5)  and  the  Levites  (‘u'u.  6 — 8).  The 
perquisites  here  named  are  clearly  (y.  3)  as- 
signed to  the  priests  as  distinct  from  the 
Levites ; the  corresponding  mention  of  privi- 
leges belonging  spe,cifically  to  the  latter  coming 
in  due  order,  -u.  6 sqq.  On  the  bearing  of 
these  2)20.  upon  the  relations  between  the 
priests  and  Levites  as  exhibited  in  Deuter- 
onomy, see  Note  at  end  of  chapter. 

the  shoulder,  and  thet^vo  cheeks,  and  the  ma2u\ 


866 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVIII. 


[''•  5—9. 


thy  wine,  and  of  thine  oil,  and  the 
first  of  the  fleece  of  thy  sheep,  shalt 
thou  give  him. 

5 For  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
chosen  him  out  of  all  thy  tribes,  to 
stand  to  minister  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord,  him  and  his  sons  for  ever. 

6 ^ And  if  a Levite  come  from 
any  of  thy  gates  out  of  all  Israel, 
where  he  sojourned,  and  come  with 


For  W/7W  read  stomach.  The  part  intend- 
ed is  the  fourth  stomach  of  ruminating  ani- 
mals in  which  the  digestion  is  completed. 
'Fhis  was  regarded  as  one  of  the  richest  and 
choicest  parts  (so  LXX.  rjvvaTpov^  Vulg. 
“ ventriculusf ’ Keil,  Schultz,  &c.).  On  the 
provision  for  the  priest  here  made  and  its 
relation  to  that  of  Levit.  vii.  31 — 34,  see 
Note  at  end  of  chapter.  As  the  animal  slain 
may  be  considered  to  consist  of  three  prin- 
cipal parts,  head,  feet,  and  body,  a portion  of 
each  is  by  the  regulation  in  question  to  be 
given  to  the  priest,  thus  representing  the  con- 
secration of  the  whole ; or,  as  some  ancient 
commentators  think,  the  dedication  of  the 
words,  acts,  and  appetites  of  the  worshipper 
to  God. 

Jewish  authorities  (Philo,  Joseph.,  theTal- 
muid)  regard  the  regulation  as  applicable  to 
animals  slam  at  home  for  food.  But  not 
only  the  phraseology  (“offer  a sacrifice”),  but 
the  utter  impossibility  of  transporting  these 
jheces  from  various  parts  of  the  country  to 
the  residences  of  the  priests,  seems  to  forbid 
such  a sense.  Keil  is  probably  right  in  un- 
derstanding the  text  to  refer  to  peace-offer- 
ings, and  animals  killed  for  the  sacrificial 
meals  held  in  connection  with  the  peace-offer- 
ings. 

4f  The  law  of  firstfruits  is  repeated  from 
Num.  xviii.  12,  13  for  the  purpose  of  adding 
thereto  “the  first  fleece  of  the  sheep.” 

5.  him  and  his  sons  fur  e^'er'\  A plain  re- 
ference to  the  original  appointment  of  Aaron 
and  his  sons  to  the  priesthood. 

6 - 8.  Allusion  is  now  made  to  the  Levites 
specifically  so  called,  t.e.  to  the  non-priestly 
L.evites,  in  contrast  with  “ the  priest”  who 
“ with  his  sons”  is  mentioned  3 and  5. 

d hese  njx'.  presuppose  that  part  ot  the 
Levites  only  will  be  in  residence  and  of- 
ficiating at  the  place  of  the  Sanctuary,  the 
others  of  course  tlwelling  at  their  own  homes 
in  tlie  Levitical  cities;  cf.  Num.  xxxv.  2 sqq. 
But  if  any  I.evite  out  of  love  for  the  service 
of  the  Sanctuary  chose  to  resort  to  it  when 
he  might  reside  in  his  own  home,  he  was  to 
have  his  share  in  the  maintenance  which  was 
provided  flm  those  ministering  in  the  order  of 
their  course. 


all  the  desire  of  his  mind  unto  the 
place  which  the  Lord  shall  choose  ; 

7 Then  he  shall  minister  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  his  God,  as  all  his 
brethren  the  Levites  do^  which  stand 
there  before  the  Lord. 

8 They  shall  have  like  portions  to 

eat,  beside  ^ that  which  cometh  of  the  t Heb. 

1 r 1 • • his  sales 

sale  or  his  patrimony.  dythe 

9 ^ When  thou  art  come  into  the 


6.  any  of  thy  gates  ..sphere  he  sojourned'] 
The  various  administrative  duties  discharged 
by  Levites  (e.g.  that  of  Shoterirn,  cf.  xvii.  8 
sqq.  and  note)  would  necessarily  lead  to  many 
individuals  of  them  “sojourning”  from  time 
to  time  in  various  parts  of  the  land,  and  often 
in  other  than  Levitical  cities ; and  indeed  as 
these  cities  were  scattered  up  and  down 
amongst  the  tribes,  and  were  the  only  regular 
dwell! ngplaces  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  the  mem- 
bers of  that  tribe  may  be  said,  in  contrast  with 
the  others,  to  be  “sojourners”  altogether. 

7.  he  shall  minister  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  his  God]  The  duty  of  the  Levites  was 
to  assist  the  priests;  and  this  subordinate 
ministration  is  expressed  in  Num.  iii.  6 by  the 
same  Hebrew  word  as  is  here  used. 

8.  They  shall  ha’ve  like  portions  to  eat] 
Lit.  “ part  like  part  shall  they  eat :”  i.e.  the 
new-comer  and  those  already  in  attendance.' 
Due  provision  had  been  made  in  the  preceding 
legislation  for  the  maintenance  of  the  ministers 
at  the  Sanctuary.  All  that  now  needed  to  be 
done  was  to  secure  the  volunteer  his  share 
in  it. 

beside  that  nvhich  cometh  of  the  sale  of  his 
patrimo7iy]  Marg.  more  literally  “his  sales 
by  the  fathers.”  The  wording  of  the  original 
is  singular  and  difficult  (see  Note  at  end 
of  chapter).  A great  variety  of  interpre- 
tations has  been  proposed,  yet  there  seems 
little  doubt  about  the  real  meaning.  The 
Levites  had  indeed  “no  part  nor  inheritance 
with  Israel,”  but  they  might  individually  pos- 
sess property,  and  in  fact  often  did  so.  Thus 
Abiathar  (i  K.  ii.  26)  owned  certain  “ fields,'” 
and  Jeremiah  (xxxii.  7 sqq.)  bought  a field  of 
his  lincle.  The  law,  Levit.  xxv.  33,  34,  for- 
bids the  sale  of  the  pastures  belonging  in  com- 
mon to  the  Levites  as  such,  but  private  pro- 
perty might  of  course  be  disposed  of  at  the 
pleasure  of  the  owner.  The  Levite  who  de- 
sired to  settle  at  the  place  of  the  Sanctuaiy 
would  probably  sell  his  patrimony  when  quit- 
ting his  former  home.  The  text  directs  that 
he  should,  notwithstanding  any  such  private 
resources,  duly  enjoy  his  share  of  the  perqui- 
sites provided  for  the  ministers  at  the  sanc- 
tuary, and  as  he  was  “ waiting  at  the  altar” 
should  be  “ partaker  with  the  altar”  (i  Cor. 
ix.  13)- 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVIII. 


867 


V.  10 — 20.] 

land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth 
thee,  thou  shalt  not  learn  to  do  after 
the  abominations  of  those  nations. 

10  There  shall  not  be  found  among 
you  any  one  that  maketh  his  son  or 
f Lev.  18.  daughter  “^to  pass  through  the  fire, 
or  that  useth  divination,  or  an  ob- 
server of  times,  or  an  enchanter,  or  a 
witch, 

rfLev.  20.  II  ‘^Or  a charmer,  or  a consulter 
with  fimiliar  spirits,  or  a wizard,  or  a 
^ 1 Sam.  ^necromancer. 

^ 12  For  all  that  do  these  things  are 

an  abomination  unto  the  Lord  : and 
because  of  these  abominations  the 
Lord  thy  God  doth  drive  them  out 
from  before  thee. 

"Or  i-^  Thou  shalt  be  "perfect  with  the 

or,  sincere.  Lord  thy  God. 

14  For  these  nations,  which  thou 
II  On  shalt  " possess,  hearkened  unto  observ- 

inherits  r ^ * 1 t • i 

ers  or  times,  and  unto  diviners : but 
as  for  thee,  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
/John  I.  suffered  thee  so  to  do. 

4s^ts  22  15  ^ -^The  Lord  thy  God  will 

& 7. 37.  ' raise  up  unto  thee  a Prophet  from  the 


midst  of  thee,  of  thy  brethren,  like 
unto  me ; unto  him  ye  shall  hearken ; 

16  According  to  all  that  thou  de- 
siredst  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  Ho- 
reb  in  the  day  of  the  assembly,  saying, 

^Let  me  not  hear  again  the  voice  of-fExod.  20. 
the  Lord  my  God,  neither  let  me  see 
this  great  fire  any  more,  that  I die  not. 

17  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me. 

They  have  v/ell  spoken  that  which 
they  have  spoken. 

18  will  raise  them  up  a Prophet  i. 
from  among  their  brethren,  like  untoA^ctss.  22. 
thee,  and  will  put  my  words  in  his  ^ 
mouth ; and  he  shall  speak  unto  them 

all  that  I shall  command  him. 


19  And  it  shall  come  to  pass, 
whosoever  will  not  hearken  unto  1117 
words  which  he  shall  speak 
name,  I v/ill  require  it  of  him. 

20  But  the  prophet,  which  shall 
presume  to  speak  a word  in  my  name, 
which  I have  not  commanded  him  to 
speak,  or  that  shall  speak  in  the  name 
of  other  gods,  even  that  prophet  shall 
die. 


that 


my 


9 — 14.  Passing  on  to  speak  of  the 
prophets,  the  legislator  begins  by  enumerating 
and  prohibiting  the  various  superstitions  by 
which  the  heathen  nations  of  Canaan  had 
sought  to  explore  the  future  and  to  test  the 
will  of  the  Deity. 

10.  maketh  his  son  or  his  daughter  to  pass 
through  the  jire~\  i.e.  to  Moloch;  cf.  Levit. 
xviii.  21  and  note.  The  practice  was  pro- 
bably in  some  way  connected  with  sooth- 
saying. 

that  useth  din)ination'\  Cf.  Num.  xxiii.  23 
and  note. 

observer  of  times']  Cf.  Lev.  xix.  26  and  note. 

enchanter]  Or  serpent-charmer;  cf.  Lev.  l.c. 

^Lvitch]  Rather  sorcerer,  as  in  Ex.  vii.  1 1 ; 
see  note  there. 

11.  a charmer]  i.e.  one  who  fascinates 
and  subdues  noxious  animals  or  mien,  such 
as  the  famious  serpent-charmiers  of  the  East. 
Cf.  especially  Ps.  Iviii.  4,  5.  The  word  is  de- 
rived from  a root  signifying  to  bind  or  ban. 

a consulter  veith  familiar  spirits]  Cf.  Lev. 
xix.  31,  XX.  6. 

a vji'zard]  Cf.  Lev.  1.  c. 

necromancer]  Literally  “one  who  interro- 
gates the  dead.”  And  it  might  be  better  to 
restore  the  literal  rendering  in  the  A.  V.,  for 
the  term  “necromancer”  seems  to  be  equiva- 
lent to  the  “consulter  with  familiar  spirits,” 


named  above.  The  purpose  of  the  text  is  ob- 
viously to  group  together  all  the  known  words 
belonging  to  the  practices  in  question  ; cf. 
2 Chron.  xxxiii.  6. 

13.  Thou  shalt  be  perfect  vjith  the  Lord 
thy  God]  On  the  worA  perfect  cf.  Gen.  xvii. 
I ; Job  i.  I.  The  sense  is  that  Israel  was  to 
keep  the  worship  of  the  true  God  wholly 
uncontaminated  by  idolatrous  pollutions. 

15 — 19.  On  this  passage  see  Note  at  end 
of  chapter. 

15.  a Prophet]  Cf.  St  John  i.  45,  v.  45— 
47.  On  the  Hebrew  word  (pidbhT)  see  Introd. 
to  Numbers,  § 4. 

unto  him  ye  shall  hearken]  Cf.  St  Matt, 
xvii.  5. 

16.  in  the  day  of  the  assembly]  Cf.  Chap, 
ix.  10  and  Ex.  xx.  19. 

18.  like  unto  thee]  Cf.  Heb.  iii.  2 sqq. 
he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I shall 

command  him]  Cf.  St  John  iv.  25,  viii.  28,  xii. 
49,  50,  and  relf. 

19.  1 nvill  require  it  of  him]  In  Acts  iii. 
23,  “shall  be  destroyed  from  among  the 
people  ;”  see  note  there. 

20.  the  prophet.!  vohich  shall presum^e.^  &C.] 
Cf.  xiii.  I — 5 and  notes;  and  Jer.  xxviii. 

15—17- 


868 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVIII. 


[v.  2 1,  22. 


21  And  if  thou  say  in  thine  heart, 
How  shall  we  know  the  word  which 
the  Lord  hath  not  spoken? 

22  When  a prophet  speaketh  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord,  if  the  thing 


follow  not,  nor  come  to  pass,  that  is 
the  thino;  which  the  Lord  hath  not 
spoken,  but  the  prophet  hath  spoken 
it  presumptuously : thou  shalt  not  be 
afraid  of  him. 


21.  And  if  thou  say  in  thine  hearty  Hoxv, 
&c.]  The  passage  evidently  assumes  such  an 
occasion  for  consulting  the  prophet  as  was 
usual  amongst  the  heathen,  e.g.  an  impending 
battle  or  other  such  crisis  (cf.  i K.  xxii.  ^ 
ii),  in  which  his  veracity  would  soon  be  put 
to  the  test.  Failure  of  a prediction  is  set 
forth  as  a sure  note  of  its  being  “ presump- 
tuous.” But  from  xiii.  z sqq.  we  see  that  the 


NOTES  on  Chap. 

On  v.  3. 

The  command  given  in  'vzf.  i and  z that 
the  priests  and  Levites  should  have  no  in- 
heritance in  Canaan  as  the  other  tribes  had, 
is  clearly  repeated,  indeed  almost  verbatim, 
from  Numbers.  Neither  can  it  fairly  and 
consistently  be  denied  that  the  provision  here 
made  has  in  view  the  regulations  of  the  earlier 
books  on  the  subject:  cf.  Ex.  xxix.  z6 — 28; 
Lev.  vii.  31 — 34,  and  x.  12 — 15  ; Num.  vi.  20, 
and  xviii.  ii — 18.  Yet  in  those  passages 
throughout  the  portions  assigned  to  the 
priest  are  “the  wave^breast  and  the  heave- 
shoulder,”  or  more  properly  “heave-leg.” 
Here,  on  the  contrary,  the  priest  is  to  have 
“the  shoulder,”  i.e.  the  fore-quarter  (y“lT), 
not  apparently  the  same  with  the  “heave- 
shoulder”  of  Lev.  vii.  34  ; the  two 

jaws  or  cheeks  ; and  “the  maw,”  LXX.  r/i/u- 
(TTpov.  By  the  latter  is  usually  and  correctly 
understood  the  lower  or  fourth  stomach  of 
ruminant  animals,  which  was  esteemed  as  a 
dainty  by  the  ancients.  Cf.  Gesen.  ‘Thesaur.’ 
s.  V. 

The  question  is  whether  the  portions  as- 
signed to  the  priest  in  this  place  are  so  in 
substitution  for  those  named  Lev.  vii.,  or  in 
addition  thereto  ? 

The  former  view  is  taken  by  a large  class 
of  commentators,  who  regard  the  provision 
here  made  for  the  priests  as  much  more  slender 
than  that  in  the  earlier  books,  and  see  in  the 
difference  a token  that  Deut.  was  written  at 
a late  date,  when  the  Levitical  priesthood  had 
declined  in  estimation,  and  had  to  be  content 
with  reduced  revenues. 

But  the  following  considerations  must  be 
borne  in  mind;  (i)  'Fhe  passage  opens,  i 
and  2,  by  emphatically  presenting  the  priests 
and  Levites  as  standing  in  need  of  some  special 
provision  after  the  settlement  in  Canaan  had 
assigned  possessions  of  land  to  the  other  tribes. 
(2)  d'hat  certain  percjuisites  hitherto  enjoyed 
by  the  priests  would  fail  after  the  necessary 


fulfilment  of  a prediction  would  not  deci- 
sively accredit  him  who  uttered  it;  for  the 
prophet  or  dreamer  of  dreams  who  en- 
deavoured on  the  strength  of  miracles  to 
seduce  to  idolatry  w'as  to  be  rejected  and 
punished.  Nothing  therefore  contrary  to  the 
revealed  truth  of  God  was  to  be  accepted 
under  any  circumstances. 


XVIII.  3,  8,  15—18. 

abolition  (cf.  ch.  xii.  15)  of  the  command 
given  in  Levit.  xvii.  to  slay  animals  nowhere 
save  at  the  door  of  the  Tabernacle.  (3) 
“The  shoulder”  and  “the  maw”  were  not 
esteemed  inferior  pieces,  but  on  the  contrary 
amongst  the  choicest.  (4)  That  n).  4 incon- 
trovertibly  provides  a new  item  of  income  for 
the  priests,  viz.  “the  first  fleece  of  thy  sheep,” 
cf.  Num.  1.  c.  (5)  A distinction  seems 
clearly  intended  between  “the  firings  of  the 
Lord  and  His  inheritance”  in  nj.  i,  which 
would  include  “ the  wave  breast  and  the  heave 
shoulder,”  and  “the  priests’  due  from  the 
people,”  n).  3,  i.e.  the  shoulder,  the  cheeks, 
and  the  maw,  which  were  to  be  given  by  the 
people  to  the  priest  out  of  their  own  portion 
o^  “ inheritance.”  (6)  It  appears  historically 
that  in  later  times  the  priest  had  a recognized 
claim  to  some  other  portions  of  the  victims 
slain  than  the  wave-breast  and  heave-shoulder ; 
cf.  I S.  ii.  13 — 16  and  note. 

On  the  whole  then  there  seems  to  be 
nothing  in  the  passage  to  point  to  a lower 
estimation  of  the  priests  than  that  suggested 
by  the  preceding  books;  nor  can  it  fairly  be 
regarded  as  substituting  for- the  more  generous 
allowance  of  old  laws  a scantier  provision, 
the  best  that  later  and  less  religious  days 
admitted  of.  On  the  contrary  its  tenor  and 
contents  clearly  point  to  the  conclusion  (adopt- 
ed by  Keil,  Schultz,  Wordsworth,  &c.), 
that  “the  shoulder,  cheeks,  and  maw”  were 
to  be  given  by  the  people  to  the  priests 
in  addition  to  those  portions  claimed  by  the 
laws  of  Levit.  as  belonging  to  the  Lord. 
Just  so  (cf.  Num.  vi.  19,  20)  the  Nazarite, 
when  the  days  of  his  separation  were  com- 
plete, had  to  give  to  the  priest  “the  sodden 
shoulder  ” (i.  the  fore-quarter)  in  addition 
to  “the  wave-breast  and  the  heave-shoulder.” 

On  -v.  8. 

The  words  hv  VlDtOlO  mS,  though 

their  general  sense  seems  clear  (see  foot-note), 


DEUTERONOMY.  XVIII. 


are  in  a grammatical  point  of  view  perplexing. 
The  anomalies  contained  in  them  are  such  as 
to  suggest  a suspicion  that  the  text  is  corrupt, 

(i)  ‘in'?  everywhere  else  when  used  as  a prep, 
is  accompanied  by  JD.  Possibly,  as  Wogue 
suggests,  the  is  here  omitted  because  of  the 
double  D of  the  word  following.  (2)  The  ex- 
pression bv  is  without  parallel  and 

hardly  intelligible.  Wogue  compares  with  it 
the  Fi-ench  idiom  “ vendre  sur  son  blen.”  (3) 
The  words  bv  must  evidently  be  an  el- 
liptical expression  for  D''!!  bv,  which 

would  mean  “ at  the  house  of  his  fathers.” 

On  'v'v.  15 — 18. 

The  ancient  Fathers  of  the  Church  have 
generally  regarded  our  Lord  as  the  Prophet 
promised  in  these  ; and  this  view  has  been 
adopted  by  most  Lutheran  Commentators  as 
well  as  by  many  Roman  Catholics  and  An- 
glicans. 

On  the  contrary  many  of  the  mediaeval 
Jewish  authorities  (Maimonides,  Kimchi,  Lip- 
mann,  &c.)  refer  it  to  the  prophetical  order 
at  large,  denying  any  reference,  or  at  least 
any  special  reference,  to  the  Messiah.  Yet 
it  is  evident  from  the  New  Testament  alone 
that  the  Messianic  interpretation  was  the  ac- 
credited one  amongst  the  Jews  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Christian  era.  Setting  aside  passages 
such  as  St  Luke  xxiv.  27 ; St  John  i.  21  and 
45,  in  which  it  is  perhaps  uncertain  whether 
Deut.  xviii.  1 5 sqq.  is  alluded  to  at  all,  or  at 
least  whether  it  alone  is  so,  it  is  certainly 
directly  cited  Acts  iii.  22  sqq.  and  vii.  37. 
On  it  no  doubt  the  Samaritans,  who  received 
the  Pentateuch  only,  grounded  their  expec- 
tation of  a Messiah;  cf.  St  John  iv.  25;  nor 
can  our  Lord  Himself,  when  He  declares 
that  Moses  “wrote  of  Him”  (St  John  v.  45 — 
47),  be  supposed  to  have  any  other  v/ords 
in  view  than  these,  the  only  words  in  which 
Moses,  speaking  in  his  own  person,  gives  any 
prediction  of  the  kind.  In  these  passages  no 
attempt  is  made  to  prove  the  Messianic  in- 
terpretation, nor  any  to  challenge  it.  It  is 
taken  for  granted  on  all  hands.  Polemical 
considerations  would  therefore  seem  in  this, 
as  in  some  other  passages,  to  have  induced 
later  Jewish  interpreters  to  depart  from  the 
judgment  of  their  forefathers. 

Yet  though  the  Messianic  interpretation  is 
thus  correct,  and  even  primarily  intended,  yet 
it*  seems  of  itself  not  to  be  exhaustive  of  the 
pregnant  clauses  before  us.  The  tenor  of  the 
passage  considered  as  a whole  points  to  a 
series  of  prophets  to  be  raised  up  as  the  exi- 
gencies of  God’s  people  might  require  as  no 
less  promised  here,  than  is  the  One  Divine 
Teacher  to  Whom  they  all  gave  witness.  For 

(i)  The  passage  occurs  amidst  a series  of 
regulations  concerning  the  orders  of  rulers, 
civil  and  spiritual,  by  vrhich  the  people  were 


869 

to  be  governed  when  settled  in  Canaan.  In 
such  a connexion  it  seems  anomalous  to  refer 
the  ‘V'u.  before  us  to  an  individual  exclusively. 

(2)  The  passage  is  introduced  by  prohi- 
bitions of  those  “curious  arts”  by  which  the 
heathen  sought  to  pry  into  futurity.  Upon 
these  interdicts  is  based  a promise,  the  pur- 
port of  which  is  to  assure  the  people  that  all 
needful  instruction  and  guidance  shall  be 
vouchsafed  to  them  in  their  necessities  by 
God  Himself.  But  to  refer  Israel  to  a single 
Teacher  in  the  distant  future  would  not  be 
to  the  purpose. 

(3)  To  the  promise  Moses  adds  a denun- 
ciation of  false  prophets,  and  gives  a test  by 
which  they  might  be  detected.  It  seems -then 
that  he  must  in  what  precedes  have  been 
speaking  not  of  a single  true  prophet,  but  of 
true  prophets  generally.  Could  any  reference 
to  such  a contingency  as  that  indicated  in 
•v^v.  10 — 20  be  suitable,  or  even  admissible,  if 
the  context  were  applicable  to  Christ  simply 
and  exclusively  ? 

(4)  If  this  passage  points  solely  to  the 
Person  of  the  Messiah,  then  the  prophets  are 
left,  so  far  as  the  Law  is  concerned,  without 
any  recognition.  Considering  the  important 
part  which  devolved  on  the  prophetical  order 
in  the  after  history  of  the  chosen  people,  and 
in  the  development  and  regulation  of  the 
Theocracy,  this  seems  highly  improbable. 

Whilst  then  the  reference  to  the  Messiah 
must  not  be  excluded,  but  rather  maintained, 
as  pre-eminently  designed  in  the  before 
us,  yet  they  seem  to  have  a further,  no  less 
evident  if  subsidiary,  reference  to  a propheti- 
cal order  which  should  stand  from  time  to 
time,  as  Moses  had  done,  between  God  and 
the  people ; which  should  make  known  God’s 
v/ill  to  the  latter;  which  should  by  its  presence 
render  it  unnecessary  either  that  God  should 
address  the  people  directly,  as  at  Sinai  (-i;.  16, 
and  cf.  chap.  v.  25  sqq.) ; or  that  the  people 
themselves  in  lack  of  counsel  should  resort  to 
the  superstitions  of  the  heathen.  It  was  the 
undeniable  fulfilment  of  this  promise  which 
lent  point  to  the  rebuke  of  Elijah  (2  K.  i.  3, 

6,  16):  “Is  it  not  because  there  is  not  a 
God  in  Israel  that  ye  go  to  inquire  of  Baal- 
zebub?”  &c.,  and  to  the  reproach  of  Amos, 
when  he  recounts  this  amongst  the  mercies 
of  God  (ii.  ii):  “ And  I raised  up  of  your 
sons  for  prophets,”  &c.  The  result  is  well 
summed  up  in  Poole’s  ‘Synopsis:’  “ Ita  de 
Prophetis  ut  simul  de  Christo  priEcipue  et 
primario  intelligendum.” 

It  is  argued  indeed  that  none  of  the  pro- 
phets could  be  fairly  said  to  be  “like  unto” 
Moses;  and  xxxiv.  10  ; Num.  xii.  6—8 ; Hebr, 
iii.  2,  5 are  quoted  in  corroboration.  Moses, 
it  is  urged,  had  no  successor,  in  his  character 
of  legislator,  or  in  the  directness  and  nearness 
of  his  approach  to  God,  except  the  Messiah. 

But  the  expression  “like  unto,”  ‘vv.  15  and 
18,  hardly  refers  to  particulars  like  these,  and 


DEUTERONOMY.  XIX. 


870 

in  fact  finds  its  explanation  by  what  follows 
in  “i;.  1 8 ; “I  will  put  ray  words  in  his  mouth, 
and  he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I shall 
command  him.”  This  explanation  embodies 
an  ordinary  formula  for  describing  the  Divine 
communications  to  the  prophets  (cf.  Num. 
xxiii.  5,  16;  Is.  li.  16;  Jer.  i.  9,  &c.)  ; and 
intimates  that  the  future  prophet -was  to  be 
‘•like  unto”  Moses  not  necessarily  in  all  re- 
spects, but  in  that  now  in  question,  viz.  that 
he  should  be  intermediate  betwixt  God  and 
the  people. 

The  arguments  which  incline  us  to  extend 
' the  scope  of  the  passage  beyond  the  Person  of 
Christ,  are  decisive  against  those  who  limit 
it  to  any  other  individual;  e.g.  David,  Jere- 
miah (Abarbanel),  or  Joshua  (Jarchi,  Aben- 
ezra).  This  last  view  was  current  amongst 
the  Jews  in  the  time  of  St  Augustine  (cf. 
‘contr.  Faust.’  xvi.  19),  and  has  received 
countenance  from  some  modern  expositors 
(Clericus,  Ammon,  &c.).  Yet  if  the  words 
could  point  solely  to  any  one  person,  it  would 
seem  obvious  that  Joshua  could  not  be  he, 
since  the  promise  is /or  the  future^  and  Joshua 
had  already  been  designated  as  Moses’  suc- 
cessor (Num.  xxvii.  18,  23). 

The  word  “ Prophet”  is  probably 

here  a “collective  noun.”  “The  writer  re- 
gards the  prophets  as  belonging  the  one  to 
the  other;  or  as  a whole,  which  includes  the 
successors  of  Moses,  as  the  post- Mosaic  em- 
bassy of  God;  and  so  uses  the  singular.”  Kno- 
bel  in  loc.  Exam.ples  of  “ collective  nouns” 
are  yiT  Gen.  i.  1 5 ; Gen.  iv.  20  ; Ex. 
iii.  6 ; “liiJ  Num.  xi.  27;  and  j'pD  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter  w.  14 — 20  appears  equivalent 
to  the  kings  of  Israel  generally.  The  word 
itself  seems  so  used  Dan.  ix.  24. 

The  passage  thus  appears  to  contemplate,  as 
its  secondary  though  still  momentous  sense,  a 
succession  of  prophets,  not  necessarily  an  un- 
interrupted succession,  but  one  which  should 
never  fail  in  Israel’s  emergency.  And  even- 


[v.  I,  2. 

if  it  bore  no  further  import  than  this  it  would 
jot  a fortiori  have  a reference  to  the  Messiah, 
though  not  to  Him  alone.  For  in  proportion 
as  we  see  in  Him  the  characteristics  of  the 
Prophet  most  perfectly  exhibited,  so  must 
we  regard  the  promise  of  Moses  as  in  Him 
most  completely  accomplished.  But  in  fact, 
in  the  words  before  us  Moses  gives  promise 
both  of  a prophetical  order,  and  of  the  Mes- 
siah in  particular  as  its  chief ; of  a line  of 
prophets  culminating  in  one  eminent  indivi- 
dual. This  view  is  supported  more  or  less 
decidedly  by  Origen  and  Theodoret,  by  Corn, 
a Lapide,  Menoch.,  Tirinus,  Calvin,  Grotius, 
Scholz,  Havern.,  Keil,  Schultz;  and  especially 
by  Reinke  in  a copious  treatise,  ‘ Beitr.  zur 
Erklarung  des  A.  T.’  iv.  289 — 352;  nor  can 
the  view  of  Hengstenberg,  ‘ Christologie  des 
A.  T.’  I.  no — 124,  be  regarded  as  substan- 
tially different. 

The  question  whether  Moses  himself  had 
consciously  in  view  the  Person  in  Whom  his 
words  would  find  their  ultimate  accomplish- 
ment has  nothing  really  to  do  with  the 
exegesis  of  the  passage.  The  maxim  “nihil 
potest*esse  in  scripto  quod  non  in  scriptore,” 
cannot  be  admitted  when  applied  to  writings 
presupposed  to  be  divinely  inspired.  We 
may  well  believe  that  the  grammatical  form 
of  the  words  (the  singular  number  of  the 
leading  noun,  and  the  singular  suffix)  was 
overruled  so  as  to  suggest  to  the  reflec- 
tive and  inquiring  the  expectation  of  One  in 
Whom  they  would  be  most  signally  realized. 
The  promise  of  Gen.  iii.  15  presents  in  this 
as  in  other  characteristics  a striking  re- 
semblance to  that  here  before  us.  Both  are 
instances  of  prophecies  which  have  had  what 
Lord  Bacon  calls  “ springing  and  germinant 
accomplishments,”  i.  e.  which  had  partial 
though  real  accomplishments  from  age  to 
age,  but  which  awaited  in  the  Messiah  that 
crowning  fulfilment  in  which  their  sense 
would  be  exhausted. 


CHAPTbJR  XIX. 

I The  cities  of  refuge.  4 The  privilege  thereof 
for  the  vianslaycr.  14  The  landmark  is  not 
to  be  removed.  1 5 Two  voitnesses  at  the  least. 
16  The  punish  ment  of  a false  witness. 

WHEN  the  Lord  thy  God 
"hath  cut  off  the  nations, 
whose  land  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth 


thee,  and  thou  ^succeedest  them,  and  ^ HeN 

, ,,  . , . . . j • 1 • inheriiesi, 

dwellest  in  their  cities,  and  in  their  or, 
houses ; 

2 ‘^Thou  shalt  separate  three  cities  '^Exod.  21. 
for  thee  in  the  midst  of  thy  land.  Numb.  35. 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee  josh.  20.2. 
to  possess  it. 


CiiAP.  XIX.  This.and  the  next  two  chap- 
ters contain  enactments  designed  to  protect 
human  life,  and  to  impress  its  sanctity  on  Israel. 

W ith  -va'.  I — 13,  which  relate  to  the  cities 
of  refuge,  cf.  Ex.  xxi.  13,  and  Num.  xxxv.  9 
— 34.  Y'he  laws  here  given  are  in  some  ])ar- 
ticulars  supplementary  to  those  of  the  last- 
named  passage. 


1,  2.  The  three  cities  of  refuge  for  the  dis- 
trict cast  of  Jordan  had  been  already  named. 
Moses  now  directs  that  when  the  territory 
on  the  west  of  Jordan  had  been  conquered, 
a like  allotment  of  three  other  cities  in  it 
should  be  made.  This  was  done  accordingly; 
cf.  Josh.  XX.  I sqq. 


V.  3— II-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XIX. 


871 


T Heb. 
fro77i  yes- 
terday the 
third  day. 


t Heb. 

iro7i. 
tHeb. 
ivood. 
t Heb. 

fi7ideth. 


I Heb. 

S77iite  hi77t 
in  life. 
t Heb. 
fro7/i  yes- 
terday the 
thh'd  day. 


3 Thou  shalt  prepare  thee  a way, 
and  divide  the  coasts  of*  thy  land, 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee 
to  inherit,  into  three  parts,  that  every 
slayer  may  flee  thither. 

4 ^ And  this  is  the  case  of  the 
slayer,  which  shall  flee  thither,  that 
he  may  live : Whoso  killeth  his  neigh- 
bour ignorantly,  whom  he  hated  not 
Mn  time  past; 

5 As  when  a man  goeth  into  the 
wood  with  his  neighbour  to  hew 
wood,  and  his  hand  fetcheth  a stroke 
with  the  axe  to  cut  down  the  tree, 
and  the  ' head  slippeth  from  the  ' helve, 
and  Uighteth  upon  his  neighbour,  that 
he  die ; he  shall  flee  unto  one  of  those 
cities,  and  live : 

6 Lest  the  avenger  of  the  blood 
pursue  the  slayer,  while  his  heart  is 
hot,  and  overtake  him,  because  the 
way  is  long,  and  ^slay  him;  whereas 
he  was  not  worthy  of  death,  inasmuch 
as  he  hated  him  not  Ln  time  past. 


7 Wherefore  I command  thee,  say- 
ing, Thou  shalt  separate  three  cities 
for  thee. 

8 And  if  the  Lord  thy  God  -^en- 
large  thy  coast,  as  he  hath  sworn 
unto  thy  fathers,  and  give  thee  all  the 
land  which  he  promised  to  give  unto 
thy  fathers; 

9 If  thou  shalt  keep  all  these 
commandments  to  do  them,  which  I 
command  thee  this  day,  to  love  the 
Lord  thy  God,  and  to  walk  ever  in 
his  ways;  "^then  shalt  thou  add  three 
cities  more  for  thee,  beside  these  three ; 

10  That  innocent  blood  be  not 
shed  in  thy  land,  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  giveth  thee  for  an  inherit- 
ance, and  so  blood  be  upon  thee. 

11  H But  if  any  man  hate  his 
neighbour,  and  lie  in  wait  for  him, 
and  rise  up  against  him,  and  smite 
him  ^mortally  that  he  die,  and  fleeth  tHeb. 
into  one  of  these  cities : 

12  Then  the  elders  of  his  city  shall 


3.  fbou  shalt  prepare  thee  a 'way~\  It  was 
the  duty  of  the  Senate  to  make  the  roads  that 
led  to  the  cities  of  refuge  convenient  by  re- 
pairing them  annually  in  the  month  Adar  and 
removing  every  obstruction.  No  hillock  was 
left,  no  river  over  which  there  was  not  a 
bridge;  and  the  road  was  at  least  two  and 
thirty  cubits  broad.  At  cross-roads  there 
were  posts  bearing  the  words  Refuge.^  Refuge, 
to  guide  the  fugitive  in  his  flight.  See  Suren- 
husius,  Mishna,  Vol.  iv.  279.  It  seems  as  if 
in  Is.  xl.  3 sqq.  the  imagery  were  borrowed 
from  the  preparation  of  the  ways  to  the  cities 
of  refuge. 

5.  nvith  the  axe'\  Lit.  “ with  the  iron.” 
Note  the  employment  of  iron  for  tools,  and 
cf.  on  iii.  ii. 

slippetlS]  On  this  word  cf.  xxviii.  40. 

8,  9.  The  three  cities  more  cannot,  as 
Knobel,  Hengstenberg,  &c.  maintain,  be  the 
same  as  those  alluded  to  in  ‘vn).  % and  7.  Ra- 
ther is  provision  here  made  for  the  anticipated 
enlargement  of  the  borders  of  Israel  to  the 
utmost  limits  promised  by  God,  from  the  river 
of  Egypt  to  the  Euphrates  (Gen.  xv.  18  ; Ex. 
xxiii.  31,  and  notes).  This  promise,  owing  to 
the  sins  of  the  people,  received  but  a late  ful- 
filment after  David  had  conquered  the  Philis- 
tines, Syrians,  &c. ; and  a transient  one,  for 
many  of  the  conquered  peoples  regained  in- 
dependence on  the  dissolution  of  Solomon’s 
empire.  And  in  several  districts  the  native 
inhabitants,  though  rendered  tributary,  were 


never  dispossessed.  Had  Israel  “ succeeded” 
to  the  heathen,  and  “dwelt  in  their  place” 
throughout  all  the  regions  assigned  by  God’s 
covenant  with  their  fathers,  the  nine  cities  of 
refuge,  which  are  contemplated  by  the  pas- 
sage before  us,  would  certainly  have  been 
needed.  That  nine  cities  and  not  six  only  are 
provided  by  the  ^‘v.  before  us  is  the  opinion 
of  the  Jewish  authorities  generally,  of  Lyra, 
Gerhard,  Keil,  Schultz,  &c.  It  is  obvious 
that  such  a passage  as  this  could  not  have 
been  penned  in  the  times  to  which  rationalist 
critics  are  wont  to  assign  Deut.  No  one 
living  in  those  times  would  think  of  treating 
as  a future  contingency  (“  if  the  Lord  thy 
God  enlarge,”  &c.)  an  extension  of  territory 
which,  at  the  date  in  question,  had  in  fact 
taken  place  long  ago  and  been  subsequently 
forfeited. 

11 — 13.  Cf.  Num.  XXXV.  12,  24;  Josh 
XX.  6 sqq.  The  elders  are  to  act  as  the  lead- 
ers and  administrators  of  the  people  at  large, 
i.e.  of  “the  congregation,”  with  whom  the 
adjudication  respecting  the  guilt  of  the  man- 
slayer  would  ultimately  rest. 

In  these  ^‘v.  the  directions  respecting  the 
preparation  of  the  roads  to  the  cities  ot 
refuge,  the  provision  of  additional  cities  in 
case  of  an  extension  of  territory,  and  the  in- 
tervention of  the  elders  as  representing  the 
congregation,  are  peculiar  to  Deut.  and  sup- 
plementary to  the  laws  on  the  same  subject 
given  in  the  earlier  books. 


872 


DEUTERONOMY.  XIX. 


2 21. 


^ chap.  17. 
6. 

Numb.  35 
30. 

i\Iatt.  18. 
16. 

John  8.  17 
2 Cor.  13. 

Heb.  10. 
28. 

II  Or, 
/ailing 
away. 


send  and  fetch  him  thence,  and  de- 
liver him  into  the  hand  of  the  avenger 
of  blood,  that  he  may  die. 

13  Thine  eye  shall  not  pity  him, 
but  thou  shalt  put  away  the  guilt  of 
innocent  blood  from  Israel,  that  it 
may  go  well  with  thee. 

14  ^ Thou  shalt  not  remove  thy 
neighbour’s  landmark,  which  they  of 
old  time  have  set  in  thine  inheritance, 
which  thou  shalt  inherit  in  the  land 
that  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee 
to  possess  it. 

15  ^ ^One  witness  shall  not  rise 
up  against  a man  for  any  iniquity,  or 
for  any  sin,  in  any  sin  that  he  sin- 
neth  : at  the  mouth  of  two  witnesses, 
or  at  the  mouth  of  three  witnesses, 
shall  the  matter  be  established. 

16  ^ If  a false  witness  rise  up 
against  any  man  to  testify  against 
him  ” that  which  is  wrong ; 


17  Then  both  the  men,  between 
whom  the  controversy  L,  shall  stand 
before  the  Lord,  before  the  priests 
and  the  judges,  which  shall  be  in 
those  days ; 

18  And  the  judges  shall  make 
diligent  inquisition  : and,  behold, 
i/’  the  witness  he  a false  witness, 
and  hath  testified  falsely  against  his 
brother ; 

19  -^Then  shall  ye  do  unto  him,  as-^^’’®''-  ^9- 
he  had  thought  to  have  done  unto  his  ban.  6. 24. 
brother:  so  shalt  thou  put  the  evil 

away  from  among  you. 

20  And  those  which  remain  shall 
hear,  and  fear,  and  shall  henceforth 
commit  no  more  any  such  evil  among 
you. 

21  And  thine  eye  shall  not  pity ; ^Exod.  21. 
but  ^life  shall  go  for  life,  eye  for  eye,  ^ev  24 
tooth  for  tooth,  hand  for  hand,  foot 

r r Matt.  5. 

tor  root.  38. 


14.  Asa  man's  life  so  his  means  of  liveli- 
hood are  to  be  held  sacred ; and  in  this  con- 
nection a prohibition  is  inserted  against  re- 
moving a neighbour's  landmark;  cf.  xxvii,  17 ; 
Prov.  xxii.  28,  xxiii.  10. 

they  of  old  time']  Rather  perhaps,  “thy 
fathers,”  as  LXX.;  Vulg.  priores.^  as  the 
word  also  probably  means  in  Is,  Ixi,  4.  The 
enactment  simply  forbids  the  removal  of  the 
landmarks  set  up  by  those  who  should  dis- 
tribute the  land  after  the  conquest.  The  facts 
that  the  words  immediately  following  refer  to 
the  land  as  yet  to  be  acquired,  ought  to  have 
precluded  the  allegation  of  Vater,  Davidson, 
&c.,  that  the  2;.  presupposes  a long  abode  in 
Canaan. 

15.  The  rule  laid  down  xvii.  6 as  to  capi- 
tal charges  is  extended  here  to  all  accusations 
before  a court  of  justice. 

16 — 21.  The  passage  refers  generally  to  the 
crime  of  bearing  false  witness,  denounced  so 
repeatedly  in  the  Decalogue  and  elsewhere ; 
cf.  Kx.  xxiii.  I ; Lev,  xix.  16.  If  any  traces  of 
this  crime  should  appear  in  the  course  of  judi- 
cial proceedings,  the  matter  was  to  be  brought 
before  the  supreme  court  (cf.  on  xvii.  9) ; 
and  the  false  witness  on  conviction  punished 
afeer  the  rule  of  the  lex  talionis.  According  to 
the  Rabbins  the  testimony  of  a single  witness 
was  in  civil  cases  so  far  admitted  as  to  oblige 
the  accused  person  to  purge  himself  by  oath ; 
in  criminal  cases  such  unsupported  testimony 
was  not  only  to  be  utterly  rejected,  but  the 
person  who  tendered  it  punished  for  a breach 


of  the  law  given  in  ’v.  15.  But  these 
do  not  refer  to  the  number  of  witnesses  at  all, 
but  simply  prescribe  how  a case  of  false  wit- 
ness is  to  be  dealt  with. 

16.  testify  against  him  that  ^vhich  is  fiurong] 
Marg.  more  literally,  “ a falling  away.”  The 
word  {s  dr  ah')  is  used  xiii.  5 to  signify  apo-  • 
stasy  ; but  here  is  no  doubt  to  be  under- 
stood in  the  wider  sense  of  any  departure 
from  the  law. 

, 17.  both  the  men.,  bet^Meen  nvhom  the  con- 
troversy A]  i.e.  the  parties  to  the  original 
suit,  one  of  whom  has  brought  forward  a 
false  witness ; not  (as  Keil)  the  accused 
and  the  false  witness.  The  supreme  court  is 
directed  to  summon  the  plaintiff  and  defend- 
ant, and  through  their  evidence,  and  such 
other  as  might  be  obtained,  try  the  suspected 
witness,  2;.  19;  cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  i. 

stand  before  the  Lord,  before  the  priests  and 
the  judges]  i.  e.  before  the  supreme  court  held, 
as  provided  in  chap,  xvii.,  at  the  Sanctuary. 
The  judges  stood  as  God's  representatives;  to 
lie  to  them  was  to  lie  to  Him.  The  crime  of 
false  witness  therefore  was  to  be  tried  on  this 
account,  as  well  perhaps  as  because  of  its 
intrinsic  gravity  and  difficulty,  in  His  more 
immediate  presence. 

19.  Cf.  Prov.  xix.  5,  9;  Dan.  vi.  24. 

21.  On  the  lex  talionis,  which  was  ob- 
served in  principle  not  in  letter  by  the  Jew- 
ish courts,  see  Ex.  xxi.  23,  24. 


V.  I — 9. 


DEUTERONOMY.  XX. 


■873 


CHAPTER  XX. 

I The  priest’’ s cxhortatioii  to  encourage  the  people 
to  battle.  5 The  officers’’  proclamation  ':vho 
are  to  be  dismissed  from  the  zvar.  i o Ihnv  to 
rise  the  cities  that  accept  or  ref  use  the  proclama- 
tion of  peace.  1 6 What  cities  must  be  devoted. 
19  Trees  of  man’s  meat  must  not  be  destroyed 
in  the  siege. 

WHEN  thou  goest  out  to  bat- 
tle against  thine  enemies,  and 
seest  horses,  and  chariots,  and  a peo- 
ple more  than  thou,  be  not  afraid  of 
them : for  the  Lord  thy  God  is  with 
thee,  which  brought  thee  up  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt. 

2  And  it  shall  be,  when  ye  are 
come  nigh  unto  the  battle,  that  the 
priest  shall  approach  and  speak  unto 
the  people, 

3  And  shall  say  unto  them.  Hear, 
O Israel,  ye  approach  this  day  unto 
battle  against  your  enemies : let  not 
\^tn'uier  hearts  ^ faint,  fear  not,  and  do 

f Hob.  ' not  tremble,  neither  be  ye  terrified 
Imstl.  because  of  them ; 

4  For  the  Lord  your  God  is  he 
that  goeth  with  you,  to  fight  for  you 
against  your  enemies,  to  save  you. 


5 ^ And  the  officers  shall  speak 
unto  the  people,  saying.  What  man 
is  there  that  hath  built  a new  house, 
and  hath  not  dedicated  it?  let  him  go 
and  return  to  his  house,  lest  he  die  in 
the  battle,  and  another  man  dedicate  it. 

6 And  what  man  is  he  that  hath 
planted  a vineyard,  and  hath  not  yet 

^ eaten  of  it  ? let  him  also  go  and  re-  t Heb. 
turn  unto  his  house,  lest  he  die  in  the 
battle,  and  another  man  eat  of  it.  See  Lev. 

7 " And  what  man  is  there  that  «^chap.  24. 
hath  betrothed  a wife,  and  hath  not 

taken  her?  let  him  go  and  return 
unto  his  house,  lest  he  die  in  the  bat- 
tle, and  another  man  take  her. 

8 And  the  officers  shall  speak  fur- 
ther unto  the  people,  and  they  shall 

say,  '^What  man  is  there  that  is  fear-  -S’ judg.  7. 
ful  and  fainthearted  ? let  him  go  and  3- 
return  unto  his  house,  lest  his  breth- 
ren’s heart  ^ faint  as  well  as  his  heart.  tHeb. 

9 And  it  shall  be,  when  the  offi- 

cers  have  made  an  end  of  speaking 
unto  the  people,  that  they  shall  make 
captains  of  the  armies  ^ to  lead  the  die  head 
people.  * people. 


Chap.  XX.  Reverence  for  human  life  and 
that  which  tends  to  preserve  it  was  the  motive 
of  the  laws  given  in  the  last  chapter.  The 
same  is  the  basis  of  those  in  this  chapter.  Even 
in  time  of  war  forbearance  was  to  be  exercised 
both  in  respect  of  the  Israelites  themselves 
w'ho  are  levied  for  war  (yv.  i — 9) : in  respect 
of  the  enemy  (yu.  10 — 15),  the  Canaanit- 
ish  nations  alone  excepted  (16 — 18):  and  in 
respect  of  the  property  of  the  vanquished  (yv. 
19,  20).  These  requirements  sound  indeed 
but  small  to  Christian  ears;  but  when  the 
ferocity  and  mercilessness  of  Oriental  wars  in 
ancient  times  are  recollected,  Moses  may  well 
in  this  as  in  other  respects  be  thought  to  have 
carried  his  demands  on  the  self-control  of  the 
people  to  the  utmost  they  could  then  bear. 

1.  horses.,  and  chariots']  The  most  formi- 
dable elements  of  an  Oriental  host,  which  the 
Canaanites  possessed  in  great  numbers;  cf. 
Josh.  xvii.  16;  Judg.  iv.  3 ; i S.  xiii.  5. 
Israel  could  not  match  these  with  correspond- 
ing forces  (cf.  xvii.  16  notes  and  relf.),  but 
having  the  God  of  battles  on  its  side,  was  not 
to  be  dismayed  by  them.  This  topic  of  en- 
couragement, not  less  than  the  language  put 
into  the  mouth  of  the  priest  atao.  3,  4,  as- 
sumes that  every  such  war  had  the  sanction 
of  God,  and  was  consequently  just. 


2.  the  priest]  Not  the  High  Priest,  but 
one  appointed  for  the  purpose,  and  called, 
according  to  the  Rabbins,  “the  Anointed  of 
the  War:”  hence  perhaps  the  expression  of 
Jer.  vi.  4,  &c.  “ to  prepare”  (lit.  consecrate) 
war.  Thus  Phinehas  went  with  the  warriors 
to  light  against  Midian,  Num.  xxxi.  6;  cf. 
I S.  iv.  4,  II  ; 2 Chron.  xiii.  12. 

4.  the  Lord  your  God  is  he  that  goeth  'with 
you^  to  fight  fior  you]  Cf.  i.  30,  iii.  22;  Josh, 
xxiii.  10,  &c. 

5.  the  officers]  i.c.  the  Shoterim,  on 
whom  see  on  Ex.  v.  10. 

dedicated  it]  Cf.  Neh.  xii.  27;  Ps.  xxx. 
title.  The  expression  is  appropriate,  because 
various  ceremonies  of  a religious  kind  were 
customary  amongst  the  Jews  on  taking  pos- 
session of  a new  house.  The  immunity  con- 
ferred in  this  no.  lasted  (Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  iv.  8. 
41),  like  that  in  no.  7 (cf.  xxiv.  5),  for  a year. 

6.  hath  not  yet  eaten  of  it]  Hebrew  as 
marg.  “hath  not  made  it  common.”  The 
fruit  of  newly  planted  trees  was  set  apart 
from  common  uses  for  four  years  (Lev.  xix. 
23  sqq.). 

9.  they  shall  make  captains  of  the  armies 
to  lead  the  people]  Marg.  m.ore  literally  “in 
the  head  of  the  people.”  The  meaning  is  that 


8/4 


DEUTERONOMY.  XX. 


[v.  10 — 20. 


Josh.  8. 

2. 


f Heb. 
spoil. 


10  ^ When  thou  comest  nigh  un- 
to a city  to  hght  against  it,  then  pro- 
claim peace  unto  it. 

1 1 And  it  shall  be,  if  it  make  thee 
answer  of  peace,  and  open  unto  thee, 
then  it  shall  be,  that  all  the  people 
that  is  found  therein  shall  be  tribu- 
taries unto  thee,  and  they  shall  serve 
thee. 

12  And  if  it  will  make  no  peace 
with  thee,  but  will  make  war  against 
thee,  then  thou  shalt  besiege  it : 

13  And  when  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  delivered  it  into  thine  hands, 
thou  shalt  smite  every  male  thereof 
with  the  edge  of  the  sword : 

14  But  the  women,  and  the  little 
ones,  and  ‘^the  cattle,  and  all  that  is 
in  the  city,  even  all  the  spoil  thereof, 
shalt  thou  Aake  unto  thyself;  and 
thou  shalt  eat  the  spoil  of  thine  ene- 
mies, which  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
given  thee. 

15  Thus  shalt  thou  do  unto  all  the 
cities  which  are  very  far  off  from  thee, 
which  are  not  of  the  cities  of  these 
nations. 

16  But  of  the  cities  of  these  people. 


which  the  Lord  thy  God  doth  give 
thee  for  an  inheritance,  thou  shalt 
save  alive  nothing  that  breatheth  : 

17  But  thou  shalt  utterly  destroy 
them;  namely^  the  Hittites,  and  the 
Amorites,  the  Canaanites,  and  the  Pe- 
rizzites,  the  Hivites,  and  the  Jebus- 
ites ; as  the  Lord  thy  God  hath 
commanded  thee : 

18  That  they  teach  you  not  to  do 
after  all  their  abominations,  which 
they  have  done  unto  their  gods;  so 
should  ye  sin  against  the  Lord  your 
God. 

19  ^ When  thou  shalt  besiege  a 
city  a long  time,  in  making  war 
against  it  to  take  it,  thou  shalt  not 
destroy  the  trees  thereof  by  forcing 
an  axe  against  them : for  thou  mayest 
eat  of  them,  and  thou  shalt  not  cut 
them  down  for  the  tree  of  the  field  is 
man’s  life')  ^ to  employ  them  in  the  siege : 

20  Only  the  trees  which  thou 
knowest  that  they  be  not  trees  for 
meat,  thou  shalt  destroy  and  cut  them 
down;  and  thou  shalt  build  bulwarks 
against  the  city  that  maketh  war  with 
thee,  until  Lt  be  subdued. 


11  Or,  for, 

O man, 
the  tree 
of  the  field 
is  to  be  em- 
ployed ill 
the  siege. 
t Heb. 
to  go  from 
before  thee. 
T Heb. 
it  come 
dozou. 


the  “officers”  (see  on  1;.  5)  should  then  sub- 
divide the  levies,  and  appoint  leaders  of  the 
smaller  divisions  thus  constituted.  See  Note 
at  end  of  the  chapter. 

10 — 20.  Directions  intended  to  prevent 
wanton  destruction  of  life  and  property  in 
sieges. 

10.  Cf.  2 S.  XX.  18 — 20.  It  appears  from 
this  7.’.  that  when  towns  surrendered  peace- 
ably not  even  the  armed  men  in  it  were  to 
be  put  to  death : and  from  the  following 
that  in  those  taken  by  storm  males  only  might 
be  killed. 

13.  smite  entcry  male']  Cf.  Num.  xxxi.  7. 

14.  the  spoil  of  thhie  enemies]  Cf.  Josh.  viii. 
2,  xxii.  8. 

15-18.  Such  forbearance,  however,  was 
not  to  be  shown  towards  the  Canaanitish 
nations,  which  were  to  be  utterly  extermi- 
nated ; cf.  vii.  I — 4. 

16.  thou  shalt  sanje  aliue  nothing  that 
breatheth]  i.e.  kill  every  human  being.  The 
command  did  not  apply  to  beasts  as  well  as 
men  ; cf.  Josh.  xi.  ii  and  14. 

19.  thou  shalt  tiot  cut  them  dor^vn  {for  the 
tree  of  the  field  is  tn  art's  life')  to  employ  them  in 
the  siege]  'I'lie  A.  V.  here  follows  the  inter- 
pretation of  Abene/ra.  'J'he  words  of  the 
parenthesis  may  be  more  literally  rendered  “for 


man  is  a tree  of  the  field,”  i.e.  has  his  life 
from  the  tree  of  the  field,  is  supported  in  life 
by  it:  cf.  xxiv.  6.  The  parenthesis  itself  may 
be  compared  with  xii.  9.  On  this  difficult 
passage  see  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

man's  life]  i.e.  the  sustenance  and  support 
of  life.  The  phrase  is  used  again  xxiv.  6, 
(“No  man  shall  take  the  nether  or  the  upper 
millstone  to  pledge,  for  he  taketh  a man’s  life 
to  pledge”)  but  the  Hebrew  there  has  “life” 
only,  whilst  here  it  has  “man”  only.  The 
A.  V.  however  seems  on  the  whole  to  exhibit 
correctly  the  sense  of  the  passage.  See  Note 
at  the  end  of  the  chapter.  The  Egyptians 
seem  invariably  to  have  cut  down  the  fruit- 
trees  in  war.  Thus  in  the  30th  year  of 
Thotmes  III.  the  king  invaded  the  Rutens, 
“ coupant  tons  ses  arbres  et  detruisant  son 
blc,”  Brugsch,  ‘Hist.  d’Egypte,’  p.  loi;  and 
ages  before  this  in  an  expedition  against  the 
Herusha,  probably  a people  of  Asia,  the  army 
of  Pepi,  of  the  Vlth  dynasty,  cut  down  the 
fig  trees  and  the  vines.  De  Rouge,  “ Recher- 
ches  sur  les  Monuments  de  I’Egypte,”  p.  125. 
(These  references  have  been  supplied  by  the 
Editor,  Rev.  Canon  Cook.) 

20.  cut  them  dorivtt]  C£  Jer.  vi.  6. 
until  it  be  subdued]  Marg.  literally  “ come 
down.”  On  the  word  cf.  xxviii.  52. 


V-  I— 3-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXL 


8/5 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xx.  9,  and  on  19,  20. 


'V.  9.* 

- The  word  “captains”  in  this  -v.  may 
grammatically  be  either  subject  or.  object. 
The  A.  V.  takes  it  to  be  the  latter,  after 
LXX.,  Onkelos,  Saad.,  Keil,  Knobel,  Wogiie, 
&c.  The  other  construction  is  however  a- 
doptcd  by  Vulg.,  Syr.,  Masius,  Clericus, 
Schultz,  &c.,  and  would  give  the  sense  “the 
captains  at  the  head  of  the  people  shall  array 
them.”  But  no  instance  can  be  produced  of 
the  verb  “ipS  being  used  without  an  object ; 
and  if  the  subject  of  the  sentence,  ought 
to  have  the  article. 

'V'v,  19,  ao. 

The  A.  V.  assumes  a parenthesis  in  the 
former  of  these  -vn). ; but  a large  class  of 
commentators  reject  this  expedient,  and  con- 
nect the  latter  clauses  of  the  -i;.  19  closely 
with  the  immediately  preceding  context.  Of 
these  some  (the  LXX.,  Jarchi,  Clericus, 
Ewald,  Knobel,  Keil)  render  the  clauses 
in  question  as  interrogative:  “For  is  the 
tree  of  the  field  a man  that  it  should  be 
besieged  before  thee  ? ” But  this  sense  re- 
quires,^ as  its  advocates  generally  allow,  an 
alteration  in  the  punctuation,  the  substitu- 
tion of  n interrogative  (i.e,  H)  for  the  article  (il) 
in  the  word  Others  arrive  at  much 

the  same  sense  by  carrying  on  a negative  from 
the  preceding  words:  “For  the  tree  of  the 
field  is  not  a man  to  go  before  thee  (/.  e. 
stand  as  an  adversary  to  thee)  in  the  siege.” 
This  rendering,  though  favoured  by  old  ex- 
positors of  weight  (the  Vulgate,  Onkelos, 
Abarbanel,  Luther,  Grotius),  has  deservedly 
been  neglected  by  the  moderns.  The  inter- 


polation of  the  negative  from  the  earlier  part 
of  the  verse  is  harsh,  and  unexampled,  and 
the  natural  order  of  the  words,  according  to 
which  is  clearly  the  subject,  is  inverted. 

To  command  a fruit-tree  to  be  spared  be- 
cause it  is  “not  a man,”  seems  absurd,  and 
irrelevant  also,  since  the  same  might  be  said 
of  trees  which  are  nqt  “trees  for  meat.” 

Our  margin  (so  de  Dieu)  suggests  a fourth 
view.  Taking  the  H as  the  sign  of  the  voca- 
tive, it  gives  the  sense  of  the  latter  part  of  the 
verse  thus ; “ for,  O man,  the  tree  of  the  field 
is  to  be  employed  in  the  siege.”  But,  passing 
by  the  fact  that  H “cum  vi  exclamandi”  is 
out  of  place  in  didactic  and  plain  prose 
narration,  the  criticism  of  Frommann  (apud 
Rosenmuller  ‘Scholia’  and  Barrett’s  ‘Synopsis’ 
in  loc.')  seems  convincing ; viz.  that  since  the 
command  to  cut  down  unproductive  trees  is 
given  clearly  and  expressly  in  the  next  ‘i/.,  it 
is  not  likely  that  Moses  should  have  given 
an  otiose,  and  it  might  be  added  obscure,  re- 
petition of  it  in  this. 

Schroeder(‘ JanuaHebr.’/«  loc.')  ingeniously 
proposes  to  remove  the  Athnaldi  from  its 
present  place  after  niDn  to  a new  position 
after  and  to  render  thus:  “thou  shalt 

not  cut  down  them  (i.  e.  the  trees)  but  men 
only.” 

On  the  whole  it  seems  best  to  retain  the 
rendering  of  the  A.  V.  In  face  of  the  fact 
that  "v.  20  m.anifestly  deals  with  the  case  of 
trees  that  are  “ not  for  meat,”  it  seems  natu- 
ral to  regard  the  trees  spoken  of  in  ‘z;.  19  as 
those  which  are  for  meat.  So  substantially 
render  Abenezra,  Frommann,  Rosenmuller, 
Dathe,  Vater,  Baumgarten,  Schultz,  Herx- 
heimer,  &c. 


CHAPTER  XXL 

I The  expicition  of  an  7nicertain  imirdcr.  10 
The  tesage  of  a captive  taken  to  vnfe.  15  The 
firstborn  is  net  to  be  disinherited  tipoii  private 
affection.  iS  A stnbborn  son  is  to  be  stoned 
to  death.  22  The  malefactor  must  not  hang 
all  night  on  a tree. 

11'  one  be  found  slain  in  the  land 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth 


thee  to  possess  it,  lying  in  the  field, 
and  it  be  not  known  who  hath  slain 
him : 

2 Then  thy  elders  and  thy  judges 
shall  come  forth,  and  they  shall  mea- 
sure unto  the  cities  which  are  round 
about  him  that  is  slain : 

3 And  it  shall  be,  that  the  city 


Chap.  XXL  The  sanctity  of  human  life  is 
still  the  leading  thought ; cf.  the  introductory 
words  to  chapters  xix.  and  xx. ; and  where  a 
corpse  is  found  “lying  in  the  field,  and  it  be 
not  known  who  hath  slain  him,”  the  whole 
land  is  regarded  as  guilty  before  God  fv.  8) 
until  a solemn  rite  of  expiation  be  gone 
through.  Vv.  i — 9 of  this  chapter  prescribe 
the  mode  and  form  of  this  expiation  ; which 
from  the  nature  of  the  case  could  have  place 


only  when  the  people  were  settled  in  Canaan, 
and  so  is  prescribed  first  in  Deuteronomy. 

2.  thy  elders  and  thy  judges)^  i.e.  the  elders 
and  judges  of  the  neighbouring  cities;  cf. 
Joseph.  ‘Ant.’  iv.  8.  The  elders  represented 
the  citizens  at  large,  the  judges  the  magis- 
tracy, whilst  “the  priests  the  sons  of  Levi,” 
•V.  5,  i.e.  some  priests  from  the  nearest  priestly 
town,  were  likewise  to  be  at  hand.  Thus  all 
classes  were  represented  at  the  purging  away 


876 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXI. 


[v.  4—13. 


which  is  next  unto  the  slain  man, 
even  the  elders  of  that  city  shall 
take  an  heifer,  which  hath  not  been 
wrought  with,  and  which  hath  not 
drawn  in  the  yoke ; 

4 And  the  elders  of  that  city  shall 
brins  down  the  heifer  unto  a rou^h 
valley,  which  is  neither  eared  nor 
sown,  and  shall  strike  off  the  heifer’s 
neck  there  in  the  valley : 

5 And  the  priests  the  sons  of  Levi 
shall  come  near;  for  them  the  Lord 
thy  God  hath  chosen  to  minister  unto 
him,  and  to  bless  in  the  name  of  the 

tHeb.  Lord;  and  by  their  Avord  shall  every 
mouth.  controversy  and  every  stroke  be  tried: 

6 And  all  the  elders  of  that  city, 
that  are  next  unto  the  slain  man.^  shall 
wash  their  hands  over  the  heifer  that 
is  beheaded  in  the  valley : 

7 And  they  shall  answer  and  say. 
Our  hands  have  not  shed  this  blood, 
neither  have  our  eyes  seen  it. 


8 Be  merciful,  O Lor.d,  unto  thy . 
people  Israel,  whom  thou  hast  re- 
deemed, and  lay  not  innocent  blood 

^ unto  thy  people  of  Israel’s  charge.  t Heb. 
And  the  blood  shall  be  forgiven  them. 

9 So  shalt  thou  put  away  the  guilt 
of  innocent  blood  from  among  you, 
when  thou  shalt  do  that  which  is 
right  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord. 

10  ^ When  thou  goest  forth  to 
war  against  thine  enemies,  and  the 
Lord  thy  God  hath  delivered  them 
into  thine  hands,  and  thou  hast  taken 
them  captive, 

1 1 And  seest  among  the  captives  a 
beautiful  woman,  and  hast  a desire 
unto  her,  that  thou  wouldest  have  her 
to  thy  wife ; 

12  Then  thou  shalt  bring  her  home 
to  thine  house;  and  she  shall  shave  n 

her  head,  and  ‘'pare  her  nails;  suffer  to 

13  And  she  shall  put  the  raiment  Heb.' 
of  her  captivity  from  off  her,  and  shall 


of  that  blood- guiltiness  which  until  removed 
attached  to  the  whole  community. 

3.  an  heifer 'which  hath  not  been  wrought 
with'\  The  requirements  as  regards  place  and 
victim  are  symbolical.  The  heifer  represented 
the  murderer,  so  far  at  least  as  to  die  in  his 
stead,  since  he  himself  could  not  be  found.  As 
bearing  his  guilt  then  the  heifer  must  be  one 
which  was  of  full  growth  and  strength,  and 
had  not  yet  been  ceremonially  profaned  by 
human  use  (cf.  Ex.  xx.  25).  The  Christian 
commentators  find  here  a type  of  Christ  and 
of  His  sacrifice  for  man  : but  the  heifer  was 
not  strictly  a sacrifice  or  sin-offering.  The 
transaction  was  rather  figurative,  and  was  so 
ordered  as  to  impress  the  lesson  of  Gen.  ix.  5. 
AVhen  the  real  culprit  escaped  justice  there 
must  be  at  least  a symbolical  infliction  of  the 
due  jjcnalty,  ere  the  innocent  blood  could  be 
deemed  to  be  expiated.  According  to  the 
Rabbinists  (see  Saalschutz,  ‘ Mos.  Recht.’  p. 
548)  the  murderer,  if  subsequently  appre- 
hended, would  be  liable  to  his  proper  punish- 
ment, notwithstanding  the  performance  of 
this  legal  expiation. 

4.  rough  'Valley]  On  these  words  see  Note- 
at end  of  chapter. 

eared]  i.e.  ploughed,  as  in  i S.  viii.  12; 
Is.  XXX.  24.  d'he  word  is  derived  from  the 
Latin  “arare,”  and  is  in  frequent  use  by 
English  writers  of  the  fifteenth  and  two  fol- 
lowing centuries : cf.  e.g.  Shakespeare,  ‘Ant. 
and  Clcop.’  i. 


“ Menecrates  and  Menas,  famous  pirates. 
Make  the  sea  serve  them,  which  they  ear 
and  plough 
With  keels.” 

strike  off  the  heifer's  neck]  Rather,  ‘ ‘ break 
its  neck,”  as  the  same  word  is  rendered  Ex. 
xiii.  13.  The  mode  of  killing  the  victim  dis- 
tinguishes this  lustration  from  the  sin-offering, 
in  which  there  would  be  of  course  shedding 
and  sprinkling  of  the  blood. 

5.  The  presence  of  the  priests  seems  re- 
quired as  the  representatives  of  their  order  in 
the  state.  They  would  also  see  that  the  rite 
was  regularly  performed,  and  accredit  it  when 
it  had  been  so.  They  do  not  appear  to  have 
any  direct  part  assigned  them  in  it,  perhaps 
in  order  to  mark  more  clearly  that  no  sacri- 
fice, properly  so  called,  was  being  offered. 

10  sqq.  The  regulations  which  now  follow 
in  the  rest  of  this  and  throughout  the  next 
chapter  bring  out  the  sanctity  of  various 
personal  rights  and  relations  fundamental  to 
human  life  and  society.  Mere  existence, 
v/hich  has  been  guarded  in  the  laws  preceding, 
is  valueless  unless  with  it  be  secured  also  the 
use  and  enjoyment  of  its  blessings  and  privi- 
leges. 

10 — 14.  The  usage  of  a captive  taken  to 
wife.  Tlie  war  supposed  here  is  one  against 
the  neighbouring  nations  after  Israel  had 
utterly  destroyed  the  Canaanites,  cf.  vii.  3, 
and  taken  possession  of  their  land  : cf.  on  xxi. 

12.  pare  her  tiails]  Marg.  “make”  or 
“dress”  or  “suffer  to  grow.”  Our  trans- 


V.  14 2 2-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXL 


877 


remain  in  thine  house,  and  bewail  her 
father  and  her  mother  a full  month : 
and  after  that  thou  shalt  go  in  unto 
her,  and  be  her  husband,  and  she  shall 
be  thy  wife. 

14  And  it  shall  be,  if  thou  have  no 
delight  in  her,  then  thou  shalt  let  her 
go  whither  she  will ; but  thou  shalt 
not  sell  her  at  all  for  money,  thou 
shalt  not.  make  merchandise  of  her, 
because  thou  hast  humbled  her. 

15  ^ If  a man  have  two  wives, 
one  beloved,  and  another  hated,  and 
they  have  born  him  children,  both 
the  beloved  and  the  hated  j and  if 
the  firstborn  son  be  hers  that  was 
hated : 

16  Then  it  shall  be,  when  he  mak- 
eth  his  sons  to  inherit  that  which  he 
hath,  that  he  may  not  make  the  son 
of  the  beloved  firstborn  before  the  son 
of  the  hated,  which  is  indeed  the  first- 
born : 

17  But  he  shall  acknowledge  the 
son  of  the  hated  for  the  firstborn,  by 


giving  him  a double  portion  of  all 
4hat  he  hath  : for  he  is  the  beginning  t Heb. 
of  his  strength ; the  right  of  the  first- /lundzvith 
born  is  his. 

18  ^ If  a man  have  a stubborn  and 
rebellious  son,  which  will  not  obey 
the  voice  of  his  father,  or  the  voice  of 
his  mother,  and  that^  when  they  have 
chastened  him,  will  not  hearken  unto 
them : 

19  Then  shall  his  father  and  his 
mother  lay  hold  on  him,  and  bring 
him  out  unto  the  elders  of  his  city, 
and  unto  the  gate  of  his  place ; 

20  And  they  shall  say  unto  the  el- 
ders of  his  city.  This  our  son  is  stub- 
born and  rebellious,  he  will  not  obey 
our  voice;  he  is  a glutton,  and  a 
drunkard. 

21  And  all  the  men  of  his  city 
shall  stone  him  with  stones,  that  he 
die : so  shalt  thou  put  evil  away  from 
among  you ; and  all  Israel  shall  hear, 
and  fear. 

22  ^ And  if  a man  j^ve  commit-  ‘ 


lators  appear  to  have  been  uncertain  of  the 
exact  sense.  The  Christian  expositors  both 
ancient  and  modern  have  generally  adopted 
the  rendering  given  by  A.  V. : the  Jewish  for 
the  most  part  prefer  the  opposite  one  given  in 
the  first  place  by  the  margin.  The  question 
must  be  determined  by  our  view  of  the 
general  purpose  of  these  directions.  We  can 
scarce  doubt  that  the  shaving  the  head  (a 
customary  sign  of  purification,  Lev.  xiv.  8 ; 
Num.  viii,  7),  and  the  putting  away  “the 
garment  of  her  captivity,”  must  be  designed 
to  signify  the  translation  of  the  woman  from 
the  state  of  a heathen  and  a slave  to  that  of  a 
wife  amongst  the  covenant  people.  Con- 
sistency seems  then  to  require  that  she  should 
“ pare,”  not  “ suffer  to  grow,”  her  nails ; and 
thus,  so  far  as  possible,  lay  aside  all  belonging 
to  her  condition  as  an  alien.  This  rendering 
of  the  word  is  strongly  supported  by  z S.  xix. 
24.  The  Rabbins  consider  that  the  intention 
of  the  legislator  is  to  deform  the  woman,  and 
so  deter  the  man  from  an  alliance  which  was 
not  to  be  encouraged  though  it  might  be  under 
regulations  permitted ; an  idea  quite  against 
the  spirit  of  the  passage. 

13.  bewail  her  father  and  her  mother  a full 
montlS]  This  is  prescribed  from  motives  of 
humanity,  that  the  woman  might  have  time 
and  leisure  to  detach  her  affections  from  their 
natural  ties,  and  prepare  her  mind  for  new 
ones. 


14.  thou  shalt  not  make  merchandise  of  her~\ 
Rather,  thou  shalt  not  constrain  her: 
lit.  “treat  her  with  constraint,”  or  “treat 
her  as  a slave.”  The  same  form  occurs  again 
xxiv.  7,  and  there  only,  and  apparently  in  the 
same  sense.  Selling  the  woman  had  been 
forbidden  just  before. 

15 — 17.  On  the  rights  of  primogeniture 
see  Gen.  xxv.  Moses  did  not  originate  these 
rights,  but  recognized  them,  since  he  found 
them  pre-existing  in  the  general  social  system 
of  the  East.  Paternal  authority  could  set 
aside  these  rights  on  just  grounds  (Gen.  xxvii. 
33),  but  is  forbidden  here  to  do  so  from  mere 
partiality. 

18 — 21.  The  incorrigible  son,  whom 
milder  measures  failed  to  reclaim,  was  to  be 
denounced  by  his  parents  to  “the  elders;” 
and  stoned  at  the  gate  of  the  city  (cf.  on  the 
place  of  execution  xvii.  5).  The  Elders  acted 
as  magistrates  in  causes  of  a domestic  character 
(cf.  note  on  xvi.  18).  The  formal  accusation 
of  parents  against  a child  was  to  be  received 
without  inquiry,  as  being  its  ovCm  proof.  Thus 
the  just  authority  of  theiparents  is  recognized 
and  effectually  upheld  (cf.  Ex.  xx.  12,  xxi. 
15,  17;  Lev.  XX.  9),  but  the  extreme  and 
irresponsible 'power  of  life  and  death,  con- 
ceded by  the  law  of  Rome  and  other  heathen 
nations,  is  withheld  from  the  Israelite  father. 
In  this,  as  in  the  last  law,  provision  is  made 
against  the  abuses  of  a necessary  authority. 

3^^ 


VoL.  I. 


878 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXL 


[v.  23. 


ted  a sin  worthy  of  death,  and  he  be 
to  be  put  to  death,  and  thou  hang 
him  on  a tree ; 

23  His  body  shall  not  remain  all 
night  upon  the  tree,  but  thou  shalt  in 


any  wise  bury  him  that  day;  (for  ^he  ^ 
that  is  hanged  is  ^ accursed  of  God ; ) 
that  thy  land  be  not  defiled,  which  of  God. 
the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee^cr  an 
inheritance. 


22,  23.  Command  has  been  given  to  chapter),  then  the  body  was  not  to  “remain 
“put  away  evil”  by  the  death  of  the  offender,  all  night  upon  the  tree,”  because  that  instead 
A caution  follows  as  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  of  cleansing  the  land  would  defile  it  anew 
command.  If  the  criminal,  as  a further  pun-  (cf.  Josh.  viii.  29,  x.  26). 

ishment,  were  condemned  to  be  hanged,  which  23.  he  that  is  hanged  is  accursed  of  God\ 
would  only  be  after  death  (see  Note  at  end  of  Cf.  Gal.  iii.  13,  and  Note  at  end  of  chapter. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xxi.  4,  and  23. 


•u.  4. 

The  words  bnj  have  been  by  most 

modern  commentators  (Gesenius,  Knobel, 
Keil,  Schultz,  &c.)  and  by  some  few  Jewish 
ones  {e.g.  Maimonides,  Abarbanel)  rendered 
“a  constant,  or  perennial  stream.”  This  sense 
is  supported  by  Amos  v.  24,  where  A.  V.  ren- 
ders the  words  “ a mighty  stream;”  as  well  as 
by  the  primary  sense  of  the  word  (cf. 

jL.  xlix.  19,  1.  44);  but  the  sequel  of  the 
2*.  which  specifies  that  the  shall  be  one 
that  is  “neither  eared”  {i.e.  worked,  plough- 
ed) “nor  sown,  seems  against  it.  For  a 
perennial  stream  of  course  could  not  be  eared 
or  sown.  The  A.  V.  therefore  has  correctly 
adhered  to  the  ancient  rendering,  which  is 
that  of  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Onkelos,  Saadia,  and 
of  Wogue,  amongst  later  authorities.  The 
word  means  sometimes  a torrent,  some- 
times a gorge  or  valley.  In  Gen.  xxvi.  17, 
19,  e.g.  it  must  evidently  be  rendered  as  here 
simply  “ valley.”  The  word  |n\S  primarily 
meaning  “firm,”  “strong;”  applied  to  a 
valley  would  import  “barren”  or  “rocky:” 
cf.  Num.  xxiv.  21. 

u).  23. 

There  were  four  methods  of  execution  in 
use  amongst  the  ancient  Jews;  stoning  (Ex. 
xvii.  4;  Dent.  xiii.  10,  &c.),  burning  (Lev. 
XX.  14;  xxi.  9),  the  sword  (Ex.  xxxii.  27), 
and  strangulation.  The  latter,  though  not 
named  in  Scripture,  is  regarded  by  the  Rab- 
bins as  the  most  common,  and  the  proper 
‘one  to  be  adopted  when  no  other  is  expressly 
enjoined  by  the  law.  Suspension,  whether 
from  cross,  stake,  or  gallows,  was  not  used 
as  a mode  of  taking  life,  but  in  cases  of  pecu- 
liar atrocity  was  so;netimes  added  after  death 
as  an  enhancement  of  punishment;  and  ac- 
cording to  the  Rabbins  for  the  crimes  of 
idolatry  and  cursing  God  only  (cf.  Saalschiitz, 
‘Mos.  Recht,’  p.  461).  Pharaoh’s  chief  baker 
(Gen.  xl.  19)  was  h-anged  after  being  put  to 
death  by  the  sword;  and  similarly  Joshua 
appears  (Jos.  x.  26)  to  have  dealt  with  the 
five  kings  who  made  war  against  Gibeon  (cf. 


also  Josh.  viii.  29;  i S.  xxxi.  10^  2 S.  xxi. 
6,  9,  12).  The  command  Num.  xxv.  4,  5, 
appears  to  mean  that  the  rebels  should  be  first 
slain  and  then  impaled  or  nailed  to  crosses; 
the  word  translated  “hang”  there  (ypin) 
being  diverse  from  the  one  ('1 7^1)  in  the  pas- 
sage of  Deut.  before  us,  and  signifying  to  he 
torn  or  dislocated  (ef.  Ges.  and  Fiirst  sub  2;. 
and  note  on  Num.  l.c.). 

The  grounds  of  the  emphatic  detestation  ex- 
pressed in  the  text  against  him  that  is  hanged 
are  variously  stated;  and  will  depend  in  some 
degree  on  the  exact  rendering  of  the  words. 
For  as  Professor  Lightfoot  (‘on  Galatians,’ p. 
150)  observes,  in  an  important  note  on  this  text, 
“the  case  attached  to  nppp  may  denote  either 
the  person  who  pronounces  the  curse,  as  Judg. 
ix.  5 7,  or  the  person  against  whom  the  curse  is 
pronounced,  as  Gen.xxvii.  13 ; in  other  words, 
it  represents  either  a subjective  or  an  objective 
genitive.  As  we  assign  one  or  other  sense 
therefore  to  the  dependent  case,  we  get  two 
distinct  interpretations”  (or  rather  classes  of 
interpretation).  These  are 

(i)  “He  that  is  hanged  is  accursed  by 
God:”  a rendering  adopted  in  substance  by 
the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Syr. ; by  St  Paul,  Gal.  iii. 
13;  and,  as  might  be  expected  in  conse- 
quence, by  nearly  all  Christian  translators  and 
commentators.  The  purport  of  the  passage 
would  then  be:  Bury  him  that  is  hanged  out 
of  the  way  before  evening:  his  hanging  body 
defiles  the  land;  for  God’s  curse  rests  on  it.” 
The  curse  of  God  is  probably  regarded  as  lying 
on  the  malefactor  because  from  the  fact  of 
his  being  hanged  he  must  have  been  guilty  of 
a peculiarly  atrocious  breach  of  God’s  cove- 
nant. Such  an  oftender  could  not  remain  on 
the  face  of  the  earth  without  defiling  it  (cf. 
Lev.  xviii.  25,  28;  Num.  xxxv.  34).  There- 
fore after  the  penalty  of  his  crime  had  been 
inflicted,  and  he  had  hung  for  a time  as  a public 
example,  the  holy  land  was  to  be  at  once  and 
entirely  delivered  from  his  _ presence.  The 
notion  of  a physical  pollution  of  the  land 
from  the  unseemly  consequences  of  lengthen- 
ed exposure  on  the  gibbet  (Michaelis,  ‘Mos. 
Recht’)  seems  unsuitable. 


V.  I— 5-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXII. 


(z)  “He  that  is  hanged  is  a curse  {i.e.  an 
insult,  injury  or  mockery)  to  God.”  This 
rendering  has  been,  according  to  Professor 
Lightfoot,  ‘Galatians,’  1.  c.,  “the  popular 
Jewish  interpretation  at  all  events  from  the 
second  century  of  the  Christian  era.”  It  is  not 
however  supported  by  the  ancient  Targum  of 
Onkelos,  or  that  of  Palestine,  or  by  Saadia. 
Its  idea  is  well  explained  by  Jarchi  in  loc. 
(edit.  Breithaupt):  “Suspensio  est  vilipensio 
sive  contemptus  regis  coelestis,  quoniam  homo 
factus  est  ad  simiiitudinem  imaginis  ejus.” 
With  which  may  be  compared  the  reason 
(Deut.  XXV.  3)  assigned  for  limiting  the  num- 
ber of  stripes  to  forty.  The  explanation  of 
others  (Saalschiitz,  ‘Mos.  Recht,’  p.  461),  that 
the  continued  suspension  of  the  body  would 
be  profaneness  towards  God  because  it  would 
keep  in  sight  and  in  mind  the  sin  for  which 
the  m.alefactor  suffered,  is  unlikely;  and  not 
less  so  that  other  which  referring  to  the  ety- 
mology rather  than  the  usage  of  n*?7p  (from 
hbp  “to  be  light”),  renders  “quia  alleviatio 
Dei  suspensus;  hoc  est  quando  reus  suspen- 
susest  hoc  Deo  sufficit,  et  alleviatur  ira-ejus” 
(apud  Gerhard,  p.  1286).  Other  Jews  (Onk., 


Saad.,  &c.)  consider  “a  curse  of  God”  to  be 
equivalent  to  “because  he  cursed  God,”  that 
being  a crime  for  which  hanging  after  death 
was  especially  adjudicated.  But  this,  as  Bishop 
Patrick  (in  loci)  observes,  though  a reason  for 
hanging  the  malefactor,  is  no  reason  why  he 
should  be  taken  down  from  the  gallows. 

On  the  whole  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
former  rendering,  that  of  LXX.,  and  follow- 
ed by  St  Paul,  is  the  original  and  correct  one ; 
yet  the  other  construction,  fairly  supported 
as  it  is  by  grammar  and  analogy,  not  with- 
out some  (tlurngh  comparatively  late)  Jewish 
authority,  and  followed  also  by  a few  Chris- 
tian commentators  (Masius,  Menochius,  Gro- 
tius,  &c.),  deserves  at  least  discussion.  It  is 
however  neglected  by  the  moderns  generally 
(e.g.  Knobel,  Keil,  Schultz). 

On  the  quotation  of  this  text  by  St  Paul, 
Gal.  iii.  13,  and  his  application  of  it,  see  note 
on  that  place. 

The  supposition  of  St  Jerome,  that  this  text 
had  been  tampered  with  by  the  Jews,  seems 
grounded  only  on  the  omission  by  St  Paul 
of  the  wwds  “of  God.”  Yet  ail  MSS.  and 
LXX.  have  these  words.  See  note  on  Gal.  l.c. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

I Of  humanity  toward  brethren.  5 The  sex  is 
to  be  distinguished  by  apparel.  6 The  dam  is 
not  to  be  taken  with  her  young  ones.  8 The 
house  must  have  battlements.  9 Confusion 
is  to  be  avoided.  1 2 Fringes  upon  the  vesture. 
13  The  punishment  of  him  that  slandereth 
his  wife.  20,  22  Of  adultery,  25  of  rape,  28 
and  of  fornication.  30  Incest. 

Exod.23. ''"T^HOU  ‘"shalt  not  see  thy  bro- 
± ther’s  ox  or  his  sheep  go  astray, 
and  hide  thyself  from  them:  thou 
shalt  in  any  case  bring  them  again 
unto  thy  brother. 

2 And  if  thy  brother  he  not  nigh 
unto  thee,  or  if  thou  know  him  not, 
then  thou  shalt  bring  it  unto  thine 
own  house,  and  it  shall  be  with  thee 


until  thy  brother  seek  after  it,  and 
thou  shalt  restore  it  to  him  again. 

3 In  like  manner  shalt  thou  do 
with  his  ass;  and  so  shalt  thou  do 
with  his  raiment;  and  with  all  lost 
thing  of  thy  brother’s,  which  he  hath 
lost,  and  thou  hast  found,  shalt  thou 
do  likewise:  thou  mayest  not  hide 
thyself. 

4 ^ Thou  shalt  not  see  thy  bro- 
ther’s ass  or  his  ox  fail  down  by  the 
way,  and  hide  thyself  from  them: 
thou  shalt  surely  help  him  to  lift  them 
up  again. 

5 % The  woman  shall  not  wear 
that  which  pertaineth  unto  a man, 
neither  shall  a man  put  on  a woman’s 


Chap.  XXII.  On  the  general  character 
of  the  contents  of  this  chapter  see  on  xxi.  10. 
The  cases  stated  and  provided  for  in  ww.  i — 12 
seem  selected  by  way  of  example,  and  belong, 
according  to  our  notions,  rather  to  ethics  than 
to  law.  It  is  noteworthy  that  no  penalty  is 
annexed  to  the  breach  of  these  regulations. 
No  doubt  it  would  be  the  duty  of  the  “offi- 
cers” (xvi.  18)  and  the  elders  in  the  several 
cities  to  enforce  their  observance. 

1 — 4.  Cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  4,  5,  of  which  these 
verses  are  an  expansion. 


5.  that  wohich pertaineth  unto  a man\  i.e. 
not  only  his  dress  but  all  that  specially  pertains 
distinctively  to  his  sex;  arms,  domestic  and 
other  utensils,  &c.,  ctkcvt]  audpos  LXX.  The 
word  (cley)  is  frequently  used  in  this  compre- 
hensive sense,  for  “things”  or  “articles”  ge- 
nerally; cf.  Ex.  XXV.  39 ; Lev.  xi.  32,  xiii.  49  ; 
Is.  Ixi.  10,  See.  Colenso  is  in  error  in  stating, 
§741,  that  it  is  used  in  the  above  sense  only 
in  this  passage  and  in  Ex.  xxii.  7. 

The  design  of  this  and  the  cognate  laws 
in  niv.  9 — 1 1 is  moral.  Cf.  Seneca,  ‘ Epist.’  122 

3K2 


88o 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXII. 


[v.  6 — 19. 


garment : for  all  that  do  so  are  abomi- 
nation unto  the  Lord  thy  God. 

6 ^ If  a bird’s  nest  chance  to  be 
before  thee  in  the  way  in  any  tree, 
or  on  the  ground,  whether  they  be 
young  ones,  or  eggs,  and  the  dam  sit- 
ting upon  the  young,  or  upon  the 
eggs,  thou  shalt  not  take  the  dam 
with  the  young: 

7 But  thou  shalt  in  any  v/ise  let 
the  dam  go,  and  take  the  young  to 
thee;  that  it  may  be  well  with  thee, 
and  that  thou  mayest  prolong  thy 
days. 

8 ^ When  thou  buildest  a nev/ 
house,  then  thou  shalt  make  a battle- 
ment for  thy  roof,  that  thou  bring 
not  blood  upon  thine  house,  if  any 
man  fall  from  thence. 

9 ^ Thou  shalt  not  sow  thy  vine- 
t Heb.  yard  v/ith  divers  seeds  : lest  the  ^ fruit 
thy  seed:  of  thy  Seed  which  thou  hast  sown, 

and  the  fruit  of  thy  vineyard,  be  de- 
filed. 

10  ^ Thou  shalt  not  plow  with  an 
ox  and  an  ass  together. 

i Lev.  19.  1 1 ^ Thou  shalt  not  wear  a gar- 

ment  of  divers  sorts,  as  of  v/oollen  and 
linen  together. 

^ Thou  shalt  make  thee  ^fringes 

“Nonne  videntur  contra  naturam  vivere  qui 
commutant  cum  foeminis  vestem  ?”  And 
“Quern  proestare  potest  mulier  galeata 
pudorem 

Quas  fugit  a sexu?”  Juv.  ‘Sat.’  vi.  252. 
The  distinction  between  the  sexes  is  natural 
and  divinely  established,  and  cannot  be  neg- 
lected without  indecorum,  and  consequent 
danger  to  purity.  There  is  an  Epistle  of  St 
Ambrose  on  this  text  and  subject  (iv.Ep.  15): 
cf.  T Cor.  xi.  3 — 15.  The  supposition  of 
Maimon,,  followed  by  Spencer,  ‘De  Leg.  Heb.’ 
and  others,  that  reference  is  here  made  to 
certain  practices  in  the  idolatrous  festivals, 
is  ill  supported. 

6 — 8.  These  precepts  are  designed  to  cul- 
tivate a spirit  of  humanity.  With  ^o'v.  6 and  7 
cf.  Lev.  xxii.  28;  ch.  xxv.  4;  and  i Cor.  ix. 
9,  10.  On  7;.  6 Gerhard  appositely  quotes 
Idiocylides: 

/xjySe  TLs  opviOas  KoXtris  (ipa  rrauras  eXecrdco 
fJirjTepci  S’  eKTrpoXiTTT/?,  lu  TrdXi  rijcrSf 

j/eorrovf. 

8.  The  roofs  of  houses  in  Palestine  were 
flat  and  used  for  various  domestic  purposes; 
for  drying  linen  or  flax.  Josh.  ii.  6;  for  walk- 


upon  the  four  ^quarters  of  thy  vesture,  ^ 

1 '11  Ilf-  ’ tumgs. 

wherewith  thou  coverest  thyself. 

13  If  any  man  take  a wife,  and 
go  in  unto  her,  and  hate  her, 

14.  And  give  occasions  of  speech 
against  her,  and  bring  up  an  evil 
name  upon  her,  and  say,  I took  this 
woman,  and  when  I came  to  her,  I 
found  her  not  a maid  : 

15  Then  shall  the  father  of  the 
damsel,  and  her  mother,  take  and 
bring  forth  the  tokens  of  the  damsel’s 
virginity  unto  the  elders  of  the  city  in 
the  gate  : 

16  And  the  damsel’s  father  shall  say 
unto  the  elders,  I gave  my  daughter 
unto  this  man  to  wife,  and  he  hateth 
her ; 

17  And,  lo,  he  hath  given  occa- 
sions of  speech  against  /;/r,  saying, 

I found  not  thy  daughter  a maid ; 
and  yet  these  are  the  tokens  of  my 
daughter’s  virginity.  And  they  shall 
spread  the  cloth  before  the  elders  of 
the  city. 

18  And  the  elders  of  that  city  shall 
take  that  man  and  chastise  him  ; 

19  And  they  shall  amerce  him  in 
an  hundred  shekels  of  silver,  and  give 
them  unto  the  father  of  the  damsel, 

ing  upon  to  take  the  air,  2 Sam.  xi.  2 ; for 
prayer.  Acts  x.  9 &c.  A battlement  then 
was  almost  a necessary  protection.  It  was 
to  be,  according  to  the  Rabbins,  at  least  two 
cubits  high. 

9 — 11.  On  these  prohibitions  cf.  Lev. 
xix.  19.  They  seem  all  founded  on  the 
aversion  to  mixtures  which  characterizes 
several  parts  of  the  law  of  Moses.  The  one 
of  7;.  10  may  be  dictated  also  by  humanity. 

The  ox  and  the  ass  being  of  such  different 
size  and  strength,  it  would  be  cruel  to  the 
latter  to  yoke  them  together.  These  two 
animals  are  named  as  being  those  ordinarily 
employed  in  agriculture  ; cf.  Is.  xxxii.  20. 

12.  Cf.  Num.  XV.  38  and  note.  Several 
commentators  however  understand  this 
to  refer  not  to  wearing  apparel  but  to  the 
coverlet  of  the  bed,  and  regard  the  fringes 
as  strings  or  ribbons  intended  for  sake  of 
decency  to  tie  the  coverlet  to  the  bed  posts  or 
corners  of  the  bed.  So  Houbigant,  Horsley, 
Geddes,  Schultz,  &c. 

13 — 29.  Certain  laws  respecting  marriage. 

18.  chastise  him]  i.e.  according  to  the 
Rabbins  with  stripes,  not  to  exceed  forty. 


V.  20-1.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXII.  XXIII. 


88 1 


because  he  hath  brought  up  an*  evil 
name  upon  a virgin  of  Israel : and  she 
shall  be  his  wife  ; he  may  not  put  her 
away  all  his  days. 

20  But  if  this  thing  be  true,  and 
the  tokens  of  virginity  be  not  found 
for  the  damsel : 

21  Then  they  shall  bring  out  the 
damsel  to  the  door  of  her  father’s 
house,  and  the  men  of  her  city  shall 
stone  her  with  stones  that  she  die  : 
because  she  hath  wrought  folly  in  Is- 
rael, to  play  the  whore  in  her  father’s 
house : so  shalt  thou  put  evil  away 
from  among  you. 

'?Lev.  ;jo.  22  ^ '^If  a man  be  found  lying 
with  a woman  married  to  an  hus- 
band, then  they  shall  both  of  them 
die,  both  the  man  that  lay  with  the 
woman,  and  the  woman : so  shalt  thou 
put  away  evil  from  Israel. 

23  ^ If  a damsel  that  is  a virgin 
be  betrothed  unto  an  husband,  and 
a man  find  her  in  the  city,  and  lie 

, with  her ; 

24  Then  ye  shall  bring  them  both 
out  unto  the  gate  of  that  city,  and 
ye  shall  stone  them  with  stones  that 
they  die ; the  damsel,  because  she 
cried  not,  being  in  the  city  ; and  the 
man,  because  he  hath  humbled  his 
neighbour’s  wife  : so  thou  shalt  put 
away  evil  from  among  you. 

25  ^ But  if  a man  find  a betroth- 
ed damsel  in  the  field,,  and  the  man 


"force  her,  and  lie  with  her:  then  "S'”’. 

’ll  • 1 1 takestyoii^ 

the  man  only  that  lay  with  her  shall  hold  of  her, 
die  : 

26  But  unto  the  damsel  thou  shalt 
do  nothing ; there  is  in  the  damsel 
no  sin  worthy  of  death  : for  as  when 
a man  riseth  against  his  neighbour, 
and  slayeth  him,  even  so  is  this 
matter  : 

27  For  he  found  her  in  the  field, 
and  the  betrothed  damsel  cried,  and 
there  was  none  to  save  her. 

28  H ^If  a man  find  a damsel  Exod.  22. 

is  a virgin,  which  is  not  betrothed, 

and  lay  hold  on  her,  and  lie  with  her, 
and  they  be  found  ; 

29  Then  the  man  that  lay  with 
her  shall  give  unto  the  damsel’s  father 
fifty  shekels  of  silver,  and  she  shall 
be  his  wife ; because  he  hath  humbled 
her,  he  may  not  put  her  away  all  his 
days. 

30  ^ A man  shall  not  take  his 18. 
father’s  wife,  nor  discover  his  father’s 

skirt. 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 

I Who  may  or  may  not  enter  into  the  congrega- 
tion. 9 Uncleanness  to  be  avoided  in  the  \ 

host.  15  Of  the  fugitive  servant.  17  Of 
filthiness.  i8  Of  abominable  sacrihees.  19 
Ofnsnry.  Ofvoias.  24  Of  trespasses. 

He  that  is  wounded  in  the  stones, 
or  hath  his  privy  member  cut 
off,  shall  not  enter  into  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  Lord. 


19.  an  hundred  shekels'\  The  fine  was  to  be 
paid  to  the  father,  because  the  slander  was 
against  him  principally  as  the  head  of  the 
wife’s  family.  If  the  damsel  were  an  orphan 
the  fine,  according  to  the  Rabbins,  reverted  to 
herself.  The  false  charge  might  have  arisen 
from  a wanton  desire  to  contract  another 
marriage,  and  would  thus  be  punished  by  the 
withdrawal  of  the  right  of  divorce  (cf.  xxiv. 
I,  a);  or  from  an  avaricious  desire  to  appro- 
priate the  damsel’s  dowry,  which  was  rebuked 
by  the  fine  of  a hundred  shekels.  The  amount 
was  twice  as  much  as  had  to  be  paid  by  a 
seducer,  cf.  -i;.  29.  False  witness  in  other  cases 
was  punished  on  the  principle  of  the  “lex 
talionis”  (cf.  xix.  16  sqq.).  The  fact  that 
the  penalties  attached  to  bearing  false  witness 
against  a wife  are  fixed  and  comparatively 
light  indicates,  as  St  Augustine  observes 
(‘ Qusstiones  in  Dent.’  xxxiii.),  the  low 


estimation  and  position  of  the  woman  under 
the  law. 

29.  The  case  of  rape  here  mentioned  is 
not  identical  with  that  of  seduction  provided 
for  Ex.  XX ii,  16,  17.  The  ravisher  has  neces- 
sarily to  marry  his  victim  and  to  pay  a fine. 

30.  Cf.  xxvii.  20;  Lev.  xviii.  8 and  xx. 
II ; I Cor.  V.  I and  1.3. 

fathers  skirf\  Cf.  Ruth  iii.  9 ; Ezek.  xvi.  8. 


Chap.  XXIII.  From  the  domestic  rela- 
tions the  lawgiver  now  passes  on  to  enjoin  ! 

sanctity  and  purity  in  the  congregation  of  * 
Israel  as  a whole,  and  to  lay  down  certain 
rights  and  duties  of  citizenship. 

1 — 8.  Exclusion  of  five  classes  of  persons 
from  the  congregation  of  the  Lord. 

1.  On  the  two  classes  named  here  cf.  Lev. 
xxi.  17—24.  The  exclusion  is  however  here 


882 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXIIL 


[v.  2 8. 


° Neh.  13. 
1. 


^ Numb. 
22.  5,  6. 


2 A bastard  shall  not  enter  into 
the  congregation  of  the  Lord  ; even 
to  his  tenth  generation  shall  he  not 
enter  into  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord. 

3 "An  Ammonite  or  Moabite  shall 
not  enter  into  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord  ; even  to  their  tenth  generation 
shall  they  not  enter  into  the  congre- 
gation of  the  Lord  for  ever  : 

4 Because  they  met  you  not  with 
bread  and  with  water  in  the  way, 
when  ye  came  forth  out  of  Egypt ; 
and  ^ because  they  hired  against  thee 
Balaam  the  son  of  Beor  of  Pethor  of 
Mesopotamia,  to  curse  thee. 


5 Nevertheless  the  Lord  thy  God 
would  not  hearken  unto  Balaam  ; but 
the  Lord  thy  God  turned  the  curse 
into  a blessing  unto  thee,  because  the 
Lord  thy  God  loved  thee. 

6 Thou  shalt  not  seek  their  peace 
nor  their  ^ prosperity  all  thy  days  for 
ever. 

7 ^ Thou  shalt  not  abhor  an  E- 
domite  ; for  he  is  thy  brother  : thou 
shalt  not  abhor  an  Egyptian  ; because 
thou  wast  a. stranger  in  his  land. 

8 The  children  that  are  begotten 
of  them  shall  enter  into  the  congre- 
gation of  the  Lord  in  their  third 
generation. 


carried,  in  the  case  of  persons  mutilated  or 
maimed  as  described  in  the  text,  further  than 
in  Lev.  Such  persons  are  not  to  be  admitted 
at  all  into  the  commonwealth  of  Israel.  Cf. 
Lev.  xxii.  24.  Amongst  the  Gentiles  eu- 
nuchs held  offices  of  the  greatest  trust.  Under 
the  theocracy,  as  exhibiting  in  their  persons 
a mutilation  of  that  human  nature  which  was 
made  in  God’s  image,  they  were  rejected 
from  the  covenant  entirely.  They  could  how- 
ever be  proselytes  (cf.  Acts  viii.  27).  The 
Old  Test,  itself  foretells  (Is.  Ivi.  3 — 5)  the 
removal  of  this  ban  when  under  the  kingdom 
of  Messiah  the  outward  and  emblematic  per- 
fection and  sanctity  of  Israel  should  be  ful- 
filled in  their  inner  meaning  by  the  covenant- 
ed presence  and  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
the  Church. 

2.  A bastard]  On  this  word  see  Note  at 
end  of  chapter. 

even  to  his  tenth  generatmi]  z.e.,  see  next 
V.  and  Neh.  xiii.  i,  for  ever.  Ten  is  the 
number  of  perfection  and  completeness. 

3—  5.  Fourthly  and  fifthly  the  Ammonite 
and  the  Moabite  are  for  ever  disqualified  from 
admission  to  Israel.  In  this  connection  it 
seems  not  unlikely  that  there  is  a tacit  refer- 
ence to  the  incestuous  origin  of  the  forefathers 
of  these  nations,  cf.  Gen.  xix.  30 — 38, 
though  other  reasons  for  the  exclusion  are 
given  vv.  4 and  5.  These  reasons  would  be 
fresh  in  the  minds  of  those  to  whom  Moses 
was  speaking,  and  would  naturally  occur  to 
him  as  instances  of  that  resistance  to  the  Theo- 
cracy which  was  to  be  punished  by  perpetual 
rejection  from  its  blessings.  Cf.  Neh.  xiii.  i, 
2;  Lam.  I.  10.  Saalschiitz  (p.  691)  remarks 
that  this  law  forbids  only  the  naturalization 
of  those  against  whom  it  is  directed.  It  docs 
not  forbid  their  dwelling  in  the  land;  and 
seems  to  refer  rather  to  the  nations  than  to  in- 
dividuals. It  was  not  understood  at  any  rate  to 
interdict  marriage  with  a Moabitess;  cf.  Ruth 


i.  4,  iv.  13.  Ruth  however  and  her  sister  were 
doubtless  proselytes.  Such  a law  would  cer- 
tainly never  have  suggested  itself  to  the  mind 
of  a writer  after  the  times  of  David,  whose 
great-grandmother  was  a Moabitess. 

4.  Because  they  met  you  not  vuith  bread] 
Cf.  ii.  29.  This  offence  was  common  to  the 
two;  the  next  one,  the  hiring  of  Balaam, 
seems,  from  Num.  xxii.  5 sqq.,  to  have  been 
the  act  of  the  king  of  Moab  only.  But  the 
Moabites  and  the  Ammonites  are  to  be  re- 
garded as  clans  of  the  same  stock  rather  than 
as  two  independent  nations  (see  Smith’s  ‘ Diet, 
of  the  Bible,’  s.  v.  Ammon),  and  as  acting 
together  in  this  as  they  did  in  other  matters. 
Cf.  2 Chron.  xx.  i. 

6.  dhoti  shalt  not  seek  their  peace  nor  their 
prosperity]  Literally,  “nor  their  good:”  i.e. 
thou  shalt  not  invite  them  to  be  on  terms  of 
amity  with  thee  (cf.  xx.  10  sqq.),  nor  make 
their  welfare  thy. care : cf.  Ezraix.  12.  There 
is  here  no  injunction  to  hatred  or  retaliation  : 
cf.  on  the  contrary  ii.  9 and  19.  Later  history 
contains  frequent  record  of  hostility  between 
Israel  and  the  Ammonites  (cf.  Judg.  xi. ; i 
S.  xi. ; 2 S.  X.  and  xii.  26 — 31;  2 Chron. 
xx.  &c.)  ; and  the  Moabites  (Judg.  iii.  12  sqq. ; 
I S.  xiv.  47;  2 S.  viii.  2;  2 Chron.  xx.  &c.). 

7,  8.  The  Edomite,  as  descended  from  Esau 
a twin  brother  of  Jacob,  and  the  Egyptian, 
as  of  that  nation  which  had  for  long  shewn 
hospitality  to  Joseph  and  his  brethren,  were 
not*to  be  objects  of  abhorrence.  The  Edom- 
ites had  indeed  shewn  themselves  unfriendly 
to  Israel  in  refusing  a passage  through  their 
land  (cf.  Num.  xx.  18  sqq.),  but  had  not  ac- 
tively resisted  them,  and  the  tie  of  kindred 
was  therefore  to  be  respected  (cf.  ii.  8).  The 
oppression  of  the  Egyptians  was  psrhaps  re- 
garded as  the  act  of  the  Pharaohs  rather  than 
the  will  of  the  people  (Schultz  aptly  refers 
to  Ex.  xi.  2,  3);  and  at  any  rate  was  not  to 
cancel  the  memory  of  preceding  hospitality. 


V.  9—23-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXIII. 


883 


9 ^ When  the  host  goeth  forth 
against  thine  enemies,  then  keep  thee 
from  every  wicked  thing. 

10  ^ If  there  be  among  you  any 
man,  that  is  not  clean  by  reason  of 
uncleanness  that  chanceth  him  by 
night,  then  shall  he  go  abroad  out  of 
the  camp,  he  shall  not  come  within 
the  camp  : 

11  But  it  shall  be,  when  evening 

t Heb.  ^ cometh  on,  he  shall  wash  himself 

toZa>d.  with  water : and  v/hen  the  sun  is 

down,  he  shall  come  into  the  camp 
again. 

12  ^ Thou  shalt  have  a place  also 
without  the  camp,  whither  thou  shalt 
go  forth  abroad  : 

13  And  thou  shalt  have  a paddle 
upon  thy  weapon ; and  it  shall  be, 

t Heb.  when  thou  ^ wilt  ease  thyself  abroad, 
thou  shalt  dig  therewith,  and  shalt 
turn  back  and  cover  that  which  com- 
eth from  thee  : 

14  For  the  Lord  thy  God  walk- 
eth  in  the  midst  of  thy  camp,  to 
deliver  thee,  and  to  give  up  thine 
enemies  before  thee  ; therefore  shall 
thy  camp  be  holy  : that  he  see  no 

t Heb.  t unclean  thing  in  thee,  and  turn  away 

nakedness  c ^ ^ ^ 

c/any  from  thec. 

i'W.  15  ^ Thou  shalt  not  deliver  unto 
his  master  the  servant  which  is  escaped 
from  his  master  unto  thee  : 


16  He  shall  dwell  with  thee,  even 
among  you,  in  that  place  which  he 
shall  choose  in  one  of  thy  gates, 
where  it  ^ liketh  him  best : thou  shalt  t Heb. 

, . IS  good  for 

not  oppress  him.  him. 

17  HI  There  shall  be  no  ” whore " 0/> 

r ' -i  11  r T 1 sodomitess. 

or  the  daughters  or  Israel,  nor  a 
sodomite  of  the  sons  of  Israel. 

18  Thou  shalt  not  bring  the*  hire 
of  a whore,  or  the  price  of  a dog, 
into  the  house  of  the  Lord  thy  God 
for  any  vow : for  even  both  these 
are  abomination  unto  the  Lord  thy 
God. 

19  HI  “^Thou  shalt  not  lend  upon^  ^^d.  22. 
usury  to  thy  brother;  usury  of  money.  Lev. 25.36. 
usury  of  victuals,  usury  of  any  thing 

that  is  lent  upon  usury : 

20  Unto  a stranger  thou  mayest 
lend  upon  usury  ; but  unto  thy  bro- 
ther thou  shalt  not  lend  upon  usury : 
that  the  Lord  thy  God  may  bless 
thee  in  all  that  thou  settest  thine 
hand  to  in  the  land  whither  thou 
goest  to  possess  it. 

21  HI  ^When  thou  shalt  vow  a vow  <^Eccies.5. 
unto  the  Lord  thy  God,  thou  shalt 

not  slack  to  pay  it : for  the  Lord  thy 
God  will  surely  require  it  of  thee  ; 
and  it  would  be  sin  in  thee. 

22  But  if  thou  shalt  forbear  to  vow, 
it  shall  be  no  sin  in  thee. 

23  That  which  is  gone  out  of  thy 


8.  in  their  third  generatioid]  i.e.  the  great- 
grandchildren of  the  Edomite  or  Egyptian 
alien  : cf.  Ex.  xx.  5. 

9 — 14.  The  sanctity  of  the  camp  is  to  be 
preserved  even  in  time  of  war.  Amongst 
others  the  ordinary  rules  of  morality  and 
religion  were  then  relaxed : 

“Nulla  fides  pietasque  viris  qui  castra  se- 
quuntur.”  Lucan,  x.  407. 

but  Israel  bn  the  contrary,  as  needing  at  such 
a time  more  especially  the  divine  help,  was 
more  especially  to  shun  “ every  wicked  thing,” 
*1^.  9.  The  special  significance  of  this  expres- 
sion is  shewn  in  the  following.  The  whole 
passage  obviously  refers  not  to  the  encamp- 
ments of  the  nation  whilst  passing  from  Egypt 
through  the  wilderness,  but  to  future  war- 
like expeditions  sent  out  from  Canaan. 

13.  upon  thy  nveapon~\  The  word  rendered 
“weapon”  occurs  in  this  form  only  in  this 
passage.  The  LXX.  (eVt  ^oovrjs)  and  the 


Vulg.  would  seem  to  have  followed  another 
reading.  The  words  should  rather  be  rendered 
“ besides  thy  weapon.” 

15,  16.  The  case  in  question  is  that  of  a 
slave  who  fled  from  a heathen  master  to  the 
holy  land.  It  is  of  course  assumed  that  the 
refugee  was  not  flying  from  justice,  but  only 
from  the  tyranny  of  his  lord.  Our  English 
law  is  in  this  point  identical  with  the  Mosaic. 

17.  Cf.  Lev.  xix.  29.  Prostitution  was  a 
common  part  of  religious  observances  amongst 
idolatrous  nations,  especially  in  the  worship 
of  Ashtoreth  or  Astarte:  cf.  Herod,  i.  199. 

18.  Another  Gentile  practice,  connected 
with  the  one  alluded  to  in  the  preceding  verse, 
is  here  forbidden.  The  word  dog  is  figura- 
tive (cf.  Rev.  xxii.  15),  and  equivalent  to  the 
“sodomite”  of  the  v.  preceding.  Cf.  Micah  i. 
7 ; Baruch  vi.  43. 

19.  20.  Cf.  Ex.  xxii.  25  sqq. ; Lev.  xxv. 
36,  37- 


884 


DEUTERONOMY. 

lips  thou  shalt  keep  and  perform  ; 
even  a freewill  offering,  according  as 
thou  hast  vowed  unto  the  Lord  thy 
God,  which  thou  hast  promised  with 
thy  mouth. 

24  ^ When  thou  comest  into  thy 
neighbour’s  vineyard,  then  thou  mayest 
eat  grapes  thy  fill  at  thine  own  plea- 


XX 1 11.  XXIV.  [v.  24-5. 

sure  ; but  thou  shalt  not  put  any  in 
thy  vessel. 

25  When  thou  comest  into  the 
standing  corn  of  thy  neighbour,  ^then  12. 
thou  mayest  pluck  the  ears  with  thine  Mark 2. 23. 
hand  ; but  thou  shalt  not  move  a 
sickle  unto  thy  neighbour’s  standing 
corn. 


21—23.  Cf.  Ex.xxii.  29;  Num.  xxx.  2;  24,  25.  Cf.  St  Matt.  xii.  i;  St  Luke  vi. . 

Eccles.  V.  4,  5;  and  the  general  laws  of  i.  The  commands  of  Deut.  xxiv.  19,  20  are 
vows  in  Lev.  xxvii.  of  like  spirit. 


NOTE  on  Chap,  xxiii.  2. 


The  Hebr.  word  which  only  oc- 

curs again  Zech.  ix.  6,  is  of  uncertain  root 
and  sense.  See  Gesen.  s.  v.  The  LXX.  ren- 
ders Ik  TTopvrjs,  Vulg.  de  scorto  natiis^  and  so 
Saad.,  Syr.,  &c.  Yet  it  seems  unlikely,  since 
concubinage  was  tolerated  and  seduction  but 
lightly  punished  under  the  law,  that  bastards 
in  the  widest  sense  of  the  term  could  have 
been  excluded  from  the  congregation.  The 
modern  Jews  in  fact  do  not  so  exclude  them. 


The  Rabbins  therefore  are  probably  right 
when  they  interpret  the  word  as  denoting 
only  those  born  of  incest  or  adultery.  This 
sense,  adopted  by  Keil,  Wogue,  and  appa- 
rently by  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Wisdom 
hi.  16,  suits  the  context,  and  the  probably 

true  derivation  from  “ITD,  Arab,  ‘‘to 

be  foul”  or  “corrupt.”  Such  persons  spring 
from  a connection  which  is  against  the  order 
of  nature  and  God. 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

1 Of  divorce.  5 A new  married  man  goeth  not 
to  war.  6,  10  Of  pledges.  7 Of  manstealers. 
8 Of  leprosy.  14  The  hire  is  to  be  given. 

1 6 Of justice,  Of  charity. 

« Matt.  s.  TT  then  a "man  hath  taken  a 
r’iq.  7-  VV  wife,  and  married  her,  and  it 

Mark  10. 4.  p^gg  find  no  favour 

in  his  eyes,  because  he  hath  found 
f Heb.  T some  uncleanness  in  her  : then  let 
TiakldVL.  him  write  her  a bill  of  ^ divorcement, 
\'!u1ingoff.  hand,  and  send  her 

out  of  his  house. 

2  And  when  she  is  departed  out  of 
his  house,  she  may  go  and  be  another 
man’s  wife. 


Chap.  XXIV.  In  this  and  the  next  ch. 
certain  particular  rights  and  duties,  domestic, 
social,  and  civil,  are  treated  of.  The  cases 
brought  forward  have  often  no  definite  con- 
nexion, and  seem  selected  in  order  to  illus- 
trate the  application  of  the  great  principles  of 
the  law  in  certain  important  events  and  cir- 
cumstances. 

1 — 5.  The  relations  of  man  and  wife. 

1 — 4.  Of  divorce.  On  these  verses  and 
on  the  subject  to  which  they  relate,  see  note 
at  end  of  ciiapt.er;  and  cf.  jer.  iii.  i ; St  Matt. 


3 And  f the  latter  husband  hate 
her,  and  write  her  a bill  of  divorce- 
ment, and  giveth  it  in  her  hand,  and 
sendeth  her  out  of  his  house  ; or  if 
the  latter  husband  die,  which  took  her 
to  be  his  wife  ; 

4 Her  former  husband,  which  sent 
her  away,  may  not  take  her  again 
to  be  his  wife,  after  that  she  is  de- 
filed ; for  that  is  abomination  before 
the  Lord  : and  thou  shalt  not  cause 
the  land  to  sin,  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  giveth  thee  for  an  inheritance. 

c ^ When  a man  hath  taken  a + ^eb. 

D ^ 7iot  any 

new  wife,  he  shall  not  go  out  to  war,  thingshaii 
^neither  shall  he  be  charged  with  anyS/'-^''"' 


V.  31,  32  and  xix.  3 — 9.  The  colon  in  mid- 
dle of  ‘v.  I and  the  full  stops  placed  at  the 
end  of  vno.  i and  2 should  be  removed,  and 
the  four  verses,  which  contain  only  one  sen- 
tence, rendered  thus : If  a man  hatli  taken 
a wife  &c.,  and  given  her  a hill  of  di- 
vorcement; and  (2;.  2)  if  she  has  de- 
parted out  of  his  house  and  become 
another  man’s  wife;  and  {y.  3)  if  the 
latter  husband  hate  her,  then  {y.  4) 
her  former  husband,  &c. 

5.  Cf.  XX.  7.  There  however  the  be- 


V.  6— 1 8.] 


885 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXIV. 


business : but  he  shall  be  free  at  home 
one  year,  and  shall  cheer  up  his  wife 
which  he  hath  taken. 

6 ^ No  man  shall  take  the  nether 
or  the  upper  millstone  to  pledge  : for 
he  taketh  a man  s life  to  pledge. 

7 ^ If  a man  be  found  stealing 
any  of  his  brethren  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  maketh  merchandise  of 
him,  or  selleth  him  ; then  that  thief 
shall  die ; and  thou  shalt  put  evil  away 
from  among  you. 

c Lev.  13.  8 ^ Take  heed  in  ‘^the  plague  of 

leprosy,  that  thou  observe  diligently, 
and  do  according  to  all  that  the 
priests  the  Levites  shall  teach  you : 
as  I commanded  them,  so  ye  shall  ob- 
serve to  do. 

9 Remember  what  the  Lord  thy 
^i^Numb.  God  did  “^unto  Miriam  by  tl)e  way, 
after  that  ye  were  come  forth  out  of 
Egypt. 

tHeb.  10  When  thou  dost  Mend  thy 
loanqf  brother  any  thing,  thou  shalt  not  go 
into  his  house  to  fetch  his  pledge. 

. 1 1 Thou  shalt  stand  abroad,  and 

the  man  to  whom  thou  dost  lend 
shall  bring  out  the  pledge  abroad  unto 
thee. 


12  And  if  the  man  he  poor,  thou 
shalt  not  sleep  with  his  pledge  : 

13  In  any  case  thou  shalt  deliver 
him  the  pledge  again  when  the  sun 
goeth  down,  that  he  may  sleep  in  his 
own  raiment,  and  bless  thee  : and  it 
shall  be  righteousness  unto  thee  be- 
fore the  Lord  thy  God. 

14  ^ Thou  shalt  not  oppress  an 
hired  servant  that  is  poor  and  needy, 
whether  he  be  of  thy  brethren,  or  of 
thy  strangers  that  are  in  thy  land 
within  thy  gates  : 

15  At  his  day  ^thou  shalt  give  him  'Lev.  19. 
his  hire,  neither  shall  the  sun  go  down  Tob.  4. 14. 
upon  it ; for  he  is  poor,  and  ^ setteth 

his  heart  upon  it : lest  he  cry  against  his  ioui 
thee  unto  the  Lord,  and  it  be  sin 
unto  thee. 

16  The  -^fathers  shall  not  be  put -^2  Kin.  14. 
to  death  for  the  children,  neither  shall  2 Chron. 
the  children  be  put  to  death  for  the  jer.'^3i.  29, 
fathers  : every  man  shall  be  put  to 

death  for  his  own  sin.  20. 

17  ^ Thou  shalt  not  pervert  the 
judgment  of  the  stranger,  nor  of  the 
fatherless ; nor  take  a widow’s  rai- 
ment to  pledge  : 

18  But  thou  shalt  remember  that 


trothed  man  is  spoken  of;  here  the  newly 
married.  The  command  here  given  was  de- 
signed to  endear  the  marriage  tie,  as  the  one 
last  preceding  was  to  prevent  a frivolous  rup- 
ture of  it. 

6.  A precept  of  like  tenor  with  that  in 
Ex.  xxii.  25,  26. 

7.  Cf.  Ex.  xxi.  16. 

maketh  merchandise  of  him\  Rather,  con- 
strswin  him,  i.e,  treat  him  as  a slave.  See 
on  xxi.  14. 

8.  9.  On  the  laws  relating  to  leprosy  see 
Lev.  xiii.  and  xiv.  On  Miriam’s  rebellion  see 
Num.  xii,  10  sqq.  The  leprosy  was  “the 
symbol  of  sin,  most  often  the  theocratic 
punishment,  the  penalty  for  sins  committed 
against  the  theocracy,  as  in  the  cases  of  Miri- 
am, of  Gehazi,  of  Uzziah”  (Abp.  Trench  ‘On 
the  Miracles,’  p.  215).  The  allusion  to  Mi- 
riam, who  disobeyed  the  ordinances  of  God 
and  was  punished  with  leprosy  for  her  rebel- 
lion, serves  to  point  the  injunction  of  2;.  8. 

10 — 15.  Warnings  against  oppression  of 
the  poor. 

10 — 13.  Cf.  Ex.  xxii.  25 — 27.  The  cre- 
ditor is  forbidden  to  enter  his  debtor’s  dwel- 
ling, and  to  seize  as  security  what  he  might 


think  sufficient.  He  is  to  stand  without,  and 
leave  it  to  the  debtor  to  bring  forth  that 
which  he  could  best  spare.  No  doubt  the 
creditor  would  have  the  right  to  judge  whe- 
ther the  pledge  offered  were  adequate  or  not. 
Vn).  12,  13  assume,  what  would  be  constantly 
the  case  in  Palestine,  that  the  poor  debtor 
would  have  nothing  to  offer  for  pledge  except 
his  wearing  apparel. 

13.  it  shall  be  righteousness  unto  thee'\  Cf. 
vi.  25;  Prov.  xix.  17;  Dan.  iv.  27. 

14,  15.  Repeated  and  enlarged  from  Lev. 
xix.  13.  Cf.  XV.  9 ; St  James  v.  4. 

16.  A caution  addressed  to  earthly  judges. 
God,  by  right  of  his  Sovereignty  over  all  man- 
kind, “jure  dominii  non  poenas”  (Grotius), 
threatens  to  visit  the  sins  of  the  fathers  upon 
the  children  (cf.  on  Ex,  xx.  5) ; but  in  the  dis- 
pensation of  earthly  justice  the  maxim  must 
hold  “poena  caput  sequitur.”  Amongst  other 
Oriental  nations  the  family  of  a criminal  was 
commonly  involved  in  his  punishment  (cf. 
Esth.  ix.  13,  14:  Herod,  iii.  19).  In  Israel  it 
was  not  to  be  so ; cf.  2 K.  xiv.  6 ; 2 
.Chron.  xxv.  4.  See  also  Jer.  xxxi.  29,  30; 
Ezek.  xviii.  20  and  notes. 

17.  Cf.  Ex.  xxii.  21,  22,  xxiii.  9. 


886 


[v.  19 22. 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXIV. 


thou  wast  a bondman  in  Egypt,  and 
the  Lord  thy  God  redeemed  thee 
thence  : therefore  I command  thee  to 
do  this  thing. 

^ Lev.  19.  19  ^ ^ When  thou  cuttest  down 

& 2^.  22.  thine  harvest  in  thy  held,  and  hast 
forTOt  a sheaf  in  the  held,  thou  shalt 
not  go  again  to  fetch  it : it  shall  be 
for  the  stranger,  for  the  fatherless, 
and  for  the  widow : that  the  Lord 
thy  God  may  bless  thee  in  all  the 
work  of  thine  hands. 

20  When  thou  beatest  thine  olive 


tree,  'thou  shalt  not  go  over  the 
boughs  again  : it  shall  be  for  the  notbmigh 
stranger,  for  the  fatherless,  and  for  \hee. 
the  widow. 

21  When  thou  gatherest  the  grapes 
of  thy  vineyard,  thou  shalt  not  glean 
it  ^afterward:  it  shall  be  for 
stranger,  for  the  fatherless,  and  for 
the  widow. 

22  And  thou  shalt  remember  that 
thou  wast  a bondman  in  the  land  of 
Egypt : therefore  I command  thee  to 
do  this  thing. 


18.  Cf.  Lev.  xix.  33,  34. 

19 — 22.  Repeated  in  substance  from 


Lev.  xix.  9 sq.  and  xxih.  22.  The  motive 
assigned  u.  22  is  the  same  as  in  n).  18  and 
xvi.  12. 


NOTE  on  Chap.  xxiv.  i — 4. 


The  A.  V.  is  undoubtedly  wrong  in  plac- 
ing a full  stop  at  the  end  of  w.  i and  2. 
The  four  ‘v‘v.  form  only  one  sentence,  the 
first  three  being  the  protasis,  &c.,  2;.  4 the 
apodosis  as  is  exhibited  in  the  foot-note.  Thus 
v.  4 lays  down  the  law  in  the  supposed  case. 
So  the  LXX.  and  the  large  majority  of  com- 
mentators. It  is  thus  evident  that  Moses  nei- 
ther institutes  nor  enjoins  divorce.  The  exact 
spirit  of  the  passage  is  given  in  our  Lord’s  words 
to  the  Jews,  St  Matt.  xix.  8 ; “ Moses  because 
of  the  hardness  of  your  hearts  suffered  you 
to  put  away  your  wives.”  Not  only  does  the 
original  institution  of  marriage  as  recorded 
by  Moses,  Gen.  ii.  24,  set  forth  the  per- 
petuity of  the  bond,  but  the  ‘vv.  before  us 
plainly  intimate  that  divorce,  whilst  tolerated 
for  the  time,  contravenes  the  order  of  nature 
and  of  God.  The  divorced  woman  who 
marries  again  is  “defiled,”  -v.  4,  and  is  grouped 
in  this  particular  with  the  adulteress ; cf.  Lev. 
xviii.  20.  Our  Lord  then  was  speaking  ac- 
cording to  the  spirit  of  the  law  of  Moses 
when  He  declared,  St  Matt.  xix.  9,  “Whoso 
marrieth  her  that  is  put  away  doth  commit 
adultery.”  He  was  speaking  too  not  less  ac- 
cording to  the  mind  of  the  Prophets,  cf.  Mai. 
ii.  14 — 16.  But  Moses  could  not  absolutely 
put  an  end  to  a practice  which  was  traditional, 
and  common  to  the  Jews  with  other  Oriental 
nations.  His  aim  is  therefore  to  regulate  and 
thus  to  mitigate  an  evil  which  he  could  not 
extirpate.  He  enacts  therefore  in  the  passage 
before  us  (r)  that  divorce  must  take  place 
not  as  heretofore,  at  the  arbitrary  will  and 
pleasure  of  the  husband,  and  by  mere  word 
{)f  mouth,  but  upon  reason  given  and  by 
means  of  a written  and  formal  document; 
(2)  that  the  divorced  wife  who  had  married 
a second  time  shall  never  return  to  her  first 


husband.  The  tendency  of  these  laws  is 
obvious.  The  former  wouM  enforce  the 
preparation  of  a regular  and  legal  instrument, 
which,  from  the  nature  of  the  cash,  would 
require  time  and  the  intervention  of  public 
authority  to  attest  its  sufficiency  and  its  due 
execution.  Thus  a certain  delay  would  ne- 
cessarily take  place,  giving  opportunity  far 
reconsideration;  and  the  interposition  of  the 
magistrates  would  prevent  many  frivolous 
complaints  from  being  treated  as  grounds  for 
divorce.  The  other  law  would  admonish  the 
parties  that  the  divorce  once  consummated 
would  be  irreparable,  and  ought  not  therefore 
to  be  brought  about  rashly  and  lightly.  It 
must  be  added  too  tliat  Moses  withholds  the 
right  of  divorce  altogether  v/here  a man 
slanders  his  wife  as  unchaste  (xxii.  13 — 19), 
or  seduces  her  before  marriage  (xxii.  28,  29). 

The  import  of  the  expression  “some  un- 
cleanness” (13“1  miy,  lit.  “the  nakedness  or 
shame  of  a thing,”)  has  been  variously  ex- 
plained. It  was  a well-known  theme  of  dis- 
putation between  the  schools  of  Hillel  and 
Shammai.  The  former  explained  it,  as  the 
Pharisees  (St  Matt.  xix.  3)  seem  to  have  done, 
in  a general  manner,  as  equivalent  to  any- 
thing which  made  the  woman  unacceptable 
to  her  husband.  And  this  certainly  seems 
borne  out  by  what  is  said  in  2;.  3,  v/here  it. 
appears  that  the  second  husband  might  divorce 
merely  on  grounds  of  personal  dislike.  The 
other  and  rival  interpreters  regard  the  terms, 
which  are  used  also  in  the  preceding  ch., 
2/.  14,  as  applicable  to  nothing  short  of  im- 
modest conduct  or  grave  physical  detect. 
Adultery  is  clearly  out  of  the  question,  since 
that  was  a capital  crime  (cf.  xxii.  20 — 22). 
Whichever  school  be  right  it  is  clear  that  the 
legislator  felt  himself  constrained  to  leave  in 


V.  I— 5-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXV. 


the  husband’s  hands  large  powers  as  regards 
divorce.  Humane  restraints  and  conditions 
are  however  imposed  on  the  exercise  of  that 
power,  and  the  rights  of  the  wife  on  her 
side  are  not  forgotten.  It  appears  from 
Ex.  XXL  10  that  the  maid  sold  to  be  “a  ser- 
vant,” i.e.  purchased  by  a man  to  be  a wife, 
could  quit  her  husband,  or  master,  if  he  did 
not  perform  his  duties  towards  her;  and  we 
can  hardly  doubt  that  the  inferences  drawn  in 
much  variety  by  the  Jewish  doctors  (cf.  Saal- 
schiitz,  ‘ Mos.  Recht,’  pp.  806,  807  and  notes), 
as  to  the  circumstances  under  which  a wife 
could  enforce  divorce,  are  in  the  main  correct. 
'Fhe  freewoman  would  certainly  not  be  in  a 
worse  position  than  is  secured  in  Ex.  l.c.  for 
the  bondwoman.  Our  Lord’s  words  too  (St 
Mark  x.  ii  and  12)  seem  to  imply  that  the 


887 

right  of  divorce  existed  equally  on  both  sides. 

Yet  no  doubt  the  initiation  of  divorce  by  the 
wife  was  extremely  rare  in  the  East.  It  was 
not  however  unknown,  at  any  rate  in  later 
times,  for  Salome,  the  sister  of  Herod,  di- 
vorced her  husband;  cf.  Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  xv.  7, 
and  XVI IT.  5,  4. 

It  appears  that  if  the  divorced  wife  did  not 
contract  a new  marriage  her  husband  might 
take  her  back.  This  has  been  the  imme- 
morial practice  of  the  Jews ; and  there  is 
certainly  nothing  to  bar  it  in  the  passage  be- 
fore us  or  elsewhere  in  the  law ; on  the  con- 
trary, the  spirit  of  the  enactments  of  Moses 
is  certainly  to  encourage  the  preservation  of 
the  original  tie;  the  prohibition  of  re-union  in 
n).  4 is  limited  expressly  to  the  case  where  a 
second  marriage  had  been  contracted. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

I Stripes  imist  not  exceed  forty.  4 The  ox  is 
not  to  be  ^mizzled.  5 0^  raising  seed  tinto  a 
brother,  ir  Of  the  immodest  woiiian.  13  Of 
unjust  weights.  17  The  memoiy  of  Amalek 
is  to  be  blotted  out. 

IF  there  be  a controversy  between 
men,  and  they  come  unto  judg- 
ment, that  the  judges  may  judge  them ; 
then  they  shall  justify  the  righteous, 
and  condemn  the  wicked. 

2 And  it  shall  be,  if  the  wicked 
man  be  worthy  to  be  beaten,  that 
the  judge  shall  cause  him  to  lie  down, 


and  to  be  beaten  before  his  face, 
according  to  his  fault,  by  a certain 
number. 

3 "Forty  stripes  he  may  give  him, 
and  not  exceed  : lest,  if  he  should 
exceed,  and  beat  him  above  these 

with  many  stripes,  then  thy  brother  ^ 9- 

should  seem  vile  unto  thee.  i Tim.  5. 

4 ^ ^Thou  shalt  not  mmzzle  the  t Heb. 
ox  when  he  ^ treadeth  out  the  corn. 

5 ^ ^ If  brethren  dwell  together,  24.^^^ 
and  one  of  them  die,  and  have  no  10. 
child,  the  wife  of  the  dead  shall  not 


Chap.  XXV.  1 — 3.  Punishment  by 

stripes. 

1,  2.  These  verses  form  grammatically 
only  one  sentence,  of  which  no.  % is  the  apo- 
dosis,  as  the  LXX.  correctly  gives  it.  Remove 
therefore  the  full  stop  at  end  of  1;.  i,  and 
render  thus:  (i)  If  tliere  he  a controversy 
between  men,  and  they  come  to  judg- 
ment, and  the  judges  judge  them,  and 
justify  the  righteous  and  condemn  the 
•wicked;  (2)  then  it  shall  he,  &c. 

1.  justify  the  righteous']  On  the  expression, 
cf.  Ex.  XTiiii.  7;  Prov.  xvii.  15. 

2 . worthy  to  he  beaten]  Lit.  “ a son  of  beat- 
ing,” i.e.  deserving  stripes:  cf.  a like  idiom, 
iii.  18 : I S.  XX.  31. 

Scourging  is  named  as  a penalty  Lev.  xix. 
20.  The  beating  here  spoken  of  would  be  on 
the  back  with  a rod  or  stick  (cf.  Prov.  x.  13, 
xix.  29,  xxvi.  3). 

3.  Forty  stripes  he  may  giase  him,  and  not 
exeeedf]  The  Jews  to  keep  within  the  letter  of 
the  law  fixed  39  stripes  as  the  maximum  (cf. 
2 Cor.  xi.  24).  Forty  signifies  the  full 
measure  of  judgment  (Keil)  cf.  Gen.  vii.  12; 
Num.  xiv.  33,  34;  but  the  reason  for  the 
limitation  is  rather  to  be  sought  in  what  is 


added  here,  “lest  tHy  brother  should  seem 
vile  unto  thee.”  The  son  of  Israel  was  not 
to  be  lashed  like  a slave  at  the  mercy  of 
another.  The  judge  was  always  to  be  pre- 
sent to  see  that  the  law  in  this  particular  was 
not  overpassed. 

4.  Cf.  I Cor.  ix.  9;  I Tim.  v.  18;  and 
Hos.  x.  II.  In  other  kinds  of  labour  the 
oxen  were  usually  muzzled.  When  driven 
to  and  fro  over  the  threshing-floor  in  order 
to  stamp  out  the  grain  from  the  chaff,  they 
were  to  be  allowed  to  partake  of  the  fruits 
of  their  labours.  The  figurative  sense  of 
this  command  is  drawn  out  by  St  Paul  l.c. 
The  Greeks  and  other  heathen  frequently 
treated  their  labouring  animals  with  great  in- 
humanity, putting  sharp  bits  in  their  mouths, 
or  keeping  them  for  a long  time  without 
drink,  before  employing  them  on  the  thresh- 
ing-floor. Another  inhuman  method  of  pre- 
venting them  from  eating  whilst  on  the  thresh- 
ing-floor is  mentioned  by  jElian,  ‘ Hist.  An.’ 
IV.  25.  The  expression  /SoC?  eVi  a-copw  was 
proverbial.  (Cf.  Bochart,  ‘Hieroz.’  ii!  40.) 
The  practice  of  threshing  by  oxen  has  re- 
tained its  hold  in  the  East,  as  has  likewise  the 
humane  rule  of  the  text. 


888 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXV.  [v.  6-io. 


marry  without  unto  a stranger  : her 
\uxtki}is  " h'^sband’s  brother  shall  go  in  unto 
man.  her,  and  take  her  to  him  to  wife,  and 
perform  the  duty  of  an  husband’s 
brother  unto  her. 

6 And  it  shall  be,  that  the  first- 
born which  she  beareth  shall  succeed 
in  the  name  of  his  brother  which  is 
dead,  that  his  name  be  not  put  out  of 
Israel. 

7 And  if  the  man  like  not  to  take 
" Or.  . his  ” brother’s  wife,  then  let  his  bro- 

7iext  kins-  , , • ^ i 

mans  tiler  s Wire  go  up  to  the  gate  unto 
Ruth  4.  the  elders,  and  say,  ^My  husband’s 
7-  brother  refuseth  to  raise  up  unto  his 

brother  a name  in  Israel,  he  will  not 


perform  the  duty  of  my  husband’s 
brother. 

8 Then  the  elders  of  his  city  shall 
call  him,  and  speak  unto  him  : and 
^ he  stand  to  it.,  and  say,  I like  not 
to  take  her ; 

9 Then  shall  his  brother’s  wife 
come  unto  him  in  the  presence  of  the 
elders,  and  loose  his  shoe  from  off  his 
foot,  and  spit  in  his  face,  and  shall 
answer  and  say.  So  shall  it  be  done 
unto  that  man  that  will  not  build  up 
his  brother’s  house. 

10  And  his  name  shall  be  called  in 
Israel,  The  house  of  him  that  hath 
his  shoe  loosed. 


5 — 10.  Law  of  levirate  marriage.  The 
law  on  this  subject  is  not  peculiar  to  the 
Jews,  but  is  found  (see  on  Gen.  xxxviii.  8) 
in  all  essential  respects  the  same  amongst  va- 
rious Oriental  nations,  ancient  and  modern, 
and  exists  at  present  amongst  the  South  Afri- 
can tribes  (Colenso,  ‘ Pent.’ § 754) ; amongst 
the  Arabians  (Burckhardt,  ‘ Notes,’  i.  112); 
amongst  the  Druses  (Volney,  ‘Travels,’  ii. 
80) ; and  amongst  the  tribes  of  the  Caucasus, 
(Haxthausen’s  ‘Transcaucasia,’  p.  403).  It 
is  obvious  from  Gen.  xxxviii.,  where  it  ap- 
pears as  familiar  and  recognized  on  all  hands, 
that  Moses  did  not  originate  it;  and  in  fact 
the  rules  in  these  like  those  upon  di- 
vorce, do  but  incorporate  existing  immemo- 
rial usages,  and  introduce  various  wise  and 
politic  limitations  and  mitigations  of  them. 
The  root  of  the  obligation  here  imposed  up- 
on the  brother  of  the  deceased  husband 
lies  in  the  primitive  idea  of  childlessness  being 
a great  calamity  (cf.  Gen.  xvi.  4,  and  note), 
and  extinction  of  name  and  family  one  of  the 
greatest  that  could  happen  (cf.  ix.  14;  Ps.  cix. 
12 — 15).  To  avert  this  the  ordinary  rules 
as  to  inter-marriage  are  in  the  case  in  ques- 
tion (cf.  Lev.  xviii.  16)  set  aside.  The  obli- 
gation was  onerous  (cf.  Ruth  iv.  6),  and  might 
be  repugnant ; and  it  is  accordingly  consider- 
ably reduced  and  restricted  by  Moses.  It 
did  not  lie  at  all  unless  the  brethren  “dwell 
together:”  i.e.  unless  they  were  neighbours. 
The  surviving  brother  from  a distant  home 
was  not  to  be  expected  to  fetch  the  widow,  or 
perhaps  widows,  and  household,  and  take  them 
to  himself.  It  would  seem  (Ruth  ii.  20,  iii.  9) 
that  the  office  in  such  cases  devolved  on  the 
next  neighbouring  kinsman;  or  perhaps  the 
term  “brethren”  nj.  5 is  to  be  understood  in 
its  more  general  sense  as  etiuivalent  to  “kins- 
men.” The  fact  that  these  arrangements 
were  well  understood  superseded  the  neces- 
sity of  minutely  ruling  such  points.  Moses 
permits  escape  from  the  marriage  altogether, 


therein  introducing  apparently  a new  relax- 
ation, if  any  brother-in-law  preferred  to  sub- 
mit to  reproach;  -vz^.  7,  8.  In  other  words, 
the  duty  is  recognized  as  one  of  affection  for 
the  memory  of  the  deceased;  it  is  not  one 
which  could  be  enforced  at  law.  That  it 
continued  “in  viridi  observantia”  down  to 
the  Christian  era  is  apparent  from  St  Matt, 
xxii.  25  sq.,  and  the  parallel  passages  in  St 
Mark  and  St  Luke. 

5.  no  child]  Lit.  “ no  son.”  But  the 
existence  of  a daughter  would  clearly  suffice, 
and  so  the  Rabbins  have  always  understood. 
The  daughter  would  inherit  the  name  and 
property  of  the  father;  cf.  Nuin.  xxvii.  i — it. 

9.  loose  his  shoe  from  off  his  foot]  In 
token  of  taking  from  the  unwilling  brother 
all  right  over  the  wife  and  property  of  the 
deceased.  Planting  the  foot  on  a thing  was 
an  usual  symbol  of  lordship  and  of  taking 
possession  (cf.  Gen.  xiii.  17  ; Josh.  x.  24),  and 
loosing  the  shoe  and  handing  it  to  another  in 
like  manner  signified  a renunciation  and  trans- 
fer of  right  and  title  (cf.  Ruth  iv.  7,  8).  Ps.  lx. 
8,  and  cviii.  9,  are  also  to  be  noted  here,  if 
the  expression  ‘ ‘ over  Edom  will  I cast  out 
my  shoe,”  is  rightly  understood  by  the  Jewish 
authorities  generally  to  mean  “of  Edom  will 
I take  possession.”  Burckhardt  (‘.Notes  on 
the  Bedouins,’  I.  113)  states  that  when  a Be- 
douin husband  divorces  a runaway  wife,  he 
usually  says : “she  was  my  slipper,  I have  cast 
her  off.”  The  widow  here  is  clirected  herself, 
as  the  party  slighted  and  injured,  to  deprive 
her  brother-in-law  of  his  shoe. 

spit  in  his  face]  According  to  the  Rabbins 
“ before  his  face.”  The  Hebrew  will  bear  this 
sense,  but  cf.  Num.  xii.  14.  The  action  of 
course  is  intended  to  aggravate  the  disgrace 
conceived  to  attach  to  the  conduct  of  the 
man. 

10.  The  house  of  him  that  hath  his  shoe 
loosed]  Equivalent  to  “the  house  of  the  bare- 


V.  II-I.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXV,  XXVI. 


889 


Heb, 

sfoueand 

sto7ie. 


Heb. 
n ephah 
fid  ail 
'p/iah. 


E.xod.  17. 


11  ^ When  men  strive  together 
one  with  another,  and  the  wife  of 
the  one  draweth  near  for  to  deliver 
her  husband  out  of  the  hand  of  him 
that  smiteth  him,  and  putteth  forth 
her  hand,  and  taketh  him  by  the 
secrets : 

12  Then  thou  shalt  cut  off  her 
hand,  thine  eye  shall  not  pity  her. 

13  ^1  Thou  shalt  not  have  in  thy 
bag  ^ divers  weights,  a great  and  a 
small. 

14  Thou  shalt  not  have  in  thine 
house  ^ divers  measures,  a great  and  a 
small. 

15  But  thou  shalt  have  a perfect 
and  just  weight,  a perfect  and  just 
measure  shalt  thou  have  : that  thy 
days  may  be  lengthened  in  the  land 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee. 

16  For  all  that  do  such  things, 
and  all  that  do  unrighteously,  are  an 
abomination  unto  the  Lord  thy  God. 

17  ^ ^Remember  what  Amalek 


did  unto  thee  by  the  way,  when  ye 
were  come  forth  out  of  Egypt ; 

18  How  he  met  thee  by  the  way, 
and  smote  the  hindmost  of  thee,  even 
all  that  zuere  feeble  behind  thee,  v/hen 
thou  wast  faint  and  weary;  and  he 
feared  not  God. 

19  Therefore  it  shall  be,  when 
the  Lord  thy  God  hath  given  thee 
rest  from  all  thine  enemies  round 
about,  in  the  land  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  giveth  thee  for  an  inhe- 
ritance to  possess  it,  that  thou  shalt 
blot  out  the  remembrance  of  Amalek 
from  under  heaven  ; thou  shalt  not 
forget  it. 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 

I The  confession  of  him  that  offer cth  the  basket 
of  firstfniits.  12  The  prayer  of  him  that 
giveth  his  third  years  tithes.  16  The  cove- 
nant between  God  and  Tie  people. 

And  it  shall  be,  when  thou  art 
L come  in  unto  the  land  which 
the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee  for 


footed  one.”  To  go  barefoot  was  a sign 
of  the  most  abject  condition;  cf.  2 S.  xv.  30. 

11,  12.  The  last  lav.^  laid  certain  burden- 
some obligations  on  men  for  the  preservation 
of  the  families  of  their  brethren.  It  is  now 
followed  up  by  another,  which  imposes  a 
severe  penalty  on  a woman  who  by  a shameless 
act  should  endanger  or  take  away  the  hope  of 
offspring  from  a man;  cf.  Ex.  xxi.  22.  The 
act  in  question  was  probably  not  rare  in  the 
times  and  countries  for  which  the  law  cf 
Moses  was  designed.  It  is  of  course  to  be 
understood  that  the  act  was  wilful,  and  that 
the  prescribed  punishment  would  be  inflicted 
according  to  sentence  of  the  judges.  This  is 
the  only  mutilation  prescribed  by  the  Law  of 
Moses,  unless  we  except  the  retaliation  pre- 
scribed as  a punishment  for  the  infliction  on 
another  of  bodily  injuries.  Lev.  xxiv.  19,  20. 
But  that  law  would  seldom  be  carried  out  in 
the  letter. 

13 — 19.  Of  duties  towards  our  neighbour 
those  which  occur  most  frequently  will  be  to 
the  legislator  the  most  important.  That  of 
honesty  in  trade  is  therefore  emphatically  en- 
forced once  more  in  conclusion  (cf.  Lev.  xix. 
35,  36).  It  is  noteworthy  that  John  the 
Baptist  puts  the  like  duties  in  the  forefront  of 
his  preaching  (cf.  St  Luke  iii.  12  sqq.)  ; and 
that  “the  Prophets”  (cf.  Ezek.  xlv.  10 — 12  ; 
Amos  viii.  8;  Mic.  vi.  10,  ii)  and  “the 
Psalms”  (Prov.  xvi.  ii,  xx.  10,  23),  not  less 
than  “the  Law,”  specially  insist  on  them. 


Every  part  of  Scripture  in  fact  gives  much 
prominence  to  these  duties. 

13.  dinoers  ’voeights'\  Lit.  “ a stone  and  a 
stone;”  i.e.  stones  of  unequal  weights,  the 
lighter  to  sell  with,  the  heavier  to  buy  with. 
So  in  Ps.  xii.  2 “a  heart  and  a heart”  means 
“a  double-heart.”  Stones  were  used  by  the 
Jews  instead  of  brass  or  lead  for  their  weights, 
as  less  liable  to  lose  anything  through  rust  or 
wear. 

15.  that  thy  days  may  be  lengthened  in  the 
land"]  Cf.  iv.  26,  v.  16. 

17 — 19.  Over  against  those  duties  which 
are  summed  up  in  the  words  “thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself,”  there  stand 
however  for  the  Jew  another  set  of  an  oppo- 
site nature  towards  the  enemies  of  God  and 
His  kingdom.  It  was  not  after  the  spirit  or 
mission  of  the  Law  (cf.  St  Luke  ix.  55,  56) 
to  aim  at  overcoming  inveterate  opposition 
by  love  and  by  attempts  at  conversion.  The 
law  taught  God’s  hatred  of  sin  and  of  re- 
bellion against  Him  by  enjoining  the  extinc- 
tion of  the  obstinate  sinner.  The  Amalekites 
were  a kindred  people  (Gen.  xxxvi.  15,  16); 
and  living  as  they  did  in  the  peninsula  of 
Sinai,  they  could  not  but  have  well  known 
the  mighty  acts  God  had  done  for  His  people 
in  Egypt  and  the  Red  Sea ; yet  they  mani- 
fested from  the  first  a persistent  hostility  to 
Israel  (cf.  Ex.  xvii.  8,  and  note ; Num.  xiv. 
45).  They  provoked  therefore  the  sentence 


890 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVI. 


[v.  2—5. 


an  inheritance,  and  possesses!  it,  and 
dwellest  therein ; 

2 That  thou  shalt  take  of  the 
first  of  all  the  fruit  of  the  earth, 
which  thou  shalt  bring  of  thy  land 
that  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee, 
and  shalt  put  it  in  a basket,  and  shalt 
go  unto  the  place  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  shall  choose  to  place  his 
name  there. 

3 And  thou  shalt  go  unto  the 
priest  that  shall  be  in  those  days, 
and  say  unto  him,  I profess  this  day 
unto  the  Lord  thy  God,  that  I am 


here  pronounced,  which  was  executed  at  last 
by  Saul,  i S.  xv. 

Chap.  XXVI.  The  rehearsal  of  rights 
and  duties,  public  and  private,  terminates  in 
this  chapter  with  two  liturgical  enactments. 
These  have  a clear  and  close  reference  to  the 
whole  of  the  preceding  legislation,  and  form 
a most  appropriate  and  significant  conclusion 
to  it.  On  the  performance  of  its  part  of  that 
covenant,  which  the  previous  books  and  chap- 
ters have  set  forth,  Israel  was  to  be  put  in. 
possession  of  God's  promises.  When  these 
should  be  realized  {y.  i)  each  Israelite  is 
directed,  for  himself  personally  and  also  as  one 
of  the  covenant  people,  to  make  solemn  ac- 
knowledgment in  deed  and  symbol  of  God’s 
faithfulness,  by  presentment  of  a basket  filled 
with  firstfruits,  and  in  word  by  recitation  of 
the  solemn  formula  prescribed  nj.  3 and  'v'v. 
5 — 10.  This  thanksgiving  is  so  worded  as  to 
express  the  entire  dependence  of  the  offerer 
and  his  nation  upon  God’s  grace  and  mercy 
for  all  they  had  and  all  they  were,  and  to 
check  the  self-righteous  temper  which  might 
under  a covenant  of  works  be  expected  to 
develop  itself. 

But  the  continuance  of  God’s  blessings  was 
contingent  on  Israel’s  obedience.  The  oc- 
casion of  the  third  tithe  (y.  la)  is  accordingly 
appointed  as  one  for  making  solemn  decla- 
ration and  profession  on  the  part  of  each 
Israelite  that  he  personally  had  acquitted 
himself  of  the  several  obligations  laid  by  the 
law  upon  him  (y-v.  13,  14),  and  for  prayer 
based  upon  that  avowal  that  God  on  His 
side  would  be  pleased  still  to  bless  His  faithful 
people  {y.  15). 

2.  thou  shalt  take  of  the  first  of  all  the 
fruit  of  the  eartfj]  As  the  fruit  was  visible 
proof  of  their  being  in  possession  of  the  land, 
so  the  presentation  of  the  first  of  their  fruit 
to  God  was  an  act  of  confession  that  they 
owed  that  blessing  to  Him. 

(^n  the  subject  of  Firstfruits  see  note  on 
Lev.  xxiii.  10  sqq. 


come  unto  the  country  which  the 
Lord  sware  unto  our  fathers  for  to 
give  us. 

4 And  the  priest  shall  take  the 
basket  out  of  thine  hand,  and  set  it 
down  before  the  altar  of  the  Lord 
thy  God. 

5 And  thou  shalt  speak  and  say 
before  the  Lord  thy  God,  A Syrian 
ready  to  perish  was  my  father,  and 
he  went  down  into  Egypt,  and  so- 
journed there  with  a few,  and  be- 
came there  a nation,  great,  mighty, 
and  populous  : 


The  firstfruits  here  in  question  are  to  be 
distinguished  alike  from  those  offered  in  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  blessings  of  harvest 
(cf.  Ex.  xxii.  29;  Lev.  xxiii.  10 — 17)  at  the 
feasts  of  Passover  and  Pentecost,  and  also 
from  the  offerings  prescribed  Num.  xviii.  8 
sqq.  The  latter  consisted  of  preparations 
from  the  produce  of  the  earth,  such  as  oil, 
flour,  wine,  &c. ; whilst  those  here  meant  are 
of  the  raw  produce : the  former  were  national 
and  public  offerings,  those  of  this  chapter  are 
private  and  personal  ones.  The  whole  of  the 
firstfruits  belonged  to  the  officiating  priest. 

On  the  mode  in  which  this  duty  of  pre- 
senting the  firstfruits  was  actually  performed 
see  note  on  Lev.  1.  c. 

5.  A Syrian  ready  to  perish  -^vas  my  father'^ 
The  reference  is  shown  by  the  context  to  be 
to  Jacob,  as  the  ancestor  in  whom  particularly 
the  family  of  Abraham  began  to  develop  into 
a nation  (cf.  Is.  xliii.  22,  28,  &c.).  Jacob  is 
called  a Syrian  (lit.  Aramcean),  not  only 
because  of  his  own  long  residence  in  Syria 
with  Laban  (Gen.  xxix. — xxxi.),  as  our  Lord 
was  called  a Nazarene  because  of  his  residence 
at  Nazareth,  but  because  he  there  married 
and  had  his  children  (cf.  Hos.  xii.  12);  and 
might  be  said  accordingly  to  belong  to  that 
more  than  to  any  other  land.  The  designation 
of  Jacob  as  a Syrian,  found  here  only,  has  led 
some  of  the  Targums  and  Versions,  also 
Luther,  and  others,  to  render  very  differ- 
ently, understanding  the  Syrian  to  be  Laban  ; 
“ A Syrian  was  destroying,  or  almost  de- 
stroyed, my  father:”  “ Syrus  persequebatur 
patrem  meum,”  Vulg.  But  this  sense  of  the 
word  (fibhad)  is  unparalleled.  The  rendering 
of  LXX.  (yvpiav  aTref^aXeu  6 Trari^p  pov')  is 
singular,  and  irreconcileable  with  the  present 
punctuation.  Others  render  the  word  {dh- 
had)  “wandering,”  as  in  Ps.  cxix.  176  (so 
Gesen.  ‘Thesaur.,’  Rosenm.,  Maurer,  &c.). 
They  refer,  as  against  the  rendering  adopted 
by  A.  V.,  to  the  fact  that  Jacob,  though  he 
led  a nomadic  life,  was  yet  wealthy  and 
powerful.  Our  rendering  of  the  word  is 


V.  6 — 14-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVI. 


891 


6 And  the  Egyptians  evil  entreated 
us,  and  afflicted  us,  and  laid  upon  us 
hard  bondage  : 

7 And  when  we  cried  unto  the 
Lord  God  of  our  fathers,  the  Lord 
heard  our  voice,  and  looked  on  our 
affliction,  and  our  labour,  and  our  op- 
pression : 

8 And  the  Lord  brought  us  forth 
out  of  Egypt  with  a mighty  hand, 
and  with  an  outstretched  arm,  and 
with  great  terribleness,  and  with  signs, 
and  with  wonders  : 

9 And  he  hath  brought  us  into  this 
place,  and  hath  given  us  this  land, 
even  a land  that  floweth  with  milk 
and  honey. 

10  And  now,  behold,  I have  brought 
the  hrstfruits  of  the  land,  which  thou, 
O Lord,  hast  given  me.  And  thou 
shalt  set  it  before  the  Lord  thy  God, 
and  worship  before  the  Lord  thy 
God ; 

1 1 And  thou  shalt  rsjoice  in  every 
good  thing  which  the  Lord  thy  God 


hath  given  unto  thee,  and  unto  thine 
house,  thou,  and  the  Levite,  and  the 
stranger  that  is  among  you. 

12  *fl  When  thou  hast  made  an  end 
of  tithing  all  the  tithes  of  thine  in- 
crease the  third  year,  which  is  ^ the 
year  of  tithing,  and  hast  given  it  unto 
the  Levite,  the  stranger,  the  father- 
less, and  the  widow,  that  they  may 
eat  within  thy  gates,  and  be  filled ; 

13  Then  thou  shalt  say  before  the 
Lord  thy  God,  I have  brought  away 
the  hallowed  things  out  of  mine  house, 
and  also  have  given  them  unto  the 
Levite,  and  unto  the  stranger,  to  the 
fatherless,  and  to  the  widow,  accord- 
ing to  all  thy  commandments  which 
thou  hast  commanded  me : I have  not 
transgressed  thy  commandments,  nei- 
ther have  I forgotten  them: 

14  I have  not  eaten  thereof  in  my 
mourning,  neither  have  I taken  away 
ought  thereof  for  any  unclean  use^  nor 
given  ought  thereof  for  the  dead : but 
1 have  hearkened  to  the  voice  of  the 


however  supported  by  Job  xxix.  13  ; Prov. 
xxxi.  6,  &c. ; and  as  regards  the  fact,  seems 
sufficiently  sustained  by  the  narrative  of  Gen. 
xxxi,;  cf,  XXXV.  3,  xlii.  2,  xliii,  2,  8,  &c. 

'Went  down  into  Egypt]  Cf.  Gen,  xlvi, 

became  there  a nation]  Cf.  ch.  vii.  7. 

6 and  7.  Cf.  Ex.  i.,  ii.,  and  iv. 

8.  the  Lord  brought  us  forth]  Cf.  Ex.  xii., 
xiii. 

with  signs ^ and  with  wonders]  Cf.  iv.  34. 

9.  a land  that  floweth  with  milk  and  honey] 
Cf.  Ex.  iii.  8. 

11.  thou  shalt  rejoice^  &c.]  Cf.  xii.  7,  12, 
xvi.  II. 

12.  Each  third  year  the  second  or  vege- 
table tithe,  instead  of  being  taken  as  in  other 
years  to  the  Sanctuary,  was  to  be  employed  at 
home  in  hospitality  and  charity  (cf.  xiv.  28, 
29).  The  LXX.  exactly  give  the  true  sense 
in  this  verse,  ro  hevrepov  ^irtbeKarov  bcoaets 
r<y  AevLTrj  k.t.X.  But  this  third  year  s tithe, 
tfiough  really  only  the  ordinary  second  tithe 
diversely  applied,  is  usually  called  the  third 
tithe  (Tobit  i.  7,  8 ; Joseph.  ‘ Ant.’  iv.  8.  22). 
The  seventh  year  being  Sabbatical,  and  no 
tithes  being  payable  in  it  (cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  10 
sqq.),  the  “third  year,  the  year  of  tithing” 
here  alluded  to,  would  be,  each  third  and  sixth 
of  the  septennial  cycle.  As  in  each  of  these 
years  the  whole  triennial  series  of  tithe  obli- 
gations would  have  been  completed,  the  Is- 


raelite is  appropriately  called  upon,  “ when  he 
had  made  an  end  of  tithing  the  third  year,”  to 
make  solemn  profession  before  God  that  he 
.had  discharged  each  and  all  as  they  fell  due, 
and  applied  them  as  the  law  appointed.  A 
strict  fulfilment  of  the  onerous  and  compli- 
cated tithe  obligations  was  a leading  part  of 
the  righteousness  of  the  Pharisees : cf.  St 
Matt,  xxiii.  23. 

The  Jewish  doctors,  in  full  conformity  with 
the  spirit  of  this  passage,  required  the  faithful 
Israelite  on  the  Preparation  Day  of  Passover 
in  each  fourth  and  seventh  year  solemnly  to 
examine  himself  whether  he  had  faithfully  and 
punctually  paid  all  the  sacred  dues  in  the 
three  preceding  years,  and  to  make  restitution 
and  satisfaction  for  all  shortcomings.  On 
the  last  day  of  Passover,  at  evening  sacrifice, 
the  pilgrim  before  he  returned  home  was  to 
recite  before  God  the  avowal  and  prayer,  ‘w. 
13 — 15  (cf.  Dr  Ginsburg  in  Kitto’s  ‘Encycl.’ 
art.  ‘Tthe:’  and  on  the  whole  subject  of 
Tithes  cf.  Introd.  § 5). 

14.  I han)e  not  eaten  thereof  in  my  mourn- 
ing]  When  the  Israelite  would  be  unclean, 
cf.  Lev.  vii,  20,  xxi.  i sqq. 

neither  ha've  I taken  away  ought  thereof  for 
any  unclean  use]  Rather  perhaps,  “ I have  not 
separated  any  of  them  when  unclean.”  Vulg. 
very  closely,  “nec  separavi  ea  in  qualibet  im- 
munditia.” 


892 


DEUTERONOMY. 

Lord  my  God,  and  have  done  ac- 
cording to  all  that  thou  hast  com- 
manded me. 

*isai.  63.  15  ^Look  down  from  thy  holy  ha- 

^5-  bitation,  from  heaven,  and  bless  thy 
people  Israel,  and  the  land  which  thou 
hast  given  us,  as  thou  swarest  unto 
our  fathers,  a land  that  floweth  with 
milk  and  honey. 

16  ^ This  day  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  commanded  thee  to  do  these 
statutes  and  judgments : thou  shalt 
therefore  keep  and  do  them  with  all 
thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul. 

17  Thou  hast  avouched  the  Lord 
this  day  to  be  thy  God,  and  to  walk 
in  his  ways,  and  to  keep  his  statutes, 
and  his  commandments,  and  his  judg- 
ments, and  to  hearken  unto  his  voice : 

f chap.  7,  18  And  '^the  Lord  hath  avouched 

thee  this  day  to  be  his  peculiar  people. 


XXVI.  XXVII.  [v.  15-2. 

as  he  hath  promised  thee,  and  that 
thou  shouldest  keep  all  his  command- 
ments ; 

19  And  to  make  thee  high  above 
all  nations  which  he  hath  made,  in 
praise,  and  in  name,  and  in  honour; 
and  that  thou  mayest  be  an  holy  peo- 
ple unto  the  Lord  thy  God,  as  he 
hath  spoken. 

CHAPTER  XXVII. 

1 The  people  are  commanded  to  ^vrite  the  law 
upon  stones,  5 and  to  build  an  altar  of  whole 
stones.  II  The  tribes  divided  on  Gerizim  and 
Ebal.  14  The  curses  pronounced  on  mount 
Ebal. 

An  D Moses  with  the  elders  of 
Israel  commanded  the  people, 
saying.  Keep  all  the  commandments 
which  I command  you  this  day. 

2 And  it  shall  be  on  the  day  "when  ^ 
ye  shall  pass  over  Jordan  unto  the 
land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth 


nor  given  ought  thereof  for  the  dead]  Others,  as 
perhaps  LXX.  (rw  reOvrjKori),  “to  the  dead,” 
with  reference  apparently  to  the  superstitious 
custom  of  placing  food  on  or  in  tombs  (cf. 
Juv.  ‘ Sat.’ v.  85,  “ feralis  coena”).  Probably 
however  it  is  the  funeral  expenses,  and  more 
especially  the  usual  feast  for  the  mourners, 
vrhich  are  meant  (cf.  Jer.  xvi.  7 ; Ezek.  xxiv. 
17;  Hos.  ix.  4 ; Tob.  iv.  17).  The  dedicated 
things  were  to  be  employed  in  glad  and  holy 
feasting,  not  therefore  for  funeral  banquets, 
for  death  and  all  associated  with  it  was 
regarded  as  unclean. 

15.  Cf.  Is.  Ixiii.  15  ; Ixvi.  i. 

16 — 19.  A brief  and  earnest  exhortation 
by  way  of  conclusion  to  the  second  and 
longest  discourse  of  the  book.  The  people  is 
reminded  that  its  troth  was  plighted  to  God, 
as  God’s  covenant  was  on  His  part  esta- 
blished towards  them.  Moses  entreats  them 
therefore  to  be  faithful,  that  God  too  might 
manifest  His  faithfulness  in  exalting  them  as 
• He  had  promised. 

17.  Thou  hast  avouched]  Lit.  “ made  to 
say : ” the  word  occurs  in  this  form  only  in  this 
and  next  v.  The  sense  is : “ Thou  hast  given 
occasion  to  the  Lord  to  say  that  He  is  thy 
God,”  i.e.  by  promising  that  He  shall  be  so. 
Cf.  Ex.  xxiv.  7 ; Josh.  xxiv.  14 — 25, 

IS.  Cf.  Ex.  xix.  5,  6,  notes  and  reff. 

19.  Cf.  Jer.  xiii.  ii,  xxxiii.  9, 

an  holy  people]  Cf.  vi(.  6,  and  reff. 

Chau.  XXVII.  The  law  having  been 
reiterated  with  special  reference  to  the  cir- 


cumstances of  ^le  people  when  settled  in  tht 
promised  land,  Moses  in  a third  discourse, 
contained  in  chapters  xxvii. — xxx.,  proceed.^ 
more  specially  to  dwell  on  its  sanctions.  In 
these  chapters  he  sets  before  Israel  in  striking 
and  elaborate  detail  the  blessings  which  would 
ensue  upon  faithfulness  to  the  covenant,  and 
the  curses  which  disobedience  would  involve. 
The  xxviith  chapter  introduces  this  portion 
of  the  book  by  enjoining  the  erection  of  a 
stone  monument  on  which  the  law  should  be 
inscribed  as  soon  as  the  people  took  posses- 
sion of  the  promised  inheritance  (yv.  i — 10); 
and  by  next  prescribing  the  liturgical  form 
after  which  the  blessings  and  cursings  should 
be  pronounced  1 1 — 26). 

1—10.  The  erection  of  the  stones  as  here 
prescribed  “on  the  day  when  Israel  passed 
over  Jordan  unto  the  land  which  the  Lord 
gave  him,”  and  the  inscription  of  the  law  on 
those  stones,  was  a symbolical  act  declaring 
on  the  part  of  the  people  that  they  took  pos- 
session of  the  land  by  virtue  of  their  covenant 
with  God,  and  on  condition  of  their  own 
faithfulness  th(^reto.  These  acts,  as  also  the 
preservation  of  the  two  tables  in  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  (cf.  xxxi.  26),  were  witness  against 
the  people  in  case  they  should  break  theirvows. 

1.  Moses  nvith  the  elders]  The  elders  are 
no  doubt  associated  with  Moses  here  because 
he  was  near  the  end  of  his  office,  and  hence- 
forth it  would  devolve  on  them  to  require 
what  was  due  to  God. 

2.  on  the  day  ^vhenye  shall  pass  over  Jordan] 
The  expression  “ on  the  day”  is  used  here,  as 


V-  3—7-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVII. 


893 


thee,  that  thou  shalt  set  thee  up  great 
stones,  and  plaister  them  with  plaister  : 

3 And  thou  shalt  write  upon  them 
all  the  v/ords  of  this  law,  when  thou 
art  passed  over,  that  thou  mayest  go 
in  unto  the  land  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  giveth  thee,  a land  that  floweth 
with  milk  and  honey;  as  the  Lord 
God  of  thy  fathers  hath  promised 
thee. 

4 Therefore  it  shall  be  when  ye  be 
gone  over  Jordan,  that  ye  shall  set  up 
these  stones,  which  I command  you 


this  day,  in  mount  Ebal,  and  thou 
shalt  plaister  them  with  plaister. 

5 And  there  shalt  thou  build  an  al- 
tar unto  the  Lord  thy  God,  an  altar 
of  stones:  ''’thou  shalt  not  lift  up  any 

iron  tool  upon  them.  Josh.  8. 

6 Thou  shalt  build  the  altar  of  the 
Lord  thy  God  of  whole  stones : and 
thou  shalt  offer  burnt  offerings  thereon 
unto  the  Lord  thy  God : 

7 And  thou  shalt  offer  peace  offer- 
ings, and  shalt  eat  there,  and  rejoice 
before  the  Lord  thy  God. 


so  often  (e.g.  Gen,  ii.  4 ; Num.iii.  i),  in  a broad 
sense,  and  is  equivalent  to  “at  the  time  when.” 
Vulg,  “cum  transieritis  Jordanem.”  Cf.  in 
'v.  3,  •^vhen  thou  art  passed  over^  and  nj.  4,  <when 
ye  be  gone  o-ver.  In  fact  the  command  was 
carried  out  by  Joshua  (viii.  30 — 35),  as  soon 
after  the  passage  of  Jordan  as  circumstances 
permitted  (cf.  notes  there). 

thou  shalt  set  thee  up  great  stones  ^ and  plaister 
them  <with  plaister^  The  stones  here  named 
are  not  those  of  which  the  altar  {y.  4)  was  to 
be  built,  but  are  to  serve  as  a separate  monu- 
ment witnessing  to  the  fact  that  the  people 
took  possession  of  the  land  by  virtue  of  the 
law  inscribed  on  them  and  with  an  acknow- 
ledgment of  its  obligations. 

3.  And  thou  shalt  ^vrite  upon  them  all  the 
'words  of  this  law]  Thus  attesting  at  once 
their  duty  and  their  resolve  to  observe  that 
which  themselves  thus  placed  in  durable  re- 
cord. Cf.  the  injunction  to  the  king,  xvii. 
18.  It  is  evident  that  the  design  is  to  set 
forth  all  the  obligations  of  the  people  on  their 
side  of  the  covenant ; hence  we  must  not  re- 
strict the  expression  all  the  words  of  this  law 
(cf.  Josh.  i.  8;  viii.  34)  to  the  Decalogue, 
since  that  was  but  a summary  and  abridgment 
of  those  obligations,  nor  would  the  “great 
stones”  of  ‘t».  2 be  required  to  contain  the 
Decalogue  only ; nor  yet  to  the  following 
blessings  and  cursings,  which  certainly  could 
not  be  properly  described  by  the  words  of 
the  text ; nor  yet  to  the  book  of  Deut.  only. 
The  words  can  only  mean  all  the  laws  re- 
vealed from  God  to  the  people  by  Moses. 
In  these  would  not  be  included  the  historical, 
didactic,  ethnological,  and  other  non-legisla- 
tive matter  comprised  in  the  Pentateuch,  but 
simply  its  legal  enactments,  regarded  by  the 
Jews  as  six  hundred  and  thirteen  in  number. 
The  exhibition  of  laws  in  this  manner  on 
stones,  pillars,  or  tablets,  was  familiar  to  the 
ancients.  Knobel  quotes  Apollodorus  in  the 
Scholiast  on  Aristoph.  ‘Nub.’ 447:  ol  dpxaiot 
\idovs  LCTTavTi^  eldOecrav  ra  bb^avra  eu  aurois 
dmypd(f)etv:  and  Polyb.  xxvi.  i.  4,  who  uses 
VoL.  I. 


irapajBrjvai  ras  (TTT]Xa9  as  a kind  of  proverbial 
expression.  The  laws  were  probably  graven 
in  the  stone,  as  are  for  the  most  part  the 
Egyptian  hieroglyphics,  the  “plaister”  being 
afterwards  added  to  protect  the  inscription 
from  the  weather. 

4.  in  mount  Eb A]  Cf.  xi.  29;  Josh.  viii.  30. 
The  Samaritan  Pentateuch  and  Version  read 
here  Gerixim  instead  of  Ebal;  and  are  fol- 
lowed by  Kennicott,  Semler,  Geddes,  Booth- 
royd,  Colenso,  &c.  But  the  Hebrew  MSS. 
and  all  ancient  versions,  except  the  Samaritan 
(even  LXX.  which  follows  elsewhere  the  Sa- 
maritan very  closely),  are  unanimous,  and  far 
outweigh  the  authority  of  the  Samaritan. 
The  original  text  was  probably,  as  nearly  all 
modern  authorities  hold,  altered  in  order  to 
lend  a show  of  scriptural  sanction  to  the 
Samaritan  temple  on  Mount  Gerizim. 

The  erection  of  the  altar,  the  offering  there- 
on burnt  offerings  and  peace  offerings 
6,  7),  the  publication  of  the  law  in  writ- 
ing, form  altogether  a solemn  renewal  of  the 
covenant  on  the  entrance  of  the  people  into 
the  promised  land,  and  recall  the  ceremonies 
observed  on  the  original  grant  of  the  covenant 
at  Sinai.  And  Ebal,  the  mount  of  cursing, 
was  the  fitting  spot  on  which  to  celebrate 
them.  For  the  curses  were  the  penalties  under 
which  the  children  of  Israel  bound  themselves 
to  keep  the  law.  Suitably  also  was  the  same 
place  selected  as  that  in  which  were  to  be 
set  up  both  the  monumental  stones  containing 
the  law,  and  the  altar  at  which  the  covenant 
was  to  be  renewed.  We  mifst  note  too 
the  fact  that  15  sqq.  set  out  verbatim 
the  curses  only,  the  blessings  being  omitted. 
The  law  because  of  man’s  sinfulness  brings  on 
him  first  and  chiefly  a curse;  cf.  xxxi.  16,  17; 
Gal.  iii.  10. 

5.  thou  shalt  not  lift  up  any  iron  tool  upon 
them]  Cf.  Ex.  xx.  25. 

6.  7.  burnt  offerings... peace  offerings]  As 
on  the  establishment  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai. 
Cf.  Ex.  xxiv.  5. 

3 ^ 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVII. 


[v.  8—17. 


8 And  thou  shalt  write  upon  the 
stones  all  the  words  of  this  law  very 
plainly. 

9 ^ And  iVloses  and  the  priests  the 
Levitcs  spake  unto  all  Israel,  saying, 
Take  heed,  and  hearken,  O Israel; 
this  day  thou  art  become  the  people 
of  the  Lord  thy  God. 

10  Thou  shalt  therefore  obey  the 
voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  do 
his  commandments  and  his  statutes, 
which  I command  thee  this  day. 

1 1 And  Moses  charged  the  peo- 
ple the  same  day,  saying, 

12  These  shall  stand  upon  mount 
Gerizim  to  bless  the  people,  when  ye 
are  come  over  Jordan;  Simeon,  and 
Levi,  and  Judah,  and  Issachar,  and 
Joseph,  and  Benjamin : 


13  And  these  shall  stand  upon 
mount  Ebal  ^to  curse;  Reuben,  Gad,  t Heb. 
and  Asher,  and  Zebulun,  Dan, 

Naphtali. 

14  ^ And  '^the  Levites  shall  speak,  -"Dan.  9. 
and  say  unto  all  the  men  of  Israel 

with  a loud  voice, 

15  Cursed  be  the  man  that  maketh 
any  graven  or  molten  image,  an  abo- 
mination unto  the  Lord,  the  work  of 
the  hands  of  the  craftsman,  and  put- 
teth  it  in  a secret  place.  And  all  the 
people  shall  answer  and  say.  Amen. 

16  Cursed  he  he  that  setteth  light 
by  his  father  or  his  mother.  And  all 
the  people  shall  say.  Amen. 

17  Cursed  be  he  that  removeth  his 
neighbour’s  landmark.  And  all  the 
people  shall  say.  Amen. 


9,  10,  An  appeal  for  attention,  made  ap- 
parently because  of  the  special  importance  of 
what  follows. 

11 — 26.  Form  and  manner  of  the  solemn 
blessing  and  cursing.  These  had  already  been 
prescribed  xi.  29,  30,  and  were  carried  out  by 
Joshua;  cf.  Josh.  viii.  32 — 35 : where  see  notes. 
The  solemnity  was  apparently  designed  only 
for  the  single  occasion  on  which  it  actually 
took  place. 

12,  13.  The  tribes  appointed  to  stand  on 
Gerizim  to  bless  the  people  all  sprang  from 
the  two  wives  of  Jacob,  Leah  and  Rachel. 
All  the  four  tribes  which  sprang  from  the 
handmaids  Zilpah  and  Bilhah  are  located  on 
Lbal.  But  in  order,  as  it  would  seem,  to 
effect  an  equal  division  two  tribes  are  added 
to  the  latter  from  the  descendants  of  the 
wives,  that  of  Reuben,  probably  because  he 
forfeited  his  primogeniture,  Gen,  xlix.  4 ; and 
of  Zebulun,  apparently  because  he  was  the 
youngest  son  of  Leah. 

'I'he  transaction  presents  itself  as  a solemn 
renewal  of  the  covenant  made  by  God  with 
Abraham  and  Isaac,  but  more  especially  with 
Jacob  and  his  family.  Accordingly  the  genea- 
logical basis ‘of  the  “twelve  patriarchs”  (cf. 
Acts  vii.  12),  the  sons  of  Jacob,  is  here  as- 
sumed. d'hc  tribes  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh 
are  merged  in  the  name  of  Joseph,  their 
father;  and  Levi,  altliough  the  tribe  is  so 
often  spoken  of  in  this  book  as  having  for 
secular  purposes  no  jxart  or  lot  with  his 
brethren  (cf  xiv.  27,  xviii.  i,  2),  regains  on 
tins  occasion  his  jdace  collaterally  with  the 
others.  And  thus  whilst  “the  Levites”  are 
in  7'.  14  appointed  to  utter  aloud,  and  no 
doubt  in  chorus,  the  communication  and  the 


benediction,  we  find  nevertheless,  7;.  12,  Levi 
amongst  the  tribes  which  had  to  make  re- 
sponse. “The  Levites”  of  7;.  14  are  no  doubt 
“the  priests  the  Levites”  (cf.  Josh,  viii,  33), 
in  whom  the  ministerial  character  attaching 
to  the  tribe  was  more  particularly  manifested. 
The  rest  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  would  stand  side 
by  side  with  the  others  to  occupy  its  own  place 
in  ratifying  the  covenant  by  its  “ Amen.”  It 
is  noteworthy  that  the  group  of  tribes  which 
stood  on  Gerizim  far  exceeded  the  other  in 
numbers  and  in  importance,  thus  perhaps 
indicating  that  even  by  the  Law  the  blessing 
should  at  length  prevail. 

15.  The  arrangements  of  this  striking 
solemnity  are  more  nearly  indicated  in  Josh, 
viii.  32  sqq. : where  see  notes.  The  “Amen” 
attested  the  conviction  of  the  utterers  that  the 
sentences  to  which  they  responded  were  true, 
just,  and  certain:  so  in  Num.  v.  22,  and  in 
our  own  Gommination  Office,  which  is  mo- 
delled after  this  ordinance  of  Moses, 

15 — 26.  Twelve  curses  against  transgres- 
sions of  the  covenant.  The  first  eleven  are 
directed  against  special  sins  which  are  selected 
by  way  of  example,  the  last  comprehensively 
sums  up  in  general  terms  and  condemns  all 
and  every  offence  against  God’s  law. 

Cursed  be  the  man  that  viaketh  any  gransen 
or  molten  image^  Cf.  iv.  16,  v.  8 ; Ex.  xx.  4, 
23;  Lev.  xxvi,  I, 

putteih  it  in  a secret  placed  This  and  the 
other  maledictions  seem  especially  to  aim  at 
those  forms  of  guilt  which  could  be  most 
easily  screened  from  human  justice. 

16.  Cf.  xxi.  18;  Lev.  xix.  3. 

17.  Cf.  xix.  14  and  reff. 


V.  i8-s.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXVII.  XXVIII.  895 


18  Cursed  he  he  that  maketh  the 
blind  to  wander  out  of  the  way.  And 
all  the  people  shall  say,  Amen. 

19  Cursed  he  he  that  perverteth 
• the  judgment  of  the  stranger,  father- 
less, and  widow.  And  all  the  people 
shall  say.  Amen. 

20  Cursed  he  he  that  lieth  with  his 
father’s  wife ; because  he  uncovereth 
his  father’s  skirt.  And  all  the  people 
shall  say.  Amen. 

21  Cursed  he  he  that  lieth  with  any 
manner  of  beast.  And  all  the  people 
shall  say.  Amen. 

22  Cursed  he  he  that  lieth  with  his 
sister,  the  daugjiter  of  his  father,  or 
the  daughter  of  his  mother.  And  all 
the  people  shall  say.  Amen. 

23  Cursed  he  he  that  lieth  with  his 
mother  in  law.  And  all  the  people 
shall  say,  Amen. 

24  Cursed  he  he  that  smiteth  his 
neighbour  secretly.  And  all  the  peo- 
ple shall  say.  Amen. 

rfEzek.22.  25  ^Cursed  he  he  that  taketh  re- 
ward  to  slay  an  innocent  person.  And 
all  the  people  shall  say.  Amen. 


26  '’Cursed  he  he  that  confirmeth  ^ 3- 

10. 

not  all  the  words  of  this  law  to  do 
them.  And  all  the  people  shall  say. 
Amen. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

I The  blessings  for  obedience.  15  The  cnrses  for 
disobedience. 

AND  it  shall  come  to  pass,  "if  thou 
shalt  hearken  diligently  unto  the 
voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  to  ob- 
serve aa^  to  do  all  his  commandments 
which  I command  thee  this  day,  that 
the  Lord  thy  God  will  set  thee  on 
high  above  all  nations  of  the  earth : 

2 And  all  these  blessings  shall  come 
on  thee,  and  overtake  thee,  if  thou 
shalt  hearken  unto  the  voice  of  the 
Lord  thy  God. 

3 Blessed  shalt  thou  he  in  the  city, 
and  blessed  shalt  thou  he  in  the  field. 

4 Blessed  shall  he  the  fruit  of  thy 
body,  and  the  fruit  of  thy  ground, 
and  the  fruit  of  thy  cattle,  the  in- 
crease of  thy  kine,  and  the  flocks  of 
thy  sheep. 

5 Blessed  shall  he  thy  basket  and  do7/gh,  or, 
thy  "store. 


18.  Cf.  Lev.  xix.  14. 

19.  Cf.  xxiv.  17  and  reff. 

20.  Cf.  xxii.  30. 

21.  Cf.  Lev.  xviii.  33,  xx.  15. 

22.  Cf.  Lev.  xviii.  9,  xx.  17. 

23.  Cf.  Lev.  xviii.  17,  xx.  14. 

24.  Cf.  xix.  II  sqq. 

25.  Cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  7,  8. 

26.  Cf.  xxviii.  15;  Ps.  cxix.  21 ; Jer.  xi.  3. 

The  blessings,  as  has  been  already  observed, 

are  not  given.  No  doubt  when  the  solemnity 
was  enacted  by  Joshua  they  ran  mutatis  mu~ 
tandis  in  the  same  formula  as  the  curses,  and 
they  were  probably  (as  the  Mishna  says,  see 
Surenhusius,  ‘ Mish.’  ill.  262)  delivered  alter- 
nately with  the  several  corresponding  curses : 
“Blessed  is  he  that  maketh  not  any  graven 
image,”  &c. 

Chap.  XXVIII.  Having  enjoined  the 
solemn  rehearsal  of  the  blessings  and  the  curs- 
ings, Moses  next  enlarges  upon  them,  and 
describes  in  detail  their  effect  and  import. 
His  object  is  of  course  to  impress  upon  his 
hearers  clearly  and  fully  the  momentous  con- 
sequences of  their  own  acts,  whether  for  good 
or  for  evil.  A comparison  of  this  chapter 
with ‘Ex.  xxiii.  20 — 23  and  Lev.  xxvi.  will 
shew  how  he  here  resumes  and  amplifies  the 


promises  and  threats  already  set  forth  in  the 
earlier  records  of  the  law.  The  blessings  are 
declared  in  fourteen  'vno. ; the  curses  require 
nearly  four  times  as  many.  Thus  here  again 
the  curse  is  the  more  conspicuous  feature  in 
the  law.  The  language  rises  in  this  chapter 
to  the  sublimest  strains,  especially  in  the  latter 
part  of  it ; and  the  prophecies  respecting  the 
dispersion  and  degradation  of  the  Jewish 
nation  in  its  later  days  are  amongst  the  most 
remarkable  in  scripture.  They  are  plain, 
precise,  and  circumstantial ; and  the  fulfil- 
ment of  them  has  been  literal,  complete,  and 
undeniable.  Dean  Jackson,  ‘ On  the  Creed,’  i. 

27 — 30,  draws  out  the  argument  derivable 
from  this  particular  prophecy  with  fulness 
and  care,  and  applies  it  to  establish  the  inspi- 
ration and  authority  of  scripture. 

1 — 14.  The  Blessing.  As  in  the  closing 
words  of  the  exposition  of  the  Law,  xxvi.  19, 
so  here,  exaltation  is  promised  to  Israel  on 
condition  of  obedience.  The  condition  is 
very  emphatically  stated  at  the  beginning  , 
I,  2),  middle  fv.f).  and  close  (^vno.  13, 14)  of 
this  portion  of  the  discourse;  and  the  several 
blessings  enumerated  appear  as  directly  conse- 
quent on  its  performance.  The  six  repetitions 
of  the  word  “blessed”  introduce  the  particu- 
lar forms  which  the  blessing  would  take  in 
the  various  relations  of  life. 


3 L 2 


896 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVIII. 


[v.  D 20. 


6 Blessed  shalt  thou  be  when  thou 
comest  in,  and  blessed  shalt  thou  be 
when  thou  goest  out. 

7 The  Lord  shall  cause  thine  ene- 
mies that  rise  up  against  thee  to  be 
smitten  before  thy  face:  they  shall 
come  out  against  thee  one  way,  and 
flee  before  thee  seven  ways. 

8 The  Lord  shall  command  the 

JOr,^  blessing  upon  thee  in  thy  ''store- 

' houses,  and  in  all  that  thou  settest 

thine  hand  unto;  and  he  shall  bless 
thee  in  the  land  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  giveth  thee. 

9 I'he  Lord  shall  establish  thee  an 
holy  people  unto  himself,  as  he  hath 
sworn  unto  thee,  if  thou  shalt  keep 
the  commandments  of  the  Lord  thy 
God,  and  walk  in  his  ways. 

10  And  all  people  of  the  earth 
shall  see  that  thou  art  called  by  the 
name  of  the  Lord  ; and  they  shall  be 
afraid  of  thee. 

*chap.  30.  II  And  ^the  Lord  shall  make  thee 
plenteous  “ in  goods,  in  the  fruit  of  thy 
^ body,  and  in  the  fruit  of  thy  cattle, 
tei/y.  and  in  the  fruit  of  thy  ground,  in  the 
land  which  the  Lord  sware  unto  thy 
fathers  to  give  thee. 

12  The  Lord  shall  open  unto  thee 
his  good  treasure,  the  heaven  to  give 
the  rain  unto  thy  land  in  his  season, 
and  to  bless  all  the  work  of  thine 
^chap.  15.  hand:  and  ^thou  shalt  lend  unto  many 
nations,  and  thou  shalt  not  borrow. 


13  And  the  Lord  shall  make  thee 
the  head,  and  not  the  tail ; and 
thou  shalt  be  above  only,  and  thou 
shalt  not  be  beneath ; if  that  thou 
hearken  unto  the  commandments  of 
the  Lord  thy  God,  which  I com- 
mand thee  this  day,  to  observe  and  to 
do  them : 

14  And  thou  shalt  not  go  aside 
from  any  of  the  words  which  I com- 
mand thee  this  day,  to  the  right  hand, 
or  to  the  left,  to  go  after  other  gods 
to  serve  them. 

15  ^ But  it  shall  come  to  pass, 

‘^if  thou  wilt  not  hearken  unto  the Lev.  26. 
voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  to  ob-  Lam.  2. 17. 
serve  to  do  all  his  commandments  £uch  i.‘ 
and  his  statutes  which  I command 
thee  this  day ; that  all  these  curses 
shall  come  upon  thee,  and  overtake 
thee  : 

16  Cursed  shalt  thou  be  in  the  city, 
and  cursed  shalt  thou  be  in  the  field. 

17  Cursed  shall  be  thy  basket  and 
thy  store. 

18  Cursed  shall  be  the  fruit  of  thy 
body,  and  the  fruit  of  thy  land,  the 
increase  of  thy  kine,  and  the  flocks  of 
thy  sheep. 

19  Cursed  shalt  thou  be  when  thou 
comest  in,  and  cursed  shalt  thou  be 
when  thou  goest  out. 

20  The  Lord  shall  send  upon  thee  ^ 
cursing,  vexation,  and  rebuke,  in  all  which  thou 
that  thou  settest  thine  hand  unto  ^ for 


5.  Blessed  shall  be  thy  basket]  The  word 
translated  “basket”  (jene')  occurs  only  again 
in  xxvi.  2,  where  its  sense  is  determined  alike 
by  the  connexion  and  by  the  immemorial 
practice  of  the  Jews,  The  basket  or  bag  was 
a customary  means  in  the  East  for  carrying 
about  whatever  might  be  needed  for  personal 
uses;  cf.  St  John  xiii.  29;  Juv.  ‘Sat.’  in.  14, 
“Judaeis,  quorum  cophinus  foenumque  su- 
pellex,” 

store]  Rather  kneading-trough,  as  the 
word  is  properly  rendered  in  Ex.  viii.  3 and 
xii.  34.  Others  render  “what  was  left;”  so 
LXX.  Vulg.  and  Luther.  Hut  see  note  on 
Ex,  xii.  34.  The  blessings  here  promised 
relate,  it  will  be  observed,  to  private  and  per- 
sonal life : in  v.  7 those  which  are  of  a more 
public  and  national  character  are  brought  for- 
ward. 

6.  C:f.  Ps.  exxi.  8. 


8.  storehouses]  The  Hebrew  word  {dsdm) 
is  Aramaic,  and  only  used  here  and  in  Prov. 
iii.  10.  See  Gesen.  s.  v. 

9.  as  he  hath  sqjjorn  unto  thee]  The  oath 
with  which  God  vouchsafed  to  confirm  His 
promises  to  the  patriarchs  (cf  Gen.  xxii.  16  ; 
Heb.  vi.  13,  14;  contained  by  implication 
these  gifts  of  holiness  and  eminence  to  Israel 
(cf  Ex.  xix.  c,  6), 

13.  Cf.  2;.  44. 

15—68.  The  Curses. 

15 — 19.  The  Blessings  are  promised  in  six 
forms  (2’2’.  3 — 6)  as  rewards  of  obedience,  and 
the  results  of  the  contrary  conduct  are  set 
forth  in  manner  and  number  corresponding. 
The  special  modes  in  which  these  threats 
should  be  executed  are  described  in  five  groups 
of  denunciations,  •w.  20 — 68. 

20 — 26.  First  series  of  judgments.  The 
curse  of  God  should  rest  on  all  they  do,  and 


V.  21  — 29.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVIII. 


to  do,  until  thou  be  destroyed,  and 
until  thou  perish  quickly  ; because  of 
the  wickedness  of  thy  doings,  whereby 
thou  hast  forsaken  me. 

21  The  Lord  shall  make  the  pes- 
tilence cleave  unto  thee,  until  he  have 
consumed  thee  from  off  the  land,  whi- 
ther thou  goest  to  possess  it. 

^Lev.  26.  22  ^The  Lord  shall  smite  thee 

with  a consumption,  and  with  a fever, 
and  with  an  inflammation,  and  with 
an  extreme  burning,  and  with  the 
" sword,  and  with  blasting,  and  with 
mildew ; and  they  shall  pursue  thee 
until  thou  perish. 

23  And  thy  heaven  that  is  over 
thy  head  shall  be  brass,  and  the  earth 
that  is  under  thee  shall  be  iron. 

24  The  Lord  shall  make  the  rain 
of  thy  land  powder  and  dust : from 
heaven  shall  it  come  down  upon  thee, 
until  thou  be  destroyed. 


25  The  Lord  shall  cause  thee  to 

be  smitten  before  thine  enemies : thou 
shalt  go  out  one  way  against  them, 
and  flee  seven  ways  before  them  : and 
shalt  be  Temoved  into  all  the  king-y^^^^;,^_ 
doms  of  the  earth.  moving. 

26  And  thy  carcase  shall  be  meat 
unto  all  fowls  of  the  air,  and  unto  the 
beasts  of  the  earth,  and  no  man  shall 
fray  them  away. 

27  The  Lord  will  smite  thee  with 
the  botch  of  Egypt,  and  with  the 
emerods,  and  with  the  scab,  and  with 
the  itch,  whereof  thou  canst  not  be 
healed. 

28  The  Lord  shall  smite  thee  with 
madness,  and  blindness,  and  astonish- 
ment of  heart : 

29  And  thou  shalt  grope  at  noon- 
day, as  the  blind  gropeth  in  darkness, 
and  thou  shalt  not  prosper  in  thy 
ways  : and  thou  shalt  be  only  op- 


f 


I 

I 


should  issue  in  manifold  forms  of  disease, 
in  famine,  and  in  defeat  in  war. 

20.  cursing']  Cf.  Mai,  ii.  2. 

‘vexation]  Rather  confusion:  the  word  is 
used  (vii.  23  ; i S.  xiv.  20)  for  the  panic  and 
disorder  with  which  the  curse  of  God  smites 
His  foes. 

21.  the  pestilence]  The  word  is  a general 
term  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  25;  Hab.  iii.  5);  the 
painful  symptoms  and  concomitants  of  the 
pestilence  are  set  forth  in  the  next  verse. 

22.  nvith*a  consumption.,  and^juith  a fe'ver] 
Cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  16.  The  Hebrew  words  occur 
only  in  these  two  places. 

'with  the  sword]  Others  “ drought”  or 
“ heat.”  But  see  Note  at  end  of  chapter. 

with  blasting.,  and  with  mildew]  The  same 
words  occur  together  Amos  iv.  9.  They  are 
derived  from  roots  signifying  respectively  “to 
be  black,”  “to  be  yellow.”  The  former 
denotes  (cf.  Gen.  xli.  23)  the  result  of  the 
scorching  east  wind,  the  latter  that  of  an  un- 
timely blight  falling  on  the  green  ear,  wither- 
ing it  and  marring  its  produce. 

23.  Cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  19. 

24.  When  the  heat  is  very  great  the  at- 
mosphere in  Palestine  is  often  filled  with  dust 
and  sand  ; the  wind  is  a burning  sirocco,  and 

• the  air  comparable  to  the  glowing  heat  at  the 
mouth  of  a furnace.  Cf.  Robinson,  ‘ B.  R.’ 
II.  123. 

25.  The  Lord  shall  cause  thee  to  be  smitten 
before  thine  enemies]  Cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  17,  37; 
Is.  XXX.  17. 


shalt  be  remo‘ved]  Lit.  “ shall  be  for  a re- 
moving.” The  threat  differs  from  that  of  Lev. 
xxvi.  33,  w’hich  refers  to  a dispersion  of  the 
people  amongst  the  heathen.  Here  it  is  meant 
that  they  should  be  tossed  to  and  fro  at  the 
win  of  others,  driven  from  one  country  to 
another  without  any  certain  settlement.  Is- 
rael should  be,  so  to  speak,  a ball  for  all  the 
kingdoms  of  the  earth  to  play  with  (Schultz). 
Contrast  v.  10  ; and  for  the  word  cf.  Jer.  xv. 
4,  xxiv.  9 ; Ezek.  xxiii.  46,  &c. 

26.  Cf.  Ps.  Ixxix.  2,  3.  This  was  looked 
upon  with  the  greatest  horror ; cf.  Joseph. 

‘ Bell.  Jud.’  IV.  5.  6 ; Sophocles,  ‘Antig.’  26  sqq. 

27 — 37.  Further  working  of  the  curse  of 
God  on  the  body,  soul,  and  outward  circum- 
stances of  the  sinners. 

27.  the  botch  of  Egypt]  Rather  boil,  as 
the  word  is  translated  in  Ex.  ix.  9,  where  see 
note. 

the  emerods]  Cf.  i S.  v.  6,  9.  The  Hebrew 
word  signifies  tumours  merely. 

with  the  scab  (cf.  Lev.  xxi.  20),  and  with  the 
itch]  Various  forms  of  the  loathsome  skin 
diseases  which  are  common  in  Syria  and  Egypt. 

28.  Mental  maladies  shall  be  added  to 
those  sore  bodily  plagues,  and  should  (29 — 
34)  reduce  the  sufferers  to  powerlessness  be- 
fore their  enemies  and  oppressors. 

madness]  LXX.  napaTrXrj^ta : cf.  Jer.  xxv. 
16—18. 

blindness]  Most  probably  mental  blindness; 
cf,  Lam.  iv.  14  ; Zeph.  i.  17  ; 2 Cor.  iii.  14,  sqq. 

astonishment]  Cf.  Jer,  iv.  9. 

29.  thou  shalt  grope]  Cf.  Is.  lix.  10. 


898 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVIII.  [v.  30-44* 


pressed  and  spoiled  evermore,  and  no 
man  shall  save  thee. 

30  Thou  shalt  betroth  a wife,  and 
another  man  shall  lie  with  her : thou 
shalt  build  an  house,  and  thou  shalt 
/chap.  20.  not  dwell  therein  : thou  shalt  plant 
f’Heb.  ^ vineyard,  and  shalt  not  ^ gather  the 
grapes  thereof. 

as  common  3 1 Thine  ox  shall  be  slain  before 
7nea . ^hine  eyes,  and  thou  shalt  not  eat 
thereof : thine  ass  shall  be  violently 
taken  away  from  before  thy  face,  and 
^ Uhall  not  be  restored  to  thee:  thy 
return  to  sheep  skall  be  given  unto  thine  ene- 
‘ ' mies,  and  thou  shalt  have  none  to 
rescue  them. 

32  Thy  sons  and  thy  daughters 
shall  be  given  unto  another  people, 
and  thine  eyes  shall  look,  and  fail 
with  longing  for  them  all  the  day 
long  : and  there  shall  be  no  might  in 
thine  hand. 

33  The  fruit  of  thy  land,  and  all 
thy  labours,  shall  a nation  which 
thou  knowest  not  eat  up  ; and  thou 
shalt  be  only  oppressed  and  crushed 
alway  : 

34  So  that  thou  shalt  be  mad  for 
the  sight  of  thine  eyes  which  thou 
shalt  see. 

35  The  Lord  shall  smite  thee  in 
the  knees,  and  in  the  legs,  with  a 
sore  botch  that  cannot  be  healed,  from 


the  sole  of  thy  foot  unto  the  top  of 
thy  head. 

36  The  Lord  shall  bring  thee, 
and  thy  king  which  thou  shalt  set 
over  thee,  unto  a nation  which  nei- 
ther thou  nor  thy  fathers  have  known ; 
and  there  shalt  thou  serve  other  gods, 
wood  and  stone. 

37  And  thou  shalt  become  ^ an ^ 9- 

astonishment,  a proverb,  and  a by-  Jer-  24-  9- 
word,  among  all  nations  whither  the 
Lord  shall  lead  thee. 

38  Thou  shalt  carry  much  seed  ^ 

out  into  the  field,  and  shalt  gather  Eag.  i.  6. 
but  little  in  ; for  the  locust  shall  con- 
sume it. 

39  Thou  shalt  plant  vineyards,  and 
dress  them.^  but  shalt  neither  drink  of 
the  wine,  nor  gather  the  grapes ; for 
the  worms  shall  eat  them. 

40  Thou  shalt  have  olive  trees 
throughout  all  thy  coasts,  but  thou 
shalt  not  anoint  thyself  with  the  oil ; 
for  thine  olive  shall  cast  his  fruit. 

41  Thou  shalt  beget  sons  and 
daughters,  but  ^ thou  shalt  not  enjoy 
them;  for  they  shall  go  into  captivity,  not  he 

42  All  thy  trees  and  fruit  of  thy 

land  shall  the  locust  " consume.  “ o-,  ^ 

43  The  stranger  that  is  within  thee  ^ 
shall  get  up  above  thee  very  high ; 
and  thou  shalt  come  down  very  low. 

44  He  shall  lend  to  thee,  and  thou 


no  man  shall  sanse  thee^^  Cf.  Lam,  v.  8. 

30.  Thou  shalt  betroth  a ^ife'\  Cf.  Jer. 
viii.  10. 

thou  shalt  build  an  house'\  Cf.  Amos  v.  ii  ; 
Micahvi.  15  ; Zeph,  i.  13. 

shalt  not  gather  the  grapes  thereof  Lit.  “use 
it  as  common,”  or  profane  it ; cf.  xx.  6,  and 
note, 

31.  shall  not  be  restored^  Lit.  “ return.  ” 

32.  Thy  sons  and  thy  daughters  shall  be 
gi'ven  unto  another  people^  Cf.  2 Chron.  xxix.  9. 

there  shall  be  no  might  in  thine  hand']  Keil 
renders  “thy  hand  shall  not  be  towards 
Crod.”  I'he  rendering  of  A.  V.  is  preferable  ; 
cf.  (len.  xxxi.  29  and  note. 

33.  (^f.  Neh.  ix.  36,  37;  Jer.  v.  17. 

35.  Cf.  -v.  27  and  Is.  i.  6. 

36.  and  thy  king]  Cf.  note  on  xvii.  14. 

38  48.  I'he  curse  is  described  as  work- 

ing on  every  kind  of  labour  and  enterprise, 


until  it  had  accomplished  the  total  ruin  of 
the  nation,  and  its  subjection  to  its  enemies, 

38,  Cf.  Mic.  vi.  15  ; Hag.  i.  6;  Joeli.  4* 

39.  ^orms]  i.  e.  the  vine-weevil,  the  con- 
volvulus of  Pliny,  ‘ Nat.  Hist.’  xvii.  47,  and 
Cato,  ‘ de  Re  Rustica,’  chap.  95,  who  pre- 
scribe elaborate  precautions  against  its  ravages. 
Plautus,  ‘Cistell.’  iv.  2,  calls  it  “involvulus:” 
ip'-  La.  Imitatin'  nequam  bestiam,  et  damnifi- 
cam.  Ph.  Quamnam  amabo  ? La.  Involvu- 
lum,  qiuK  in  pampini  folio  intorta,  implicat 
se”).  Bochart,  ‘ Hieroz.’  Part  ii.  Lib.  iv.  ch. 
27,  identifies  this  worm  with  that  called  or 
i\j/  by  the  Greeks. 

40.  thine  olinse  shall  cast  his  fruit]  Render 
shall  fall  off.  See  Note  at  end  cf  chapter. 

41.  they  shall  go  into  captivity]  Cf.  Lam. 
i.  5. 

42,  shall  the  locust  consume]  Lit.  “ possess,” 
a word  in  this  connection  even  more  forcible. 

43,  44.  Contrast  w.  12  and  13. 


V. 45-56.]  df:uteronomy.  xxviii. 


899 


T Heb. 
hear. 
t Heb. 
strong  o_ 
face. 


shalt  not  lend  to  him : he  shall  be  the 
head,  and  thou  shalt  be  the  tail. 

45  Moreover  all  these  curses  shall 
come  upon  thee,  and  shall  pursue 
thee,  and  overtake  thee,  till  thou  be 
destroyed  ; because  thou  hearkenedst 
not  unto  the  voice  of  the  Lord  thy 
God,  to  keep  his  commandments  and 
his  statutes  which  he  commanded  thee : 

46  And  they  shall  be  upon  thee  for 
a sign  and  for  a wonder,  and  upon  thy 
seed  for  ever. 

47  Because  thou  servedst  not  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  joyfulness,  and 
with  gladness  of  heart,  for  the  abun- 
dance of  all  things; 

48  Therefore  shalt  thou  serve  thine 
enemies  which  the  Lord  shall  send 
against  thee,  in  hunger,  and  in  thirst, 
and  in  nakedness,  and  in  want  of  all 
things:  and  he  shall  put  a yoke  of 
iron  upon  thy  neck,  until  he  have 
destroyed  thee. 

49  The  Lord  shall  bring  a nation 
against  thee  from  far,  from  the  end 
of  the  earth,  as  swift  as  the  eagle 
flieth  \ a nation  whose  tongue  thou 
shalt  not  ^ understand ; 

50  A nation  ^ of  fierce  counte- 
nance,  which  shall  not  regard  the 
person  of  the  old,  nor  shew  favour 
to  the  young: 

51  And  he  shall  eat  the  fruit  of 
thy  cattle,  and  the  fruit  of  thy  land, 
until  thou  be  destroyed : which  also 


shall  not  leave  thee  either  corn,  wine, 
or  oil,  or  the  increase  of  thy  kine,  or 
flocks  of  thy  sheep,  until  he  have  de- 
stroyed thee. 

52  And  he  shall  besiege  thee  in 
all  thy  gates,  until  thy  high  and 
fenced  walls  come . down,  wherein 
thou  trustedst,  throughout  all  thy 
land  : and  he  shall  besiege  thee  in 
all  thy  gates  throughout  all  thy  land, 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  given 
thee. 


53  And  ^’thou  shalt  eat  the  fruit 

of  thine  own  ^ body,  the  flesh  of  thy  2^kin.  e. 
sons  and  of  thy  daughters,  v/hich  the  Sm.  4. 10, 
L0R.D  thy  God  hath  given  thee,  in  2. 
the  siege,  and  in  the  straitness,  where-  t Heb. 
with  thine  enemies  shall  distress  thee  : 

54  So  that  the  man  that  is  tender 
among  you,  and  very  delicate,  his  eye 
shall  be  evil  toward  his  brother,  and 
toward  the  v/ife  of  his  bosom,  and 
toward  the  remnant  of  his  children 
which  he  shall  leave : 

55  So  that  he  will  not  give  to  any 
of  them  of  the  flesh  of  his  children 
whom  he  shall  eat : because  he  hath 
nothing  left  him  in  the  siege,  and  in 
the  straitness,  wherewith  thine  ene- 
mies shall  distress  thee  in  all  thy 
gates. 

56  The  tender  and  delicate  wo- 
man among  you,  which  would  not 
adventure  to  set  the  sole  of  her  foot 
upon  the  ground  for  delicateness  and 


•46.  for  e'ver']  Yet  “the  remnant”  (Rom. 
ix.  27,  xi.  5)  would  by  faith  and  obedience 
become  a holy  seed. 

47.  Cf.  Neh.  ix.  35 — 37  ; ch,  xxxii.  15. 

48.  Cf.  Jer.  xxviii.  14. 

49 — 58.  The  calamities  and  horrors 

which  should  ensue  when  Israel  should  be 
subjugated,  as  was  denounced  in  the  preceding 
by  its  foreign  foes. 

49.  The  Lord  shall  bring  a nation  against 
thee  from  far']  This,  as  other  features  of  the 
description  (cf.  Jer.  iv.  13,  v.  15  ; Lam.  iv.  19  ; 
Hab.  i.  8),  apply  undoubtedly  to  the  Chal- 
deans, and  in  a degree  to  other  nations  also 
whom  God  raised  up  as  ministers  of  vengeance 
upon  apostate  Israel  (e.g.  the  Medes,  cf.  Is. 
xiii.  17,  18).  But  it  only  needs  to  read  this 
part  of  the  denunciation,  and  to  compare  it 
with  the  narrative  of  Josephus,  ‘ De  Bell.  Jud.’ 


VI.  to  see  that  its  full  and  exact  accomplish- 
ment took  place  in  the  wars  of  Vespasian  and 
Titus  against  the  Jews,  as  indeed  the  Jews 
themselves  generally  admit. 

49.  the  eagle]  The  Roman  ensign;  cf.  St 
Matt.  xxiv.  28. 

50.  A nation  of  fierce  coiinteticmce]  Lit. 
“ strong  or  firm  of  face.”  So  in  the  prediction 
of  the  Roman  power,  Dan.  viii.  23.  Cf. 
Prov.  vii.  13,  xxi.  29. 

52.  And  he  shall  besiege  thee]  This  part  ol 
the  prophecy  received  various  minor  fulfil- 
ments before  the  crowning  accomplishment 
of  it  by  the  Romans.  Cf.  2 K.  vi.  and  xxv. 

53.  Cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  29  and  reff. ; 2 K.  vi. 
2 8,  sqq. 

54.  his  eye  shall  be  enjil]  i.  e.  grudging ; 
cf.  XV.  9. 


900 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXVIII.  [v.  57-67. 


tenderness,  her  eye  shall  be  evil  to- 
ward the  husband  of  her  bosom,  and 
toward  her  son,  and  toward  her 
daughter, 

f Heb.  ry  And  toward  her  Yo^np;  one 

tnat  cometh  out  rrom  between  her 
feet,  and  toward  her  children  which 
she  shall  bear : for  she  shall  eat  them 
for  want  of  all  things  secretly  in  the 
siege  and  straitness,  wherewith  thine 
enemy  shall  distress  thee  in  thy  gates. 

58  If  thou  wilt  not  observe  to  do 
all  the  words  of  this  law  that  are 
v/ritten  in  this  book,  that  thou  may- 
est  fear  this  glorious  and  fearful  name, 

THE  LORD  THY  GOD; 

59  Then  the  Loud  will  make  thy 
plagues  wonderful,  and  the  plagues  of 
thy  seed,  eve?!  great  plagues,  and  of 
long  continuance,  and  sore  sicknesses, 
and  of  long  continuance. 

60  Moreover  he  will  bring  upon 
thee  all  the  diseases  of  Egypt,  which 
thou  wast  afraid  of;  and  they  shall 
cleave  unto  thee. 

61  Also  every  sickness,  and  every 
plague,  which  is  not  written  in  the 
book  of  this  law,  them  will  the  Lord 

tHeb.  ^ bring;  upon  thee,  until  thou  be  de- 

canseto 

ascend.  stroyed. 

62  And  ye  shall  be  left  few  in 


number,  whereas  ye  were  '^’as  the  stars 
of  heaven  for  multitude ; because  thou 
wouldest  not  obey  the  voice  of  the 
Lord  thy  God. 

63  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that 
as  the  Lord  rejoiced  over  you  to  do 
you  good,  and  to  multiply  you ; so  the 
Lord  will  rejoice  over  you  to  destroy 
you,  and  to  bring  you  to  nought ; and 
ye  shall  be  plucked  from  off  the  land 
whither  thou  goest  to  possess  it. 

64  And  the  Lord  shall  scatter 
thee  among  all  people,  from  the  one 
end  of  the  earth  even  unto  the  other; 
and  there  thou  shalt  serve  other  gods, 
which  neither  thou  nor  thy  fathers 
have  known,  even  wood  and  stone. 

65  And  among  these  nations  shalt 
thou  find  no  ease,  neither  shall  the 
sole  of  thy  foot  have  rest : but  the 
Lord  shall  give  thee  there  a trem- 
bling heart,  and  failing  of  eyes,  and 
sorrow  of  mind : 

66  And  thy  life  shall  hang  in  doubt 
before  thee;  and  thou  shalt  fear  day 
and  night,  and  shalt  have  none  as- 
surance of  thy  life : 

67  In  the  morning  thou  shalt  say, 
Would  God  it  were  even!  and  at 
even  thou  shalt  say.  Would  God  it 
were  morning!  for  the  fear  of  thine 


57.  A?id  toward  her  young  one~\  The  word 

translated  “ one”  means  “afterbirth;” 

and  this  verse  is  probably  to  be  taken  as 
setting  forth  the  reason  why  “the  delicate 
woman”  would  have  an  “evil  eye”  toward 
her  husband:  i.e.  she  would  grudge  him  his 
share.  “ Idque  ob  secundinam  suam  et  ob 
filios”  (Rosenm.).  The  Hebrew  text  in  fact 
suggests  an  extremity  of  horror  which  the 
A.V.  fails  to  exhibit.  Cf.  2 K.  vi.  29:  and 
Josephus,  ‘ De  Bell.  Jud.’  vi.  3.  4. 

58  68.  Ultimate  issues  of  the  curse  in 

the  uprooting  of  Israel  from  the  promised 
land,  and  its  dispersion  amongst  other  nations. 

58.  in  this  hook~\  i.e.  in  the  book  of  the 
Law,  or  the  Pentateuch  in  so  far  as  it  con- 
tains commands  of  God  to  Israel.  IDeut.  is 
included,  but  not  exclusively  intended.  So  v. 
61  ; cf.  xxvii.  3 and  note,  xxxi.  9 and  note. 

this  glorious  and  fearful  name~\  Cf.  Ex.  vi. 
3 ; Lev.  xxiv.  ii,  sqq. 

60.  all  the  diseases  of  Egypt]  Cf.  vii.  15 
and  note. 


62.  ye  shall  be  left  few  in  number]  See  the 
same  threat  iv.  27. 

ye  were  as  the  stars  of  heaven]  Cf.  x.  22 ; 
Neh.  ix.  23. 

63.  rejoiced  over  you  to  do  you  good]  Cf. 
XXX.  9 ; Jer.  xxxii.  41. 

rejoice  over  you  to  destroy  you]  Cf.  Prov.  i.  26. 

64.  the  Lord  shall  scatter  thee]  Cf.  iv.  27, 
28  ; Lev.  xxvi.  33  ; Neh.  i.  8 ; Jer.  xvi.  13  ; 
Ecclus.  xlviii.  15  ; Joseph.  ‘ De  Bell.  Jud.’  vi. 
9.  2. 

65.  Cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  36  ; Amos  ix.  4. 

66.  thy  life  shall  hang  in  doubt  before  thee] 
Lit.  “thy’^life  shall  be  hanging  before  thee,  ’ 
i.  e.  shall  be  hanging  as  it  were  on  a thread, 
and  that  before  thine  own  eyes.  The  Fathers 
(Iren.  ‘ Adv.  Haer.’  iv.  23,  V.  23  ; Tertullian, 
‘ Contr.  Jud.’  xi. ; Lactant.  ‘de  Ver.  Sap.’ 
IV.  18;  Athanas.  ‘ de  Incar.’  xxxv.  and 
others)  regard  this  passage  as  suggesting^  in 
a secondary  or  mystical  sense  Christ  hanging 
on  the  cross,  as  the  life  of  the  Jews  who 
would  not  believe  in  Him. 

67.  Cf.  Job  vii.  4, 


V.6S-I.1  DEUTERONOMY.  XXVIII.  XXIX. 


901 


heart  wherewith  thou  shalt  fear,  and 
for  the  sight  of  thine  eyes  which  thou 
shalt  see. 

68  And  the  Lord  shall  bring  thee 
into  Egypt  again  with  ships,  by  the 


way  whereof  I spake  unto  thee.  Thou 
shalt  see  it  no  more  again : and  there 
ye  shall  be  sold  unto  your  enemies  for 
bondmen  and  bondwomen,  and  no 
man  shall  buy  you. 


68.  bring  tbee  into  Egypt  again  'rjjith  ships] 
This  is  the  climax.  As  the  exodus  from 
Egypt  was  as  it  were  the  birth  of  the  nation 
into  its  covenant  relationship  with  God,  so 
the  return  to  the  house  of  bondage  is  in  like 
manner  the  death  of  it.  The  mode  of  con- 
veyance, “in  ships,”  is  added  to  heighten  the 
contrast.  * They  crossed  the  sea  from  Egypt 
with  a high  hand,  the  waves  being  parted  before 
them.  They  should  go  back  again  cooped  up 
in  slave-ships.  Cf.  Hosea  viii.  13,  ix.  3. 

by  the  rujay  nvhereof  I spake  unto  thee..  Thou 
shalt  see  it  no  more  again]  An  explanation, 
not  of  the  words  “in  ships,”  but  of  the  pre- 
ceding threat  that  they  should  be  brought 


back  to  Egypt;  cf.  xvii.  16.  With  the  'v. 
cf.  Jer.  xlii.  and  xliii.;  EIos.  viii.  13,  ix.  3. 

there  ye  shall  be  sold]  Rather,  “ there  shall  ye 
offer  yourselves,  or  be  offered  for  sale.”  This 
denunciation  was  literally  fulfilled  on  more 
than  one  occasion  : most  signally  when  many 
thousand  Jews  were  sold  into  slavery  and 
sent  into  Egypt  by  Titus  (cf.  Joseph.  ‘ De 
Bell.  Jud.’  VI.  9.  2)  ; but  also  under  Hadrian, 
when  numbers  were  again  sold  at  Rachel’s 
grave.  Cf.  Jerome  on  Jer.  xxxi. 

no  fnan  shall  buy  you]  i.e.  no  one  shall  ven- 
ture even  to  employ  you  as  slaves,  regarding 
you  as  accursed  of  God,  and  to  be  shunned 
in  everything. 


NOTES  on  Chap,  xxviii.  22,  and  40 


v,  22. 

The  rendering  “ drought,”  “ heat,”  is 
supported  by  Samar.,  Vulg.,  Luth.,  Geddes, 
Gesen.,  &c.,  but  would  seem  to  require  a 
change  in  the  pointing;  cf.  Gen.  xxxi.  40. 
The  A.  V.  is  supported  by  LXX.  ((povco), 
Saad.,  and  the  majority  of  authorities  of  all 
kinds.  The  judgment  of  drought  too  is 
introduced  in  what  immediately  follows. 


•v.  40. 

The  verb  is  best  taken  with  Furst, 
Gesen.,  Knobel,  and  most  authorities  as  the 
Kal.  Fut.  of  used  intransitively.  Keil 
however,  with  Schultz  and  some  others,  hold 
it  to  be  the  Niphal  of  another  verb  and 
the  sense  would  thus  be  “shall  be  spoiled  or 
plundered.”  A like  difference  of  opiiiion 
exists  on  xix.  5,  where  a form  occurs  which 
probably  belongs  to  the  same  verb. 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

I Moses  exhorteth  them  to  obedience^  by  the 
inesnory  of  the  works  they  have  seen,  10  Ail 
are  presented  before  the  Lord  to  enter  into  his 
covenant.  1 8 The  great  wrath  on  him  that 
flatter eth  himself  in  his  wickedness.  29  Secret 
things  belong  unto  God. 


These  are  the  words  of  the  co- 
venant, which  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses  to  make  with  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  in  the  land  of  Moab, 
beside  the  covenant  which  he  made 
with  them  in  Horeb. 


Chap.  XXIX.  This  and  the  following 
chapter  contain  the  address  of  Moses  to  the 
people  on  the  solemn  renewal  of  the  covenant. 
The  people  were  now  on  the  borders  of  the 
promised  land,  ready  to  enter  in  and  take 
possession  of  that  which  God  on  His  side  had 
stipulated.  It  was  fitting  therefore  that  in 
doing  so  they  should  once  more  on  their  side 
recognize  the  obligations  under  which  they 
were  laid.  The  renewal  of  the  covenant  in  the 
land  of  Moab  did  not  consist  in  any  revision 
or  alteration  of  stipulations,  nor  in  a repeti- 
tion of  the  sacrifices  and  the  blood-sprinkling 
(cf.  FN.  xxiv.),  with  which  the  compact  was 
ratified  at  Sinai.  These  acts  remained  still 
valid,  and  all  that  was  necessary  was  a de- 


claration on  the  part  of  God  that  His  pro- 
mises and  purposes  towards  them  still  con- 
tinued in  force;  and  on  the  part  of  the  people 
a new  and  solemn  profession  of  their  duties, 
and  a vow  to  discharge  them.  This  it  was 
the  more  incumbent  on  them  to  make,  and  on 
Moses  to  require,  because  thus  far,  as  Moses 
reminded  them  in  ch.  i.,  they  had  repeatedly 
broken  their  engagements  to  God. 

After  making  appeal  to  God’s  past  mercies 
(tj-v.  I — 9),  Moses  summons  the  people  to 
pledge  themselves  anew  to  the  covenant  (‘v'v. 
10 — 15),  denouncing  once  more  rejection  of 
them  by  God  in  case  of  their  apostasy  (‘vt. 
16-— 29);  but  promising  restoration  upon 
their  repentance  (xxx.  i — 14).  Finally  he 


902 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXIX. 


[v.  2 12. 


2 ^ And  Moses  called  unto  all  Is- 
« Exod.  19.  rael,  and  said  unto  them,  "*^Ye  have 

seen  all  that  the  Lord  did  before 
your  eyes  in  the  land  of  Egypt  unto 
Pharaoh,  and  unto  all  his  servants, 
and  unto  all  his  land; 

3 The  great  temptations  'which 
thine  eyes  have  seen,  the  signs,  and 
those  great  miracles : 

4 Yet  the  Lord  hath  not  given 
you  an  heart  to  perceive,  and  eyes  to 
see,  and  ears  to  hear,  unto  this  day. 

5 And  I have  led  you  forty  years 
in  the  wilderness : your  clothes  are 
not  waxen  old  upon  you,  and  thy 
shoe  is  not  waxen  old  upon  thy  foot. 

6 Ye  have  not  eaten  bread,  neither 
have  ye  drunk  wine  or  strong  drink: 
that  ye  might  know  that  I am  the 
Lord  youn  God. 

7 And  when  ye  came  unto  this 


place,  Sihon  the  king  of  Heshbon,  and 


Og  the  king  of  Bashan,  came  out 


against  us  unto  battle,  and  we  smote 
them : 

8 And  we  took  their  land,  and 
gave  it  for  an  inheritance  unto  the 
Reubenites,  and  to  the  Gadites,  and 
to  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh. 

9 ‘^Keep  therefore  the  words  of '’chap.  4. 
this  covenant,  and  do  them,  that  ye  josh.  i.  7. 
may  prosper  in  all  that  ye  do. 

10  Ye  stand  this  day  all  of  you 
before  the  Lord  your  God^  your 
captains  of  your  tribes,  your  elders, 
and  your  officers,  with  all  the  men  of 
Israel, 


I Kin.  2.  2. 


II  Your  little  ones,  your  wives, 


and  thy  stranger  that  is  in  thy  camp, 
from  the  hewer  of  thy  wood  unto  the 
drawer  of  thy  water : 


2 That  thou  shouldest  Tnter  into 


t Heb. 


/ass. 


solemnly  sets  before  them,  the  blessing  and 
the  curse,  and  adjures  them  to  choose  the 
blessing  1 5 — 20). 

1.  This  'V.  is  added  to  the  last  chapter 
in  the  Hebrew  text  of  most  editions;  and  so 
Gedd.,  Knob.,  Schultz,  Wogue,  and  the 
Jewish  authorities  generally,  who  regard  it, 
and  probably  correctly  (cf.  the  very  similar 
case  Lev.  xxvi.  46),  as  a recapitulation. 
The  division  of  the  A.  V.  is  however  that  of 
LXX.  and  Vulg. 

2.  Cf.  Ex.  xix.  4.  ♦ 

3.  T/je  great  temptations']  Cf.  iv.  34,  vii. 
19. 

4.  Tet  the  Lord  hath  not  gin^enyou  an  heart 
to  perceiije.^  and  eyes  to  see.,  and  ears  to  hear] 
Ability  to  understand  the  things  of  God  is 
the  gift  of  God  (cf.  i Cor.  ii.  14);  yet  man 
is  not  guiltless  if  he  lacks  that  ability.  The 
people  had  it  not  because  they  had  not  felt 
their  want  of  it,  nor  asked  for  it.  God  makes 
a like  complaint  of  the  people  'v.  29;  as  does 
St  Paul  in  later  days,  2 Cor.  iii.  14,  15.  It 
is  needless  either  to  turn  the  passage  inter- 
rogatively (as  Clericus)  “hath  God  given?” 
or  (with  Grotius  and  others,  after  Maiino- 
nides)  to  explain  “given”  as  really  meaning 
“received;”  “non  accepistis  cor  intelligens.” 
Cf.  Is.  vi.  9,  ro,  Ixiii.  9,  10,  17  ; Kzek.  xii.  2; 
St  .Matt.  xiii.  15  ; St  John  viii.  43;  Acts 
xxviii.  26,  27. 

5.  ylnd  I ha-ve  led  you  forty  years]  Cf.  i.  3, 
viii.  2. 

your  clothes  are  not  nvaxen  old]  Cf.  viii.  4 
and  note. 

6.  Cf.  viii.  3.  Moses  passes  imperceptibly 


into  an  address  as  from  God  Himself,  on 
Whose  behalf  he  was  standing  before  the 
people;  so  in  xi.  13,  14. 

7.  Cf.  ii.  32,  iii.  i. 

8.  Cf.  iii.  12,  13. 

9.  Cf.  iv.  6;  Josh.  i.  7. 

that  ye  may  prosper]  Literally  “that  ye 
may  act  wisely ; ” so  perhaps  in  xxxii.  29  ; 
Josh.  i.  7 ; I K.  ii.  3.  The  connexion  of  the 
two  ideas  of  wisdom  in  conduct  and  prosperity 
in  circumstances  is  noteworthy. 

10 — 15.  Summons  to  enter  anew  into  the 
Covenant. 

10.  your  captains  of  your  tribes.,  your  elders., 
and  your  opfcers.,  ^jith  all  the  men  of  Israel] 
The  A.  V.  here  follows  the  LXX.  But  the 
Hebrew  strictly  construed  runs  thus:  your 
captains,  your  tribes,  your  elders,  and 
your  officers,  every  man  of  Israel. 
The  word  “tribes”  apparently  denotes  all 
not  in  office. 

11.  The  covenant  was  national,  and  there- 
fore embraced  all  the  elements  which  make 
up  the  nation.  The  “little  ones”  would  of 
course  be  represented  by  their  parents  or 
guardians;  the  absent  (yv.  15)  by  those  pre- 
sent ; nor  were  the  servants  and  proselytes  to 
be  excluded  (cf.  Acts  ii.  39).  The  text  is 
fairly  alleged  in  justification  of  the  Church’s 
practice  of  admitting  little  ones  into  covenant 
with  God  by  baptism,  and  accepting  promises 
made  on  their  behalf  by  sponsors. 

thy  stranger]  LXX.  “ the  proselyte.”  Cf. 
Ex.  xii.  38,  48. 

the  he^juer  of  thy  ^juood]  Cf.  Josh.  ix.  21  sqq. 


V.  13  — 20,] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXIX. 


903 


covenant  with  the  Lord  thy  God, 
and  into  his  oath,  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  niaketh  with  thee  this  day : 

13  That  he  may  establish  thee  to 
day  for  a people  unto  himself,  and 
that  he  may  be  unto  thee  a God,  as 
he  hath  said  unto  thee,  and  as  he  hath 
sworn  unto  thy  fathers,  to  Abraham, 
to  Isaac,  and  to  Jacob. 

14  Neither  with  you  only’  do  I 
make  this  covenant  and  this  oath ; 

15  But  with  him  that  standeth  here 
with  us  this  day  before  the  Lord  our 
God,  and  also  with  him  that  is  not 
here  with  us  this  day: 

16  (For,  ye  know  how  we  have 
dwelt  in  the  land  of  Egypt;  and  how 
we  came  throu2;h  the  nations  which 
ye  passed  by ; 


1 7 And  ye  have  seen  their  abomi- 
nations, and  their  Mdols,  wood  and  + Heb.  • 
stone,  silver  and  gold,  which  were^idf^ 
among  them : ) 

18  Lest  there  should  be  among 
you  man,  or  woman,  or  family,  or 
tribe,  whose  heart  turneth  away  this 
day  from  the  Lord  our  God,  to  go 
and  serve  the  gods  of  these  nations ; 
lest  there  should  be  among  you  a root 

that  beareth  " gall  and  wormv/ood ; " ^ , 

. , . poisonjiil 

19  And  It  come  to  pass,  when  he  herb. 

heareth  the  words  of  this  curse,  that  Hf/l] 
he  bless  himself  in  his  heart,  saying,  I 
shall  have  peace,  though  I walk  in 
the  "imagination  of  mine  heart,  to  J 
add  Mrunkenness  to  thirst:  Tn^h 

20  The  Lord  will  not  spare  him,  the  drunk- 
but  then  the  anger  of  the  Lord  and 


15.  <U}ith  him  that  is  not  here  nvith  us^  i.  e., 
as  the  Jews  explain,  posterity;  which  through- 
out all  generations  was  to  be  taken  as 
bound  by  the  act  and  deed  of  those  present 
and  living. 

16 — 29.  The  appeal  just  made  is  enforced 
by  another  warning  against  apostasy,  and 
declaration  of  the  fearful  judgments  which 
would  follow  upon  it. 

IG,  17.  These  are  not  parenthetic  as 
in  the  A.  V.  T.  18  stands  in  close  connexion, 
not  with  *1^.  15,  but  with  what  immediately 
precedes.  The  people  is  reminded  (‘w.  16, 
17)  of  what  it  had  itself  Vv^itnessed,  in  Egypt 
and  on  its  journey,  of  the  vileness  of  idolatry, 
and  that  experience  is  urged  (pv.  18)  as  a 
motive  for  shunning  that  heinous  sin. 

17.  idols']  Marg.  “dungy  gods;”  i.e.  clods 
or  stocks  which  can  be  rolled  about ; cf.  Lev. 
xxvi.  30. 

18.  'whose  heart  turneth  away]  Cf.  xi.  16. 

lest  there  should  be  among  you  a root  that 

beareth  gall  and  wormwood]  The  word  Q'bsh) 
here  and  in  xxxii.  32  rendered  “gall,”  is  in 
Hos.  X,  4 translated  “ hemlock.”  It  is  the 
name  of  a plant  of  intense  bitterness,  and  (cf. 
Hos.  X.  4)  of  quick  growth;  and  is  there- 
fore repeatedly  used  in  conjunction  with 
“wormwood”  (cf.  Jer.  ix.  15,  Lam.  hi.  19; 
Amos  vi.  12),  to  express  figuratively  the 
nature  and  effects  of  sin  (cf.  Acts  viii.  23  ; 
Heb.  xii.  15).  The  Hebrew  word  means  “a 
head,”  and  is  no  doubt  descriptive  of  the 
plant,  which  grew  to  a tuft.  Some  identify 
the  herb  with  colocynth,  others  with  tares, 
Gesen.,  more  probably,  with  the  poppy.  Hence 
the  “water”  {i.e.  juice)  “of  gall”  (Jer.  viii. 
14,  xxiii.  15)  would  be  opium.  This  would 
explain  its  employment  in  the  stupefying 


drink  given  to  criminals  at  the  time  of  execu- 
tion (cf.  Ps.  Ixix.  21;  St  Matt,  xxvii.  34), 
and  the  use  of  the  word  as  synonymous  with 
poison  (cf.  xxxii.  33;  Job  xx.  16). 

wormwood]  Hebr.  (laandh)  derived  from  a 
root  signifying  “ to  detest”  or  “curse.”  The 
plant  (absinthium)  is  sufficiently  familiar.  It 
is  used  to  denote  metaphorically  the  distress 
and  trouble  which  result  from  sin,  and  is 
translated  by  the  LXX.  here  TrtKpi'a;  in  Jerem. 
obvvT)  and  avayKrj.  Cf.  the  passages  quoted 
above,  and  Amos  v.  7 ; Rev.  viii.  ii.  In  Amos 
vi.  12  this  word  is  rendered  “hemlock.” 

“The  root  that  beareth  gall  and  worm.- 
wood,”  means  in  this  place  any  person  lurking 
amongst  them  who  is  tainted  with  apostasy. 

19.  ylnd  it  come  to  pass^...that  he  bless  him- 
self in  his  heart.,  saying.,  1 shall  ha-ve  peace., 
though  I walk  . in  the  imagination  of  mine 
heart]  The  marg.  for  “imagination”  has 
more  correctly  “stubbornness.”  The  word 
is  derived  from  a root  {shdrar]  signifying 
“to  twist  into  a cord,”  and  so  “to  resolve” 
or  “ determine.”  The  subst.  here  used  is  not 
found  except  in  combination  with  “heart” 
(Ps.  Ixxxi.  12;  Jer.  iii.  17  and  elsewhere), 
and  imports  hardness  or  stedfast  determina- 
tion of  the  heart.  The  particle  rendered  in 
A.  V.  “though”  may  retain  its  ordinary 
sense,  “for”  or  “ because.”  “ It  is  well  with 
me,  for  I am  living  in  the  self-will  of  my 
mind:  i.e.  my  ‘ summum bonum’  is  in  follow- 
ing my  own  will  and  way.”  Cf.  on  the 
thought  Jer.  xxiii.  17.  The  secret  and  pre- 
sumptuous sinner  is  meant  who  flatters  him- 
self that  he  will  remain  undetected  and  un- 
punished, since  he  follows  his  own  devices 
and  prospers.  Cf.  Ps.  Ixxiii.  ii  sqq. 

to  add  drunkenness  to  thirst]  On  this  diffi- 
cult and  proverbial  phrase,  see  Note  at  the  end 


904 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXIX. 


[v.  21—29. 


his  jealousy  shall  smoke  against  that 
man,  and  all  the  curses  that  are  writ- 
ten in  this  book  shall  lie  upon  him, 
and  the  Lord  shall  blot  out  his  name 
from  under  heaven. 

21  And  the  Lord  shall  separate 
him  unto  evil  out  of  all  the  tribes  of 
Israel,  according  to  all  the  curses  of 

tHeb.  the  covenant  that  Ure  written  in  this 

22  So  that  the  generation  to  come 
of  your  children  that  shall  rise  up 
after  you,  and  the  stranger  that  shall 
come  from  a far  land,  shall  say,  when 
they  see  the  plagues  of  that  land,  arid 

tHeb.  the  sicknesses  ^ which  the  Lord  hath 

v>herc-Mith  1 • 1 

the  Lord  laid  upon  it; 

23  And  that  the  whole  land  thereof 
is  brimstone,  and  salt,  and  burning, 
that  it  is  not  sown,  nor  beareth,  nor 

Gen.  19.  any  grass  groweth  therein,  “^like  the 
overthrow  of  Sodom,  and  Gomorrah, 
Admah,  and  Zeboim,  which  the  Lord 
overthrew  in  his  anger,  and  in  his 
wrath : 

24  Even  all  nations  shall  say, 


^Wherefore  hath  the  Lord  done  thus  g ^ ^in.  o. 
unto  this  land?  what  meaneth  the  heat  Jer.  22.  8. 
of  this  great  an^er? 

25  T hen  men  shall  say.  Because 
they  have  forsaken  the  covenant  of 
the  Lord  God  of  their  fathers,  which 
he  made  with  them  when  he  brought 
them  forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt : 

26  Eor  they  went  and  served  other 
gods,  and  worshipped  them,  gods  whom 
they  knew  not,  and  " whom  he  had  not " Or, 

^ given  unto  them  : 

27  And  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was  any'^p'". 
kindled  against  this  land,  to  bring 
upon  it  all  the  curses  that  are  written  divided. 
in  this  book : 

28  And  the  Lord  rooted  them  out 
of  their  land  in  anger,  and  in  wrath, 
and  in  great  indignation,  and  cast 
them  into  another  land,  as  it  is  this 
day. 

29  The  secret  things  belong  unto 
the  Lord  our  God : but  those  things 
which  are  revealed  belong  unto  us  and 
to  our  children  for  ever,  that  we  may 
do  all  the  words  of  this  law. 


of  the  chapter.  The  sense  is  probably : “so 
that  the  sated  soul  hurry  away  with  itself 
that  other  soul  which  longs  for  the  forbidden 
sin.” 

The  sense  of  the  whole  passage  from  i;.  i6 
onward  to  'u.  20  may  be  exhibited  thus: 
“Ye  have  seen  the  abominations  of  idolatry 
amongst  the  heathen.  Do  you  therefore  look 
diligently  that  there  be  no  secret  idolater 
amongst  you ; a root  of  bitterness  to  all  about 
him.  Let  there  be  no  one,  I say,  who  when 
he  hears  the  curses  of  the  law  against  this  sin, 
flatters  himself,  saying  within  himself,  ‘ All 
will  be  well,  for  I walk  unmolested  in  my  own 
self- chosen  path;’  and  thus  acting,  not  only 
takes  his  own  fill  of  sin,  but  destroys  likewise 
every  tempted  brother  within  his  reach ; for 
the  Lord  will  not  spare  him,”  &:c. 

20.  Though  the  secret  idolater  may  escape 
human  justice,  he  shall  not  escape  the  judg- 
ment of  God.  Cf.  Ezek.  xiv.  7,  8.  More 
literally  the  2).  would  run:  “the  Lord  will 
not  pardon  him,”  See. 

the  anger  of  the  Lord  and  his  jealousy  shall 
smoke'\  (T.  Ps.  Ixxiv.  i,  Ixxix.  5. 

blot  out  his  name']  Cf.  ix,  14. 

21.  that  are  avritten]  Marg,  correctly 
thatiswritten:  the  participle  agrees  with 
“covenant.” 


22.  23.  The  baleful  effects  of  the  “root 
of  bitterness”  are  described.  It  would  defile 
and  ruin  the  whole  land. 

23.  The  description  is  borrowed  from  the 
local  features  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  its  vicinity. 
The  towns  of  the  vale  of  Siddim  were  fertile 
and  well  watered  (cf.  Gen.  xiii.  10)  until  de- 
vastated by  the  wrath  of  God  (Gen.  xix. 
24,  25).  The  ruin  of  Israel  and  its  land 
should  be  of  the  like  sort  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  31, 
32;  Ps.  evii.  34;  Zeph.  ii.  9).  The  desolate 
state  of  Palestine  at  present,  and  the  traces  of 
former  fertility  and  prosperity,  are  attested  by 
every  traveller.  See  e.g.  Keith’s  ‘Land  of 
Israel,’  chaps.  3,  4,  and  5. 

24.  Cf.  I K.  ix.  8,  9;  Jer.  xxii.  8,  9. 

26.  nvhorn  he  had  not  given  unto  them] 
Cf.  iv.  19  and  note. 

27.  Cf.  Dan.  ix.  ii — 15. 

28.  and  cast  them  into  another  land]  See 
on  these  words  Note  at  end  of  chapter. 

29.  The  secret  things  belong  unto  the  Lord 
our  God]  This  v.  seems  to  be  added,  not 
(as  some  take  it)  by  way  of  an  expression 
of  pious  submission  on  the  part  of  those  who 
give  their  answer  to  the  questions  proposed  in' 
«z;.  24,  but  rather  as  a solemn  admonition  on 
the  part  of  Moses,  in  order  to  close  the  series 
of  blessings  and  cursings  which  he  has  de- 


V.  I— 3-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXX. 


905 


livered.  The  sense  seems  to  be  this:  “The 
future,  when  and  how  these  good  and  evil 
things  will  take  effect,  it  lies  with  the  Lord 
our  God  to  determine ; it  pertains  not  to  man’s 
sphere  and  duty.  His  revealed  will  is  that 
which  we  must  carry  out.”  The  17th  of  our 
Articles  of  Religion  concludes  with  much  the 


same  sentiment.  The  words  “ unto  us  and 
to  our  children  ” are  in  the  Hebr.  distinguished 
by  “puncta  extraordinaria,”  in  order  no  doubt 
to  draw  attention  to  them.  Nor  is  this  with- 
out reason.  For  that  “they  and  their  chil- 
dren ” should  act  upon  the  revealed  will  of 
God  was  the  aim  and  end  of  the  whole  law. 


NOTES  on  Chap.  xxix.  19,  and  28. 


•V.  19. 

Many  and  various  interpretations  have  been 
given  of  these  words.  It  is  to  be  noted 
however  that  (i)  the  two  words  translated 
“drunkenness”  and  “thirst”  are  strictly  two 
feminine  adjectives;  (2)  the  former  adj.,  “the 
drunken,”  seems  to  belong  to  the  subject  of 
the  verb,  the  other  being  marked  by  the  usual 
particle  as  the  object;  (3)  the  verb  (HSD), 
though  sometimes  meaning  “ to  add,”  is  al- 
ways {e.g.  xxxii.  23)  in  this  sense  associated 
with  a prep.  (b'J),  which  is  here  wanting;  and 
therefore  the  other  sense  which  the  verb  un- 
doubtedly has  also,  and  which  suits  the  present 
context  well,  viz.  “to  take  away,”  “con- 
sume,” or  “destroy”  (cf.  Gen.  xviii.  23;  Num. 
xvi.  26;  Is.  vii.  20),  is  in  this  place  to  be 
preferred ; (4)  that  the  subst.  to  be  supplied 
for  the  two  adjectives  seems  in  this  connexion 
evidently  to  be  “person”  or  “soul”  (ne~ 
pheslo).  The  words  would  then  appear  to 
mark  the  result  of  the  conduct  of  the  sin- 
ner whose  hardihood  has  been  set  forth  in 
the  context  preceding;  and  to  mean  “so  that 
the  soul  that  is  drunken  with  sin  carry  away 


that  which  thirsts  for  sin.”  The  presumptu- 
ous sinner  is  described  as  congratulating 
himself  that 'all  is  and  will  be  well  with  him, 
.since  he  acts  as  pleases  him  best ; and  thus, 
himself  “drinking  iniquity  like  water”  (cf. 
Job  XV.  16),  he  corrupts  and  destroys  others 
who  are  thirsting  or  prone  to  it.  So  Maurer, 
and  substantially  Schultz,  Wogue.  &c.  Other 
renderings  are  given  by  Rosenm.,  who  prefers 
to  supply  the  subst.  “ land,”  and  to  treat  the 
whole  as  a sort  of  proverbial  expression : 
“that  the  watered  and  the  thirsty  soil  may 
be  destroyed  together;”  i.e.  that  there  may 
be  a general  and  sweeping  ruin.  But  this 
seems  farfetched. 

n).  28. 

The  Hebr.  word  {yashllchem')  is  written 
with  a great  lamed,  and  with  yod  defective. 
The  former  letter  is  the  first  in  the  word 
(J'‘dlam)^  “for  ever;”  the  latter  used  as  a 
numeral  signifies  “ten.”  In  the  mode  of 
writing  is  supposed  to  be  mystically  signified 
the  perpetual  rejection  of  the  Ten  tribes. 
Buxtorf,  ‘Masoret.  Com.’  xiv. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

I Great  mercies  promised  ‘iinto  the  repeiitant. 
II  The  commandment  is  manifest.  1^  Death 
and  life  are  set  before  thei7i. 

AND  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when 
all  these  things  are  come  upon 
thee,  the  blessing  and  the  curse,  which 
I have  set  before  thee,  and  thou  shalt 
call  them  to  mind  among  all  the  na- 


tions, whither  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  driven  thee, 

2 And  shalt  return  unto  the  Lord 
thy  God,  and  shalt  obey  his  voice  ac- 
cording to  all  that  I command  thee 
this  day,  thou  and  thy  children,  with 
all  thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul ; 

3 That  then  the  Lord  thy  God 
will  turn  thy  captivity,  and  have  com- 


CiiAP.  XXX.  Yet  the  rejection  of  Israel 
and  the  desolation  of  the  promised  inherit- 
ance were  not  to  be  the  close  of  God’s  dis- 
pensations. Were  this  so  the  good  purposes 
of  God  would  have  been  defeated,  and  the 
promise  have  been  brought  at  last  to  nought. 
But  such  a result  is  impossible  (cf.  Num. 
xxiii.  19;  Rom.  xi.  i and  29).  The  closing 
words  of  the  address  therefore  are  words  of 
comfort  and  promise.  So  when  Moses  had 
previously  (iv.  29  sqq. ; Lev.  xxvi.  40  sqq.) 
denounced  the  judgments  of  God  against 
apostasy,  he  adds  similar  predictions  of  the 


eventual  conversion  and  restoration  of  Israel. 
(Cf.  I K.  viii.  46 — 50.) 

1 — 10.  The  chastisements  of  God  would 
lead  the  nation  to  repent,  and  thereupon  God 
would  again  bless  them. 

2.  And  shalt  return~\  Cf.  Neh.  i.  9. 

3.  avill  turn  thy  captia.nty']  Will  change  or 
put  an  end  to  thy  state  of  captivity  or  dis- 
tress; not  (as  some)  “bring  back  thy  cap- 
tives,” a rendering  refuted  by  the  use  of  the 
phrase  in  Job  xlii.  10.  (Cf.  Ps.  xiv.  7,  Ixxxv. 


[v.  4— IT. 


go6  DEUTERON 

passion  upon  thee,  and  will  return 
and  gather  thee  from  all  the  nations, 
whither  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  scat- 
tered thee. 

«Neh.  I.  4 ""If  any  of  thine  be  driven  out 
unto  the  outmost  parts  of  heaven, 
from  thence  will  the  Lord  thy  God 
gather  thee,  and  from  thence  will  he 
fetch  thee: 

5 And  the  Lord  thy  God  will 
bring  thee  into  the  land  which  thy 
fathers  possessed,  and  thou  shalt  pos- 
sess it;  and  he  will  do  thee  good,  and 
multiply  thee  above  thy  fathers. 

- 6 And  the  Lord  thy  God  will  cir- 
cumcise thine  heart,  and  the  heart  of 
thy  seed,  to  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy 
soul,  that  thou  mayest  live. 

7  And  the  Lord  thy  God  will  put 
all  these  curses  upon  thine  enemies, 
and  on  them  that  hate  thee,  which 
persecuted  thee. 


OMY.  XXX. 

8 And  thou  shalt  return  and  obey 
the  voice  of  the  Lord,  and  do  all  his 
commandments  which  I command 
thee  this  day. 

9 ^And  the  Lord  thy  God  wilE^'J^^'P- 
make  thee  plenteous  in  every  work  of 
thine  hand,  in  the  fruit  of  thy  body, 

and  in  the  fruit  of  thy  cattle,  and  in 
the  fruit  of  thy  land,  for  good:  for^ 
the  Lord  will  again  rejoice  over  thee 
for  good,  as  he  rejoiced  over  thy  fa- 
thers : 

10  If  thou  shalt  hearken  unto  the 
voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  to  keep 
his  commandments  and  his  statutes 
which  are  written  in  this  book  of  the 
law,  and  if  thou  turn  unto  the  Lord 
thy  God  with  all  thine  heart,  and 
with  all  thy  soul. 

11  ^ For  this  commandment  which 
I command  thee  this  day,  it  is  not 
hidden  from  thee,  neither  is  it  far 
off. 


a;  Jer.  xxx.  i8.)  The  rendering  of  the  LXX. 
is’significant;  “the  Lord  will  heal  thy  sins.” 

The  promises  of  this  and  following  v'v. 
had  no  doubt  their  partial  fulfilments  in  the 
days  of  the  Judges;,  but  the  fact  that  various 
important  features  of  them  are  repeated  in 
Jer.  xxxii.  37  sqq.,  and  in  Ezek.  xi.  19 
sqq.,  xxxiv.  13  sqq.,  xxxvi.  24  sqq.,  shews 
us  that  none  of  these  was  regarded  as  ex- 
hausting the  promises.  In  full  analogy  with 
the  scheme  of  prophecy  we  may  add  that 
the  return  from  the  Babylonian  Captivity 
has  not  exhausted  their  depth.  The  New 
I'cstament  takes  up  the  strain  {e.g.  Rom. 
xi.),  and  foretells  the  restoration  of  Israel  to 
the  covenanted  mercies  of  God.  True  these 
mercies  shall  not  be,  as  before,  confined  to 
that  nation.  The  “turning  again  of  the 
captivity”  will  be  when  Israel  is  converted 
to  flirn  in  Whom  the  Law  was  fulfilled,  and 
who  died  “ not  for  that  nation  only,”  but 
also  that  he  might  “ gather  together  in  one 
the  children  of  God  that  were  scattered 
abroad”  (St  John  xi.  51,  52).  Then  shall 
there  be  “one  fold  and  one  shepherd”  (St 
John  X.  16).  But  whether  the  general  con- 
version of  the  Jews  shall  be  accompanied 
with  any  national  restoration,  any  recovery 
of  their  ancient  prerogatives  as  the  chosen 
people;  and  further,  whether  there  shall  be 
any  local  replacement  of  them  in  the  land 
of  their  fathers,  may  be  regarded  as  of  “ the 
secret  things”  which  belong  unto  God  (xxix. 
29);  and  so  indeed  our  Lord  Himself  teaches 
us  (Acts  i.  6,  ;)•  The  letter  of  the  w. 


before  us  and  of  the  parallel  passages  seems 
indeed  to  point  to  both  a national  and  a local 
return  of  Israel.  On  the  other  hand,  in  this 
very  passage  nj.  6 seems  plainly  to  intimate 
that  in  the  Kingdom  of  the  Messiah  the  cere- 
monies and  ordinances  at  any  rate  shall  reach 
that  accomplishment  in  which  the  outward 
sign  shall  be  superseded  by  the  thing  signified ; 
cf.  Rom.  ii.  29.  And  God’s  purpose  may  be 
similar  as  regards  the  promises.  The  restora- 
tion here  foretold  may  be  realized,  and  the 
promises  to  Abraham  (Gen.  xvii.  6,  &c.) 
most  abundantly  fulfilled  to  Israel,  yet  not  to 
the  Israel  “according  to  the  flesh”  merely, 
but  to  that  spiritual  Israel  whose  Promised 
Land  is  not  narrowed  to  an  earthly  Canaan. 
To  us  however  the  exact  import  of  the 
prophecies  respecting  the  future  of  the  Jews 
must  remain  as  yet,  as  was  the  sinailar  inquiry 
respecting  the  Messianic  prophecies  in  pre- 
Messianic  days  (cf.  i Pet.  i.  n),  matter  of 
reverent  search  and  discussion  only. 

4.  Cf.  Neh.  i.  9. 

6.  circumcise  thine  heart\  Cf.  x.  16;  Jer. 

xxxii.  39  sqq.;  Heb.  viii.  10. 

9.  rejoice  o'ver  thee  for  good]  Cf.  xxviii. 
63  ; Jer.  xxxii.  41- 

10 20.  The  law  wliich  thus  bears  with 

it  blessings  for  the  faithful,  and  woes  for  the 
disobedient,  has  been  brought  home  to  Israel 
{y'v.  10 — 14),  so  that  ignorance  of  its  re- 
quirements cannot  be  pleaded;  hence  {w. 

I g 20)  life  and  death,  good  and  evil,  are 

solemnly  set  before  the  people  for  their  own 


V.  12 20.] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXX. 


907 


Rom. 

, &c. 


12  is  not  in  heaven,  that  thou 
shouldest  say,  Who  shall  go  up  for  us 
to  heaven,  and  bring  it  unto  us,  that 
we  may  hear  it,  and  do  it 

13  Neither  is  it  beyond  the  sea, 
that  thou  shouldest  say.  Who  shall 
go  over  the  sea  for  us,  and  bring  it 
unto  us,  that  we  may  hear  it,  and 
do  it? 

14  But  the  word  is  very  nigh  unto 
thee,  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart, 
that  thou  mayest  do  it. 

15  ^ See,  I have  set  before  thee 
this  day  life  and  good,  and  death  and 
evil ; 

16  In  that  I command  thee  this 
day  to  love  the  Lord  thy  God,  to 
walk  in  his  ways,  and  to  keep  his 
commandments  and  his  statutes  and 
his  judgments,  that  thou  mayest  live 


and  multiply : and  the  Lord  thy  God 
shall  bless  thee  in  the  land  whither 
thou  goest  to  possess  it. 

17  But  if  thine  heart  turn  away, 
so  that  thou  wilt  not  hear,  but  shalt 
be  drawn  away,  and  worship  other 
gods,  and  serve  them ; 

18  I denounce  unto  you  this  day, 
that  ye  shall  surely  perish,  aitd  that 
ye  shall  not  prolong  your  days  upon 
the  land,  whither  thou  passest  over 
Jordan  to  go  to  possess  it. 

19  call  heaven  and  earth  to  re-  '^chap.  4. 
cord  this  day  against  you,  that  I have  ^ ’ 

set  before  you  life  and  death,  blessing 
and  cursing : therefore  choose  life, 
that  both  thou  and  thy  seed  may  live : 

20  That  thou  mayest  love  the 
Lord  thy  God,  and  that  thou  mayest 
obey  his  voice,  and  that  thou  mayest 


choice ; and  an  earnest  exhortation  to  choose 
the  better  part  concludes  the  address. 

11 — 14.  The  immediate  purpose  of  this 
passage  is  to  encourage  the  people  by  re- 
minding them  that  all  necessary  instruction . 
had  been  placed  within  their  reach.  God  had 
on  His  side  done  all  that  was  possible  to 
make  the  knowledge  of  His  will  and  the 
performance  of  it  ^ easy  to  Israel:  cf.  Isa. 
xlv.  19,  and  especially  Rom.  x.  6 sqq.  The 
passage  is  not  cited  by  St  Paul  strictly 
either  according  to  the  Hebr.  or  the  LXX. 
Yet  we  must  not  consider  it  as  quoted 
by  him  merely  in  the  way  of  illustration, 
much  less  as  accommodated  to  suit  the 
purposes  of  the  argument  on  hand,  regard- 
less of  its  significance  in  its  own  context.  We 
have  in  Rom.  an  authoritative  interpretation 
of  what  the  words  of  Moses  do  really  and 
principally  if  not  obviously  signify.  The 
Prophet  spake,  the  Apostle  expounded,  by 
one  and  the  selfsame  Spirit.  Those  who 
believe  this  will  not  question  the  authority, 
and  consequently  not  the  correctness,  of  the 
sense  assigned  by  the  latter  to  the  words  of 
the  former.  It  is  nothing  to  the  purpose  to 
inquire  how  far  the  ideas  assigned  to  the 
words  by  St  Paul  were  present  to  the  mind 
of  Moses.  At  any  rate  what  is  here  predi- 
cated by  Moses  of  the  law  finds  its  practical 
issue  only  under  the  Gospel.  The  law  may 
give  “ line  upon  line,  and  precept  upon  pre- 
cept,” yet  where  the  heart  is  unrenewed 
actual  fulfilment  of  it  will  still  be  far  off 
and  unattainable.  It  isHhen  only  by  “the 
word  of  faith  ” (Rom,.,  x.  8)  that  the  objec- 
tive nearness  and  facility  of  the  command- 
ment are  realized  by  man ; and  that  which  is 


so  feasible  per  se  (cf.  Mic.  vi.  8)  becomes  practi- 
cable in  fact  to  us.  Thus  “the  righteous- 
ness which  is  of  faith”  is  really  and  truly  de- 
scribed in  these  words  of  the  law,  and  under 
St  Paul’s  guidance  we  affirm  was  intended 
so  to  be.  For  the  simplicity  and  accessibility 
which  Moses  here  attributes  to  the  law  of 
God  neither  are  nor  can  be  experimentally 
found  in  it  except  through  the  medium  of 
faith ; even  though  outwardly  and  in  the  letter 
that  law  be  written  out  for  us  so  “that  he 
may  run  that  readeth,”  and  be  set  forth  in  its 
duties  and  its  sanctions  as  plainly  as  it  was 
before  the  Jews  by  Moses.  The  seeming  ease’ 
of  the  commandment,  and  its  real  impos- 
sibility to  the  natural  man,  form  part  of  the 
qualifications  of  the  law  to  be  our  school- 
master to  bring  us  unto  Christ.  See  further 
on  Rom.  1.  c. 

11.  hidden  from  thee~\  Rather,  too  li^ird 
for  thee,  as  the  same  Hebrew  word  is 
rendered,  xvii.  8. 

neither  is  it  far  off'\  Cf.  St  Luke  xvii.  21. 

13.  The  paraphrase  of  this  n),  in  the  Jer. 
Targ.  is  noteworthy,  and  should  be  com- 
pared with  St  Paul’s  rendering  in  Rom.  x.  7 : 
“ Neither  is  the  law  beyond  the  great  sea, 
that  thou  shouldest  say.  Oh  that  we  had  one 
like  Jonah  the  prophet  who  could  descend 
into  the  depths  of  the  sea  and  bring  it  to 
us!” 

14.  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart]  Cf.  vi. 
6,  xi.  18 — 20. 

15 — 20.  Last  appeal  to  the  people  to 
choose  the  better  of.the  alternatives  set  before 
them. 

15.  Cf.  xi.  26,  27. 

IS.  Cf.  iv.  26 : viii.  19, 


9o8 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXX.  XXXI.  [v.  i-8. 


'f  Numb. 
20.  12. 
chap.  3. 
27. 


cleave  unto  him : for  he  is  thy  life, 
and  the  length  of  thy  days : that 
thou  mayest  dwell  in  the  land  which 
the  Lord  sware  unto  thy  fathers,  to 
Abraham,  to  Isaac,  and  to  Jacob,  to 
give  them. 

CHAPTER  XXXL 

I Moses  encourageth  the  people.  7 He  encoiirag- 
eth  Joshita.  9 He  delivereth  the  laiu  unto 
the  priests  to  read  it  in  the  seventh  year  to  the 
people.  14  God giveth  a charge  to  Joslijia,  19 
and  a song  to  testify  against  the  people.  24 
Moses  delivereth  the  book  of  the  law  to  the 
Lccdtes  to  keep.  28  He  maketh  a protestation 
to  the  elders. 

AND  Moses  went  and  spake  these 
jf\,  Vvmrds  unto  all  Israel. 

2 And  he  said  unto  them,  I am 
an  hundred  and  twenty  years  old  this 
day;  I can  no  more  go  out  and  come 
in : also  the  Lord  hath  said  unto  me, 
"Thou  shalt  not  go  over  this  Jordan. 

3 The  Lord  thy  God,  he  will  go 
over  before  thee,  and  he  will  destroy 
these  nations  from  before  thee,  and 
thou  shalt  possess  them:  and  Joshua, 


he  shall  go  over  before  thee,  ^as  the  * Numb. 
Lor-D  hath  said. 

4 And  the  Lord  shall  do  unto 
them  as  he  did  to  Sihon  and  to  Og, 
kings  of  the  Amorites,  and  unto  the 
land  of  them,  whom  he  destroyed. 

5 And  '^the  Lord  shall  give  them  7- 
up  before  your  face,  that  ye  may  do 

unto  them  according  unto  all  the 
commandments  which  I have  com- 
manded you.  , 

6 Be  strong  and  of  a good  courage, 
fear  not,  nor  be  afraid  of  them : for 
the  Lord  thy  God,  he  it  is  that  doth 
go  with  thee;  he  will  not  fail  thee, 
nor  forsake  thee. 

7 ^ And  Moses  called  unto  Joshua*, 
and  said  unto  him  in  the  sight  of  all 
Israel,  Be  strong  and  of  a good  cou- 
rage : for  thou  must  go  with  this  peo- 
ple unto  the  land  which  the  Lord 
hath  sworn  unto  their  fathers  to  give 
them ; and  thou  shalt  cause  them  to  '*' 
inherit  it. 

8 And  the  Lord,  he  it  is  that  doth 


20.  that  thou  mayest  lonoe  the  Lord\  Cf. 
vi.  5.  Love  stands  first  as  the  essential  and 
only  source  of  obedience. 

he  is  thy  Ife']  Or,  as  Jer.  Targ.,  LXX., 
Liith.,  &c.,  “that”  (/.<?.  “to  love  the  Lord,”) 
“is  thy  life;”  i.e.  the  condition  of  thy  life 
and  of  its  prolongation  in  the  promised  land. 
Cf.  iv.  40,  xxxii.  47.  With  the  passage  as 
it  stands  in  A.  V.  cf.  Ps.  xxvii.  i;  St  John 
xi.  25,  xvii.  3;  I John  v.  20. 

Chap.  XXXL  Certain  last  acts  and  ar- 
rangements of  Moses  in  view  of  his  death. 

1.  Moses  ^ent and spake^  The  word  “went” 
must  not  be  pressed,  as  in  e.g.  the  Targum  of 
Palestine,  “Mosheh  went  into  the  tabernacle 
of  the  house  of  instruction  and  spake.”  This 
verb  is  frequently  in  Hebrew  as  in  English 
prefixed  to  another  verb  with  a kind  of 
redundancy;  cf.  Ex.  ii.  i ; Job  i.  4,  and  is  so 
used  here. 

2.  / am  an  hundred  and  tdventy  years 
old]  The  forty  years  of  the  wandering  had 
passed  since  Moses,  then  fourscore  years 
old,  “ spake  unto  Pharaoh,”  Ex.  vii.  7.  Cf. 
xxxiv.  7. 

/ can  720  more  go  out  and  come  in]  Pvender: 
I sliall  not  longer  be  able  to  go  out 
and  come  in:  LXX.  correctly  ov  bvvr}<jop.o.L 
€TL  K.T.'k.  Thus  there  is  no  inconsistency 
with  xxxiv.  7.  Moses  here  adverts  to  his 
own  age  as  likely  to  render  him  in  future 


unequal  to  the  active  discharge  of  his  office 
as  leader  of  the  people:  the  writer  of  the 
xxxivth  chapter,  one  of  Moses’  contempora- 
ries, remarks  of  him  that -up  to  the  close  of 
life  “ his  eye  was  not  dim,  nor  his  natural 
force  abated  ;”  i.  e.  that  he  was  to  the  last,  in 
the  judgment  of  others,  in  full  possession  of 
faculties  and  strength.  It  is  thererore  needless, 
with  Patrick,  Ainsworth,  &c.,  to  render  the 
clause  following  thus:  “Jbr  the  Lord  hath 
said,”  &c.  The  phrase  “to  go  out  and 
come  in”  generally  means  “to  discharge  my 
duties  amongst  you:”  cf.  Num.  xxvii.  17; 
I K.  iii.  7. 

Thou  shalt  not  go  oaoer  this  Jordan]  Cf.  iii.  27. 

3.  he  <vjill go  over  before  thee]  Cf.  ix.  3. 

and  Joshua.^  he  shall  go  over  before  thet^ 
Cf.  i.  37  sq.,  and  iii.  28. 

6.  Cf.  i.  29,  vii.  18;  Josh.  x.  25. 

he  void  not  fail  thee.,  nor  forsake  thee]  Cf. 
Josh.  i.  5 ; Heb.  xiii.  5. 

7,  8.  Moses  hands  over  to  Joshua  that 
office  as  leader  of  the  people,  to  which  Joshua 
had  already  been  designated  (i.  38;  Num. 
xxvii.  23).  He  assigns  also  to  the  Levitical 
priests  and  the  elders,  as  the  ecclesiastical  and 
civil  heads  of  the  nation,  the  responsibility  of 
teaching  the  law  and  enforcing  its  observance 
{yv.  10 — 13).  Both  these  were  symbolical 
acts,  designed  to  mark  the  responsibility  of 
the  parties  concerned  after  the  death  of  Moses. 
It  is  therefore  not  at  all  inconsistent  that 


V.  9—^5-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXI. 


909 


go  before  theej  he  will  be  with  thee, 
he  will  not  fail  thee,  neither  forsake 
thee:  fear  not,  neither  be  dismayed. 

9 *^1  And  Moses  wrote  this  law,  and 
delivered  it  unto  the  priests  the  sons 
of  Levi,  which  bare  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  of  the  Lord,  and  unto  all 
the  elders  of  Israel. 

10  And  Moses  commanded  them, 
saying,  At  the  end  of  every  seven 

<^chr,p.  15,  years,  in  the  solemnity  of  the  ^year 
of  release,  in  the  feast  of  tabernacles, 

1 1 When  all  Israel  is  come  to  ap- 
pear before  the  Lord  thy  God  in  the 
place  which  he  shall  choose,  thou 
shalt  read  this  law  before  all  Israel  in 
their  hearino-. 

12  Gather  the  people  together, 
men,  and  women,  and  children,  and 


thy  stranger  that  is  within  thy  gates, 
that  they  may  hear,  and  that  they 
may  learn,  and  fear  the  Lord  your 
God,  and  observe  to  do  all  the  words 
of  this  law: 

13  And  that  their  children,  which 
have  not  known  any  things  may  hear, 
and  learn  to  fear  the  Lord  your  God, 
as  long  as  ye  live  in  the  land  whither 
ye  go  over  Jordan  to  possess  it. 

14  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Behold,  thy  days  approach  that 
thou  must  die : call  Joshua,  and  pre- 
sent yourselves  in  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation,  that  I may  give  him 
a charge.  And  Moses  and  Joshua 
went,  and  presented  themselves  in  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

15  And  the  Lord  appeared  in  the 


Moses  should  appear,  in  the  short  interval 
which  has  yet  to  elapse  before  he  is  actually 
withdrawn,  as  in  full  possession  of  his  own 
raithority.  The  duties  of  Joshua  as  his  suc- 
cessor, and  those  here  devolved  upon  the 
priests  and  elders,  could,  from  the  nature  of 
the  case,  only  recpiire  to  be  in  fact  discharged 
by^  them  when  the  event  which  rendered  the 
transfer  of  those  duties  necessary  had  taken 
place. 

9.  Moses  qvrote  this  and  deli-vered 

it  unto  the  priests'\  This  simply  means  that 
Moses  now  consigned  to  the  charge  of  the 
priests  the  law  which  he  had  written.  The 
first  clause,  though  connected  with  the  fol- 
lowing one  by  “and,”  is  (as  often  in  He- 
brew) subordinate  to  it.  The  point  to  be 
noted  is  that  Moses  now  formally  intrusted 
the  law,  which  at  God's  command  he  had 
promulgated,  and  with  the  exception  of  the 

• concluding  clauses  (see  ic  24)  had  already 
written  out,  to  those  who  should  be  the 
regular  and  official  guardians  and  teachers 
of  it  in  future.  He  evidently  did  nPt  actually 
transfer  “ the  book,”  -u.  24,  from  his  own 
hands  to  theirs  until  he  had  completed  the 
writing  as  there  described. 

the  priests  the  sons  of  Lcn:i\  Cf.  2.’.  25  and 
xvii.  18. 

10.  the  year  of  release']  Cf.  xv.  i and 
note. 

feast  of  tabernacles]  Cf.  Lev.  xxiii.  34. 

11.  When  all  Israel  is  come  to  appear  before 
the  Lord]  Cf.  xvi.  16.  The  actual  discharge 
of  this  duty  is  recorded  Neh.  viii.  i sqq. 

thou  shalt  read  this  /n:-u]  Cf.  Josh.  viii.  34, 
35;  2 K.  xxiii.  2;  Neh.  viii.  i sqq.  It  is 
not  to  be  supposed  that  the  whole  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch w'as  read,  nor  does  the  letter  of  the 
VoL.  I. 


command  require  that  it  should  be  so.  Tliis 
reading  could  'not  be  primarily  designed  for 
the  information  and  instruction  of  the  people, 
since  it  only  took  place  once  in  seven  years ; 
but  v/as  evidently  a symbolical  transaction, 
intended,  as  so  many  others  were,  to  impress 
on  the  people  the  conditions  on  which  they 
held  possession  of  their  privileges  and  bless- 
ings. For  such  purposes  a solemn  and  public- 
reading of  lessons  out  of  the  book  of  the  Law 
{i.e.  the  Pentateuch)  was  all  that  was  needed;: 
and  it  is  left  by  the  text  to  the  Jewish 
Church  to  rule  details,  such  as  when  during 
the  eight  days  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles- 
the  reading  should  take  place,  who  should, 
read,  and  what  portion  of  the  law.  From. 
Neh.  viii.  18  it  appears  that  Ezra  “read  in 
the  book  of  the  law  of  God”  day  by  day 
during  the  feast;  but  later  Jev/ish  practice 
has  confined  the  reading  to  the  first  day  of 
the  feast,  and  to  certain  portions  of  Deutero- 
nomy only.  In  after  times  the  Jewish  rule 
assigned  this  duty  to  the  High  Priest  or  King, 
who  was  expected  to  perform  it  in  the 
Temple  before  the  whole  congregation  (yv.  12). 

14 — 23.  Moses  and  Joshua  summoned  to 
the  tabernacle  that  God  might  “give  Joshua 
a charge,”  i.c.  the  command  which  is  given 
(perhaps  in  substance  only)  in  no.  23,  where 
see  note.  This  is  the  first  occasion  on  which 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  is  mention- 
ed in  Deuteronomy.  This  will  not  appear 
remarkable  when  we  remember  that  the  book 
thus  far  has  consisted  almost  exclusively  of 
addresses  made  by  Moses  to  the  people,  and 
that  the  bulk  of  these  is  legislative  matter.  The 
transaction  recorded  in  these  nj-io.  may  be  re- 
garded as  the  solemn  inauguration  of  Joshua 
to  the  office  to  which  he  had  some  time  before 
(Num.  xxvii.  23  sqq.)  been  called,  and  his 

3 M 


910 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXI. 


[v.  16—25. 


tabernacle  in  a pillar  of  a cloud : and 
the  pillar  of  the  cloud  stood  over  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle. 

16  ^ And  the  Lord  said  unto  Mo- 

]]e^  I Behold,  thou  shalt  Eleep  with 

thy  fathers;  and  this  people  will  rise 
up,  and  go  a whoring  after  the  gods 
of  the  strangers  of  the  land,  whither 
they  go  to  be  among  them,  and  will 
forsake  me,  and  break  my  covenant 
which  I have  made  with  them. 

17  Then  my  anger  shall  be  kindled 
against  them  in  that  day,  and  I will 
forsake  them,  and  I will  hide  my  face 
from  them,  and  they  shall  be  devour- 
ed, and  many  evils  and  troubles  shall 
^^^Ell  them;  so  that  they  will  say 
in  that  day.  Are  not  these  evils 
come  upon  us,  because  our  God  is 
not  among  us.? 

18  And  I will  surely  hide  my  face 
in  that  day  for  all  the  evils  which  they 
shall  have  wrought,  in  that  they  are 
turned  unto  other  gods. 

19  Now  therefore  write  ye  this 
song  for  you,  and  teach  it  the  children 
of  Israel : put  it  in  their  mouths,  that 
this  song  may  be  a v/itness  for  me 
against  the  children  of  Israel. 

20  For  when  I shall  have  brought 


them  into  the  land  which  I sware 
unto  their  fathers,  that  doweth  with 
milk  and  honey;  and  they  shall  have 
eaten  and  filled  themselves,  and  wax- 
en fat ; then  will  they  turn  unto  other 
gods,  and  serve  them,  and  provoke 
me,  and  break  my  covenant. 

2 1 And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when 
many  evils  and  troubles  are  befallen 
them,  that  this  sono;  shall  testifv 

, ^ ^ before. 

gainst  them  as  a witness;  ror  it  shall* 
not  be  forgotten  out  of  the  mouths  of 
their  seed:  for  I knov/  their  imagina- 
tion which  they  ^go  about,  even  now,  t Heb.  do. 
before  I have  brought  them  into  the 
land  which  I sware. 

22  ^ Moses  therefore  wrote  this 
song  the  same  day,  and  taught  it  the 
children  of  Israel. 

23  And  he  gave  Joshua  the  son  of 
Nun  a charge,  and  said,  ^Be  strong i. 
and  of  a good  courage  : for  thou  shalt 
bring  the  children  of  Israel  into  the 

land  which  I sv/are  unto  them : and 
I will  be  with  thee. 

24  ^ And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
Moses  had  made  an  end  of  v/riting 
the  words  of  this  lav/  in  a book,  until 
they  were  finished, 

25  That  Moses  commanded  the 


recognition  in  it  by  God,  which  were  mani- 
fested by  his  being  summoned  into  the  taber- 
nacle with  Moses  whilst  the  Lord  appeared  in 
the  pillar  of  cloud  (cf.  Num.  xi.  25,  xii.  5). 

16.  God  announces  to  Moses  the  future 
apostasy  of  the  people.  This  is  done  in  the 
presence  of  Joshua  that  the  latter  might  be 
fully  aware  of  the  danger  and  strive  in  his  day 
to  avert  it.  This  he  faithfully  did  (cf.  Josh, 
xxiv.  31);  but  we  find  him  in  his  own  last 
address  to  Israel  repeating  (Josh,  xxiii.  15, 
16)  the  self-same  prediction  and  warning. 

sleep  rjoith  ihy  fathers^  Hebr.  as  margin 
“lie  down.”  The  same  word  is  used  in  the 
same  sense  in  the  very  ancient  Phcenician  In- 
scription of  Kshmunay.ar. 

go  a ^hori?2g]  Cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  15;  Judg.  ii.  17. 

forsake  me.,  and  break  my  co've}iant~\  Cf. 
xxxii.  15;  Judg.  ii.  12  sqq. 

17.  hide  my  face  froyn  theni]  Cf.  xxxii. 
20;  Is.  viii.  17  and  Ixiv.  7;  Ezek.  xxxix.  23. 

19.  I^ecause  of  what  has  been  foretold 
T7>.  16-18  Moses  and  Joshua  (“write  ye”) 
are  commanded  to  write  the  song  of  Moses 
(xxxii.  1—43),  and  to  teach  it  to  the 


children  of  Israel  that  it  might  be  “a  witness 
for  God  against  them:”  i.e.  an  attestation  from 
their  own  mouths  at  once  of  God’s  benefits, 
their  own  duties,  and  their  deserts  when  they 
should  fall  away. 

20.  ewaxen  fat\  Cf.  xxxii.  15 ; Neh.  ix. 
25  ; Hos.  xiii.  6. 

21.  it  shall  not  be  forgotten']  Being  in  verse 
it  would  be  the  more  easily  learned  and  kept 
in  memory.  The  use  of  songs  for  such  di- 
dactic purposes  was  not  unknown  to  the 
legislators  of  antiquity;  cf.  Plato,  ‘de  Leg.’ii. 
(Vol.  II.  p.  656,  edit.  Steph.);  and  was  fa- 
miliar to  theologians  of  later  times;  cf.  Sccr. 
‘Hist.  EccL’  VI.  8;  and  St  Paul,  Col.  iii.  16, 
“teaching  and  admonishing  one  another  in 
psalms  and  hymns  and  spiritual  songs.” 

their  imagination  <ivhich  they  go  about.,  ei'en 
nozv]  Cf.  Amos  v.  25  sqq. 

23.  hegari’e]  i.e.  the  Lord  gave-:  cf.  on 
'V.  14. 

Be  strong]  Cf.  -v.  7. 

24 — 30.  Moses  completes  the  writing  out 
of  the  book  of  the  law,  and  directs  it  to  be 
placed  by  the  ark  of  the  Covenant. 


v.26-2.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXXI.  XXXII. 


911 


Levites,  which  bare  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  of  the  Lord,  saying, 

26  Take  this  book  of  the  law,  and 
put  it  in  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  co- 
venant of  the  Lord  your  God,  that 
it  may  be  there  for  a witness  against 
thee. 

27  For  I know  thy  rebellion,  and 
thy  stiff  neck : behold,  while  I am  yet 
alive  with  you  this  day,  ye  have  been 
rebellious  against  the  Lord  ; and  how 
much  more  after  my  death  ? 

28  ^ Gather  unto  me  all  the  elders 
of  your  tribes,  and  your  officers,  that 
I may  speak  these  words  in  their  ears, 
and  call  heaven  and  earth  to  record 
.against  them. 

29  For  I know  that  after  my  death 
ye  will  utterly  corrupt  yourselves^  and 


turn  aside  from  the  way  which  I have 
commanded  you ; and  evil  will  befall 
you  in  the  latter  days;  because  ye 
will  do  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord, 
to  provoke  him  to  anger  through  the 
work  of  your  hands. 

30  And  Moses  spake  in  the  ears 
of  all  the  congregation  of  Israel  the 
words  of  this  song,  until  they  were 
ended. 

CHAPTER  XXXII. 

I Moses'  song^  xuhich  settcth  forth  God's  mercy 
and  vengea7ice.  46  He  exho7'tcth  the77i  to  set 
their  hearts  upo7i  it.  48  God  se7ideth  hwt  tip 
to  77iou7it  A'ei/o,  to  see  the  land,  atid  die. 

Give  ear,  O ye  heavens,  and  I 
will  speak;  and  hear,  O earth, 
the  words  of  my  mouth. 

2 My  doctrine  shall  drop  as  the 


24.  writing  the  <ivords  of  this  law  in  a book~\ 
“To  write  in  a book”  simply  means  “to 
commit  to  writing.”  A later  word  for  “ book  ” 
(sep her^  \s xoWf  or  “ roll  of  a book:”  cf. 
Jer.  xxxvi,  23,  and  ibid.  w.  2,  4:  Ps.  xl.  7. 
The  “book”  here  spoken  of  would  contain 
the  whole  Pentateuch  up  to  07.  24  of  this 
chapter  (see  note  there);  and  be  “the  book 
of  Moses,”  called  generally  by  the  Jews  “ the 
law:”  cf.  St  Matt.  xxii.  40:  Gal.  iv.  21,  &c. 

25.  the  Lenoites,  which  hare  the  ark~\  i.e. 
as  in  07.  9,  “the  priests  the  sons  of  Levi.” 
The  non-priestly  Levites  could  not  so  much 
as  enter  the  Sanctuary  or  touch  the  ark 
(cf.  Num.  iv.  15).  Though  in  the  journeys 
through  the  wilderness  the  ark  was  borne  by 
the  non-priestly  Kohathites,  yet  on  occasions 
of  a more  solemn  and  public  character  it 
was  carried  by  the  priests  themselves  (Josh, 
iii.  3 sqq.,  iv.  9,  10,  vi.  6,  12,  viii.  33;  i K. 
viii.  3). 

26.  put  it  in  the  side  of  the  ark~\  Rather, 
hy  the  side  of  the  ark.  The  two  tables 
of  the  Decalogue  were  in  the  ark,  i K.  viii. 
9 ; the  book  of  the  law  was  to  be  laid  up 
in  the  Holy  of  Holies  close  by  the  ark  of  the 
covenant,  probably  in  a chest.  Cf.  2 K.  xxii.  8. 
This  was  not  so  much  a provision  for  the  safe 
custody  of  the  volume,  nor  yet  an  attestation 
of  its  divine  authority,  though  it  served  both 
these  ends  also,  as  a witness  or  protest  against 
their  breach  of  the  covenant,  of  which  the  ark 
was  a symbol,  by  idolatry.  Cf.  Dr  Pusey’s 
‘Daniel,’  pp.  306,  307. 

27.  how  much  more  after  my  deat}S\  AVith 
these  words  Moses  appears  to  have  handed 
over  the  book  written  and  completed  by 
him  (pu.  24)  to  the  priests.  It  would  seem 
then  that  what  is  actually  intended  to  be 


taken  as  transcribed  by  Moses  in  person  ends 
in  this  place  with  “u.  23,  and  that  2;.  24  and 
the  rest  of  the  book  (with  the  exception 
of  the  Song,  07.  19)  must  be  regarded  as  a 
kind  of  appendix  added  after  Moses’  death 
by  another  hand;  though  the  Blessing  is  of 
course  to  be  regarded  as  a composition  of 
Moses.  Cf.  Introduction,  §11. 

28 — 30.  Gathering  of  the  elders  and  offi- 
cers and  the  whole  congregation  by  order  of 
Moses  that  he  might  rehearse  the  ode  to  them. 
The  elders  and  officers  would  be  specially 
charged  with  the  duty  of  making  the  people 
learn  the  ode. 

28.  call  hea'ven  and  earth  to  record^  Cf. 
XXX.  19,  xxxii.  I. 

29.  in  the  latter  days']  Cf.  iv.  30. 

Chap.  XXXII.  1 — 43.  Song  of  Moses. 
On  general  questions  connected  with  this  Song 
see  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter. 

The  contents  have  been  very  diversely  dis- 
tributed into  heads  by  the  commentators.  It  is 
obvious  that  minute  and  artificial  divisions  of 
the  matter  are  inapplicable  to  a poetical  com- 
position like  this.  One  of  the  most  simple  and 
satisfactory  arrangements  is  that  suggested  by 
Kamphausen.  Regarding  0707.  i — 3 as  the  in- 
troduction, and  07.  43  as  the  conclusion,  he 
groups  the  main  contents  of  the  song  under 
three  heads,  viz.  (i)  0707.  4 — 18,  the  faithfulness 
of  God,  the  faithlessness  of  Israel;  (2)  0707. 
19 — 33,  the  chastisement  and  the  need  of  its 
infliction  by  God;  (3) 'U'u.  34 — 42,  God’s 
compassion  upon  the  low  and  humbled  state 
of  His  people. 

1 — 3.  Introduction. 

1.  Heaven  and  earth  are  invoked,  as  in 
iv.  26,  XXX.  19,  xxxi.  28,  29  (cf.  Isa.  i.  2 ; 

3 M 2 


912 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXII. 


lO. 


rain,  my  speech  shall  distil  as  the  dew, 
as  the  small  rain  upon  the  tender  herb, 
and  as  the  showers  upon  the  grass : 

3 Because  I will  publish  the  name 
of  the  Lord  : ascribe  ye  greatness 
unto  our  God. 

4 He  is  the  Rock,  his  work  is  per- 
fect: for  all  his  ways  are  judgment: 
a God  of  truth  and  without  iniquity, 
just  and  right  is  he. 

f Heb.  3 ^They  have  corrupted  themselves, 
co^rrupted  " their  spot  is  not  the  spot  of  his  chil- 
^ perverse  and  crook- 

are'^J^f/j/s  generation. 

children,  6 Do  ye  thus  requite  the  Lord,  O 
iS/rW.  foolish  people  and  unwise?  is  not  he 
thy  father  that  hath  bought  thee  ? 


hath  he  not  made  thee,  and  establish- 
ed thee  ? 

7 ^ Remember  the  days  of  old, 
consider  the  years  of  ^ many  genera- ^ Heb. 
tions : ask  thy  father,  and  he  will 
shew  thee ; thy  elders,  and  they  will 

tell  thee. 

8 When  the  most  High  divided  to 
the  nations  their  inheritance,  when 
he  separated  the  sons  of  Adam,  he 
set  the  bounds  of  the  people  according 
to  the  number  of  the  children  of 
Israel. 

9 For  the  Lord’s  portion  is  his 
people;  Jacob  is  the  Mot  of  his  in- 
heritance. 

to  He  found  him  in  a desert  land, 


Jer.  ii.  12,  xxii.  29),  in  order  to  impress  on 
the  hearers  the  importance  of  what  is  to  fol- 
low. 

2.  My  doctrine  shall  drop']  Or  perhaps  (as 
LXX.,  Vulg.,  &c.)  “ Let  my  doctrine  drop.” 

4 — 14.  Here  follows  the  main  body  of 
the  Song,  commencing  with  a contrast  drawn 
between  the  faithfulness  of  God  and  the  per- 
fidy of  Israel. 

4.  He  is  the  Rock,  his  ^joork  is  perfect]  Ra- 
ther, the  Rock,  perfect  is  His  •work.  The 
term  Rock  stands  absolutely  as  the  first  and 
leading  word.  This  epithet,  repeated  no  less 
than  five  times  in  the  Song,  {yx'.  15,  18,  31, 
37),  represents  those  attributes  of  God  which 
mioses  is  seeking  to  enforce,  immutability  and 
impregnable  strength.  Cf.  the  expression  “ the 
stone  of  Israel,”  Gen.  xlix.  24;  and  i S.  ii. 
2;  Ps.  xviii.  2;  Isa.  xxvi.  4 and  xxx.  29; 
>Iatt.  xvi.  18;  John  i.  42.  The  Hebrew 
word  tsor  is  frequently  used  in  compound- 
ing proper  names  of  the  Mosaic  time,  e.g. 
Num.  i.  5,  6,  10,  ii.  12,  iii.  35,  &c.  Our 
translators  have  elsewhere  rendered  it  accord- 
ing to  the  sense  (“everlasting  strength,”  “the 
-Mighty  One,”  See.)  ; in  this  chapter  they  have 
rightly  adhered  to  the  letter  throughout. 

5.  'Phe  other  side  of ‘the  picture  is  now 
brought  forward  with  a brevity  and  abrupt- 
ness which  strikingly  enforces  the  contrast. 

They  haue  corrupted  themsel'ves.,  &c.]  The 
verb  is  in  the  singular.  Render,  “It”  {i.e. 
“ the  perverse  and  crooked  generation”  under- 
stood from  the  context)  “hath  corrupted  itself 
before  Him  (cf.  Isa.  i.  4);  they  are  not  ffis 
children,  but  their  blemish:”  i.e.  the  generation 
of  evil-doers  cannot  be  styled  God’s  children, 
but  rather  the  shame  and  disgrace  of  God’s 
children.  On  the  words  their  spot.,  &c.,  see 
the  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter.' 


a per’verse  and  crooked  generation]  Cf. 
Matt.  xvii.  17  ; Luke  ix.  41. 

6.  foolish  people  and  unxvise]  Cf.  iv.  6 ; 
Ps.  XC.  12. 

is  not  he  thy  father  that  hath  bought  thee] 
Rather  perhaps  “ hath  acquired  thee  for  his 
own,”  or  “ possessed  thee:”  and  on  the  word 
see  note  on  Gen.  xiv.  19,  &c.,  Ps.  Ixxiv.  2; 
Isa.  Ixiii.  16;  Acts  xx.  28;  i Pet.  ii.  9 (“a 
peculiar  people;”  marg.  “a  purchased  peo- 
ple”), and  reft'. 

7.  days]  The  plural  form  of  this  noun 
is  archaic,  and  occurs  only  here  and  in  the 
Psalm  attributed  to  Moses,  Ps.  xc.  15.  In 
both  places  too  it  is  in  combination  with 
“ years.” 

8.  When  the  most  High  dixjided,  &c.]  That 
is,  whilst  nations  were  being  constituted  under 
God’s  providence,  and  the  bounds  of  their 
habitation  determined  under  His  government 
(cf.  Acts  xvii.  26),  He  had  even  then  in  view 
the  interests  of  His  elect,  and  reserved  a fit- 
ting inheritance  “ according  to  the  number  of 
the  children  of  Israel;”  i.e.  proportionate  to 
the  wants  of  their  population.  The  LXX.  in- 
stead of  “according  to  the  number  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,”  has  “according  to  the  number 
of  the  angels  of  God;”  following  apparently 
not  a dififerent  reading,  but  the  Jewish  notion 
that  the  nations  of  the  earth  are  seventy  in 
number  (cf.  Gen.  x.),  and  that  each  has  its  own 
guardian  angel  (cf.  Ecclus.  xvii.  17).  This 
rendering,  which  thus  curiously  preserves 
the  general  sense,  whilst  signally  departing 
from  the  letter,  was  possibly  suggested  by  an 
apprehension  that  the  literal  one  might  prove 
invidious  to  the  many  Gentiles  who  would 
read  the  Greek  version. 

9.  the  Lord's  portion]  Cf.  Ex.  xv.  16, 
xix.  5 and  rclf. 


V.  Ii-iy.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXXII. 


913 


and  in  the  waste  howling  wilderness  ; 
nOr,  he  “led  him  about,  he  instructed  him, 
the  apple  of  his  eye. 

1 1 As  an  eagle  stirreth  up  her  nest, 
fluttereth  over  her  young,  spreadeth 
abroad  her  wings,  taketh  them,  bear- 
eth  them  on  her  wings : 

12  So  the  Lord  alone  did  lead 
him,  and  tb^re  was  no  strange  god 
with  him. 

13  He  made  him  ride  on  the  high 
places  of  the  earth,  that  he  might  eat 
the  increase  of  the  fields ; and  he 
made  him  to  suck  honey  out  of  the 
rock,  and  oil  out  of  the  flinty  rock ; 

14  Butter  of  kine,  and  milk  of 
sheep,  with  fat  of  lambs,  and  rams 


of  the  breed  of  Bashan,  and  goats, 
with  the  fiit  of  kidneys  of  wheat ; and 
thou  didst  drink  the  pure  blood  of  the 
grape. 

15  ^ But  Jeshurun  waxed  fat,  and 
kicked : thou  art  waxen  fat,  thou  art 
grown  thick,  thou  art  covered  with 
fatness;  then  he  forsook  God  which 
made  him,  and  lightly  esteemed  the 
Rock  of  his  salvation. 

16  They  provoked  him  to  jealousy 
with  strange  gods^  with  abominations 
provoked  they  him  to  anger. 

17  They  sacrificed  unto  devils,  “not 

to  God ; to  gods  whom  they  knew  were  not 
not,  to  new  gods  that  came  newly  up, 
whom  your  fathers  feared  not. 


10 — 14.  These  nj-v.  set  forth  in  figura- 
tive language  the  helpless  and  hopeless  state  of 
the  nation  when  God  took  pity  on  it,  and  the 
love  and  care  which  He  bestowed  on  it.  The 
illustration  of  a ijian  ready  to  perish  in  the 
desert  (cf.  xxvi.  5),  though  sufficiently  obvious 
to  one  writing  in  the  East,  is  probably  chosen 
because  God  did  in  fact  lead  the  people 
through  the  desert  of  Arabia,  but  it  is  not  the 
design  of  the  passage  to  rehearse  events  histo- 
rically. 

10.  in  the  ^aste  hoveling  vuilderness~\ 
Lit.  “ in  a waste,  the  howling  of  a wilder- 
ness,” i.e.  a wilderness  in  which  wild  beasts 
howl.  The  word  for  waste  is  that  used  Gen. 
i.  2,  and  there  rendered  “ without  form.” 

apple  of  his  eye]^  Cf.  Ps.  xvii.  8 ; Prov. 
vii.  2. 

11.  As  an  eagle']  Cf.  Ex.  xix.  4. 

spreadeth  abroad  her  vjings]  These  words 

begin  the  apodosis.  The  “so,”  which  A.  V. 
supplies  at  the  next  -z;.,  should  be  inserted 
here.  The  sense  is,  “so  He  spread  out  His 
wings,  took  them  up,”  &c.  The  v.  is  thus  an 
expansion  of  the  figure  employed  in  Ex.  1.  c. 

12.  So  the  Lord]  Omit  “ so.”  The  sen- 
tence is  independent. 

vjith  him]  i.  e.  with  God.  The  Lord  alone 
delivered  Israel ; Israel  therefore  ought  to 
have  served  none  other  than  Him. 

13.  He  made  him  ride  on  the  high  places] 
i.e.  gave  Israel  possession  of  those  command- 
ing positions  which  carry  with  them  dominion 
over  the  whole  land.  Cf.  xxxiii.  29. 

made  him  to  suck  honey  out  of  the  rock.,  and 
oiF]  i.e.  the  blessing  of  God  enabled  Israel 
to  draw  the  richest  provision  out  of  spots 
naturally  unproductive.  The  wild  bees  how- 
ever hived  and  the  olives  flourished  in  the 
rocky  soil  of  Canaan.  Cf.  Ex.  iii.  8,  and  note. 


14.  breed  of  Bash  an]  Bashan  was  famous 
for  its  cattle.  Cf.  Ps.  xxii.  12 ; Ezek.  xxxix.  18. 

fat  of  kidneys  of  vuheat]  i.e.  the  finest  and 
most  nutritious  wheat.  The  fat  of  the  kid- 
neys was  regarded  as  being  the  finest  and 
tenderest,  and  was  therefore  specified  as  a 
part  of  the  sacrificial  animals  which  was  to 
be  offered  to  the  Lord:  cf.  Ex.  xxix.  13,  &c. 

the  pure  blood  of  the  grape]  Render,  the 
"blood  of  the  grape  (cf.  Gen.  xlix.  ii), 
even  wine.  The  Hebrew  word  means 
“foaming”  or  “fermenting,”  and  seems  (cf. 
Isa.  xxvii.  2)  a poetical  term  for  wine. 

15.  Jeshurun]  This  word,  found  again 
only  in  xxxiii.  5,  26,  and  Isa.  xliv.  2,  is  not  a 
diminutive  but  an  appellative  (from  ydshar 
“to  be  righteous”);  and  describes  not  the 
character  which  belonged  to  Israel  in  fact,  but 
that  to  which  Israel  was  called.  Cf.  Num. 
xxiii.  21.  The  prefixing  of  this  epithet  to  the 
description  of  Israel’s  apostasy  contained  in  the 
words  next  following  is  full  of  keen  reproof. 

Rock  of  his  salvation]  Cf.  v.  4. 

16.  They  provoked  hhn  to  jealousy]  The 
language  is  borrowed  from  the  matrimonial 
relationship,  as  in  xxxi.  16;  Exod.  xxxiv.  14, 
15  (relf.);  Isa.  liv.  5;  Jer.  ii.  25,  and  fre- 
quently in  the  Prophets. 

17.  devils]  Render,  destroyers;  and 
also  in  Ps.  cvi.  37.  The  root  is  common 
to  the  Shemitic  languages  (cf.  its  use  Ps. 
xci.  6),  and  means  “to  waste”  or  “hurry 
away  violently.”  Its  application  here  to  the 
false  gods  points  to  the  trait  so  deeply  graven 
in  all  heathen  worship,  that  of  regarding  the 
deities  as  malignant,  and  needing  to  be  propi- 
tiated by  human  sufferings. 

not  to  God]  Rather,  “ not- God,”  i.e.  which 
were  not  God ; see  margin. 

nvhom  your  fathers  feared  not]  Cf.  xiii.  7, 
xxix.  25. 


914 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIL 


[v.  1 8 — 24, 


lOr, 

despised. 


18  Of  the  Rock  that  begat  thee 
thou  art  unmindful,  and  hast  forgotten 
God  that  formed  thee. 

19  And  when  the  Lord  saw  he 
"abhorred  them,^  because  of  the  pro- 
voking of  his  sons,  and  of  his  daugh- 
ters. 

20  And  he  said,  I will  hide  my  face 
from  them,.  I will  see  what  their  end 
shall  be:  for  they  are  a very  froward 
p-eneration,  children  in  whom  is  no 
Eith. 

21  They  have  moved  me  to  jea- 
lousy with  that  zvhlch  is  not  God ; 


they  have  provoked  me  to  anger  with 
their  vanities : and  "I  will  move  them 
to  jealousy  with  those  which  are  not  a 
people ; I will  provoke  them  to  anger 
with  a foolish  nation. 

22  For  a fire  is  kindled  in  mine 
anger,  and  " shall  burn  unto  the  low- 

est  hell,  and  " shall  consume  the  earth  burned. 
with  her  increase,  and  set  on  fire  the  con- 
foundations  of  the  mountains.  sumed. 

23  I will  heap  mischiefs  upon  them ; 

I will  spend  mine  arrows  upon  them. 

24  They  shall  be  burnt  with  hunger,  t Heb. 
and  devoured  with  ^ burning  heat,  and 


19 — 33.  God's  decree  of  rejection;  the 
terrible  accomplishment  of  it ; and  the  reasons 
which  led  to  its  severity  and  to  its  eventual 
mitigation. 

19.  The  anger  of  God  at  the  apostasy  of 
His  people  is  stated  in  general  terms  in  this 
<!’. ; and  the  results  of  it  described,  in  words 
as  of  God  Himself,  in  the  next  and  following 
-I’T,’.  These  consisted  negatively  in  the  with- 
drawal of  God’s  favour  (pv.  20),  and  positively 
in  the  infliction  of  a righteous  retribution. 

Jlnd  ewhen  the  Lord  5a<w  it,,  he  abhorred 
them,,  because  of ,,  &c.]  The  rendering,  “And 
the  Lord  saw  it,  and  from  provocation  {i,e. 
from  being  provoked)  rejected  his  sons,” 
adopted  by  Keil,  Knobel,  &c.,  seems  easier 
than  that  of  A.  V.,  but  has  no  support  in  the 
ancient  Targums  or  Versions. 

daughters'],  The  women  had  their  full  share 
in  the  sins  of  the  people.  Cf.  Isa.^iii.  16  sqq., 
xxxii.  9 sqq.;  Jer.  vii.  18,  xliv.  15  sqq. 

20.  Cf.  xxxi.  17,  18. 

1 evjill  see  qvhat  their  end  shall  be]  Cf.  Gen. 
xxxvii.  20  ad  fin. 

21.  They  have  moved  me  to  jealousy]  Cf. 
V,  16.  God  would  mete  out  to  them  the 
same  measure  as  they  had  done  to  Him. 
Though  chosen  by  the  one  God  to  be  His 
own,  they  had  preferred  idols,  which  are  no 
gods.  So  therefore  would  He  prefer  to  His 
people  that  which  was  no  people.  As  they 
had  angered  Him  with  their  vanities,  so  would 
He  provoke  them  by  adopting  in  their  stead 
those  whom  they  counted  as  nothing.  Cf. 
Hos.  i.  10;  Rom.  x.  19  ; i Pet.  ii.  10.  The 
force  of  the  passage  turns  on  the  antithesis 
between  two  sets  of  terms,  viz.  “not-God,” 
and  “ vanities”  (or  “nothingnesses”)  on  the 
one  side  ; anti  “ not  a people,”  and  “ a foolish 
nation,”  on  tlie  other.  Now  the  first  pair  of 
terms  (not-God,  and  vanities)  must  clearly 
be  taken  strictly  in  a theological,  and  (so  to 
say)  technical  sense,  and  denotes  the  privation 
of  those  blessings  which  in  the  phraseology 
of  Scripture  would  be  described  by  such 


words  as  God,  Truth,  Being,  &c.  Hence 
the  second  and  contrasted  set  of  terms,  “ not 
a people,”  and  “a  foolish  nation,”  cannot 
mean  a barbarous  or  inhuman  people,  such  as 
the  Chaldeans  (Rosenm.,  Maur.,  Kamph., 
&c.),  but  such  a people  as  not  being  God’s, 
would,  from  the  theological  point  of  view,  not 
be  accounted  a people  at  all  (cf.  Eph.  ii.  12  ; 
I Pet.  ii.  10).  And  the  V foolish  nation”  is 
such  as  is  destitute  of  that  which  alone 
can  make  a really  “wise  and  understanding 
people”  (Deut.  iv.  6),  the  knowledge  of  the 
revealed  word  and  will  of  God;  and  there- 
fore, though  perhaps  wise  in  this  world’s 
wisdom,  is  foolishness  before  God  (cf.  i Cor. 
i.  18 — 28). 

The  epithets  “not  a people,”  and  “foolish 
nation,”  represent  very  faithfully  the  estima- 
tion in  which  the  Jews  held  all  others  than 
themselves  (cf.  Ecclus.  1.  25,  26).  When 
therefore  St  Paul  asserts  that  Israel  in  this 
passage  had  forewarning  of  the  call  of  the 
Gentiles,  he  is  assuredly  only  declaring  its 
real  import.  God  announces  His  resolve 
to  repay  the  faithlessness  of  the  Jews  by 
withdrawing  their  privileges,  and  conferring 
them  on  those  whom  the  Jews  despised. 
The  ultimate  result,  that  by  the  call  of  the 
Gentiles  Israel  should  be  provoked  to  emu- 
lation, and  so  eventually  be  saved  also,  is  not 
here  brought  forward.  It  lies  amongst  those 
mysteries  of  the  distant  future  which  the 
Gospel  was  to  bring  to  light.  Moses,  the 
minister  of  the  Law,  goes  on  to  utter  in  glow- 
ing language  the  threatenings  of  God  against 
the  apostates. 

22.  Cf.  Jer.  xv.  14,  xvii.  4;  Lam.  iv.  ii. 

23.  / voill  spend  mine  arrovus]  Cf.  v.  42 ; 
Ps.  vii.  12,  13,  xlv.  5. 

24.  burning  heat]  i,e,  the  fever  of  a pesti- 
lential disease.  On  the  “four  sore  judg- 
ments,” famine,  plague,  noisome  beasts,  the 
sword,  cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  22;  Jer.  xv.  2;  Ezek.  v. 
17,  xiv.  21. 


V.  25-33]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXXII. 


915 


with  bitter  destruction : I will  also 
send  the  teeth  of  beasts  upon  them, 
with  the  poison  of  serpents  of  the  dust. 

25  The  sword  without,  and  terror 
t Heb.  ^within,  shall  Mestroy  both  the  youno: 

from  the  ’ , . . J 

chambers,  man  aiid  the  virgin,  the  suckling  also 
blleave.  with  the  mail  of  gray  hairs. 

26  I said,  I would  scatter  them  into 
corners,  I would  make  the  remem- 
brance of  them  to  cease  from  amonor 

O 

men : 

27  Were  it  not  that  I feared  the 
wrath  of  the  enemy,  lest  their  ad- 
versaries should  behave  themselves 

^OurhHi  Strangely,  and  lest  they  should  say, 
hand,  and  " Qui*  hand  IS  high,  and  the  Lord 
"lord,  hath  not  done  all  this. 

^eduhis"^  28  For  they  are  a nation  void  of 


counsel,  neither  is  there  any  under- 
standing in  them. 

29  O that  they  were  wise,  that  they 
understood  this,  that  they  would  con- 
sider their  latter  end ! 

30  How  should  '^one  chase  a thou-  ^ Josh.  23. 
sand,  and  two  put  ten  thousand  to 
flight,  except  their  Rock  had  sold 
them,  and  the  Lord  had  shut  them  up  ? 

31  For  their  rock  is  not  as  our 
Rock,  even  our  enemies  themselves 
being  judges. 

32  For  their  vine  LV  of  the  vine  of!  Ou 

Sodom,  and  of  the  fields  of  Gomor-  than  the 
rah  : their  grapes  are  grapes  of  gall,  "sZot, 
their  clusters  are  bitter : • 

33  Their  wine  is  the  poison  of 
dragons,  and  the  cruel  venom  of  asps. 


26.  I '^Mould  scatter  them  into  corner s~\ 
Rather,  I would  utterly  disperse' them. 
See  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

27.  Were  it  not  that  I feared  the  Rvrath  of 
the  enemy]  Rather,  Were  it  not  that  I 
apprehended  the  provocation  of  the 
enemy,  t.e.  that  I should  be  provoked  to 
wrath  when  the  enemy  ascribed  the  overthrow 
of  Israel  to  his  own  prowess  and  not  to  my 
judgments.  So  Vitringa,  Keil,  Wogue,  &c. 
The  Hebrew  noun  {caas')  is  used  in  the 
same  sense  as  the  cognate  verb  in  -u.  21.  On 
the  general  sense  of  the  passage  cf.  Ezek.  xx. 
9,  14,  21.  Moses  employs  a like  argument 
in  interceding  with  God  for  Israel,  ix.  28,  29. 

behanje  themsel'ves  strangely]  Rather,  mis- 
understand it,  i.e.  mistake  the  cause  of 
Israel’s  ruin. 

28  sqq.  The  reason  why  such  severity  was 
needed  is  noted  and  dwelt  upon,  the  discourse 
passing  almost  imperceptibly  into  words  of 
Moses’  own. 

29.  Cf.  Isa.  xlvii.  7 ; Lam.  i.  9. 

30.  their  Rock]  i.e.  the  Lord,  Israel’s 
true  Rock,  -n.  4,  as  the  parallel  clause  which 
follows  makes  clear.  Some  commentators 
wrongly  refer  the  expression  here  to  the  false 
gods,  to  which  however  it  certainly  is  applied 
in  the  next  nj.  But  the  purpose  of  Moses 
here  is  evidently  to  shew  that  the  defeat  of  Is- 
rael would  be  due  to  the  fact  that  God,  their 
strength,  had  abandoned  them  because  of  their 
apostasy. 

31.  their  rock... our  Rock]  i.e.  the  false 
gods  of  the  heathen  to  which  the  apostate  Is- 
raelites had  fallen  away,  on  the  one  side;  and 
God,  the  true  Rock,  in  which  Moses  and  the 
faithful  trust,  on  the  other  side.  The  change 
in  the  application  of  the  term  “their  rock,” 


rightly  marked  in  the  A.  V.  by  the  with- 
drawal of  the  capital  from  the  substantive, 
is  sudden  ; but  the  sense  is  settled  by  the 
antithesis  on  which  the  *1;.  turns,  and  which 
is  sharpened  by  the  very  suddenness  of  the  in- 
terchange in  the  pronouns.  In  the  next  v. 
the  pronoun  “ their”  reverts  to  its  usual  sense 
in  the  whole  passage,  and  denotes  the  apostate 
Israelites. 

our  enemies]  The  enemies  of  Moses  and 
the  faithful  Israelites;  the  heathen,  more  spe- 
cially those  wdth  whom  Israel  was  brought 
into  collision,  whom  Israel  was  commissioned 
to  “chase,”  but  to  whom,  as  a punishment 
for  faithlessness,  Israel  vras  “sold,”  -v.  30. 
Moses  leaves  the  decision,  whether  “their 
rock”  or  “our  Rock”  is  superior,  to  be  de- 
termined by  the  unbelievers  themselves.  For 
examples  we  have  the  testimony  of  the  Egyp- 
tians, Ex.  xiv.  25;  of  Balaam  in  Num.  xxiii. 
and  xxiv. ; of  the  Philistines:  cf.  also  Josh.  ii. 
9 sqq.;  i S.  iv.  8 and  v.  7 sqq.;  i K.  xx.  28. 
That  the  heathen  should  thus  be  constrained 
to  bear  witness  to  the  supremacy  of  Israel’s 
God  heightens  the  folly  of  Israel’s  apostasy. 

Judges]  The  Hebrew  word  is  a very  rare 
and  undoubtedly  archaic  one,  occurring  only 
Ex.  XX.  22. 

32.  their  -vine]  i.e.  the  nature  and  cha- 
racter of  Israel:  cf.  for  similar  expressions  Ps. 
Ixxx.  8,  14;  Jer.  ii.  21;  Hos.  x.  i.  This  and 
the  following  verses  must  not  (with  Schultz, 
Volck,  &c.)  be  referred  to  the  heathen  ene- 
mies of  Israel.  Such  a digression  upon  the 
faults  of  the  heathen  is  quite  foreign  to  the 
purpose  of  the  Song. 

Sodom... Gomorrah]  Here,  as  elsewhere, 
and  often  in  the  prophets,  emblems  of  utter 
depravity:  cf.  Isa.  i.  10;  J:r.  xxiii.  14. 

gall]  Cf.  xxix.  18. 


gi6 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXH.  U 34-44. 


34  Is  not  this  laid  up  in  store  with 
me,  and  sealed  up  among  my  treasures  ^ 
cEccIug.  33  To  me  belongeth  ^vengeance, 
Rom.  J2.  and  recompence ; their  foot  shall  slide 
ileb  lo  time ; for  the  day  of  their  cala- 

30.  mity  is  at  hand,  and  the  things  that 
shall  come  upon  them  make  haste. 

36  For  the  Lord  shall  judge  his 
people,  and  repent  himself  for  his  ser- 

1?^/'  vants,  when  he  seeth  that  their  ^ power 
is  gone,  and  there  is  none  shut  up,  or  left. 

37  And  he  shall  say.  Where  are  their 
gods,  their  rock  in  whom  they  trusted, 

38  Which  did  eat  the  fat  of  their 
sacrifices,  and  drank  the  wine  of  their 
drink  offerings?  let  them  rise  up  and 

\!nhi:ung  help  you,  and  be  ^your  protection. 
joryo2i.  29  See  now  that  I,  even  I,  am  he, 

I Sam.  2.  there  is  no  o-od  with  me:  kill, 

Tob.  13.2.  and  I make  alive;  I wound,  and  I 
\v  ibd.  16.  neither  is  there  any  that  can  de- 

liver out  of  my  hand. 


40  For  I lift  up  my  hand  to  heaven, 
and  say,  I live  for  ever. 

41  If  I whet  my  glittering  sword, 
and  mine  hand  take  hold  on  judg- 
ment; I will  render  vengeance  to 
mine  enemies,  and  will  reward  them 
that  hate  me. 

42  I will  make  mine  arrows  drunk 
with  blood,  and  my  sword  shall  de- 
vour flesh ; and  that  with  the  blood  of 
the  slain  and  of  the  captives,  from  the 
beginning  of  revenges  upon  the  enemy. 

43  Rejoice,  O ye  nations, 

his  people:  for  he  will  avenge  the j>'^’ 
blood  of  his  servants,  and  will  render 
vengeance  to  his  adversaries,  and  will  f j., 
be  merciful  unto  his  land,  and  to  his 
people. 

44  H And  Moses  came  and  spake 
all  the  words  of  this  song  in  the  ears 

of  the. people,  he,  and  "Hoshea  the  son  n Or, 


34 — 43.  God's  purpose  to  have  mercy  on 
His  people  when  chastised  and  humbled.  The 
declaration  is  introduced  by  an  assertion  that 
God’s  plan  had  been  all  along  fixed,  and  that 
its  execution  was  therefore  sure  and  rapidly 
approaching.  On  the  language  of  a’.  34,  cf. 
job  xiv.  17  ; Hos.  xiii.  la. 

35.  their  foot  shall  srule~\  Cf.  Ps,  xxxviii. 
17,  xciv.  18.  These  words  should  not,  as  in 
the  A.V.,  stand  as  a distinct  clause.  They 
are  closely  connected  with  the  preceding. 
'Phe  passage  should  rather  be  rendered: 
“ Vengeance  is  mine  and  recompence,  at  the 
time  when  their  foot  slideth.” 

36.  the  Lord  shall  judge  his  people'^  Cf. 
Ps.  cxxxv.  14;  I Pet.  iv.  17. 

repent  himself  fo)'\  R-ather,  have  com- 
passion upon.  The  T’.  declares  that  God’s 
judgment  of  His  ])eople  would  issue  at  once 
in  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  and  in  the 
comfort  of  the  righteous. 

none  shut  up.  or  leff\  On  this  proverbial 
phrase,  see  the  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

38.  let  theyn  rise  up~\  Cf.  Jer.  ii.  28. 

39.  7,  earn  /,  am  he.,  and  there  is  no  god 
<with  me~\  'J'he  words  interpolated  in  the 
A.  V.,  though  necessary  for  the  idiom  of  the 
English,  somewhat  mar  the  force  of  the  short- 
er original.  'J'he  LXX.  has  e-yco  dfn  kul  ovk 
ecTTL  Qcus  7r\rj^  ifiov.  Cf.  Isa.  xli.  4,  xlviii. 
12;  Joh.  viii.  24,  xviii.  5. 

I kilh  and  I make  ali've']  Cf.  i S.ii.  6;  2 K. 
V.  7. 

I auound,  and  I he aV^  Cf.  Job  v.  18;  ?Ios. 

vi.  I. 


neither  is  there  any  that  can  deliver  out  of 
yny  hand]  Cf.  Isa.  xliii.  13;  Hos.  v.  14. 

40 — 42.  These  are  closely  connect- 
ed. The  full  scop  in  the  A.  V.  at  end 
of  no.  40  should  be  removed,  and  the  pas- 
sage should  run  thus:  For  I lift  up  my 
hand  to  heaven  and  say.  As  I live  for 
ever,  if  I whet,  &c.  On  no.  40,  in  which 
God  is  described  as  swearing  by  Himself,  cf. 

Isa.  xlv.  23;  Jer.  xxii.  5 ; Heb.  vi.  17.  The 
lifting  up  of  the  hand  was  a gesture  used  in 
making  oath.  Cf.  Gen.  xiv.  22;  Rev.  x.  5,  6. 

40.  I linoe for  enoerj,  “The  Lord  liveth ” was 

an  usual  formula  in  swearing.  Cf.  Num.  xiv.  » 
21;  I S.  xiv.  39,  45;  Jer.  v.  2. 

41.  I mill  render  njengeance~\  Having 
taken  the  work  in  hand,  I will  thoroughly 
and  terribly  avenge  myself.  Here  begins  the 
apodosis  of  the  sentence,  the  substance  of  the 
oath. 

42.  from  the  beginning  of  revenges  upon 
the  enemy']  Render,  from  the  head  {i.e.  the 
chief)  of  the  princes  of  the  enemy. 

See  Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

43.  Rejoice.,  0 ye  nations.,  avith  his  people] 
Render  rather,  0 ye  nations,  praise  His 
people ; and  see  the  Note  at  end  of  the  chap- 
ter. The  A.  V.  however  follows  I^XX.,  as 
docs  St  Paul  when  citing  the  passage,  Rom. 

XV.  10. 

Nor  docs  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  differ 
greatly  in  effect  from  that  above  suggested. 

For  the  heathen,  here  called  upon  to  laud 
God’s  people,  can  only  be  reejuired  to  do 


V.  45-52.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIL 


917 


45  And  Moses  made  an  end  of 
speaking  all  these  words  to  all  Israel : 

18  And  he  said  unto  them,  .^Set 

' your  hearts  unto  all  the  words  which 
I testify  among  you  this  day,  which 
ye  shall  command  your  children  to 
observe  to  do,  all  the  words  of  this 
law. 

47  For  it  is  not  a vain  thing  for 
you ; because  it  is  your  life : and 
through  this  thing  ye  shall  prolong 
your  days  in  the  land,  whither  ye  go 
over  Jordan  to  possess  it. 

^■Numb.  48  ^ And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses  that  selfsame  day,  saying, 

49  Get  thee  up  into  this  mountain 
Abarim,  unto  mount  Nebo,  which  is 
in  the  land  of  Moab,  that  is  over 


against  Jericho;  and  behold  the  land 
of  Canaan,  which  I give  unto  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  for  a possession  : 

50  And  die  in  the  mount  whither 
thou  goest  up,  and  be  gathered  unto 

thy  people;  as  Aaron  thy  brother Numb, 
died  in  mount  Hor,  and  was  gathered  & 33.^3^' 
unto  his  people : 

51  Because  ^’ye  trespassed  against  * Numb, 
me  among  the  children  of  Israel  at  & 

the  waters  of  ” Meribah-Kadesh,  in  “ Or, 
the  wilderness  of  Zin ; because  ye  ^K^dtsfu 
sanctified  me  not  in  the  midst  of  the 
children  of  Israel. 

52  Yet  thou  shalt  see  the  land  be- 
fore thee;  but  thou  shalt  not  go  thither 
unto  the  land  which  I give  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel. 


so  when  they  have  themselves  received  a 
share  of  God’s  mercies  “to  His  land  and 
to  His  people,”  and  had  cause  therefore 
themselves  to  “rejoice  with  His  people.”  It 
is  apparent  also  that,  since  the  praise  is  to 
be  addressed,  in  the  first  instance,  to  “ His 
people,”  and  not  directly  to  God  Himself,  the 
“ mercies”  must  be  regarded  as  overflowing  to 
the  rejoicing  Gentiles  through  and  from  the 
Jews.  Nor  can  we  imagine  such  praise  to  be 
bestowed  by  the  Gentiles  upon  the  Jews  for 
such  “mercies,”  whilst  the  Jews  were  them- 
selves excluded  from  the  same.  It  seems  then 
that,  in  this  profound  passage,  there  is  shadow- 
ed forth  the  purpose  of  God  to  overrule  (i) 
the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  to  the  bringing  in  of 
the  Gentiles;  and  (2)  the  mercy  shewn  to  the 
Gentiles  to  the  eventual  restoration  of  the 
Jfws  (cf.  Rom.  xi.  25 — 36). 


The  Song  closes  then,  as  it  began  1—3, 
with  an  invitation  to  praise ; and  has  reached, 
through  a long  series  of  Divine  interpositions, 
the  grandest  them.e  for  it  in  this  call  to  the 
Gentiles,  now  heathen  no  more,  to  rejoice 
over  God’s  restored  people,  the  Jews. 

44 — 52.  These  verses  were,  no  doubt, 
added  by  the  author  of  the  supplement  to 
Deut.  See  Introd.,  § ii.  Vu.  48  sqq.  re- 
peat the  command  already  given,  Num.  xxvii. 
1 2 sqq. 

44.  Hosbea]  Cf.  Num.  xiii.  16. 

46.  Cf.  vi.  6,  xi,  18. 

47.  because  it  is  your  life~\  Cf.  xxx.  20. 

49.  this  mountain  Abarim^  unto  mount 

Nebo'\  Cf.  Num.  xxi.  10,  20,  and  notes. 

52.  Tet  thou  shalt  see  the  land\  Cf.  Heb. 
xi.  13. 


NOTES  on  Chap,  xxxii;  and 
NOTE  on  ch.  xxxii. 

Those  who  deny  that  Moses  is  the  author 
of  Deuteronomy,  of  course  include  this  chap- 
ter in  their  statements.  As  regards  it,  how- 
ever, the  further  and  special  question  has  been 
raised  whether  it  is  from  the  same  hand,  be  it 
of  Moses  or  of  any  other,  as  the  rest  of  the 
book  in  which  it  is  placed.  That  there  is 
nothing  in  its  length  and  structure  to  prove 
a late  origin  has  been  in  effect  shown  by  the 
remarks  on  the  other  Song  of  Moses  given  in 
Ex.  XV,:  cf.  Introduction  to  Exodus,  p.  239. 
Many  modern  critics  (Ewald,  Knobel,  Bleek, 
Kamphauien,  Davidson,  &c.)  have  however 
confidently  maintained  that  this  Song  was 
first  written  in  the  days  of  the  Kings,  sub- 
sequent to  the  revolt  of  Jei'oboam,  and  was 
inserted  by  the  still  later  “Deuteronomist”  in 


on  vv.  5,  26,  33,  36,  42,  and  43. 

his  compilation.  They  maintain  this  as  re- 
gards the  Song  because  of  the  characteristics 
(i)  of  its  style,  (2)  of  its  ideas. 

I.  That  the  Song  differs  signally  in  diction 
and  idiom  from  the  preceding  chapters  is  ob- 
vious, but  proves  nothing.  That  a lyrical  pas- 
sage should  be  conceived  in  modes  of  thought 
wholly  unlike  those  which  belong  to  narrative 
or  exhortfition,  and  be  uttered  in  different 
phraseology,  is  ordinary  and  natural.  The 
same  general  traits  distinguish  the  choruses  of 
a Greek  play  from  its  dialogue. 

There  are  in  the  Song  notwithstanding  nu- 
merous coincidences  both  in  thoughts  and 
wmrds  with  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch,  and 
especially  with  Deut.  Some  of  these  have  been 
pointed  out  in  the  notes  on  the  successive  verses. 
A long  list  of  them  is  given  by  Colenso,  ‘ Penta- 
teuch,’ § 799.  Many  no  doubt  are  unimportant, 


i8 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXII. 


but  others  are  not  so ; and  their  critical  weight 
altogether  is  more  than  enough  to  outweigh 
the  presumption,  in  itself  not  very  grave,  of  a 
difference  of  authorship  drawn  from  a differ- 
ence of  style. 

The  occurrence  of  Aramaisms  in  the  Song  is 
alleged  by  Kamph.  and  others  (e.g.  -z'. 

17;  'u’n  from  t:;.  18;  ‘v.  26; 

-v.  36).  Of  these  and  other  instances 
given,  some  are  questioned  by  recent  critics 
(see  e.g.  the  note  on  ‘v.  26);  and  even  were 
all  certain,  they  would  not  furnish  conclusive 
proof  of  the  date  assigned  by  Ewald,  Kamph,, 
(See..  For  the  canon  laid  down  by  Koenig, 
‘Alttest.  Studien,’  ii.  8,  “Aramaisms  in  a 
book  of  Scripture  are  a token  either  of  a 
very  early  or  very  late  composition,”  is  now 
generally  accepted.  In  poetry  particularly 
Aramaisms  were  used,  as  are  archaisms  in 
the  poetry  of  all  languages,  long  after  they 
had  ceased  to  be  vernacular  (see  Bleek,  ‘ In- 
troduction to  the  Old  Testament,’  Vol.  i. 
§ 39  (edit.  Venables);  Keil,  ‘ Introd.  to  the 
Old  Testament,’  Part  I.  ch.  ii,  § 13  (edit. 
Clark).  The  Aramaisms  in  question  then 
are  compatible  with  a Mosaic  origin  of 
the  Song,  and  possibly  also  with  one  dating 
after  the  reign  of  Hezekiah;  but  they  can 
hardly  be  so  with  the  date  suggested  by 
Knobcl,  the  reign  of  Ahab,  i.e.  the  tenth  cen- 
tury B,  c, 

I'he  resemblances  between  Ps.  xc.  and  Deut, 
xxxii.  have  been  rightly  regarded  as  important. 
Cf.  especially  the  expression  “the  Rock,” 
with  V.  I of  the  Psalm ; and  Deut.  xxxii.  7 
with  ii-z;.  I and  15  of  the  Psalm ; also  4 
and  36  of  the  former  with  16  and  13  of 
the  latter.  The  manner  and  turn  of  thought 
of  the  Psalm  are  certainly  also  similar  to  those 
of  the  Song  (see  Delitzsch  on  Ps.  xc.).  Now 
Bleek,  remarking  (‘  Introduction  to  Old  Tes- 
tament,’ Vol.  II.  p.  234,  edit.  Venables)  on 
the  superscription  of  the  Psalm,  which  calls  it 
“A  Prayer  of  Moses,”  says There  is  no 
authentic  reason  for  denying  to  the  lawgiver 
the  authorship  of  this  Psalm,  and  at  all  events 
it  bears  the  stamp  of  very  great  antiquity.” 
Ewald  also  grants  the  last  part  of  this  state- 
me’it. 

Kamph.  however  himself  seems  practically 
to  admit  the  insufiiciency  of  the  argument 
drawn  from  style,  when  he  says,  p.  247,  “ If 
the  composition  of  Deuteronomiy  by  Moses, 
of  \^'hich  many  learned  men  are  still  convinced, 
could  really  stand  as  established,  then  natu- 
rally the  (jiicstion  about  the  authenticity  of 
our  Song  would  be  decided  in  the  traditional 
sense.” 

(2)  Of  arguments  against  the  Mosaic  au- 
thorship belonging  to  the  second  class,  many 
resolve  themselves  ul'imatcly  into  a mere  re- 
jection of  prophecy  as  such.  The  Song  has 
reference  to  a state  of  things  which  did  not 
ensue  until  long  after  tlie  days  of  Moses.  It 
is  thence  inferred  at  once  that  it  could  not 


have  been  written  by  him.  Such  assumptions 
need  not  be  here  discussed. 

But  some  (e.g.  Kamph.)  who  will  not  reject 
prophecy  in  toto^  are  nevertheless  convinced 
that  the  Song  must  have  originated  at  a far 
later  epoch  than  that  of  Moses.  It  sets  forth, 
they  observe,  a religious  and  political  aspect  of 
affairs  which  did  not  arise  until  after  the  dis- 
ruption in  the  reign  of  Rehoboam,  and  even 
the  decline  of  the  Monarchy  of  the  Ten 
Tribes;  its  whole  tenor  of  ideas  and  associa- 
tions is  of  some  such  era  ; its  very  theme  and 
scope  is  the  restoration  of  a right  relation- 
ship of  God’s  people  to  Him,  a relationship 
which  is  assumed  to  have  been  interrupted  by 
the  faithlessness  of  the  human  party  in  the 
covenant.  Now  the  topics  of  Isaiah  and  the 
prophets  following  him  are  the  very  same. 

In  reply  it  must  be  said  that  other  parts  of 
Deuteronomy  and  the  Pentateuch  no  less  dis- 
tinctly contemplate  an  apostasy  (e.g.  Deut. 
xxviii,;  Lev.  xxvi.),  and  that  therefore  the 
mere  fact  of  such  being  referred  to  in  this 
chapter  proves  nothing  as  to  it  in  particular. 
Further,  the  apostasy  is  really  named  here  in 
general  and  highly  poetical  terms ; terms  cer- 
tainly not  so  definite  as  those  employed  in 
other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  on  the  same 
subject.  The  exhibition  of  the  apostasy  in 
the  Song,  not  as  a possible  but  as  an  accom- 
plished event,  is  in  the  manner  common  to  the 
prophets.  They  treat  a Future  presented  to 
their  inspired  gaze  whilst  they  write  or  speak, 
as  though  it  were  a real  living  Present;  and 
hence  “the  prophetic  present”  has  passed 
into  a well-understood  and  technical  term. 

The  like  remarks  apply  to  the  political  allu- 
sions. No  doubt  these  assume  that  the  people 
has  passed  through  an  era  of  prosperity  and 
success,  and  has  reached  one  of  disaster  and 
subjugation.  Yet  the  description  contains  no 
single  trait  which  can  fairly  be  said  to  imply 
a personal  knowledge  either  of  the  Syrian  or 
Assyrian  victories  over  Israel.  Indeed  the 
fact  (remarked  by  Knobel),  that  the  close  of 
the  Song  holds  out  to  Israel,  and,  be  it 
noted,  not  to  a portion  of  Israel,  but  em- 
phatically to  Israel  as  a whole,  a lively  hope  cf 
revenge  and  recovery,  seems,  on  the  ground  of 
“ the  higher  criticism”  at  least,  to  refute  at  once 
the  usual  hypothesis  of  the  critics  of  that 
school  themselves ; for  in  the  closing  years  of 
the  kingdom  of  Samaria  such  triumphs  could 
hardly  be  dreamed  of  by  any  discerning  pa- 
triot against  the  overwhelming  might  of  Assy- 
ria. And  yet  it  is  just  to  those  years  that 
they  ascribe  the  origin  of  the  Song. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  blessings  an- 
nexed in  the  Song  to  faithfulness,  whether 
named  as  promises  or  performances,  are  those 
which  recur  so  commonly  in  Deuteronomy, 
and  which  must  have  been  in  the  closing  months 
of  Moses’  life  perpetually  in  his  mind ; those 
namely  connected  with  the  Promised  Land. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  promises  which  emerge 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXII. 


919 


in  the  later  times,  and  which  cluster  round 
the  “Son  of  David,”  who  should  restore 
again  all  things  to  Israel,  are  wholly  absent. 

The  “ objectivity”  of  the  Song  is  justly  re- 
ferred to  by  Schultz  and  others  as  one  of  its 
most  remarkable  traits.  Now  there  is  no  more 
universal  or  striking  characteristic  of  the  most 
ancient  poetry  of  every  nation  than  this. 

It  may  be  added  that,  exhibiting  as  it  does 
in  series,  God’s  preventing  mercies,  His  peo- 
ple’s faithlessness  and  ingratitude,  God’s  con- 
sequent judgments,  and  the  final  and  com- 
plete triumph  of  the  Divine  counsels  of  grace, 
it  forms  the  summary  of  all  later  Old  Testa- 
ment prophecies,  and  gives  as  it  were  the 
framework  upon  which  they  are  laid  out. 
Here  as  elsewhere  the  Pentateuch  presents  it- 
self as  the  foundation  of  the  religious  life  of 
Israel  in  after  times. 

If  once  we  admit  the  possibility  that  Moses 
might  foresee  the  future  apostasy  of  Israel,  it 
is  scarce  possible  to  conceive  how  such  fore- 
sight could  be  turned  to  better  account  by 
him  than  by  the  writing  of  this  Song.  In 
style  rugged,  sententious,  and  incisive;  abound- 
ing in  pregnant  metaphors,  and  bold  con- 
trasts ; impassioned  in  earnestness ; and  built 
up  with  a very  careful  attention  to  rhythm,  no 
strain  could  be  more  likely  to  strike  the  ima- 
gination or  to  fasten  on  the  memory  of  an. 
Eastern  people  or  better  calculated  to  attain 
the  specific  purpose  announced  as  aimed  at  in 
its  composition:  see  xxxi.  19  sqq.  Its  currency 
would  be  a standing  protest  against  apostasy ; 
a protest  which  might  well  check  waverers,  and 
warn  the  faithful  that  the  revolt  of  others  was 
neither  unforeseen  nor  unprovided  for  by  Him 
in  whom  they  trusted. 

That  this  Ode  must  on  every  ground  take  the 
very  first  rank  in  Hebrew  poetry  is  universally 
allowed.  The  rationalist  critics  however  have 
no  better  explanation  to  otter  about  its  origin 
than  that  “the  Deuteronomist,”  a compiler 
supposed  to  be  living  in  the  years  immediately 
preceding  the  Babylonish  captivity,  “found” 
it,  an  anonymious  docum.ent  of  more  than  a 
century  old,  the  production  of  some  for- 
gotten author  belonging  to  the  northern  king- 
dom, and  incorporated  it  into  his  work,  in- 
venting by  way  of  accounting  for  its  insertion 
the  statements  of  xxxi.  16 — 30.  Such  a con- 
jecture is  most  unlikely  on  the  face  of  it ; 
and  is  a supposition  such  surely  as  no  one 
would  maintain  about  this  splendid  poem, 
unless  he  had  adopted  it  on  grounds  other 
than  those  found  in  the  Song  itself,  and  had 
to  defend  it  to  the  utmost  at  all  hazards. 

“The  Song  of  Moses”  has  furnished  a 
theme  for  several  monographs ; amongst  the 
most  noteworthy  of  which  are  Vitringa, 

‘ Commentarius  ad  Canticum  Mosis’  (1734); 
Dathe,  ‘Dissertatio  in  Canticum  Mosis’ 
(1769);  Ewald,  ‘ Das  grosse  Lied  in  Deu- 
teronomium’  (‘Jahrb.  der  Bibl.  Wissenschaft,’ 
1857);  Volck,  ‘Mosis  Canticum  Cygneum,’ 


Nordlingen,  1861;  Kamphausen,  ‘Das  Lied 
Moses,’  Leipzig,  1862. 

•V.  5. 

The  word  “spot”  or  “blemish”  (DID) 
appears  to  have  a moral  signification  here  as 
Prov.  ix.  7 ; Job  xi.  15 ; 2 Pet.  ii.  13. 

The  rendering  of  margin,  though  sup- 
ported by  Abenez.,  Philippson,  &c.,  is  in- 
tolerably harsh ; others  (Rosenm.,  Baumg., 
Schultz,  &c.)  treat  the  whole  passage  as  inter- 
rogative, and  carry  on  the  subject  from  the 
preceding  verse,  “Has  He”  (i.e.  God)  “acted 
corruptly  towards  him  ? No  : His  children 
themselves  are  their  own  disgrace.”  But  this 
does  not  suit  the  tenor  of  the  context.  Others 
(Lowth,  Donald.,  &c.)  render  “their  spot” 
(i.e.  the  defiling  infection  of  their  sin)  “has 
corrupted  before  flim  children  not”  (i.e.  no 
longer)  “His”;  but  this  inversion  of  the  order 
of  the  words  is  unwarrantable.  Ewald  and 
Fiirst  assign  quite  another  sense:  “ His  not- 
sons  have  violated  their  oath  to  Him.”  They 
give  however  no  example  of  DID  in  the 
sense  of  “oath”  from  the  Hebrew,  and  the 
illustrations  from  the  Arabic  are  not  convinc- 
ing. On  the  whole,  though  the  passage  is 
difficult,  no  better  version  has  yet  been  offered 
than  that  suggested  in  the  foot-note;  which 
is  substantially  that  adopted  by  Knob.,  Keil, 
Schroder,  &c.  The  variations  of  the  ancient 
versions  suggest  the  suspicion  that  the  text  in 
this  ‘v.  is  and  has  long  been  corrupt. 

'V.  26. 

LXX.  StacTTTfpco  avrovs-  The  Hebrew  word 
here  is  cIttu^  Xey.,  and  is  taken  by  the  English 
Version  after  most  ancient  authorities  as  a de- 
nominative from  The  modern  Hebra- 

ists (Gesen.,  Fiirst,  &c.)  however  regard  it  as 
an  independent  root,  found  also  in  HD  and 

Arab,  ilj  (cf.  Gk.  0r;-/Lii,  Lat.  fa-ri),  and  ^ 
meaning  to  “breathe”  or  “blow.”  Hence 
it  means  “ceu  vento  dispergam  eos,”  Gesen. 

‘ Thes.’ 

'v.  36. 

This  phrase  is  proverbial  (cf.  i K.  xiv.  10, 
xxi.  21 ; 2 K.  ix.  8),  and  based  on  a parono- 
masia (Dliyi  "il'ify).  Its  general  sense  is  clear: 
it  means  “all  men  of  all  sorts;”  and  its 
literal  force  is  correctly  given  in  the  A.  V., 
though  the  word  translated  “left”  might  per- 
haps as  well  be  rendered  “ set  free.”  Its 
original  and  proper  significance  has  however 
been  uncertain  from  very  early  times.  The 
best  explanation  of  it  is  probably  that  of  De 
Dieu,  which  has  analogies  in  the  Arabic,  and  is 
followed  by  Dathe,  Baumg.,  Delitzsch,  Keil, 
Knob.,  &c.,  who  regard  it  as  originally  mean-, 
ing  “married  and  single”  (cf.  the  German 
ledig) : others  (Rosenm.,  Gesen.,  De  Wette, 
&c.)  suggest  “bond  and  free,”  or  “confined 
and  at  large:”  others  (Kimchi  and  some 


920 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIII. 


[v.  I,  2. 


Jewish  authorities)  “precious”  (and  so  shut 
up  and  guarded),  and  “vile”  (and  so  neglect- 
ed) : others  (Fiirst,  &c.)  “he  who  is  restrained 
and  he  who  is  his  own  master,”  which  is  sub- 
stantially identical  with  that  of  Kamph.,  “he 
who  is  not  of  full  age,  and  he  who  is  so,  and 
therefore  is  independent : ” al'il  alia. 

v.  42. 

The  LXX.  [dyro  KecfioXfjs  dpxovrcov  ix~ 
6pd>v]  adopts  the  rendering  suggested  in  the 
foot-note.  So  Vatcr,  Gesen.,  Maur.,  Kamph., 
Fiirst,  Wogue,  See.  This  rendering  is  strongly 
supported  by  the  Hebrew  of  Judg.  v.  2 (sec 
note).  Others  indeed  (Cappellus,  Vitringa, 
Knobel,  Keil,  Schroder,  Volck,  &c.)  render 
the  word  y"l2  by  “hair,”  as  in  Num.  vi.  5; 
cf.  Lev.  xxi.  10;  and  thus  the  passage  would 
run;  “from  the  hairy  head  of  the  enemy;”  cf. 
Ps.  Ixviii.  21.  The  word  PID  is  however  here 
in  the  plural.  Either  way  the  clause  connects 
itself  with  the  verbs  in  the  preceding  clauses: 
“ I will  make  my  arrows  drunk  with  blood, 
and  my  sword  shall  devour  flesh;  with  (or 
from)  the  blood  of  the  slain,  and  with  (or 
from)  the  chief  of  the  princes.”  The  render- 
ing of  the  A.V.,  in  this  place  and  Judg. 
V.  2,  cannot  be  maintained. 

‘v.  43. 

The  word  “with”  is  supplied  by  the 
A.V.,  as  by  the  LXX.  evcjypdvdrjre  eSvrj  perd 
Tov  \aov  avTov,  but  needlessly.  The  trans- 


lation of  the  words,  however,  which  has 
been  variously  given,  must  depend  upon  that 
of  the  verb,  This  verb  in  Kal  and 

Piel  means  “to  sound;”  and  also  “to  re- 
joice,” or  “to  utter  praise;”  and  transitively 
“to  laud,”  “praise,”  or  “rejoice  in”  (cf. 
for  Kal,  Isa.  Ixi.  7 ; for  Piel,  Ps.  li.  16). 
The  intransitive  senses  of  the  verb  in  Kal  and 
Piel  are  found  also  in  its  Hiphil  forms  (e.^. 
Job  xxix.  13;  Ps.  xxxii.  ii).  There  can 
then  be  no  doubt  that  the  transitive  sense, 
though  it  does  not  actually  occur,  is  admis- 
sible in  Hiphil;  and  we  have,  in  all  likeli- 
hood, an  example  of  it  in  the  words  before 
us.  (So  Vulg.,  “ Laudate  gentes  populum 
ejus;”  Samar.,  and  many  Jewish  authorities; 
Dathe,  Baumg.,  Schultz,  VoHk,  Herx.,  Knob., 
Schroder,  Wogue,  &c.)  Other  renderings 
are  (i)  “O  ye  nations,  cause  His  people  to 
rejoice”  (Alting,  Vater,  &c.) ; (2)  “ O ye  nar 
tions,  who  are  His  people,  rejoice”  (Aquila, 
Theodot.,  Luther,  Rosenm.,  Ewald,  Maur., 
Gesen.,  Fiirst,  &c.).  But  of  these  two  the 
former  does  not  suit  the  context,  no  reason 
being  assigned  in  it  why  “ the  nations”  should 
cause  joy  to  God’s  people;  the  latter  is  ob- 
jectionable, because  it  assumes  an  apposition 
between  and  D'"!!!,  which  terms  are 

generally  (though  not  universally)  contra- 
distinguished, and  here  seem  to  be  especially 
so  from  the  tenor  of  the  whole  Song  (cf  'v. 
21),  and  from  the  difference  of  number  in 
the  nouns. 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

I The  majesty  of  God.  6 The  blessings  cf  the 
txvclve  tribes.  26  The  excclleuty  of  Israel. 

AND  this  is  the  blessing,  where- 
l\.  with  Moses  the  man  of  God 


blessed  the  children  of  Israel  before 
his  death. 

2 And  he  said,  The  Lord  came 
from  Sinai,  and  rose  up  from  Seir 
unto  them*;  he  shined  forth  from 


Chap.  XXXIII.  Blessing  of  Moses.  For 
general  remar ks,  see  Note  at  end  of  chapter. 

The  Blessing  contains  (i)  an  Introduction, 
'v'v.  I — 5;  (2)  the  Benedictions  pronounced 
on  the  Tribes  individually,  6 — 25;  (3)  a 

Conclusion,  'w.  26 — 29. 

It  was  no  doubt  spoken  by  Moses,  probably 
on  the  same  day  and  to  the  same  assembly  as 
the  Song  (xxxii.  i — 43),  as  soon  as  he  re- 
ceived the  renewed  notice  of  his  approaching 
decease  (xxxii.  48),  and  just  before  he  ascend- 
ed Mount  Nebo.  Like  the  Blessing  of  Jacob 
(Gen.  xlix.),  to  which  it  has  an  intimate 
though  independent  correspondence  through- 
out, it  is  the  solemn  farewell  of  the  earthly 
head  of  the  race.  A comparison  with  Gen. 
1.  c.  will  shew  how  the  blessings  uttered  by 
Moses  over  the  several  Tribes  partly  repeat, 
partly  enlarge  and  supplement,  and  sometimes 
modify  or  even  reverse,  the  predictions  of  the 
dying  Jacob.  'Fhe  characteristics  of  the  Bless- 
ing are  such  as  distinctly  suit  the  place  which 


it  occupies  in  the  Pentateuch,  both  as  to  time 
and  circumstance. 

This  chapter,  in  striking  contrast  with  the 
last,  is  pervaded  by  a tone  of  happy  augury. 
It  is  indeed  fltting  to  use  auspicious  words 
in  a leave-taking;  but  the  total  absence  of 
warning  and  reproof  has  been  rightly  noted 
as  indicating  that  Moses  is  here  speaking  of 
the  ideal  Israel,  of  the  people  of  God 
as  they  might  and  would  have  been  but  for 
their  perverseness,  rather  than  foretelling  what 
would  in  fact  be  the  fate  and  fortunes  of 
the  Twelve  Tribes.  As  then  the  Song  sets 
forth  the  calamities  with  which  God’s  justice 
will  visit  Israel’s  fall,  so  does  the  Blessing  de- 
scribe the  glory  and  greatness  which  would 
from  His  mercy  crown  Israel’s  faithfulness. 
The  Song  and  the  Blessing  are  therefore  cor- 
respondent, and  mutually  supplementary. 
The  form  into  which  the  Blessing  is  thrown 
exhibits  the  several  tribes  co-operating,  each 
according  to  its  peculiar  characteristics  and 


V.  3—6-] 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIII. 


IHeb. 
a Jire  of 
law. 


92  I 


mount  Paran,  and  he  came  with  ten 
thousands  of  saints : from  his  right 
hand  went  ^a  fiery  law  for  them. 

3 Yea,  he  loved  the  people;  all  his 
saints  arc  in  thy  hand : and  they  sat 
down  at  thy  feet;  every  one  shall  re- 
ceive of  thy  words. 

4 Moses  commanded  us  a law,  even 


the  inheritance  of  the  congregation  of 
Jacob. 

5 And  he  was  king  in  Jeshurun, 
when  the  heads  of  the  people  and 
the  tribes  of  Israel  were  gathered  to- 
gether. 

6 ^ Let  Reuben  live,  and  not  die; 
and  let  not  his  men  be  few. 


circumstances,  for  the  accomplishment  of  the 
national  mission. 

1— 5.  Introduction. 

1.  Moses  the  man  of  Goif  Th?  same  title  is 
given  to  Moses,  Josh.  xiv.  6,  and  in  the  heading 
of  Ps.  xc.  Cf.  I S.  ix.  6;  I K.  xii.  22.  The 
“man  of  God”  in  the  Old  Testament  is  one 
who  is  favoured  with  direct  revelations,  but 
not  necessarily  an  official  Prophet  {tiabhT). 
The  occurrence  of  the  title  here  is  no  doubt  a 
token  that  the  Blessing  was  not,  as  was  the 
Song,  transcribed  by  Moses  himself.  Cf.  xxxi. 
22. 

Moses  when  he  spoke  it  had  no  doubt  his 
coadjutor  (cf.  xxxi.  14  sqq.)  and  successor 
Joshua  by  his  side,  who  also  shared  in  the 
prophetic  spirit  by  which  the  Blessing  was 
dictated. 

2 —  5.  The  glorious  giving  of  the  Law  from 
Sinai,  and  appointment  thereby  of  Israel  to  be 
God’s  peculiar  people.  The  blessings  of  the 
individual  tribes  spring  out  of  God’s  mercies 
to  the  nation,  and  hence  are  introduced  as 
they  are  summed  up  {yns.  26 — 29)  by  an  eu- 
logy of  the  great  privileges  pertaining  to  Israel 
as  a whole. 

2.  The  Lord  came  from  Sinai,  and  rose  up 
from  Seir,  &c.]  By  “ Seir”  is  to  be  under- 
stood the  mountain-land  of  the  Edomites,  and 
by  “mount  Paran”  (cf.  on  Num.  x,  12)  the 
range  which  forms  the  northern  boundary  of 
the  desert  of  Sinai.  Thus  the  -v.  forms  a 
poetical  description  of  the  vast  arena  upon 
which  the  glorious  manifestation  of  the  Lord 
in  the  giving  of  the  Covenant  took  place. 
The  passage  is  imitated  Judg.  v.  4,  5,  and 
Hab.  Hi.  3,  where  Teman  is  synonymous  with 
Seir,  Cf.  also  Ps.  Ixviii.  7,  8. 

toi  thousands  of  saints']  Render,  from 
amidst  ten  thousands  of  holy  ones; 
lit.  from  myriads  of  holiness,  i.  e.  holy  angels ; 
cf,  Zech.  xiv.  5.  See  Note  at  end  of  the 
chapter. 

3.  he  loosed  the  people]  Lit.  “the  peoples,” 
i.e.  the  Twelve  Tribes,  not  the  Gentiles.  The 
latter  sense,  suggested  by  some,  is  here  out  of 
place. 

all  his  saints  are  in  thy  hand]  The  term 
saints  refers  to  God’s  chosen  people  just  be- 
fore spoken  of.  Cf.  vii,  18,  21;  Ex.  xix.  6; 
Dan,  vii.  18,  21.  The  change  from  the  third 


to  the  second  person,  or  vice  versa,  is  not  un- 
common in  Hebrew  poetry.  Cf.  xxxii,  15 ; 
Ps.  xlix.  15 — 19.  The  explanation  suggested 
by  Wordsw.  after  Vater,  Keil,  &c.,  “all  the 
holy  angels  wait  upon  Him,”  seems  less  suit- 
able to  the  tenor  of  the  context. 

4.  Moses  commanded  us  a la^v]  Though 
Moses  probably  did  not  transcribe  this  Bless- 
ing, yet  he  probably  uttered  these  words,  al- 
though he  himself  is  thus  referred  to  in  the 
third  person.  The  inspired  writers,  speaking 
less  their  own  words  and  in  their  own  person 
than  in  the  name  and  words  of  the  Spirit 
which  moved  them,  frequently  refer  to  them- 
selves in  this  objective  way:  cf.  Num.  xii.  3; 
Judg.  V.  13;  Ps.  xxi.  throughout.  In  the 
word  “us”  Moses  identifies  himself  with  the 
people.  Cf.  Hab.  Hi.  19;  Joh.  xix.  24. 

5.  he  ^ivas  king]  Rather,  he  became 
king,  i.e.  the  Lord,  not  (as  Abenez.,  Vatabl., 
Luth.,  &c.)  Moses,  who  is  never  spoken  of  as 
a “ king.” 

Jeshurun]  Cf.  xxxii.  15. 

6 — 25.  Blessings  of  the  Tribes  indivi- 
dually. 

6.  Reuben. 

let  not  his  men  be  fe^]  Lit.  “a  number.” 
The  negative  particle  is  supplied  in  the  A.  V. 
from  the  preceding  context,  and,  so  far  as 
concerns  the  sense,  rightly.  The  term  “a 
number”  means  “a  small  number,”  such 
as  could  be  easily  counted.  Cf.  iv.  27;  Gen. 
xxxiv.  30.  The  v.  thus  promises  that  the 
tribe  shall  endure  and  prosper,  and  its  tenor 
is  in  contrast  with  that  of  Gen.  xlix.  3,  4, 
Yet  it  must  be  noted  that  the  tribe  had  de- 
creased since  the  Exodus,  cf.  Num,  i,  21 
with  xxvi.  7 ; and  also  that  in  later  times  its 
numbers,  even  when  counted  with  the  Gadites 
and  the  half  of  Manasseh,  were  fewer  than 
that  of  the  Reubenites  alone  at  the  census  of 
Num.  i.  (Cf.  I Chron.  v.  18).  The  blessing 
of  the  text  seems  therefore  to  be  so  worded  as 
to  carry  with  it  a warning.  The  Reubenites 
took  possession  of  the  southern  portion  of  the 
land  conquered  east  of  Jordan,  a large  and 
fertile  district  without  determinate  boundary 
towards  the  Euphrates.  Occupied  with  their 
herds  and  flocks,  they  appear,  soon  after  the 
days  of  Joshua,  to  have  lost  their  early 
energy.  They  could  not  be  roused  to  take 


922 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIII. 


[v.  7 — lo. 


7 ^ And  this  is  the  blessing  of  Ju- 
dah : and  he  said,  Hear,  Lord,  the 
voice  of  Judah,  and  bring  him  unto 
his  people : let  his  hands  be  sufficient 
for  him ; and  be  thou  an  help  to  him 
from  his  enemies. 

«Exod.  28.  8 ^ And  of  Levi  he  said,  ^ Let 

thy  Thummim  and  thy  Urim  be  with 
thy  holy  one,  whom  thou  didst  prove 


at  Massah,  and  with  whom  thou  didst 
strive  at  the  waters  of  Meribah ; 

9 Who  said  unto  his  father  and  to 

his  mother,  I have  not  seen  him ; nei- 
ther did  he  acknowledge  his  brethren, 
nor  knew  his  own  children : for  they 
have  observed  thy  word,  and  kept  thy 
covenant.  11  Or, 

10  "They  shall  teach  Jacob  thy 


their  part  in  the  national  rising  against  Jabin 
(cf.  Judg.  V.  15,  16);  they  dissipated  their 
strength  in  distant  expeditions,  carried  some- 
times as  far  as  the  Euphrates,  and  under- 
taken no  doubt  to  provide  pastures  for  their 
multiplying  flocks  (cf.  i Chron.  v.  9,  10, 
18  sqq.);  and  they  do  not  seem  to  have 
cared  to  complete  the  conquest  of  the  terri- 
tory of  which  they  took  possession  after  the 
victories  over  Sihon  and  Og:  cf.  Num,  xxxii. 
and  notes.  No  judge,  prophet,  or  national 
hero  arose  out  of  this  tribe ; and,  as  the  re- 
cently discovered  Moabite  stone  proves,  the 
cities  assigned  to  the  Reubenites  by  Joshua 
were  for  the  most  part  wrested,  partly  or 
wholly,  from  them  by  the  Moabites,  with 
whom  they  in  all  likelihood  became  gradually 
much  intermixed.  (See  Schlottmann,  ‘ Die 
Siegesiiule  Mesa’s,  pp.  36  sqq.) 

The  tribe  of  Simeon,  v/hich  would  accord- 
ing to  the  order  of  birth  come  next,  though  of 
course  comprehended  in  the  general  blessing 
bestowed  upon  the  whole  people,  'vv.  1 — 5 and 
26 — 29,  is  not  here  named.  This  omission  is 
explained  by  reference  to  the  words  of  Jacob 
concerning  Simeon,  Gen.  xlix.  7.  This  tribe 
with  Levi  was  to  be  “scattered  in  Israel.” 
The  fulfilment  of  this  prediction  was  in  the 
case  of  Levi  so  ordered  as  to  carry  with  it 
honour  and  blessing;  but  no  such  reversal  of 
punishment  is  granted  to  Simeon.  Rather 
had  this  latter  tribe  added  new  sins  to  those 
which  Jacob  denounced  (cf.  Num.  xxv.). 
Accordingly,  though  very  numerous  at  the 
Exodus,  it  had  surprisingly  diminished  before 
the  death  of  Moses;  cf.  Num.  i.  22,  23  vrith 
Num.  xxvi.  T2 — 14;  and  found  eventually  an 
adequate  territory  within  the  limits  of  Judah. 
Cf.  Josh.  xix.  2 — 9.  The  tribe  is  mentioned 
as  making  certain  conquests  along  with  Ju- 
dah, Judg.  i.  17;  and  is  probably  “the  rem- 
nant of  tlie  people”  spoken  of,  i K.  xii.  23, 
as  constituting,  together  with  Judah  and  Ben- 
jamin, the  forces  of  Rehoboarn.  In  later  his- 
tory the  families  of  the  Simeonites  were  not 
only  still  extant,  but  made  certain  conquests 
in  the  south,  i Chro.  iv.  24  sqq.,  and  39 — 43. 

7.  Judah. 

bring  him  unto  his  people]^  Jacob  (Gen.  xlix. 
8,  9)  had  predicted  glorious  success  in  war 
to  this  tribe.  Moses  now,  taking  up,  as  it 
were,  the  promise  of  Jacob,  prays  that  Judah, 


marching  forth  at  the  head  of  fhe  tribes,  might 
ever  be  brought  back  in  safety  and  victory; 
and  intimates  that  God  would  grant  help  to 
accom.plish  this.  (So  substantially  Onkel., 
Saad.,  Hengst.,  Keil,  &c.)  It  is  obvious 
that  the  words  “bring  him  unto  his  people” 
cannot  have  the  sense  attached  to  them  by 
the  rationalist  commentators,  “ bring  back 
the  tribes,”  i.e.  the  ten  tribes  which  revolted 
under  Jeroboam  “ to  him.” 

8—11.  Levi. 

The  blessing  of  Levi,  like  that  of  Judah,  is 
addressed  to  God  as  a prayer. 

thy  Thummim  and  thy  Urim']  i.e.  “thy  Right 
and  thy  Light:”  cf.  on  Lx.  xxviii.  30. 

thy  holy  07ie]  i.e.  Levi,  regarded  as  the  re- 
presentative of  the  whole  priestly  and  levitical 
stock  which  sprang  from  him.  Hence,  in  the 
following,  the  blessing  proceeds  in  the 
plural  form.  The  contrast  between  the  tone 
of  this  passage  and  that  of  Gen.  xlix.  5 — 7 is 
remarkable.  Though  the  prediction  of  Jacob 
respecting  the  dispersion  of  this  tribe  held 
good,  yet  it  was  so  overruled  as  to  issue  in 
honour  and  reward.  The  recovery  of  God’s 
favour  is  to  be  traced  to  the  faithfulness  with 
which  Moses  and  Aaron,  who  came  of  this 
tribe,  seived  God  in  their  high  offices;  and  to 
the  zeal  and  constancy  which  conspicuous 
persons  of  the  tribe  {e.g.  Phinehas,  Num.  xxv. 
II  sqq.),  and  the  whole  tribe  itself  (cf.  Ex. 
xxxii.  26),  manifested  on  critical  occasions  in 
supporting  the  leaders  of  the  people.  The 
same  reasons  led  to  Levi’s  being  selected  for 
the  special  service  of  God  in  the  Sanctuary, 
ch.  X.  8 sqq.,  and  Num.  viii.  5 sqq.;  and  for 
the  office  of  instructing  their  brethren  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  Law.  On  Massah.^  cf.  Ex. 
xvii.  I — 7;  on  Meribah.^  Num.  xx.  i — 13. 
The  two  events  thus  alluded  to,  the  one  oc- 
curring at  the  beginning,  the  other  towards 
the  end  of  the  forty  years’  wandering,  serve 
to  represent  the  whole  series  of  trials  by 
which  God  proved  and  exercised  the  faith  and 
obedience  of  this  chosen  tribe.  In  conformity 
with  the  spirit  of  the  chapter,  the  facts  that 
Moses  and  Aaron  failed  under  the  trial  at 
Kadesh  (cf.  Num.  xx.),  and  that  some  of  the 
Levites  were  concerned  in  the  rebellion  of  Ko- 
rah  (Num.  xvi.),  are  passed  over  in  silence. 

9.  Who  said  unto  his  father  and  to  his  mo- 
ther] Cf.  St  Matt.  X.  37;  St  Luk(i,xiv.  26. 


V.  II-I9.]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIII. 


923 


nor, 
let  thcvi 
put  in- 
ceiise. 
tHeb. 
at  thy 
uose. 


Gen.  49. 
25- 


tHeb. 
thrust 
forth.. 
t Heb. 
moons. 


judgments,  and  Israel  thy  lav/:  "they 
shall  put  incense  Tefore  thee,  and 
whole  burnt  sacrifice  upon  thine  altar. 

1 1 Bless,  Lord,  his  substance,  and 
accept  the  work  of  his  hands : smite 
throu2:h  the  loins  of  them  that  rise 
against  him,  and  of  them  that  hate 
him,  that  they  rise  not  again. 

12  ^ And  of  Benjamin  he  said,  T'he 
beloved  of  the  Lord  shall  dwell  in 
safety  by  him ; and  the  Lord  shall 
cover  hini  all  the  day  long,  and  he 
shall  dwell  between  his  shoulders. 

13  And  of  Joseph  he  said,  ^Bless- 
ed of  the  Lord  be  his  land,  for  the 
precious  things  of  heaven,  for  the  dew, 
and  for  the  deep  that  coucheth  be- 
neath, 

14  And  for  the  precious  fruits 
brought  forth  by  the  sun,  and  for  the 
precious  things  ^put  forth  by  the 
^ moon. 


15  And  for  the  chief  things  of  the 
ancient  mountains,  and  for  the  pre- 
cious things  of  the  lasting  hills, 

16  And  for  the  precious  things  of 
the  earth  and  fulness  thereof,  and  for 
the  good  will  of  him  that  dwelt  in  the 
bush  : let  the  blessing  come  upon  the 
head  of  Joseph,  and  upon  the  top  of 
the  head  of  him  that  was  “^separated 
from  his  brethren. 

17  His  glory  is  like  the  firstling  of 
his  bullock,  and  his  horns  are  like  the 
horns  of  unicorns : with  them  he  shall 
push  the  people  together  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth : and  they  are  the  ten 
thousands  of  Ephraim,  and  they  are 
the  thousands  of  Manasseh. 

18  ^ And  of  Zebulun  he  said,  Re- 
joice, Zebulun,  in  thy  going  out  j and, 
Issachar,  in  thy  tents. 

19  They  shall  call  the  people  unto 
the  mountain ; there  they  shall  offer 


11.  smite  through  the  loins']  Rather,  smite 
the  loins,  i.e.  the  seat  of  their  strength. 

12.  Benjamin. 

he  shall  chvell  bet<iueen  his  shoulders]  i.e.  be 
supported  by  God  as  a son  who  is  carried  by 
his  father;  cf.  i.  31.  The  change  of  subject  in 
this  no.  is  not  rare  in  Hebrew,  cf.  e.g.  % S. 
xi.  13,  and  is’  here  the  less  difficult,  because 
the  suffix  throughout  the  passage  has  but  one 
reference,  viz.  to  God.  Benjamin  was  speci- 
ally beloved  of  his  hither  (Gen.  xxxv.  18,  xliv. 
20)  ; Moses  now  promises  no  less  love  to  him 
from  God  Himself.  To  refer  the  words, 
“He  shall  dwell,  &c.”  to  God  and  to  ex- 
plain them  of  the  Temple,  which  was  after- 
wards built  in  the  land  of  this  tribe,  as  many 
commentators  do,  is  farfetched  and  harsh. 

13 — 17.  Joseph,  including  Ephraim  and 
Manasseh. 

The  resemblance  of  this  blessing  to  that 
pronounced  on  the  same  tribes  by  J acob  (cf. 
Gen.  xlix.  25  and  26)  is  obvious  both  in 
thoughts  and  words;  and  in  both  the  exube- 
rant fertility  of  the  large  districts  allotted  to 
the  descendants  of  Joseph  is  a leading  feature. 
Yet  the  words  of  Moses  are  far  from  being  a 
mere  reproduction  of  Jacob’s.  The  patriarch 
dwells  with  emphasis  on  the  severe  conflicts 
which  these  tribes  would  undergo  (cf.  Gen. 
xlix.  23,  24);  the  lawgiver  seems  to  look  be- 
yond, and  to  behold  the  two  tribes  triumph- 
ant and  established  in  their  power.  The  ut- 
terances respecting  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  in 
these  nins.  are  such  as  are  wholly  unlikely 
to  have  proceeded  from  a writer  of  the  king- 


dom of  Judah,  at  the  time  assigned  by  the  ra- 
tionalist critics  for  the  composition  of  Deut. 

17.  His  glory  is  like  the  firstling  of  his  bul- 
lock] Render  rather:  “ The  first-born  of  his” 
{i.e.  Joseph’s)  “bullock  is  his  glory.”  (So 
substantially  Onkeh,  Maurer,  Knobel,  &c.) 
The  reference  here  is  not  to  Joseph,  nor  to 
Joshua,  nor  to  Jeroboam  II.,  but  to  Ephraim, 
who  was  raised  by  Jacob  to  the  honours 
of  the  firstborn  (Gen.  xlviii.  8),  and  is  here 
likened  to  the  firstling  of  Joseph’s  oxen,  i.e. 
of  Joseph’s  offspring,  the  singular  noun  {shor] 
being  taken  collectively.  The  ox  is  a com- 
mon emblem  of  power  and  strength;  cf. 
Gen.  xlix.  6,  margin,  and  note;  Ps.  xxii.  12; 
Jer.  xlvi.  20;  Amos  iv.  i. 

unicorns]  Render,  a wild  bull.  Cf.  Num. 
xxiii.  22  and  note. 

the  ten  thousands  of  Ephraim atnd...the 
thousands  of  Manasseh]  Cf.  Gen  xlviii.  19 ; 
I S.  xviii.  7,  8. 

18,  19.  Zebulun  and  Issachar. 

Cf.  Gen.  xlix.  13 — 15,  the  substance  of 
which  is  forcibly  repeated;  and,  like  Jacob, 
Moses  places  first  the  younger  of  the  two 
tribes.  Zebulun  possessed  a commodious  sea- 
shore, and  the  fisheries  of  the  Lake  of  Tibe- 
rias: and  was  therefore  to  thrive  by  com- 
merce, and  to  rejoice  in  his  “going  out,” 
i.e.  in  his  mercantile  enterprises.  Issachar 
possessed  a fertile  inland  district,  and  would 
therefore  dwell  at  home  and  prosper  in  agri- 
culture. Both  tribes  distinguished  themselves 
in  the  contest  with  Jabin;  cf.  Judg.  v.  14,  15, 
18:  and  of  Zebulun  it  is  particularly  noted 


924 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIIL  [v.  20-25. 


tHeb. 

deled. 


sacrifices  of  righteousness : for  they 
shall  suck  of  the  abundance  of  the 
seas,  and  of  treasures  hid  in  the  sand. 

20  ^ And  of  Gad  he  said,  Blessed 
he  he  that  enlargeth  Gad  : he  dwelleth 
as  a lion,  and  teareth  the  arm  with 
the  crown  of  the  head. 

21  And  he  provided  the  first  part 
for  himself,  because  there,  in  a por- 
tion of  the  lawgiver,  was  he  Eeated ; 
and  he  came  with  the  heads  of  the 
people,  he  executed  the  justice  of  the 
Lord,  and  his  judgments  with  Israel. 


22  ^ And  of  Dan  he  said,  Dan  is  a 
lion’s  whelp:  he  shall  leap  from  Bashan. 

23  ^ And  of  Naphtali  he  said,  O 
Naphtali,  satisfied  with  favour,  and 
full  with  the  blessing  of  the  Lord  : 
possess  thou  the  west  and  the  south. 

24  ^ And  of  Asher  he  said.  Let 
Asher  be  blessed  with  children;  let 
him  be  acceptable  to  his  brethren,  and 
let  him  dip  his  foot  in  oil. 

25  "Thy  shoes  shall  be  iron 

brass ; and  as  thy  days,  so  shall  thy  shoes  shall 
strength  be. 


that  it  produced  the  officers  and  tacticians 
who  led  and  mafshalled  the  host  which  van- 
quished Sisera:  see  on  Judg.  v.  14,  and  cf. 
I Chron.  xii.  33. 

19.  unto  the  mountahi\  Cf.  Ex.  xv.  17. 

sacrifices  of  ri^hteousness'\  Sacrifices  of- 
fered by  the  righteous,  and  therefore  well 
pleasing  to  God.  Cf.  Ps.  iv.  5,  li.  19. 

treasures  bid  in  the  san(r\  The  riches  of 
the  seas  in  general.  It  is  noteworthy  however 
that  the  sand  of  these  coasts  vv^as  specially 
valuable  in  the  manufacture  of  glass  (cf.  Tac. 

‘ Hist.’  v.  7 ; Pliny  ‘ H.  N.’  v.  17  ; xxxvi.  65  ; 
Joseph.  ‘ B.  J.’  II.  10.  2);  and  glass  was 
a precious  thing  in  ancient  times:  cf.  Job 
xxviii.  17.  The  murex  too,  from  which  the 
precious  purple  dye  .was  extracted,  was  found 
here.  A typical  reference  to  the  conversion 
of  the  Gentiles  is  strongly  suggested  by  Isa. 
lx.  5,  6,  16,  and  Ixvi.  ii,  12. 

20,  21.  Gad. 

20.  Blessed  be  he  that  enlargeth  Gad^  i.e. 
blessed  be  God  who  shall  grant  to  Gad  a spa- 
cious territory ; cf.  the  blessing  of  Shem,  Gen. 
ix.  26. 

the  arm  rMitb  the  crowri]  Rather,  yea,  the 
crown.  The  warlike  character  of  this  tribe 
is  shewn  by  their  leading  the  van  in  the  long 
campaigns  of  Joshua;  cf.  Josh.  iv.  12,  13, 
xxii.  I — 4;  by  the  acts  of  Jehu,  2 K.  ix.  x. ; 
by  I Chro.  v.  18 — 22,  and  xii.  8 sqq. 

21.  the  first  part  for  himself]  The  first 
fruits  of  the  conquest  made  by  Israel  were  as- 
signed to  Gad  and  Reuben  by  Moses  at  their 
own  rccjiiest.  Cf  Num,  xxxii. 

because  there.,  in  a portion  of  the  lavogiver., 
raoas  he  seated]  Render  rather,  because 
there  was  the  leader’s  portion  re- 
served, i.e.  there  was  reserved  the  fitting 
portion  for  Gad  as  a leader  in  war.  See 
Note  at  end  of  the  chapter. 

and  he  came  ^ith  the  heads  of  the  people] 
i.e.  he  joined  the  other  leaders  to  fulfil  the 
commands  of  God  respecting  the  concjuest  of 
Canaan.  Cf.  Num.  xxxii.  17,  21,  32;  Josh.  i. 


14,  iv.  12.  Moses  regards  the  promise  of  the 
Gadites  to  do  this  as  already  redeemed. 

22.  Dan. 

he  shall  leap  from  Bashan]  i.e.  be  like  a lion 
v'vhich  leaps  forth  from  his  covert  in  Bashan. 
Cf.  Song  of  S.  iv.  8.  There  is  no  historical 
reference,  as  e.g.  to  the  conquest  of  Dan- 
Laish,  Josh.  xix.  47. 

23.  Naphtali. 

satisfied  <iuiih  fa'vour]  Cf.  Gen.  xlix.  21 
and  note.  The  idea  suggested  in  both  pas- 
sages is  similar. 

the  nvest  and  the  south]  The  territory  of 
Naphtali  was  situated  in  the  north-west  of 
Canaan;  and  the  words  should  therefore  evi- 
dently be  taken,  as  in  the  Hebrew  they  often 
are,  and  as  LXX.  and  other  Versions  suggest, 
as  referring  not  to  geographical  position,  but 
to  natural  characteristics.  Render  therefore 
“the  sea  and  the  sunny  district.”  The  pos- 
session of  Naphtali  included  nearly  the  whole 
west  coast  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  the  Lake  of 
Merom,  the  modern  Bahr  el  lluleh.,  and  the^ 
well-watered  district  near  to  the  springs  of 
Jordan.  It  contained  some  of  the  grandest 
scenery  and  some  of  the  most  fertile  land  in 
Palestine.  Josephus  speaks  of  the  shore  of 
Gennesaret  as  “an  earthly  paradise”  (‘  B.  }.’ 
III.  3.2);  and  Porter,  ‘Handbook  for  Syria,’ 
as  “ the  garden  of  Palestine.”  The  modern 
name  for  this  district  Belad  Besharah.,  (“land 
of  good  tidings”)  is  Significant.  The  climate 
in  the  lower  levels  towards  the  waters  of 
Merom  is  exceedingly  hot,  peculiarly  suited 
for  tropical  productions.  Fruits  ripen  here 
much  earlier  than  in  other  parts  of  the  coun- 
try: see  Robinson  ‘ B.  R.’  ii.  434  sqq.; 
Tristram  ‘Land  of  Israel’  p.  583;  Burck- 
hardt,  ‘ Syria,’  pp.  40  sqq. 

24.  25.  Asher. 

Let  Asher  be  blessed  'with  children',  and  let 
him  be  acceptable  to  his  brethren]  These  words 
should  rather  perhaps  be  rendered  (with 
Keil.  Knobel,  Wogue,  &c.),  “ Blessed  above 
the  sons”  (i.  e.  of  Jacob  = most  blessed  amongst 

• 


Os  R, 


V.  26-:9]  DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIII. 


925 


26  ^ There  is  none  like  unto  the 
God  of  Jeshurun,  who  rideth  upon 
the  heaven  in  thy  help,  and  in  his  ex- 
cellency on  the  sky. 

27  The  eternal  God  is  thy  refuge, 
and  underneath  are  the  everlasting 
arms : and  he  shall  thrust  out  the 
enemy  from  before  thee  5 and  shall 
say.  Destroy  them. 

28  ‘^Israel  then  shall  dwell  in  safety 


alone:  the  fountain  of  Jacob  shall  be 
upon  a land  of  corn  and  wine;  also 
his  heavens  shall  drop  down  dew. 

29  Happy  art  thou,  O Israel : who 
is  like  unto  thee,  O people  saved  by 
the  Lord,  the  shield  of  thy  help,  and 
who  is  the  sword  of  thy  excellency ! 
and  thine  enemies  "shall  be  ^^^id 
liars  unto  thee ; and  thou  shalt  tread  subdued. 
upon  their  high  places. 


the  sons  of  Jacob)  “be  Asher;  let  him  be 
the  favoured  one  of  his  brethren,”  i.e.  the  one 
favoured  of  God. 

25.  Thy  shoes'l  See  the  Note  at  end  of 
the  chapter.  The  t;.  preceding  had  described 
the  plenty  with  which  this  tribe  should  be 
blessed  under  the  figure  of  dipping  the  foot  in 
oil  (cf.  Job  xxix.  6);  and  this  'v.  continues 
the  figure,  and  represents  the  strength  and 
firmness  of  Asher  to  be  as  if  he  were  shod 
with  iron  and  brass.  Cf.  Rev.  i.  15.  The  ter- 
ritory of  this  tribe  probably  contained  iron 
and  copper.  Cf.  viii.  9. 

as  thy  days,  so  shall  thy  strength  he^  The 
original  here  has  two  words  only,  of  which 
the  latter  is  not  found  elsewhere.  On  it 
see  the  Note  at  the  end  of  the  chapter.  The 
sense  is  “ thy  strength  shall  be  continued  to 
thee  as  long  as  thou  shalt  live:  thou  shalt 
never  know  feebleness  and  decay.” 

26 — 29.  Conclusion. 

God’s  glory  and  power,  and  the  conse- 
quent safety  and  prosperity  of  God’s  people, 
form  the  climax,  as  tliey  do  the  basis,  of  the 
J31essing  which  the  lawgiver  has  to  pro- 
nounce. 

26.  There  is  none  like  unto  the  God  of  Je- 
shurun']  Rather,  as  the  punctuation  of  the 


original  requires.  There  is  none  like  unto 
God,  0 Jeshurun. 

27.  thy  refuge'\  Rather,  “ dwellingplace.” 
Cf.  Ps.  xc.  I,  xci.  9. 

28.  Israel  then  shall  d-well  in  safety  alone: 
the  fountain  of  Jacob  shall  be  upon  a land 
of  corn  and  'wine'\  The  A.  V.  does  not 
preserve  the  symmetry  of  the  clauses,  so  mark- 
ed in  the  original  here  as  throughout.  Render 
rather,  “Israel  shall  dwell  in  safety;  alone 
shall  the  fountain  of  Jacob  be ; in  a land,” 
&c.  The  rendering  “ eye  of  Jacob”  (Vulg., 
&c.)  yields  no  apt  sense,  unless  the  words  be 
closely  connected  with  the  following  con- 
text (“  oculus  Jacob  in  terra  frumenti,”  &c., 
Vulg.),  and  such  a construction  is  forbidden 
by  the  rhythmical  structure  of  the  clauses 
above  referred  to.  On  the  phrase  “fountain 
of  Jacob,”  cf.  Ps.  Ixviii.  26;  Isa.  xlviii.  1. 

29.  be  found  liars  unto  thee^  Perhaps  ra- 
ther “ cringe  before  thee.”  The  verb  means 
to  shew  a feigned  or  forced  obedience:  cf. 
Ps.  xviii.  45  and  note,  and  Ps.  Ixvi.  2. 

thou  shalt  tread  upon  their  high  places^  i.  e. 
occupy  the  commanding  positions  in  their 
land,  and  so  have  it  in  subjection.  Cf.  xxxii. 
13  ; Isa.  xxxvii.  24. 


NOTES  on  Chap,  xxxiii.;  and  on  vv.  2,  21,  and  25. 


NOTE  on  ch.  xxxiii. 

Many  modern  critics  have  argued  that  the 
Blessing  of  the  Tribes  cannot  be  really  Mosaic 
on  the  same  general  grounds  of  style,  literary 
characteristics,  &c.  as  have  been  brought  for- 
ward in  reference  to  the  Song  of  Moses.  It 
is  needless  to  repeat,  from  the  Note  at  the  end 
of  ch.  xxxii.,  the  answers  already  made  to  ob- 
jections of  this  kind. 

It  has  however  been  specially  objected  to 
the  Blessing’,  that  its  contents  in  various  places 
betray  on  the  face  of  them  an  origin  far  later 
in  date  than  the  days  of  Moses.  There  are,  it 
is  urged,  unquestionable  allusions  in  what  is 
said  of  several  of  the  Tribes  to  the  different 
districts  in  Canaan  which  they  occupied  after 
the  conquests  of  Joshua:  e.g.  in  the  Blessing 
VoL.  I. 


of  Zebulun  and  Issachar,  n:.  19  ; of  Naphtali, 
n).  23  ; of  Asher,  'v'v.  24,  25.  These  allusions 
have  been  by  some  attributed  to  that  pro- 
phetic foresight  which  Moses  undoubtedly 
possessed.  Yet  they  may  be  piobably  explain- 
ed without  reference  to  it.  F or  the  location 
of  the  several  tribes  was  fixed  in  a general 
way  before  the  time  at  which  the  Blessing 
is  represented  as  spoken  (cf.  Num.  xxxiv. 
16,  and  note);  and  Moses,  as  having  lived 
for  many  years  at  the  very  borders  of 
Canaan  and  in  frequent  intercourse  with 
its  inhabitants  and  their  neighbours,  must 
undoubtedly  have  possessed  some  knowledge 
of  the  topography  of  the  country  which  was 
to  be  the  future  home  of  his  people.  The 
allusions  in  question  are  of  a general  kind,  and 
quite  consistent  in  character  with  a knowledge 

3 


926  DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIII. 


SO  acquired.  It  has  been  asserted  also  that 
‘v.  5 contains  a reference  to  a monarchical 
form  of  government ; that  v.  7,  in  which  Moses 
prays,  “ Hear,  Lord,  the  voice  of  Judah,  and 
bring  him  to  his  people,”  is  an  aspiration  for 
the  reunion  under  the  sceptre  of  Judah  of 
the  kingdom  divided  under  Rehoboam  (Graf, 
Von  Lengerke,  Ewald,  &c.);  that  v.  12  must 
be  explained  as  an  allusion  to  the  Temple, 
See.  These  objections  rest  on  erroneous  inter- 
pretations of  particular  verses,  and  are  suffi- 
ciently answered  in  the  notes  on  those  verses. 
The  utter  uncertainty  of  the  grounds  on  which 
such  objections  rest,  is  demonstrated  by  the 
very  diverse  and  totally  inconsistent  conclu- 
sions deduced  from  them.  Thus  Knobel  refers 
the  Blessing  to  the  days  of  David,  whilst 
Graf,  followed  by  Bleek  (‘Introduction  to 
Old  Testament,’  Vol.  i.  p.  3.^5  sqq.,  Eng. 
TransL),  proposes  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II. 
(b.c.  825 — 785).  The  main  reason  for  se- 
lecting this  particular  period  is  the  admission, 
M'hich  the  critics  are  constrained  to  make,  that 
the  Blessing  must  have  been  composed  at  a 
time  when  all  the  Twelve  Tribes  were  still 
abiding  in  their  places  in  Canaan,  and  enjoy- 
ing a high  degree  of  material  prosperity.  But 
the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II.  hardly  satisfies  these 
conditions.  That  time  was  certainly  marked 
by  considerable  recovery,  but  such  passages  as 
2 K.  xiv.  26,  and  the  tenor  of  the  utterances  of 
Amos  respecting  the  condition  of  the  northern 
kingdom  at  this  very  date,  are  inconsistent 
with  any  such  happy  circumstances  as  the 
Blessing  confessedly  supposes.  Indeed  it  is 
•little  likely  that  the  two  tribes  and  a half  on 
the  east  of  Jordan  ever  recovered  from  the 
calamities  inflicted  by  Hazael ; cf.  2 K.  x. 
32  sqq.  Still  more  improbable  is  the  opinion 
of  Maurer  and  Hoffmann,  who  place  the 
Blessing  in  the  days  of  Jehoiachin  (b.c.  599), 
and  explain  "j.  7 as  referring  to  the  large  num- 
ber of  Jews  who  were  then  carried  away 
from  Terusalem  to  Babylon  (cf.  2 K.  xxiv. 
10  sqq.). 

As  against  the  various  dates  suggested  sub- 
sequent to  the  disruption  under  Rehoboam, 
it  is  to  be  noted  that  there  is  not  the  slightest 
trace  of  a reference  to  any  of  those  bloody 
civil  dissensions  and  disorders,  nor  to  any  of 
those  foreign  wars  and  frequent  defeats  from 
S)Tiansand  other  neighbouring  nations,  which 
befell  the  people,  or  some  one  or  more  of 
its  tribes  in  the  years  following  that  dis- 
ruption, and  which  continued,  with  but  little 
intermission,  in  the  northern  kingdom  at  least, 
until  the  captivity.  I'he  Blessing  speaks 
throughout  of  peace  and  plenty.  These  facts 
have  obliged  Knobel  to  admit  that  the  Bless- 
ing cannot  have  been  composed  later  than 
the  beginning  of  David's  reign.  His  own  ar- 
guments ought  in  consistency  to  have  carried 
liim  further,  and  led  him  to  place  it  much 
earlier.  For  it  is  impossible  on  his  own  prin- 
ciples to  explain  how  the  disasters,  apostasies, 


and  confusion  of  the  latter  part  of  Saul’s 
reign,  and  still  more  those  of  the  times  of  the 
Judges,  could  have  happened  at  a date  not 
long  preceding  that  in  which  the  Song  was 
penned. 

There  is  therefore  no  substantial  reason  in 
the  contents  of  the  Blessing  for  questioning 
that  conclusion  to  which  many  verbal  charac- 
teristics of  the  chapter  point,  viz.  that  it  is  by 
the  sam^e  author  as  chapter  xxxii.,  to  which 
it  has  an  evident  relationship  (see  Note  at  be- 
ginning of  chapter),  i.e.  by  Moses. 

On  this  chapter  the  following  special  trea- 
tises may  be  mentioned:  W.  A.  Teller,  ‘ Notae' 
criticae’  in  Gen.  xlix.  Deut.  xxxiii.  &c.,  and 
‘ Uebersetzung  des  Segens  Jacob  und  Mosis,’ 
Halle,  1766;  A.  G.  Hoffman,  ‘Comm,  in 
Mosis  Benedictionem,’  in  Keil’s  ‘Analekten,’ 
ivx  2,  Jena,  1823;  K.  H.  Graf,  ‘Der  Segen 
Mosis,’  Leipzig,  1857  ; L.  Diestel  also  (‘  Der 
Segen  Jakob’s,’  Braunschweig,  1853)  has  many 
valuable  remarks  on  this  chapter. 

•V.  2. 

avitb  ten  thousands  of  samts'\  The  prep. 
(^D)  can  hardly  mean  “with,”  as  A.  V.  ren- 
ders (after  LXX.,  Vulg.-,  Luth.,  and  others). 
The  notion  that  the  angels  took  an  active  part 
in  the  covenant  making  at  Sinai,  though  in 
itself  a correct  one  (cf.  Ps.  Ixviii.  17;  Acts 
vii.  53  ; Gal.  hi.  19;  Heb.  ii.  2),  and  one  on 
which  the  Jews  specially  dwell  as  proof  of 
the  superiority  of  the  Law  to  all  other  dispen- 
sations, is  not  found  in  the  original  words  of 
this  passage.  They  rather  represent  God  as 
quitting  heaven,  where  He  dwells  amidst  the 
hosts  of  the  angels  (cf.  i K.  xxii.  19;  Job  i. 
6),  and  descending  in  majesty  to  earth  (cf. 
Mic.  i.  3).  The  “ten  thousands  of paints” 
cannot  in  such  a context  mean  the  hosts  of 
the  Israelites  (as  Cler.,  Dathe,  Winz.,  &c.). 
Eiirst  (‘Lex.’  s.  v.  n32"))  proposes  to  point 
as  in  xxxvii.  51,  and  to  treat  these  words  as 
a proper  name  “from  Meribah.” 

from  /ms  rig/jt  hand  'njoent  a fery  la^iv  for 
them/]  The  A.  V.  here  follows  Vulg.,  Saad., 
Luther,  and  many  other  authorities  both  an- 
cient and  modern.  But  the  original  has  (see 
marg.)  not,  as  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V. 
would  seem  to  require,  “a  law  of  fire”  {i.e. 
“a  fiery  law”),  but  “a  fire  of  law”  (m 
i.e.  apparently,  “a  fire  which  was  a law.” 
Accordingly  Gesenius  suggests  that  the  refer- 
ence is  not  to  the  lightnings  of  Sinai,  but  to 
the  pillar  of  fire  Ex.  xiii.  21,  “ columna  ignis 
quae  legi  esset  iis.”  So  De  Wette,  Maur., 
Dathe,  &c. 

Several  Hebrew  MSS.  however  write  the 
words  in  question  as  one.  The  chief  reason 
advanced  by  some  (Keil,  Furst,  &c.)  for  pre- 
ferring this  reading  is,  that  m is  not  properly 
a Hebrew  word,  but  one  imported  in  later 
times  from  the  Chaldee,  which  (it  is  said) 
derived  it  from  the  Persian.  The  word  cer- 
tainly occurs  in  Flebrew  only  in  Ezra  and 


V.  1 — 4- 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIV. 


927 


Esther;  but  Havcmick  (‘Introduction  to  Old 
Testament,’  pp.  146,  147,  edit.  Clark)  argues 
with  some  force  that  it  is  an  old  Hebrew 
word,  connected  with  I'T  and  {H,  which, 
like  other  archaisms,  held  its  ground  in  poetry, 
as  in  the  present  passage,  after  it  had  fallen 
into  disuse  in  prose.  But  the  authority  of  all 
kinds  for  the  reading  is  considerable. 

The  LXX.  (eK  de^icov  avrov  ayyeXot  fxer 
avTov)  probably  had  it ; for  their  ayyeXoi  seems 
to  be  this  Hebrew  word  considered  as  a plural 
noun,  and  connected  with 

Yet  if  this  probable  reading  be  accepted, 
further  questions  arise  as  to  its  pointing  and 
meaning.  Amongst  the  best  suggestions  may 
be  named  that  oF  Bottcher  (approved  substan- 
tially by  Gesen.,  Knob.,  Keil,  &c.),  who 
writes  “ishdeth,”  and  renders  the  word  “ fire- 
darting,’’  treating  it  as  a noun  fern,  sing.;  and 
that  of  Fiirst,  who  compares  Josh.  xii.  3 and 
8,  and  regards  it  as  a proper  name,  or  a de- 
scription of  a locality  (Lexicon,  s.  v.). 

•V.  21. 

The  word  ppriD  is  used  here  as  in  Judg. 
V.  9;  Isa.  xxxiii.  22.  The  fern,  subst.  with 
masc.  adj.  as  Gen.  iv.  10,  xlix.  15.  So  Graf, 
Delitzsch,  Johlson,  Schroder,  &c.  The  ren- 
dering of  A.  V.  can  only  mean  that  Gad  in 
fact  firmly  established  himself  in  the  territory 
assigned  to  him  by  Moses.  But  the  v/ords 
are  introduced  by  “because,”  and  are  in- 
tended to  explain  why  Gad  ‘ ‘ provided  the 
first  part  for  himself.”  This  explanation  is 


not  given  by  the  rendering  in  question, 
though  adopted  also  by  Rosenm.,  Gesen.,  See. 
The  Jewish  authorities  (e.g.  Onkel.,  Jarchi) 
and  Fiirst,  with  Diest.,  Baum*g.,  and  other 
moderns,  refer  the  passage  to  the  grave  of 
Moses,  though  differing  somewhat  as  to  the 
precise  rendering  of  the  words.  So  Vulg., 
“quod  in  parte  sua  doctor  esset  repositus.” 
But  such  a sense  seems  unsuited  to  the  con- 
text; and  in  fact  from  xxxiv.  i — 5,  compared 
with  Josh.  xiii.  20,  it  would  seem  tliat  the 
place  where  Moses  died  and  was  buried  was 
in  the  country  of  Reuben. 

•V.  25. 

The  Hebrew  word  is  ott.  Xey.,  and 

by  several,  both  ancient  and  modern  (Onk., 
Saad.,  Gesen.,  Maur.,  Keil,  Schrod.,  &c.), 
is  rendered  “ thy  bars.”  The  root 
means  to  “ fasten”  or  “ bind,”  as  is  clear  from 

the  Arabic  , and  numerous  cognate  forms. 
But  the  force  of  the  root  is  almost  equally 
exhibited  in  either  rendering.  That  of  A.V. 
on  the  whole  seems  best. 

•V.  25. 

The  Hebrew  word  XIT  here  used  is  again 
OTT.  Xey.,  and  is  variously  rendered.  Vulg. 
with  Jerus.  Targum,  “senectus  tua;”  others 
(Rosenm.,  Gesen.,  Keil,  Maur.,  Graf,  Diest., 
and  most  moderns),  “thy  rest ; ” Fiirst  (‘  Lex,’ 
s.  V.  ^m)  “riches,  affluence.”  The  A.V., 
follows  the  majority  of  ancient  authorities. 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 


I!  Or,  tAe 
hill. 

chap.  3. 
27. 

2 *Mac.  2. 
4- 


I Moses  from  mount  Nebo  viezveth  the  land. 
5 He  diet/i  there.  6 His  burial.  7 His  age. 
8 Thirty  days'  mourning  for  him.  g Joshua 
succeedeth  him.  10  Ihe praise  of  Moses. 


AND  Moses  went  up  from  the 
plains  of  Moab  unto  the  moun- 
tain of  Nebo,  to  the  top  of  “Pisgah, 
that  is  over  against  Jericho.  And 
the  Lord  "shewed  him  all  the  land 


of  Gilead,  unto  Dan, 

2 And  all  Naphtali,  and  the  land 


of  Ephraim,  and  Manasseh,  and  all  the 
land  of  Judah,  unto  the  utmost  sea, 

3 And  the  south,  and  the  plain  of 
the  valley  of  Jericho,  the  city  of  palm 
trees,  unto  Zoar. 

4 And  the  Lord  said  unto  him, 

“^This  is  the  land  which  I sware  un-  * Gen.  12. 
to  Abraham,  unto  Isaac,  and  unfo  & 13. 15. 
Jacob,  saying,  I will  give  it  unto  thy 

seed:  I have  caused  thee  to  see  it  - 
with  thine  eyes,  but  thou  shalt  not  go 
over  thither. 


Chap.  XXXIV.  Death  and  Burial  of 
Moses. 

1.  mountain  of  Nebo'\  Cf.  xxxii.  49  sqq. 
and  reff. 

oil  the  land  of  Gilead.,  unto  Dafi]  This  can 
hardly  be  the  Dan  (Dan-Laish)  of  Judg.  xviii. 
27  sqq.,  which  was  not  in  Gilead.  It  is  pro- 
bably a town  of  this  name  which  stood  in  the 
north  of  Peraea;  perhaps  the  same  as  Dan-jaan, 
2 S.  xxiv.  6,  and  the  Dan  of  Gen.  xiv.  14, 
where  see  note. 


2.  ut77iost  sea^  Cf.  xi.  24. 

3.  unto  Zoar~\  At  the  southern  extremity 
of  the  Dead  Sea.  Cf,  Gen.  xix.  22. 

4.  I hanje  caused  thee  to  see  it]  The  sight 
thus  afforded  to  Moses,  like  that  of  “all  the 
kingdoms  of  the  world  in  a moment  of  time,” 
Luke  iv.  5,  was  no  doubt  supernatural.  Yet 
it  was  not  imaginary  only,  but  a real  view  of 
the  land,  obtained  perhaps  through  an  extra- 
ordinary enhancement  of  the  dying  lawgiver’s 
power  of  vision. 


928 


DEUTERONOMY.  XXXIV.  U 5-12. 


5 So  Moses  the  servant  of  the 
Lord  died  there  in  the  land  of 
Moab,  according  to  the  word  of  the 
Lord. 

6 And  he  buried  him  in  a valley  in 
the  land  of  Moab,  over  against  Beth- 
peor:  but  no  man  knoweth  of  his 
sepulchre  unto  this  day. 

7 ^ And  Moses  was  an  hundred 
and  twenty  years  old  when  he  died: 

tHeb.  his  eye  was  not  dim,  nor  his '^natural 

moistin'e,  r ^ ^ \ 1 

f Heb.  force  ‘ abated. 

8 ^ And  the  children  of  Israel  wept 
for  Moses  in  the  plains  of  Moab  thirty 
days:  so  the  days  of  weeping  and 
mournino;  for  Moses  were  ended. 


9 ^ And  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun 
was  full  of  the  spirit  of  wisdom ; for 
Moses  had  laid  his  hands  upon  him : 
and  the  children  of  Israel  hearkened 
unto  him,  and  did  as  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses. 

10  ^ And  there  arose  not  a prophet 
since  in  Israel  like  unto  Moses,  whom 
the  Lord  knew  face  to  face, 

1 1 In  all  the  signs  and  the  wonders, 
which  the  Lord  sent  him  to  do  in 
the  land  of  Egypt  to  Pharaoh,  and  to 
all  his  servants,  and  to  all  his  land, 

12  And  in  all  that  mighty  hand, 
and  in  all  the  great  terror  which  Moses 
shewed  in  the  sight  of  all  Israel. 


5.  according  to  the  nvord  of  the  Lord]  Lit. 
“ at  the  mouth  of  the  Lord,”  which  the  Rab- 
bins explain  “by  a kiss  of  the  Lord.”  But 
.the  sense  of  the  phrase  is  clear,  cf.  Gen.  xlv. 
21.  Vulg.  correctly  “jubente  Domino.”  It 
denotes  that  Moses  died,  not  because  his  vital 
powers  were  exhausted,  but  at  the  sentence 
of  God,  and  as  a punishment  for  his  sin. 
Cf.  xxxii.  51. 

6.  he  buried  him]  i.e.  God  buried  him. 
The  penalty  of  Moses’  sin  was  fully  paid  by 
his  death ; and  this  signal  honour  conferred  on 
him  after  death  was,  doubtless,  designed  to 
sustain  the  lawgiver's  authority,  which  with- 
out it  might  have  been  impaired  with  the  peo- 
ple in  consequence  of  his  punishment. 

no  man  kno-^veth  of  his  sepulchre]  Hardly 
lest  the  grave  of  ^Ioses  should  become  an 
object  of  superstitious  honour,  for  the  Jews 
were  not  prone  to  this  particular  form  of 
error.  Bearing  in  mind  the  appearance  of 


Moses  at  the  Transfiguration  (St  Matt.  xvii. 
I — 10),  and  what  is  said  by  St  Jude,  ni.  9, 
we  may  conjecture  that  Moses  after  death 
passed  into  the  same  state  with  Enoch  and 
Elijah;  and  that  his  sepulchre  could  not  be 
found  because  he  was  shortly  translated  from 
it. 

9.  spirit  of  ^visdom]  Cf.  Isa.  xi.  2.  The 
practical  wisdom  {pporrjais)  of  the  ruler  is 
specially  meant. 

10.  there  arose  not  a prophet  since  in  Is- 
rael] Words  like  these  can  only  have  been 
written  some  time,  but  not  necessarily  a long 
time,  after  the  death  of  Moses.  They  refer 
more  particularly  to  the  wonders  wrought  by 
the  hand  of  Moses  at  the  Exodus  and  in  the 
desert;  and  do  but  reecho  the  declaration  of 
God  Himself,  Num.  xii.  6 sqq.  They  may 
naturally  enough  be  attributed  to  one  of  Moses’ 
successors,  writing  perhaps  soon  after  the  set- 
tlement of  the  people  in  Canaan. 


END  OF  VOLUME  I. 


i|F  HMf  ComntFnlapg 


A PLAIN  EXPLANATORY  EXPOSITION  OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES 
FOR  EVERY  BIBLE  READER. 


To  be  published  at  regular  intervals  in  royal  octavo  volumes  at  the  uniform 
price  of  ^5.00 per  volume. 

■ THE  HOLY  BIBLE, 

^ccov!itii0  to  tfjt  EMtljorffta  Uetsston,  B.  icn. 

WITH  EXPLANATORY  AND  CRITICAL  NOTES  AND  A 
REVISION  OF  THE  TRANSLATION 

BY  BISHOPS  AND  CLERGYMEN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 

The  BIBLE  COMMENTARY,  the  publication  of  which  will  shortly  be  commenced,  by  CHARLES  SCRIBNER 
& CO.  simultaneously  with  its  appearance  in  England,  had  its  origin  in  the  widely  felt  want  of  a plain  explanatory  Com- 
mentary on  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which  should  be  at  once  more  comprehensive  and  compact  than  any  now  published- 
Projected  in  1S63,  the  selection  of  the  scholars  to  be  employed  upon  it  was  entrusted  to  a Committee  named  by  the  Speaker 
of  the  British  House  of  Commons  and  the  Archbishop  of  York  {/hr  tJu  names  of  this  Committee  and  list  of  contributors 
see  another  page),  and  through  the  agency  of  this  Committee,  there  has  been  concentrated  upon  this  great  work,  a com- 
bination of  force  such  as  has  not  been  enMsted  in  any  similar  undertaking  in  England,  since  the  translation  of  King  James’s 
version  of  the  Bible.  Of  the  THIRTY-SIX  DIFFERENT  DIVINES  who  are  engaged  upon  the  work,  nearly  all  are 
widely  known  in  this  country  as  well  as  in  England,  for  their  valuable  and  extensive  contributions  to  the  Literature  of  the 
Bible,  and  in  this  Commentary  they  condense  th.eir  varied  learning  and  their  most  matured  judgments. 

The  great  object  of  the  BIBLE  COMMENTARY  is  to  put  every  general  reader  and  student  iu  full  possession  oi 
whatever  information  may  be  necessary  to  enable  him  to  understand  the  Holy  Scriptures  ; to  give  him,  as  far  as  possible* 
the  same  advantages  as  the  Scholar,  and  to  supply  him  with  satisfactory  answers  to  objections  resting  upon  misrepresenta- 
tions or  misinterpretations  of  the  text.  To  secure  this  end  most  effectually,  the  Comment  is  chiefly  explanatory,  presenting 
in  a concise  and  readable  form  the  results  of  learned  investigations  carried  on  during  the  last  half  century.  When  fuller 
discussions  of  difficult  passages  or  important  subjects  are  necessary,  they  are  placed  at  the  end  of  the  chapter  or  volume. 

The  text  is  reprinted  without  alteration,  from  the  Authorized  Version  of  1611  with  marginal  references  and  renderings; 
but  the  notes  forming  this  Commentary,  will  embody  amended  translations  of  passages  proved  to  be  incorrect  in  that  Version. 

The  work  will  be  divided  into  EIGHT  SECTIONS  which  it  is  expected  will  be  comprised  in  as  many  volumes,  and 
each  volume  will  be  a royal  octavo.  Typographically  special  pains  has  been  taken  to  adapt  the  work  to  the  use  of  older 
readers  and  students. 

N.  B.  The  American  edition  of  the  Bible  Commentary,  will  be  printed  from  stereo- 
type plates,  duplicated  from  those  upon  which  the  English  edition  is  printed,  and  will  be 
fully  equal  to  that  in  every  respect. 

THE  FIRST  VOLUME  OF 

(JomiHpnfeFg 

IS  NOW  READY,  IT  CONTAINS 

THE  PENTATEUCH, 

The  books  of  which  are  divided  as  follows,  among  the  contributors  named  ; 

( Rt.  Rev.  E.  Harold  Browne,  Bishop  of  Ely,  and 

( author  of  Expositioti  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles, 

EXODUS Chap.  I-XIX.  The  Editor. 

“ Chap.  XX.  to  the  End,  and 

LEVITICUS Rev.  Samuel  Clark,  M.A. 

NUMBERS  AND  DEUTERONOMY.  | Bhr^ngham!^’^’’  Warden  of  Queen’s  Col- 

Making  one  vol.  royal  8vo,  of  nearly  1000  pages,  being  the  only  complete  Commen- 
tary upon  the  Pentateuch,  in  one  volume,  in  the  English  language.  Price  in  cloth,  $5.00, 
less  than  one-half  that  of  the  English  edition. 

OHAELES  SOEIBNER  & CO.,  654  Broadway,  llew  York, 

IB'or  division  of  sections  and  list  of  contribtetors,  see  2^ci(/es  following. 


The  Bible  Commentary 


DIYISIOff  OF  THE  SEGTIOHS  AID  lAIES  OF  THE  COITRIBHTOES  TO  EACH. 


The  plan  of  the  BIBLE  COMMENTARY  was  settled,  and  the  writers  appointed,  under  the  sanction  of  a Committee 
consisting  of 


ArchbisLiop  of  Canterbury  (A.  C.  TAIT,  D.DJ. 
Archbishop  of  York  (WILLIAM  THOMSON,  D.D.). 
Bishop  of  London  (JOHN  JACKSON,  D.D.). 
Bishop  of  Llandaff  (ALFRED  OLLIVANT,  D.D.). 
Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol  (C.  J.  ELLI- 
COTT,  D.D.). 


Bishop  of  Chester  (WILLIAM  JACOBSON,  D.D.). 
LORD  LYTTLETON. 

Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  (the  Rt.  Eon. 
J.  E.  DENISON). 

Dean  of  Lincoln  (J.  A.  JEREMIE,  D.D.) 

Right  Hon.  SPENCER  WALPOLE. 


This  Committee  entrusted  the  conduct  of  the  work  to  Rev.  F.  C.  COOK,  M.A.,  Canon  of  Exeter,  Examining 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen,  and  author  of  “ Commentary  on  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,”  “Sermons  in  Lincoln  Inn,”  &c.,  &c.,  as  General  Editor. 

The  ARCHBISHOP  OF  YORK  in  consultation  with  the  REGIUS  PROFESSORS  OF  DIVINITY  OF 
OXFORD  AND  CAMBRIDGE  advises  with  the  General  Editor  upon  questions  arising  during  the  progress  of  the  work. 


The  division  of  the  work  into  sections,  and  the  List  of  Contributors  sanctioned  by  the  Committee,  is  as  follows: 


Section  I.— The  Pentateuch. 

( Right  Rev.  E.  Harold  Browne,  D.D.,  Lord  Bishop  of  Ely, 

GENESIS ■<  2i\i\\\ox  oi  Exposition  of  the  Thirty-itine  Articles^  Sermons 

I 071  the  Atoneme7it^  The  Pe7itateuch  in  Reply  to  Cole7iso, 


EXODUS,  Chap.  I.-XIX 

“ “ XX.  to  the  end*  . 


The  Editor. 

Rev.  Samuel  Clark,  M.A.,  .author  of  The  Bible  Atlas,  &=c. 


LEVITICUS 

NUMBERS  and  DEUTE- 
RONOMY  


Rev.  Samuel  Clark,  M.  A. 

Rev.  T.  E.  Espin,  B.  D.,  Warden  of  Queen’s  College,  Bir- 
mingham, author  of  Critical  Essays. 


Section  BS.— The  Historical  Books. 


JOSHUA Rev.  T.  E.  Espin,  B.D. 

{Right  Rev.  Lord  Arthur  Hervev,  M.A.,  Lord  Bishop  of 
Bath  and  Wells,  author  of  Inspij'ation  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
hires,  Genealogies  of  Our  Saviour,  Sy^c.,  Sy=‘C. 

KINGS,  CHRONICLES,  f Rev.  George  Rawlinson,  M. A.,  Camden  Professor  of  An- 
EZRA,  NEHEMIAPI,  ■<  dent  History  at  Oxford,  author  of  The  Five  Great  Mon- 

ESTHER ( archies  of  the  East,  Maiiual of  Ancieiit  History,  ^c. 

Section  III.— The  Poetical  Books. 


JOB 

PSALMS 

PROVERBS 

ECCLESIASTES 

SONG  OF  SOLOMON 


The  Editor. 

Very  Rev.  G.  II.  S.  Johnson,  M.A.,  author  of  Sermoits 
Preached  in  WelVs  Cathedral. 

The  Editor. 

Rev.  C.  L Elliott,  M.A. 

Rev.  E.  H.  Plumptre,  M.A.,  author  of  Christ  and  Chris- 
tendo77i  (Boyle  Lectures),  Sermons  on  Theology  and  Life, 
Sy^c. 

Rev.  W.  T.  Bullock,  M.A.,  Secretary  to  the  S.P.G. 

Rev.  T.  Kingsbury,  M.A.,  Trinity  Coll.,  Cambridge. 


ISAIAH 

JEREMIAH 
EZEKIEL. . 
DANIEL  , 


Section  IV.-The  Four  Great  Prophets. 

( Rev.  W.  Kay,  D.D.,  late  Principal  of  Bishop’s  College,  Cal- 
J cutta,  author  of  The  Psaliiis  translated froin  the  Hebrew, 

( Essays  on  the  Promise  of  Christianity. 

( Rev.  R.  Payne  Smith,  D.  D.  , Regius  Professor  of  Divinity, 
J Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  author  of  Bampton  Lec- 

( tures  for  1869,  Authenticity  of  Isaiah,  Sy^c. 

Rev.  G.  CURREY,  D.D.,  author  of  Hulsean  Lectures,  1851. 

fVen.  H.  J.  Rose,  B.D.,  Archdeacon  of  Bedford,  author  of 
Sermons  on  the  Duty  of  the  Clergy,  The  Gospel  an  Abid- 
ing  System. 


Section  V.— The  Twelve  Fi#!inor  Prophets. 


Right  Rev.  Connop  Thirlwall,  D.D.,  Lord  Bishop  of  St.  David’s,  author  of  History  of  Gree<ty 
Translation  of  JVieb^iIer's  Rome,  ^c. , ^c. 


H03EA  and  JONAH 

AMOS  & other  PROPHETS.. 
JOEL  and  OBADIAH 

ZECHARIAH  & MALACHI. 


j Rev.  E.  IIuxTABi.E,  M.A.,  author  of  Sacred  Record  of  Crea- 
( tion  Vindicated,  il/inistry  of  St.  folin  the  Baptist,  &^c. 

Rev.  R.  Gandell,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Arabic,  Oxford. 

( Rev.  F.  Meyrick,  M.A.,  author  of  Theology  of  the  Chui'ch 
( of  Rome,  Ecclesice  Anglicana:  Religio,  &=c. 

( Rev.  W.  Drake,  M.A.,  Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen, 
( author  of  Sermons  on  Jonah,  A7nos,  and  Hosea,  Sf^c. 


Section  VI.— The  Gospels  and  Acts. 


ST.MATTHEW&ST.MARK 


ST.  LUKE.. 
ST.  JOHN.. 
THE  ACTS 


Most  Rev.  W.  Thomson,  D.D.,  Lord  Archbishop  of  York, 
author  of  Limits  of  Philosophical  Inqiciry,  Life  in  thi 
Light  of  God^s  Word,  &=c. 

Very  Rev.  H.  L.  Mansel,  B.  D.  , Dean  of  St.  Paul’s,  author 
of  Metaphysics,  Philosophy  of  the  Conditioned,  Limits  of 
Religious  Thought,  St'c. 

( Ven.  \Vm.  Basil  Jones,  M.A.,  Archdeacon  and  Prebendary 
I of  York,  2i\\\\\oY  Peace  of  (Sermons),  &c. 

{ Rev.  B.  F.  Westcott,  M.  A. , Canon  of  Peterborough,  author 
of  Hiitojy  of  the  English  Bible,  Eletnents  of  the  Gospel 
( HarmoJiy,  Sernuvis  on  Gospel  Miracles,  &=^c. 

( Right  Rev.  W.  Jacobson,  D.  D.,  Lord  Bishop  of  Chester, 
( author  of  Pat  res  Apostolici,  Sermons,  &=c. 


Section  VII.— The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul. 

Rev.  E.  H.  Gifford,  D.D.,  Plonorary  Canon  of  Worcester. 
Rev.  T.  Evans,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Greek  in  Durham  Univcr 
sity. 

Rev.  J.  Waite,  M.A.,  Master  of  University  College,  Durham. 

^ Very  Rev.  J.  S.  PIowsON,  D.D.,  Dean  of  Chester,  author  of 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  Metaphors  of  St.  Paul. 

J.  A.  Jeremie,  Very  Rev.  Dean  of  Lincoln,  Regius  Professor 
of  Divinity,  Cambridge,  author  of  History  of  the  Scenes 
in  the  Life  of  St.  Paul,  St=c. 

Rev.  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  D.D.,  Hulsean  Professor  of  Divinity, 
Cambridge,  Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen,  author  of 
Co7nmentary  07t  St.  Paul's  Episiles  to  the  Galatia7is  and 
Philippians. 

Rev.  B.  Pb  Westcott,  B.D.,  author  of  History  of  the  E7tg‘ 
lish  Bible,  <Sr’c. 

Rev.  E.  W.  Benson,  D.D.,  Head  Master  of  Wellington  Col- 
lege. 

Right  Rev.  John  Jackson,  D.D.,  Lord  Bishop  of  London, 
author  of  God’s  Word  a7td  Ma7i’s  Heart. 

• Rev.  W.  Kay,  T).  D.  , author  of  The  Psalms  tra7islated from 
the  Hebrew. 

Section  VIII.— The  Catholic  Epistles  and  Revelations. 

EPISTLE  OF  ST.  JOHN. . . . Right  Rev.  W.  Alexander,  D.D.,  Lord  Bishop  of  Derry. 

EPISTLE  OF  ST.  JAMES.. . Rev.  R.  Scott,  D.D.,  Master  of  Balliol  College,  Oxford. 

ST.  PETER  and  ST.  JUDE..  The  Editor. 

( Ven.  W.  Lee,  D.D.,  Archdeacon  of  Dublin,  author  of  Insfi- 
REVELATION  of  ST.  JOHN  \ ratio7t  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical 

( History,  &^c. 

The  volumes  of  the  BIBLE  COMMENTARY  will  be  sent,  post-paid,  to  any  address,  upon  receipt 
of  the  price  ($5.00  per  volume),  by  the  publishers, 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER  & CO.,  ' 

654:  Broadway,  New 


ROMANS 

I.  and  II.  CORINTHIANS...  | 

GALATIANS | 

PHILIPPIANS I 

f 

EPHESIANS,  COLOS-  I 
SIANS,  THESSALO-  { 
NIANS,  & PHILEMON.  | 

PASTORAL  EPISTLES | 

HEBREWS ] 


TWO  NEW  VOLUMES  OF 

Isngg's  {^omnipnlBPB^ 

Messrs.  Charles  Scribner  & Co. 

/fAF£  THE  GRATIFICATION  OF  ANNOUNCING  FOR  IMMEDIATE  PUBLIC  A. 
TION,  THE  LONG  ANTICIPATED  COMMENTARY 
UPON 

THE  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN, 

TRANSLATED  AND  EDITED  BY 

Rev.  PHILIP  SCHAFF,  D.D.,  assisted  by  E.  R.  CRAVEN,  D.D.,  and  the  late  E.  D.  YEOMANS,  D.D. 

One  Mol.  8m.,  650  pages,  cloth,  $5.00. 

This  volume  will  universally  be  regarded  as  the  Commentary  of  Commenuiries  upon  the  Gospel  of  Gospels.”  IJ 
gathers  up  the  results  of  the  latest  research,  and  is,  besides,  enriched  with  the  fruits  of  the  original  labors  of  some  of  the 
first  living  Biblical  Scholars.  Completing  the  Gospels,  it  worthily  finishes  an  important  section  of  what  is  universally  re 
garded  as  the  most  important  Biblical  enterprise  of  the  age. 


ALSO,  JUST  PUBLISHED: 

©to  ^t^iarntni  Volume* 

JEREMIAH. 

Translated  and  edited  by  Rev.  C.  R.  Asbury,  of  Andover,  Mass. 


LAMENTATIONS. 


Translated  and  edited  by  Rev.  Dr.  Hornblowtjr,  of  Paterson,  N.  J.  Under  the  general  editorship  of  Rev.  Dr.  Schaff. 


One  vol.  royal  8vo.,  cloth 


$5  oo 


The  TEN  VOLUMES  previously  issued  are  in  the 

OLD  TESTAi^EPIT. 

I.— GENESIS.  II.— PROVERBS,  SONG  OF  SOLOMON,  ECCLESIASTES. 


P(3EW  TESTAJ^Ei^T. 

I.-MATTHEW.  IL— MARK  AND  LUKE.  III.— ACTS.  IV.— THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL  TO  THE 
ROMANS.  V.— CORINTHIANS.  VI.— THESSALONIANS,  TIMOTHY,  TITUS,  PHILEMON, 
AND  HEBREWS.  VII.— GALATIANS,  EPHESIANS,  PHILIPPIANS,  COLOSSIANS. 

VIII.— THE  EPISTLES  GENERAL  OF  JAMES,  PETER,  JOHN,  AND  JUDE. 

Each  one  vol.  8vo.  Price  per  vol.,  in  half  calf,  $7-50 ; in  sheep,  $6.50  ; in  cloth,  $5.00. 


NAMES  AND  DENOMINATIONS  OF  CONTRIBUTORS: 


W.  G.  T.  SHEDD,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

E.  A.  WASHBURNE,  D.D.,  Episcopal. 

A.  C.  KENDRICK,  D.D.,  Baptist. 

W.  H.  GREEN,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

T.  F.  HURST,  D.D.,  Methodist. 

TAYLER  LEWIS,  LL.D.,  Dutch  Reformed. 
Rev.  CH.  F.  SCHAFFER,  Lutheran. 

R.  D.  H-TCHCOCK,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

E.  HARWOOD,  D.D.,  Episcopal. 

H.  B.  HACKETT,  D.D.,  Baptist. 

JOHN  LILLIE,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 


E.  D.  YEOMANS,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

Rev.  C.  C.  STARBUCK,  Congregational. 

J.  ISIDOR  MOMBERT,  D.D.,  Episcopal. 

D.  W.  POOR,  D.D.,  Presbyterian, 

C.  P.  WING,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

GEORGE  E.  DAY,  D.D.,  Congregational. 

Rev.  P.  H.  STEENSTRA,  Episcopal. 

•A.  GOSMAN,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

Pres’t  CHARLES  A.  AIKEN,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 
M.  B.  RIDDLE,  D.D.,  Dutch  Reformed. 

Prof.  WILLIAM  WELLS,  D.D.,  Methodist. 

W.  H.  HORNBLOWER,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 


Rev.  W.  G.  SUMNER,  Episcopal. 

Each  volume  of”  LANGE’S  COMMENTARY  ” is  complete  in  itself,  and  can  be  purchased  separately.  Sent 
post-paid  to  any  address  upon  receipt  of  the  price  ($5  per  volume)  by  the  publishers, 


CHAELES  SCEIBNEE  & 00.,  654  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


ANOTHER  GREAT  HISTORICAL  WORK 


fisloFg  of  §FFfr?, 


By  Prof.  Dr.  ERNST  CURTIUS. 

Translated  by  ADOLPHUS  WILLIAjM  WARD,  IM.  A.,  Fellow  of  St.  Peter^s 
College,  Cambridge,  Professor  of  History  in  Owen’s  College,  Manchester. 

To  he  completed  in  fonr  or  five  rots,  crowdi  8m.,  at  $2.50  per  volume, 

PRINTED  UPON  TINTED  PAPER,  UNIFORM  WITH  MOMMSEN’S  HISTORY  OF  .ROME 
AND  THE  LIBRARY  EDITION  OF  FROUDE’S  HISTORY  OF  ENGLAND. 


VoL  /.  just  published. 

Curtius’  History  of  Greece  is  similar  in  plan  and  purpose  to  Mommsen’s  History  of  Rome,  with  which  it 
deserves  to  rank  in  every  respect  as  one  of  the  great  masterpieces  of  historical  literature.  Avoiding  the 
minute  details  which  overburden  other  similar  works,  it  groups  together  in  a very  picturesque  manner  all  the 
important  events  in  the  history  of  this  kingdom,  which  has  exercised  such  a wonderful  influence  upon  the 
world’s  civilization.  The  narrative  of  Prof.  Curtius’  work  is  flowing  and  anim.ated,  and  the  generalizations, 
although  bold,  are  philosophical  and  sound. 

SRITICAL  NOTICES. 

“Professor  Curtius’  eminent  scholarship  is  a sufficient  guarantee  for  the  trustworthiness  of  his  history',  while  the  skill 
with,  which  he  groups  his  facts,  and  his  effective  mode  of  narrating  them,  combine  to  render  it  no  les.s  readable  than 
sound.  Professor  Curtius  everywhere  maintains  the  true  dignity  and  impartiality  of  history,  and  it  is  evident  his  sym- 
pathies are  on  the  side  of  justice,  humanity,  and  progress.” — Londo7i  Athenteum. 

“We  cannot  express  our  opinion  of  Dr.  Curtius’  book  better  than  by  saying  that  it  may  be  fitly  ranked  with  Theodor 
Mommsen’s  great  work.” — London  Spectator. 

“ As  an  introduction  to  the  study  of  Grecian  history,  no  previous  work  is  comparable  to  the  present  for  vivacity  and 
picturesque  beauty,  while  in  sound  learning  and  accuracy  of  statement  it  is  not  inferior  to  the  elaborate  productions 
which  enrich  the  literature  of  the  age.” — N.  Y.  Daily  Tribune. 

“The  History  of  Greece  is  treated  by  Dr.  Curtius  so  broadly  and  freely  in  the  spirit  of  the  nineteenth  century,  that  it 
becomes  in  his  hands  one  of  the  worthiest  and  most  instructive  branches  of  study  for  all  who  desire  something  more  than 
a knowledge  of  isolated  facts  for  their  education.  This  translation  ought  to  become  a regular  part  of  the  accepted  course 
of  reading  for  young  men  at  college,  and  for  all  who  are  in  training  for  the  free  political  life  of  our  country.” — N.  Y . 
Evening  Post. 

“The  qualifications  of  Dr.  Curtius  for  a work  of  such  importance  and  magnitude  are  of  the  highest  character.  He  has 
the  true  historical  aptitude.  He  rightly  conceives  the  character  of  the  times  of  which  he  writes.  He  grasps  deep  prin- 
ciples and  grand  tendencies  as  well  as  isolated  events.  His  mind  is  equally  distinguished  by  the  amplitude  of  its  reach 
and  the  precision  of  its  knowledge.  He  combines  a rare  faculty  for  acute  analysis  with  large  powers  of  broad  generaliza- 
tion  He  manages  his  perspective  admirably,  grouping  facts  with  skill,  and  illuminating  ^hem  with 

the  lucid  beams  of  a deep  and  pervasive  philosophy.  The  narrative  is  not  loaded  down  with  fine  details  or  discursive 
disquisitions,  but,  judiciously  selecting  and  arranging  all  important  points,  flows  on  in  a fresh,  limpid  and  vigorous  cur- 
rent. The  style  is  chaste,  weighty  and  copious,  sometimes  picturesque  and  always  animated.  A work  distinguished  by 
so  many  merits  may  fairly  be  said  to  rank  among  the  best  pieces  of  historical  composition.” — Albany  Eveni7ig  Journal. 

“ Prof.  Curtius,  with  his  full  and  exact  scholarship,  his  sound  and  philosophical  spirit,  and  his  flowing,  picturesque  style, 
is,  perhaps,  better  fitted  than  any  man  living  to  produce  a really  good  history  of  Greece, — a history  which,  in  its  digni- 
fied tone,  is  worthy  of  that  great  people,  and  in  its  broad,  generous  sympathies  with  the  spirit  of  modern  progress  is 
admirably  adapted  to  the  wants  of  readers  of  this  age.  This  history,  judging  by  the  first  volume,  is  to  be  a masterpiece 
of  historical  grouping  of  the  great  men  and  events  which  conspired  to  lift  the  little  kingdom  of  Greece  into  such  towering 
eminence.” — Boston  lYatckman  and  Rejlector. 

“Taken  all  in  all,  the  best  history  of  Greece  that  exist  for  general  readers It  does  not  discuss  and  argue ; 

but  tells  what  is  best  worth  knowing  about  Greece  and  the  Greeks,  in  a most  attractive  and  suggestive  style.— Now  this 
we  hold  to  be  an  essential  quality  for  an  historian  as  distinguished  from  a historical  scholar  or  an  antiquarian.  W e 
would  not  overvalue  popular  qualities.  The  term  “popular  history  ” is  redolent  of  superficial  and  sensational  rhetoric. 
But  a history  to  be  read  for  instruction  by  educated  and  intelligent  people  should  be  interesting.  It  is  not  enough  that 
it  be  accurate  and  wise ; it  must  be  a work  of  art  as  well  as  a production  of  scientific  scholarship.  . . ._  The  author 

has  a lively  imagination,  which  is  well  under  the  control  of  a sound  judgment  and  accurate  scholarship.  His  styleis  easy 
and  brilliant ; and  he  is  particularly  good  in  narrative.” — N.  Y.  Independent. 

“ The  treatment  of  the  work  thus  far  exhibits  the  great  research  and  the  varied  and  extensive  scholarship  of  the  au- 
thor.”— Chicago  Evenuig  Post. 

“The  work  before  us  deserves  faithful  study.  It  is  learned  and  philosophical.” — Boston  Congregationaliti, 

“ The  Narration  is  clear  and  yet  graphic  ....  readable  and  yet  thorough.  It  supplies  the  want  long  felt  of  5 a 
good  brief  account  of  the  growth  and  character  of  Hellenic  civilization.” — I\i.  Y.  Herald. 

This  book  sent  post-paid,  upon  receipt  of  the  price,  by  the  Publishers, 

• CHARLES  SCRIBNER  & CO. 

654  Broadway,  R,  Y. 


A NEW  AND  TIMELY  WORK 


or,  What  Books  shall  I Read,  and  How  shall  I Read  them? 
Pto£<  mo  AH!  POHTEIi, 

OF  YALE  COLLEGE.  ’ 

Author  of  Humar\  Intellect,”  Etc, 

One  YoL,  crown  8vo.,  witli  a complete  Index.  Price  in  cloth  $2,  half  calf  $4. 

A most  thorough,  acquaintance  with  the  whole  range  of  English  literature,  combined  with 
pre-eminent  candor,  catholicity  and  maturity  of  judgment,  render  Professor  Porter  the  safest 
possible  guide  upon  the  important  subjects  of  which  this  book  treats.  As  an  index  for  all  who 
wish  to  economize  their  time  in  reading  by  selecting  only  the  best  works  in  each  department  of 
literature  this  volume  is  simply  indisjpensable. 

NOTICES  OF  THE  PRESS. 

■^Thls  book  is  of  very  great  importarice.  Prof.  Porter  is  one  of  the  ripest  scholars  and  one  of  the  most  comprehensive 
and  discriminating  readers  in  America,  He  is  familiar  with  every  branch  of  the  literature  of  the  past  and  the  present. 
'Ihe  ideas  of  such  a critic  in  regard  to  the  merits  of  different  authors  and  the  ends  and  uses  of  literary  studies  are  of 
very  great  moment,  Kis  book  is  written  in  popiilar  form,  and  in  a didactic  style.  It  abounds  in  illustrations  from  the 
best  authors  which  serve  to  give  point  to  the  principles  laid  down  for  the  development  of  correct  judgments  and  tastes 
on  the  part  of  the  reader.  _ The  very  important  questions  which  parents  are  asking  in  respect  to  the  best  and  safest 
courses  of  reading  for  their  children  are  answered  in  a manner  that  shows  a vast  range  of  knowledge,  and  a deep  con- 
scientiousness on  the  part  of  the  author.  At  such  a time  as  the  present,  when  there  is  so  much  of  light,  trashy  and 
hurtful  literature,  and  so  much  of  superficial  acquaintance.ship  with,  if  not  total  ignorance  of  the  productions  of  the  best 
authors,  there  is  greatest  need  of  just  such  a book  as  this  by  Dr.  Porter.  Its  careful  reading  will  not  fail  to  “stimulate 
to  a wise  selection  of  books  and  to  enlightened  and  successful  methods  of  reading.” — Bosio7i  Watchman  and  Reflector. 

" It  is  distinguisdied  by  all  the  rare  acumen,  discriminating  taste,  and  extensive  literary  knowledge  of  the  author.  The 
chief  departments  of  literature  are  reviewed  in  detail,  and  a variety  of  very  suggestive  and  useful  comments  are  made 
in  regard  to  the  representative  volumes  under  each  head,” — JV.  V.  Ti?ncs. 

“Such  a volume  is  greatly  needed  in  these  days  of  superficial  reading : and  if  its  advice  should  be  universally  followed, 
the  next  will  be  a wiser  and  better  generation  than  the  present.” — Albany  Evetting  Journal.  „ 

“ The  scholar  will  find  his  reminiscences  refreshed  in  reading  it ; the  beginner  will  be  told  where  to  begin,  and  how 
to  shape  his  oourse  in  the  great  labyrinth  of  literature.  It  is  by  a veteran  and  accomplished  man  of  letters,  thoroughly 
competent  to  form  a discriminating  judgment,  and  to  express  it  with  taste  and  vigor.” — Ehil.  Age. 

“The  result  of  a scholarly  lifetime  so  rich  in  practical  results  as  to  guarantee  him  the  right  to  act  as  counsellor  for  the 
young,  in  advising  tlicm,  both  in  their  choice  of  books  and  in  the  proper  way  of  reading  them.  Kis  essays  have  also  an- 
other valuable  phase,  in  that  they  present  a very  graphic  history  and  healthy  criticism  of  the  best  works  in  English 
literature,” — Chicago  Tribune. 

“ Professor  Porter’s  volume  is  extremely  satisfactory',  and  is  withal  a readable  book.” — Mil-waukee  Sentinel. 

" Thei^  is  a world  of  information  and  stiggestion  in  this  volume,  and  the  questions,  what  books  to  read  and  how  to  read, 
are  cleverly  answered,” — N,.  Y.  Cojii.  Advertiser. 

“ A clear  and  instructive  dissertation  upon  the  best  mode  of  becoming  usefully  familiar  with  the  best  boolcs  of  the  best 
authors.” — BujJdlo  Com.  Advertiser. 

“ A book  which  will  be  found  to  contain  many  vahiable  hints,  even  in  cases  where  individual  taste  or  preference  may 
irot  follow  it  as  an  absolute  guide,  which  it  docs  not  pretend  to  be.” — Boston  Post. 

“ As  Professor  Porter  is  a man  of  clear  and  severely  logical  mind  and  unclouded  judgment,  and  has  a wide  acquaintance 
with  LLterature,  his  Judgments  arc  entitled  to  great  re.spect.” — Hartford  Coura^it. 

“Professor  Porter’s  new  book  forms  a fresh  and  admirable  and  coming  from  one  who  has  at  his  com- 

mand the  rc-sma'ces  of  leaniing  and  of  the  most  wide  and  v.aried  culture,  who  has  given  to  this  subject  earnest  thought, 
and  has  treated  it  in  a philosophic  as  well  as  inspiriting  way,  this  work  will  have,  we  doubt  not,  a deservedly  wide  cir- 
culation, and  be  gladly  received  by  those  who  are  needing  just  such  a counsellor.” — New  Englander. 

“ One  of  the  ablest  and  most  sensible  and  instructive  volumes  which  a lover  of  books  can  read.” — N.  V.  Ohscruer. 

“ The  work  can  not  be  tno  highly  commended  to  young  men  who  wush  to  make  the  wisest  and  most  profitable  employ- 
ment of  their  time.” — Christian  JntcLligeticcr. 

“The  wide  range  of  topics  included  In  the  title  Is  discussed  with  marked  ability.” — Pittsburg  Pres.  Banner. 

This  hook  sent  ^ost-paid^  upon  receipt  of  the  price,  by  the  Publishers, 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER  & CO. 

654  Broadway,  N.  T, 


PEOF.  POETES’S  lEITAl 

THE  HUMAN  INTELLECT; 

R'iih.  «H  Introduction  upon  Psj/cholof/?/  and  the  Uutnan  Soul.  Jiy  NOAH  POltTEJtf  JD.I). 

Clarh  Professor  of  Moral  Philosophy  and  Metaphysics  in  Yale  College. 

One  Volnsne  8vo.  Nearly  700  Pag;es,  - - - - $5.00 

This  is  by  far  the  most  thorough  and  comprehensive  work  upon  Mental  Science  ever  published  in  this  country. 
It  Is  p .-onounccd  and  positive  against  the  materialistic  tendencies  of  the  cerebral  and  physiological  schools  of  MiLi 
an  I Bain,  and  aims  to  guide  the  more  advanced  students  to  a clear  understanding  and  a just  estimate  of  the  questiona 
which  have  perpetually  reappeared  in  the  history  of  Philosophy.  The  tj'p^’g’^^^phical  arrangement  of  the  volume — the 
move  Important  principles  of  facts  being  in  larger  print— adapts  it  for  use  as  a text-book,  while  its  fulness  of  statement 
makes  it  invaluable  to  all  interested  in  Mental  Science. 

CRITICAL  NOTICES. 

From  tilt  North  American  Review. 

“This  copious,  well-digested  treatise  will  challenge  the  attention  of  students  of  philosophy  on  both  sides  of  the 
ocean.  Whatever  dissent  special  poi’tions  of  the  work  may  awaken,  discerning  readers  will  appreciate  the  acute  and 
vigorous  tone  of  the  discussions,  the  familiarity  with  the  course  of  speculation  that  is  everywhere  manifest,  and  the 
obvious  anxiety  of  the  author  to  treat  in  a fair  and  manly  spirit  the  theories  and  arguments  which  he  seeks  to  con- 
trovert. As  a preparatory  disciphne  for  the  student  of  theology,  law,  or  physical  science,  a treatise  like  the  present  is 
Invaluable.” 

From  the  Princeton  Review. 

“Alter  a careful  examination  of  this  truly  great  work,  we  are  ready  to  pronounce  it  the  most  complete  and 
exhaustive  exhibition  of  the  cognitive  faculties  of  the  human  soul  to  be  found  in  our  language,  and,  so  far  as  we 
know,  h\  any  language.  More  extended  and  elaborate  discussions  on  some  single  facirlties,  or  questions  emerging 
from  them,  may  perhaps  be  found,  though  even  these  are  few  and  far  between.  * * * Its  contents  fully  equal  those 
of  a collected  volume  of  Reid’s,  and  another  (somewhat  abridged)  of  Locke’s  works,  and,  we  think,  of  moro  than  half 
the  seven  volumes  of  Dugald  Stewart’s  works  now  before  us.  * in  short,  the  work  is  a monument  of  the 
author’s  insight,  industry,  learning,  and  judgment ; one  of  the  great  productions  of  our  time  ; an  honor  to  our  coun- 
try, and  a fresh  proof  that  genuine  philosophy  has  not  died  out  among  us,  and  that  those  are  not  wanting  who  see 
that  false  philosophy  must  be  counteracted  by  that  which  is  true.” 

From  the  New  Englander. 

“We  lay  down  the  volume  with  a sentiment  of  respect  and  admiration  for  Professor  Porter’s  earnest  zeal,  and  his 
wide  attainments,  which  we  have  seldom  felt  toward  an  American  author.  In  comprehensiveness  of  plan  and  in 
elaborate  faithfulness  of  execution,  the  work  is  far  before  any  other  in  oqr  language.  For  such  a labor  of  years  and. 
Buch  an  example  of  enthusiasm  in  the  pursuit  of  abstract  truth,  the  author’s  countrymen  may  well  be  proud  of  him. 
We  suspect  that  their  grateful  appreciation  of  an  aim  so  high  and  well  sustained  will  rank  him,  perhaps,  foremost 
among  our  American  scholars,  in  the  loftiest  and  most  difficult  walks  of  investigation. 

Prof.  H.  B.  Smith,  in  the  American  Presbyterian  Review. 

“ It  is  a long  time  since  we  have  had  such  a solid  volume  of  philosophy  from  an  American  author,  or  one  so  able 
It  is  abreast  of  the  sharp  discussions  of  the  day,  and  on  some  points  takes  the  lead  in  our  country.” 

Prest.  McCosh,  of  Princeton  College,  in  the  Independent. 

“ The  author  treats  his  subject  carefully  and  lovingly.  It  is  evidently  his  Life-work,  on  which  he  has  spent  years  of 
jdeasant  and  profitable  labor.  We  are  able  to  say,  unhesitatingly  and  conscientiously,  that  it  is  worthy  of  the  pains 
which  have  been  bestowed  upon  it.  It  reflects  the  highest  credit  on  the  teacher  who  has  constructed  it,  and  on  the 
famous  college  of  which  he  is  an  ornament.” 

From  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra. 

“This  is  the  most  important  contribution  to  Mental  Science  which  has  been  produced  in  our  country  for  many 
years.  It  is  the  result  of  a hfe-long  study,  and  reflects  honor  not  only  on  its  author,  but  also  on  our  national  charac- 
ter. It  is  a thorough  and  exhaustive  treatise,  and  deserves  the  studious  attention  of  our  clergymen,  as  weU  as  pro- 
fessional scholars.” 

From  the  Methodist  Quarterly  Review.  * 

“ The  publication  of  this  work  is  a marked  event  in  the  history  of  Mental  Science,  not  only  in  our  country  but  in 
the  English  language.  It  is  not  only  a standard,  but  in  its  fulness,  symmetry  , and  completeness,  it  i«?  a standard  without 
a competitor.  Let  every  student  who  would  master  the  mysteries  of  Intellectual  Science  master  the  contents  of 
this  work.” 

From  the  New  York  Tribune. 

“ Prof.  Porter’s  manner  is  worthy  of  all  praise.  He  is  equally  free  from  dogmatism  and  flippancy.  His  tone  ia 
calm,  discriminating,  judicial.  If  he  still  cUngs  to  the  traditions  of  early  education,  he  is  none  the  less  a sincere 
searcherafter  truth.” 

From  the  New  York  Evening  Post. 

“ It  is  a wonderful  work,  embodying  an  amount  of  labor  frightful  to  imagine— a sustained  mental  effort,  of  which, 
considering  merely  its  duration  and  intensity,  few  minds  in  the  country  are  capable,  not  to  mention  its  superior 
vigor  and  comprehensiveness.  It  is  a fascinating  book,  too,  for  every  mind  that  has  any  taste  for  this  class  of 
studies.” 

From  the  New  York  Observer. 

“ It  constitutes  one  of  the  most  important  contributions  to  metaphysical  literature  that  has  been  made  in  our 
day.  We  welcome  it,  not  only  as  a production  of  American  genius,  but  as  a standard  book  of  reference,  as  well  as  a 
text-book  for  students  in  our  colleges  and  seminaries,” 

From  the  Boston  Watchman  and  Reflector. 

“ The  work  is  a most  important  contribution  to  the  literature  of  its  kind.  Indeed,  for  clearness  and  profundity 
of  discussion,  exactness  of  statement,  aptness  of  illusti'ation,  and  mingled  beauty  and  strength  of  style,  wc  know 
where  to  find  its  equal  among  the  great  standard  works  upon  Mental  Philosophy.” 

Copies  of  the  dbove  work  for  sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent  by  mail,  post-paid,  on  receipt  of  the  price,  by 

CHAELES  SOEIBNEE  & CO.,  654  Broadway,  New  York 


r’ 

I 


.*•  ^ i 


«r 

& 

t*.' 


’■’ray 


!, 


« • 


>1 


,1 


r 


/,i 


; <> 


% 

4. 


